Well done on cup run but fans deserve better

[Geekins]

Clarke did say when he arrived and Cox hadn't scored for a while, that he needs to step up and do his job, which was to score goals.

[genome]

Sources close to the club

Your m8 who works in B&Q?

[GH Royal]

Clarke did say when he arrived and Cox hadn't scored for a while, that he needs to step up and do his job, which was to score goals.

I don't think he experimented with him enough though, he was in good form when partnered with Murray. But doesn't play well when partnered with Pog, why not give him and Mackie and go upfront together? I'd say Mackie is more effective at hassling defenders than Pog anyway and this will encourage us to play the ball on the floor and add a bit more pace to the side.

I don't mind Pog, but when you talk about a Reading type player then Cox fits the bill. Hardworker, cheap, loves the club and fans.

[Snowball]

we don't score when (Pog) isn't our main outlet either...tbf

0-4 Forest
1-0 Boro
3-2 Millwall
3-3 Wolves
0-0 Leeds
3-0 Rotherham
1-2 Cardiff
2-1 Norwich
0-0 Bolton
1-6 Birmingham

0-1 Watford
2-2 Brighton
2-1 Norwich
0-3 Huddersfield
1-4 Watford
0-1 Bournemouth

1-0 Huddersfield

Scored in 11games, FTS in 6.

W6 D4 L7 20-30

can you do just the ones under Clarke?

Why, are you retracting your statement, or merely modifying it?

The underlined games above (when, in many we played a weakened side)

P7, scored in 4

[Ian Royal]

Clarke did say when he arrived and Cox hadn't scored for a while, that he needs to step up and do his job, which was to score goals.

I don't think he experimented with him enough though, he was in good form when partnered with Murray. But doesn't play well when partnered with Pog, why not give him and Mackie and go upfront together? I'd say Mackie is more effective at hassling defenders than Pog anyway and this will encourage us to play the ball on the floor and add a bit more pace to the side.

I don't mind Pog, but when you talk about a Reading type player then Cox fits the bill. Hardworker, cheap, loves the club and fans.

Agree. Mackie and Cox aren't an ideal partnership as they're both more hustle and bustle link strikers. Pog is more a link striker too. So there's no reason not to give Cox and Mackie a go. Or Cox and Blackman. Or Cox and HRK. At least there's no reason on the Cox front.

Pog and Cox don't work IMO because Pog needs someone to burst past him into the box. Which is why Mackie seems to work better with him. Whereas I think Cox needs to sit off someone and arrive to support them in the box.

Pog's probably done just enough to justify keeping his place once he got it and scored a couple of goals. But now is the ideal time to try some different combinations.

[Extended-Phenotype]

From what little info I've gleaned I'd say Cox is one of the people Clarke isn't overly fond of, to the extent that I'm surprised that he came on on Saturday

As in doesn't rate him as a player or doesn't like him as a person? (Or both)

[melonhead]

[quote="Dr_Hfuhruhurr

True, and we probably wont do if Clarke wont play Cox.

.

one of our other non scoring strikers

Bit harsh considering the amount of game time he's had since Clarke came in.. He was one of our top performers before Clarke and is still our leading goalscorer...[/quote]

i'm just not making a case for him being much better than any of our other strikers in terms of being prolific, and think the pog gives much more in terms of contribution to the team, holding up the ball, flicking on the ball, and in defence at set pieces, that you don't see from cox.

plus its clear that Clarke don't rate him at all.


and nor do i

[GH Royal]

i'm just not making a case for him being much better than any of our other strikers in terms of being prolific, and think the pog gives much more in terms of contribution to the team, holding up the ball, flicking on the ball, and in defence at set pieces, that you don't see from cox.

plus its clear that Clarke don't rate him at all.


and nor do i

I'm not one to go searching through the stats to prove my point but I'm pretty certain that if you compared 'Games started / Goals Scored' then Cox would be the most prolific striker we've had this season with the exception of Murray.

Quite like Pog for his work rate and contribution to the team as a whole, just think Cox proved he can score goals if he's played the right way, but Clarke hasn't experimented enough to figure out how he can fit into his team. Every manager has their favourites and also people they don't rate - I'd say Clarke wrote him off at West Brom and the opinion is still the same now, which is unfortunate for Cox who I thought was doing really well before he came.

Oh well, new striker with some pace in the summer please Mr Clarke.

[Big Foot]

I'm sorry but if Simon Cox was from Taunton instead of Tilehurst, then half of Reading fans would rate him a lot less

IMO he's not a big man (like say, Pogrebnyak), not a fast, nippy striker (like a Forster), not a poacher (like Cureton), not a hardworker who'll work the channels (like Long/Doyle) and not clever enough to play a "number 10" role (like Hunt)

He's average joe, who would excel for a club in the top half of League 1

Please sell him this Summer

[Hoop Blah]

I'd pretty much agree on that BF

He's a bit similar to Simon Church in that sense but what he does have is the ability to score goals and put himself about to good effect.

