Skip to main content

Manchester City 1-0 Reading

The Royals fought valiantly against a superior Manchester City team.

Reading largely kept the 5-3-2 from facing Tottenham, but you could argue it was closer to a 3-4-1-2, with both James and Fishlock playing deeper. Cooper came back into the side to replace Emma Mitchell, and Rachel Rowe returned after suspension.

City overloaded the wing in the 5-3-2, with the defence stretched

The problem was that Manchester City's 4-3-3 stretched the three centre-backs, with Kelly and Hemp starting against the touchline. Reading's wing-backs offered little support as they pressed high, worrying far more about City's full-backs. When Reading gain possession further up the pitch they were liable to be countered on, with City getting numbers forward quickly. And that was coupled with the fact that some sloppy errors led to big chances too. Reading were lucky not to be three or four down by the time they had their first shot - 25 minutes into the match.

It was a change of shape that allowed Reading enough of a foothold to actually have that shot on goal. Chambers switched to a 4-2-3-1. That gave the two centre-backs less to worry about, as they were insulated from the wide forwards by Leine and Woodham, while The Royals' wide midfielders were the ones to focus on Bronze and Stokes. Those extra bodies in midfield contributed to Reading winning the ball high, with Fishlock able to slip through Eikeland. It's a chance that she, really, should have buried, but as we know Eikeland is not adept at finishing chances.

Leine isn't quick enough to track the run of Weir

The change in formation also put less pressure on Leine. Reading's centre backs track players fairly high - slightly odd in a formation with two defensive midfielders - but they don't seem to have the pace to get back into position. Bartrip seems to put herself in the right position the majority of the time but maybe Leine hasn't had that consistent game-time needed to get up to speed. On a few occasions, she was lagging behind the play.

It must be said that it didn't seem to matter what the formation was, Chloe Kelly managed to find enough space to cause Reading problems, especially in the first half. No Reading defender seemed to be able to deal with her. It was only Moloney in goal that kept the score down. Moloney was impervious. She may have had an issue at Bristol, but she kept her team in the game for long stretches.

The goal, while a great piece of play by Hemp, was a defensive failing on the part of many players. James and Harding turned over possession before both made half-hearted tackles to stop Hemp's run. Maybe worried about giving a penalty away, and Leine could have felled the winger before she even got that far. I think Bartrip probably got a little too deep, rather than being in the right passing lane.

At the end of the day, a 1-0 loss is not a terrible result, but it was a score of Manchester City's making. Another tight game against the big four should have ended up more like games against Chelsea or Arsenal than 


Popular posts from this blog

Reading FC Season Review | 2020/2021

When your season starts with your manager having to watch your opening match from the hotel because he's not been hired in time to beat the quarantine, anything above getting relegated should probably be classed as a success. And Reading exceeded surely even the most optimistic of pre-season predictions. Veljko Paunovic Veljko Paunovic almost exclusively utilised a core group of players in a 4-2-3-1, only changing things when enforced. One of the consequences of that is that Reading had more players play over 3,000 minutes than any other side (roughly three-quarters of the season). That consistency is often seen as a good thing, but in a condensed season, it surely contributed to the injury woes. It can't have helped that the manager also used the second-fewest number of players over the course of the season. His substitutions were often categorised as late (Reading's subs played just 16 minutes on average, only Norwich's played fewer) or non-existent (Reading were 19t

The Big Man Cometh

In the grand scheme of things, I consider myself a bit of an Andy Carroll sceptic. Reading have a penchant for signing players that spend the majority of their time in the physio room, and Carroll aligns with that transfer policy to a tee. It must be said that given the lack of other options, and a short term deal that has no real risk for the club, there isn't any big downside in gambling on the Geordie. With that being said, even I was calling out for the introduction for The Big Man at half-time on Saturday. Reading had a heap of possession just outside the box in the opening forty-five but couldn't translate that into chances. Drinkwater had a tame shot saved after good work from Yiadom, but the best chance of the half fell to Puscas after a fortuitous deflection off a Forest player. The flag went up for offside but it didn't matter as the striker couldn't convert anyway. Both managers had done a fairly good job at negating the other side's strengths. Forest'

"We’ve never been so flat"

There have been some abysmal Reading performances this season, I don't really need to list them out. But in that dirge, there are two performances that I haven't fully come to terms with my feelings on. The visits of Sheffield United and Luton to The SCL are a clash between feeling like the concept behind the tactics was  reasonable and the implementation clearly not working. But there's one issue with my reading of the game; Veljko himself wasn't happy with either performance. In fact, he used the exact same word to label both - 'flat'. Reading's three in midfield meant they could cover SU attacking midfielders and wing backs And yet, the set-ups for both seem to perfectly explain why the team may be flat. Against The Blades they switched to a 4-3-2-1, with Ejaria dropping deeper to form the three alongside Drinkwater and Laurent. That trio were effectively tasked with stopping McGoldrick and Gibbs-White from being able to come central. On Wednesday we may