Richardson out

[Orion1871]

I can't be bothered to read all Brogue's rants etc but consider our last 2 promotions from this league....

1. Pardew - we basically bought our way out and even then it took him 2.5 seasons and we nearly messed it up when we eventually made it.

2. McGhee - it took him 3 seasons and after the first season when we finished towards the bottom there were plenty at Elm Park who wanted him out and slow hand clapped the perceived slow and ponderous passing.....it took him a further 2 seasons to build a promotion winning team with the players he needed for his style which we all agree produced some of the best football we have all seen.

All managers need TIME.

See. All we needed to do was give the likes of Bullivant and Ince time and they'd have come good.

Not sure Ince comment really holds up as he was manager during the transfer embargo days and only got relegated after a second points deduction in as many seasons.

You can also add Coppell to the list, came here in 2003 and took two seasons to work through his plans.

Seems a long time since fans protested to stop him from walking away or bringing sacked.

McDermott took two stabs at getting up and let’s be honest, he’d have done a better job the post-relegation season. Sacked way too soon.

Selles went from bottom of the league to chasing playoffs, when given time to work out the characters in his squad and finessed his approach. That second half of 23-24 and first half of 24-25 were great fun.

I can't be bothered to read all Brogue's rants etc but consider our last 2 promotions from this league....

1. Pardew - we basically bought our way out and even then it took him 2.5 seasons and we nearly messed it up when we eventually made it.

2. McGhee - it took him 3 seasons and after the first season when we finished towards the bottom there were plenty at Elm Park who wanted him out and slow hand clapped the perceived slow and ponderous passing.....it took him a further 2 seasons to build a promotion winning team with the players he needed for his style which we all agree produced some of the best football we have all seen.

All managers need TIME.

See. All we needed to do was give the likes of Bullivant and Ince time and they'd have come good.

Not sure Ince comment really holds up as he was manager during the transfer embargo days and only got relegated after a second points deduction in as many seasons

So all Ince needed was more TIME as all managers need. Leam's excuse is that he has only had one transfer window, where he could bring in what he wanted. Whereas, the Guv'ner had to deal with worse and was limited with what he could do due to embargoes.

So Ince should really still have been here until at least the end of this season when he could have the things Noel and Leam had. All Ince needed was TIME.

[stealthpapes]

Whereas, the Guv'ner had to deal with worse and was limited with what he could do due to embargoes.

This is clearly true.

I just wouldn’t have brought that spell up.

Have people actually forgotten where we were only a year ago? Or how long we were under embargoes and restrictions?

[El Diablo]

Just watched the Bolton - Bradford p/o game.

It's like watching a different league in comparison to the turgid one dimension anti football shite Richardson produces.

He'll never get us out of L1.

[AthleticoSpizz]

^Weeellll, that’s a ‘different take’ on things^

[stealthpapes]

So Ince

We were only relegated in the end by the points deduction.

Outside of that, overall form consistent with 54 points a season.

I’m not saying he’s above criticism, there was a complete collapse in form after the second points deduction in two seasons, too often we played just to Carroll’s strengths, but his record is nowhere close to say:

Bullivant 38 league games, 10 wins, 9 draws, 19 losses, actual relegation form.

I would hope most Reading fans would consider his spell in charge in the context of what was going on in the club those seasons.

[leon]

I can't be bothered to read all Brogue's rants etc but consider our last 2 promotions from this league....

1. Pardew - we basically bought our way out and even then it took him 2.5 seasons and we nearly messed it up when we eventually made it.

2. McGhee - it took him 3 seasons and after the first season when we finished towards the bottom there were plenty at Elm Park who wanted him out and slow hand clapped the perceived slow and ponderous passing.....it took him a further 2 seasons to build a promotion winning team with the players he needed for his style which we all agree produced some of the best football we have all seen.

All managers need TIME.

lol love these sort of comparisons, I’m not sure using examples from 30 years ago holds water in the modern game. . We didn’t even have transfer windows when McGhee was here nor did we have the bosman ruling it was a completely different era. It’s bonkers. So basically what you’re saying is because we gave a manager 3 years in the role back in 1991 - 35 years ago, that’s means we should give Richardson more time now? you realise how ridiculous that sounds?

You’re talking absolute bollocks Brogue and you know it.

The mans giving examples of where giving a manager time worked. This footballs changed nonsense is just a load of cock.

[Brogue]

I can't be bothered to read all Brogue's rants etc but consider our last 2 promotions from this league....

