Mathematically speaking, it’s far too early to definitively say whether Reading’s season is now actually over. On today’s evidence though, it may as well be. The first half? Poor, but I’ve seen worse. The second? An error-strewn, aimless mess – defensively and offensively; individually, collectively and tactically.
And the overriding feeling I get from today’s match is that this Reading team simply isn’t up for a challenge when a game is going against it. If there’s truly any burning desire in this group
to put things right when the opposition score, or to get a grip on a match slipping away from us, I’d love to see evidence of that.
Simply put, the Dons wanted it more than us today. They were first to 50/50s time and time again in the second half, and if any team was going to score at 3-2, it was only going to be them.
The lack of spirit among the players shouldn’t excuse Leam Richardson’s responsibility for this defeat – more on that later – but if all else fails, the Royals should at least have the pride and stubbornness to make the opposition work hard for the points. I truly hate tepid failures to mount a late fightback, such as today’s, when the game drifts away from us because we allow it to.
I don’t see a group of players who don’t care – that feels like it’d be too simplistic (and unfair) a diagnosis. I do however see complacency and defeatism slipping in, as if a mid-table finish has already been accepted as inevitable.
I’d love to be wrong about that, I really would. But when you’re 3-2 down on the road at Wimbledon and chasing the game for the last 20 minutes, that’s the time to prove your resolve. That’s the time for individuals to stand up and take responsibility.
Go and prove me wrong on Tuesday at Wigan Athletic, and then next Saturday at home to Wycombe Wanderers. Unfortunately, at the moment it feels an awful lot like this side won’t do that, that this season it’s going nowhere.
The manager
None of the above should absolve Richardson of his own fair share of criticism. Ultimately a collectively poor showing is also on him, particularly the aimlessly ineffective attacking display which yielded just three shots on target – and little sense that Reading even knew how they wanted to hurt Wimbledon.
Reading (4-2-3-1): Pereira; Nyambe, O’Connor, Dorsett, Roberts; Wing, Savage; Lane, Keane, Doyle; Marriott
Subs: Stevens, Yiadom, Burns, Ward, Fraser, Ritchie, Ehibhatiomhan
Specific decisions of his were odd. In the starting XI, Paddy Lane and Will Keane simply aren’t good fits for their winger/wing-back hybrid and number 10 roles respectively. The former was also – strangely – moved into the middle when Keane went off after half an hour, with Kamari Doyle (strongest centrally) kept out on the left.
As for Richardson’s subs, first and foremost it’s not apparent why new signing Kadan Young wasn’t included on the bench but two centre-backs (as well as a full-back and midfielder who can play there) were.
Young was available – he travelled as the spare man and warmed up on the pitch before the match – but the option of introducing his pace, dynamism and creativity was conspicuous by its absence as Reading’s attacking options quickly ran out in the second half.
As for the changes the manager made in the second half, initially putting Savage out to the left wing (while removing Lane and Doyle) was a waste, as was later bringing Andy Yiadom on for Haydon Roberts. While neither Lane, Doyle nor Roberts played so well as to expect to stay on, it’s still on the manager to ensure the team retains balance and isn’t undermined by its own changes.
In fact, Reading ended the game in a 3-5-2 desperately short on dynamism and invention:
Pereira; Nyambe, O’Connor, Dorsett; Yiadom, Fraser, Wing, Savage, Ritchie; Marriott, Ehibhatiomhan
It’d be remiss of me to ignore who was missing today: it would have been great to have any of Ben Elliott, Daniel Kyerewaa and Randell Williams available. But Richardson still had a decent hand and played it too poorly – more specifically, too conservatively. Lane and/or Doyle should have been kept on.
Zooming out a bit, it’s clear Richardson wants to make his system work: a 4-2-3-1 on paper which becomes a 3-2-4-1 in possession (I manage to bring this up in every match report, I know I know). But it’s also clear it’s not working for a few of these players: Lane, Keane and Savage all seem stifled by it.
Perhaps altering the system to more of an orthodox 4-2-3-1, especially in games like this when Reading need to push for a goal, would pay off?
Defensive woes
Despite all the above, Reading did at least manage to score twice, continuing a general goalscoring improvement under Richardson on his predecessor. Marriott finding the net is par for the course nowadays, and a well worked set-piece made it 2-2 (Charlie Savage’s inswinging corner headed back by Paudie O’Connor, Jeriel Dorsett nodding home).
But that’s overridden by just how open Reading were at the back: in both halves, but particularly the second. Joel Pereira’s howler for the second Dons goal was the obviously poor error, but Marcus Browne was granted far too much space to slot home for 1-0 and 3-2, and the Royals were generally all over the place in an erratic second half.
This isn’t an issue of experience – Reading have plenty of that in the team, particularly in the form of Ryan Nyambe and O’Connor – but does seem to come back to that same point of complacency I mentioned higher up. Ringing the changes on Tuesday – perhaps bringing in Finley Burns and Benn Ward – is in order.