He, like Pogrebnyak, is a second forward though. He's not a number 9 and, a you say, not a number 10 in the mould of a Sigurdsson or really creative player with guile and the ability to do something really out of the ordinary.

As much as I don't rate him I'd like Clarke to give Blackman a bit of a chance as our number 9 (with Cox/Pogrebnyak as his partner) over the last few games to see if he can do half the job that Mackie has done. He's the most obvious number 9 we have since Murray left. It's just a shame he's a bit crap.

[Big Foot]

A couple of meaningless run outs at the end of the season for a Blackman & Cox partnership is ok, but if that were our front 2 going into 2015/16 then I'd be straight down the bookies asking for odds on us to finish in bottom third of the table

[72 bus]

I'm not one to go searching through the stats to prove my point but I'm pretty certain that if you compared 'Games started / Goals Scored' then Cox would be the most prolific striker we've had this season with the exception of Murray.

And if you compared 'Games started / Goals conceded' then Cox would be the worst striker we've had this season when it comes to defending from the front.
Which is probably why he is not in the team, Steve Clarke being the defensive minded coach that he is

[Extended-Phenotype]

Doesn't matter who the fall guy is, our strike force is fcuking lame. Leave all this hard work to the midfield, we need someone who can hit the target rather than fall over, limp it wide or trip on the ball. Or all three.

[GH Royal]

I'm not one to go searching through the stats to prove my point but I'm pretty certain that if you compared 'Games started / Goals Scored' then Cox would be the most prolific striker we've had this season with the exception of Murray.

And if you compared 'Games started / Goals conceded' then Cox would be the worst striker we've had this season when it comes to defending from the front.
Which is probably why he is not in the team, Steve Clarke being the defensive minded coach that he is

That's ridiculous. How can you blame our shambolic defensive record during Adkins tenure this season on a striker? It was our defense that was awful which was why we conceded goals.

[Forbury Lion]

He's average joe, who would excel for a club in the top half of League 1

playing up front with Blackman.

[genome]

With Adkins we had a decent strikeforce (Murray) with a shit defence. Keep wondering how this season would've gone had Clarke sorted out the defence and had access to play Murray all season.

[wingnut]

Doesn't matter who the fall guy is, our strike force is fcuking lame. Leave all this hard work to the midfield, we need someone who can hit the target rather than fall over, limp it wide or trip on the ball. Or all three.

While I agree wholeheartedly that we need a new strike force, it isn't only our strikers that have mis-fired this season; the contribution from midfield has been almost non-existent, particularly from our wide players. How many has McCleary got this season - 1 (not rhetorical, I genuinely don't know)?

[El Diablo]

Doesn't matter who the fall guy is, our strike force is fcuking lame. Leave all this hard work to the midfield, we need someone who can hit the target rather than fall over, limp it wide or trip on the ball. Or all three.

While I agree wholeheartedly that we need a new strike force, it isn't only our strikers that have mis-fired this season; the contribution from midfield has been almost non-existent, particularly from our wide players. How many has McCleary got this season - 1 (not rhetorical, I genuinely don't know)?

The ball doesnt stick long enough up top for any of our Midfielders to get a chance to score. Thats because we're lame on the forward line. TBH - if we can get two decent strikers and a creative midfielder / number 10 - and keep what we have for Mid / back line - we'll be a top 6 team.

[melonhead]

Clarke did say when he arrived and Cox hadn't scored for a while, that he needs to step up and do his job, which was to score goals.

I don't think he experimented with him enough though, he was in good form when partnered with Murray. But doesn't play well when partnered with Pog, why not give him and Mackie and go upfront together? I'd say Mackie is more effective at hassling defenders than Pog anyway and this will encourage us to play the ball on the floor and add a bit more pace to the side.

I don't mind Pog, but when you talk about a Reading type player then Cox fits the bill. Hardworker, cheap, loves the club and fans.

and not very good....
thought they looked very toothless any time they've played together cox/mackie

[melonhead]

i'm just not making a case for him being much better than any of our other strikers in terms of being prolific, and think the pog gives much more in terms of contribution to the team, holding up the ball, flicking on the ball, and in defence at set pieces, that you don't see from cox.

plus its clear that Clarke don't rate him at all.


and nor do i

I'm not one to go searching through the stats to prove my point but I'm pretty certain that if you compared 'Games started / Goals Scored' then Cox would be the most prolific striker we've had this season with the exception of Murray.

Quite like Pog for his work rate and contribution to the team as a whole, just think Cox proved he can score goals if he's played the right way, but Clarke hasn't experimented enough to figure out how he can fit into his team. Every manager has their favourites and also people they don't rate - I'd say Clarke wrote him off at West Brom and the opinion is still the same now, which is unfortunate for Cox who I thought was doing really well before he came.

Oh well, new striker with some pace in the summer please Mr Clarke.

he s the most prolific full stop. regardless of minutes played.
but most of those were in games that we conceded loads too
pretty clear that he doesn't really fit with how Clarke wants to play-ie with discipline, shape, etc
hes certainly had a lot of experience with him, so im happy to take his opinion.