1. Pardew - we basically bought our way out and even then it took him 2.5 seasons and we nearly messed it up when we eventually made it.

2. McGhee - it took him 3 seasons and after the first season when we finished towards the bottom there were plenty at Elm Park who wanted him out and slow hand clapped the perceived slow and ponderous passing.....it took him a further 2 seasons to build a promotion winning team with the players he needed for his style which we all agree produced some of the best football we have all seen.

All managers need TIME.

lol love these sort of comparisons, I’m not sure using examples from 30 years ago holds water in the modern game. . We didn’t even have transfer windows when McGhee was here nor did we have the bosman ruling it was a completely different era. It’s bonkers. So basically what you’re saying is because we gave a manager 3 years in the role back in 1991 - 35 years ago, that’s means we should give Richardson more time now? you realise how ridiculous that sounds?

You’re talking absolute bollocks Brogue and you know it.

The mans giving examples of where giving a manager time worked. This footballs changed nonsense is just a load of cock.

Checks post time. 1:14am. When you wake up, and sober up, you can apologise.

[leon]

lol love these sort of comparisons, I’m not sure using examples from 30 years ago holds water in the modern game. . We didn’t even have transfer windows when McGhee was here nor did we have the bosman ruling it was a completely different era. It’s bonkers. So basically what you’re saying is because we gave a manager 3 years in the role back in 1991 - 35 years ago, that’s means we should give Richardson more time now? you realise how ridiculous that sounds?

You’re talking absolute bollocks Brogue and you know it.

The mans giving examples of where giving a manager time worked. This footballs changed nonsense is just a load of cock.

Checks post time. 1:14am. When you wake up, and sober up, you can apologise.

No. Still bollocks Brogue.

I don’t need you telling when and what I can post. Thanks.

[Brogue]

You’re talking absolute bollocks Brogue and you know it.

The mans giving examples of where giving a manager time worked. This footballs changed nonsense is just a load of cock.

Checks post time. 1:14am. When you wake up, and sober up, you can apologise.

No. Still bollocks Brogue.

I don’t need you telling when and what I can post. Thanks.

Apology accepted

[leon]

Checks post time. 1:14am. When you wake up, and sober up, you can apologise.

No. Still bollocks Brogue.

I don’t need you telling when and what I can post. Thanks.

Apology accepted

[Hound]

So Ince

We were only relegated in the end by the points deduction.

Outside of that, overall form consistent with 54 points a season.

I’m not saying he’s above criticism, there was a complete collapse in form after the second points deduction in two seasons, too often we played just to Carroll’s strengths, but his record is nowhere close to say:

Bullivant 38 league games, 10 wins, 9 draws, 19 losses, actual relegation form.

I would hope most Reading fans would consider his spell in charge in the context of what was going on in the club those seasons.

Had no real issue with Ince. In fact I think had he stayed we’d have done quite well with him in L1

Was dealt a ridiculously difficult hand and as stated only relagated due to the points deduction. We had a dreadful squad for the champ

Again got hounded out a bit really. Obvs he annoyed people with some of his comments but he wasn’t that bad at all

[linkenholtroyal]

So Ince

We were only relegated in the end by the points deduction.

Outside of that, overall form consistent with 54 points a season.

I’m not saying he’s above criticism, there was a complete collapse in form after the second points deduction in two seasons, too often we played just to Carroll’s strengths, but his record is nowhere close to say:

Bullivant 38 league games, 10 wins, 9 draws, 19 losses, actual relegation form.

I would hope most Reading fans would consider his spell in charge in the context of what was going on in the club those seasons.

Had no real issue with Ince. In fact I think had he stayed we’d have done quite well with him in L1

Was dealt a ridiculously difficult hand and as stated only relagated due to the points deduction. We had a dreadful squad for the champ

Again got hounded out a bit really. Obvs he annoyed people with some of his comments but he wasn’t that bad at all

As stated before I am quite firmly so far embedded on this fence that it’s actually starting to hurt. But if I remember rightly Inces philosophy was to be hard to beat and then build a team from there. Consolidate etc…. So what’s the difference other than experience between the guvnor and Leam. Both have inherited poor squads with very little other than loans to make a difference.

Maybe Leam just needs time…. Or maybe he is just s**t time will tell….

[linkenholtroyal]

So Ince

We were only relegated in the end by the points deduction.

Outside of that, overall form consistent with 54 points a season.

I’m not saying he’s above criticism, there was a complete collapse in form after the second points deduction in two seasons, too often we played just to Carroll’s strengths, but his record is nowhere close to say:

Bullivant 38 league games, 10 wins, 9 draws, 19 losses, actual relegation form.

I would hope most Reading fans would consider his spell in charge in the context of what was going on in the club those seasons.

Had no real issue with Ince. In fact I think had he stayed we’d have done quite well with him in L1

Was dealt a ridiculously difficult hand and as stated only relagated due to the points deduction. We had a dreadful squad for the champ

Again got hounded out a bit really. Obvs he annoyed people with some of his comments but he wasn’t that bad at all

As stated before I am quite firmly so far embedded on this fence that it’s actually starting to hurt. But if I remember rightly Inces philosophy was to be hard to beat and then build a team from there. Consolidate etc…. So what’s the difference other than experience between the guvnor and Leam. Both have inherited poor squads with very little other than loans to make a difference.

Maybe Leam just needs time…. Or maybe he is just s**t time will tell….

Call me switzerland

[stealthpapes]

So Ince

We were only relegated in the end by the points deduction.

Outside of that, overall form consistent with 54 points a season.

I’m not saying he’s above criticism, there was a complete collapse in form after the second points deduction in two seasons, too often we played just to Carroll’s strengths, but his record is nowhere close to say:

Bullivant 38 league games, 10 wins, 9 draws, 19 losses, actual relegation form.

I would hope most Reading fans would consider his spell in charge in the context of what was going on in the club those seasons.

Had no real issue with Ince. In fact I think had he stayed we’d have done quite well with him in L1

Was dealt a ridiculously difficult hand and as stated only relagated due to the points deduction. We had a dreadful squad for the champ

Again got hounded out a bit really. Obvs he annoyed people with some of his comments but he wasn’t that bad at all

As stated before I am quite firmly so far embedded on this fence that it’s actually starting to hurt. But if I remember rightly Inces philosophy was to be hard to beat and then build a team from there. Consolidate etc…. So what’s the difference other than experience between the guvnor and Leam. Both have inherited poor squads with very little other than loans to make a difference.

Maybe Leam just needs time…. Or maybe he is just s**t time will tell….

Leam’s record so far is a solid, just-shy of playoffs, one. Collapse in form at end adds a sour note but not much more.

If we’d just stayed up, then yeah, there might be a point here, but we really didn’t. And in terms of summer business, I think we’re talking about the right few additions not a complete squad rebuild.

[Brogue]

Had no real issue with Ince. In fact I think had he stayed we’d have done quite well with him in L1

Was dealt a ridiculously difficult hand and as stated only relagated due to the points deduction. We had a dreadful squad for the champ

Again got hounded out a bit really. Obvs he annoyed people with some of his comments but he wasn’t that bad at all

As stated before I am quite firmly so far embedded on this fence that it’s actually starting to hurt. But if I remember rightly Inces philosophy was to be hard to beat and then build a team from there. Consolidate etc…. So what’s the difference other than experience between the guvnor and Leam. Both have inherited poor squads with very little other than loans to make a difference.

Maybe Leam just needs time…. Or maybe he is just s**t time will tell….

Leam’s record so far is a solid, just-shy of playoffs, one. Collapse in form at end adds a sour note but not much more.

If we’d just stayed up, then yeah, there might be a point here, but we really didn’t. And in terms of summer business, I think we’re talking about the right few additions not a complete squad rebuild.

Our luck ran out. This ‘collapse in form’ was always there ready and waiting. Waiting for us to stop scoring with our only shot on target. If we were playing well and it dropped off I’d be in agreement with you. But it’s not like that. We’ve been mostly dog shit from the moment the fraud arrived.

[El Diablo]

^Weeellll, that’s a ‘different take’ on things^

Aww, one too many sherrys me thinks...

[AthleticoSpizz]

Good effort Sir

[Extended-Phenotype]

Our luck ran out. This ‘collapse in form’ was always there ready and waiting. Waiting for us to stop scoring with our only shot on target. If we were playing well and it dropped off I’d be in agreement with you. But it’s not like that. We’ve been mostly dog shit from the moment the fraud arrived.

I think the reason for disparate opinions is due to it being quite difficult to pinpoint the problems with any confidence. It’s reasonable to argue that Leam is the problem, having watched poor team performances somewhat rescued by moments of individual quality, particularly Marriott’s remarkable goal scoring form. But then there are reasonable arguments to be made in defence of Leam too; a ramshackle squad stripped of its core, patched up with summer signings that were either struggling to gel or simply not good enough. And of course a string of injuries that no doubt meant two steps backwards each time it felt like we were moving forwards.

Ultimately, whether his fault or not, we just don’t have any real idea what Leam’s football is supposed to look like, either because he lacks the quality to impose it, or circumstances somewhat out of his control has delayed its development. Some people think time will give us an answer. Others think we already have our answer.

I honestly flip flop from one to the other on a weekly basis. I hate sacking managers after only a short time in charge, especially if we aren’t in any immediate danger. But then I also hate the idea of waiting for something that might not ever happen. I do think there is a chance things will change. You don’t, which is fair enough - he’s not exactly got a pedigree that screams positive, attacking football, and we are yet to really see much of that ourselves. But maybe it’s right to wait and see. As I’ve said before, his excuses might sound convincing now, but they won’t really work after the summer.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

Our luck ran out. This ‘collapse in form’ was always there ready and waiting. Waiting for us to stop scoring with our only shot on target. If we were playing well and it dropped off I’d be in agreement with you. But it’s not like that. We’ve been mostly dog shit from the moment the fraud arrived.

I think the reason for disparate opinions is due to it being quite difficult to pinpoint the problems with any confidence. It’s reasonable to argue that Leam is the problem, having watched poor team performances somewhat rescued by moments of individual quality, particularly Marriott’s remarkable goal scoring form. But then there are reasonable arguments to be made in defence of Leam too; a ramshackle squad stripped of its core, patched up with summer signings that were either struggling to gel or simply not good enough. And of course a string of injuries that no doubt meant two steps backwards each time it felt like we were moving forwards.

Ultimately, whether his fault or not, we just don’t have any real idea what Leam’s football is supposed to look like, either because he lacks the quality to impose it, or circumstances somewhat out of his control has delayed its development. Some people think time will give us an answer. Others think we already have our answer.

I honestly flip flop from one to the other on a weekly basis. I hate sacking managers after only a short time in charge, especially if we aren’t in any immediate danger. But then I also hate the idea of waiting for something that might not ever happen. I do think there is a chance things will change. You don’t, which is fair enough - he’s not exactly got a pedigree that screams positive, attacking football, and we are yet to really see much of that ourselves. But maybe it’s right to wait and see. As I’ve said before, his excuses might sound convincing now, but they won’t really work after the summer.

I agree 100% with you.

Any manager would need time to turn this thing around. We don't know if Richardson is the right guy to do it, neither do we know of he's the wrong one either.

So I favour the view that he gets until November. But I'm not fully convinced by him either. However there is absolutely no way I won't be renewing my season ticket. I don't give up after 26 years just because times are a bit tough.

[stealthpapes]

Our luck ran out. This ‘collapse in form’ was always there ready and waiting. Waiting for us to stop scoring with our only shot on target. If we were playing well and it dropped off I’d be in agreement with you. But it’s not like that. We’ve been mostly dog shit from the moment the fraud arrived.

I think the reason for disparate opinions is due to it being quite difficult to pinpoint the problems with any confidence. It’s reasonable to argue that Leam is the problem, having watched poor team performances somewhat rescued by moments of individual quality, particularly Marriott’s remarkable goal scoring form. But then there are reasonable arguments to be made in defence of Leam too; a ramshackle squad stripped of its core, patched up with summer signings that were either struggling to gel or simply not good enough. And of course a string of injuries that no doubt meant two steps backwards each time it felt like we were moving forwards.

Ultimately, whether his fault or not, we just don’t have any real idea what Leam’s football is supposed to look like, either because he lacks the quality to impose it, or circumstances somewhat out of his control has delayed its development. Some people think time will give us an answer. Others think we already have our answer.

I honestly flip flop from one to the other on a weekly basis. I hate sacking managers after only a short time in charge, especially if we aren’t in any immediate danger. But then I also hate the idea of waiting for something that might not ever happen. I do think there is a chance things will change. You don’t, which is fair enough - he’s not exactly got a pedigree that screams positive, attacking football, and we are yet to really see much of that ourselves. But maybe it’s right to wait and see. As I’ve said before, his excuses might sound convincing now, but they won’t really work after the summer.

The only things I would add are:

The list of things beyond his control is a longer list, but again should get less significant with time.

Reading has a long and distinguished history of giving managers time and it working out. Are memories really that short?