bristolcitysweden Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Tomas Kalas is a great keeper and would do fine. Also Lloyd Kelly and Marlon Pack are decent keepers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Personally think its ridiculous not to have a sub keeper on the bench,especially with how our luck has been with them of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse With No Name Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 This. If you cant cover all positions with the 6 outfield subs then you have problems, especially when several players can play in more than one position. I wonder, in the 2 recent games who the sub was who replaced Marinovic on the bench, and if he got to get on. I bet not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownendRed97 Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 23 minutes ago, The Horse With No Name said: This. If you cant cover all positions with the 6 outfield subs then you have problems, especially when several players can play in more than one position. I wonder, in the 2 recent games who the sub was who replaced Marinovic on the bench, and if he got to get on. I bet not. Madness how on Friday we had Watkins on the bench and not a sub keeper...absurd in my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashton_fan Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Max is young and less likely to be injured than the other two, have to say I'm no longer worried about him being in goal, doing a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 10 minutes ago, DownendRed97 said: Madness how on Friday we had Watkins on the bench and not a sub keeper...absurd in my opinion Why is it absurd? I remember Tinnion do the same saying that keepers rarely get sent off or get too injured to continue. LJ said he likes having more outfield options on the subs bench and that several of the players have goalkeeping experience from earlier in their careers. I don’t know what the stats are for losing a keeper during a game but the percentage can’t be that high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Of course it’s a gamble. Literally..! If it goes wrong it’s a lost gamble, but the odds on the amount of times a sub keeper is ever needed, makes it a valid gamble. It’s not one I’d take myself, personally, but for people to brand it as “wrong” or “absurd”, well, it wasn’t, was it. Because we didn’t need a sub keeper. It will only be wrong, if it leaves us without a keeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selred Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 7 minutes ago, Robbored said: Why is it absurd? I remember Tinnion do the same saying that keepers rarely get sent off or get too injured to continue. LJ said he likes having more outfield options on the subs bench and that several of the players have goalkeeping experience from earlier in their careers. I don’t know what the stats are for losing a keeper during a game but the percentage can’t be that high. Watkins isn’t fully fit and we had Eliasson and Taylor who plays in his positions. We had no player on the bench who can cover if MOL got injured. 6 subs should be enough, plus a keeper. No need for unfit unready players when there’s other options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 7 minutes ago, Robbored said: I don’t know what the stats are for losing a keeper during a game but the percentage can’t be that high. This is my fiftieth season of supporting City. Anyone else my age feel free to correct if my memory is slipping. John Galley took over when Millwall crocked Mike Gibson at AG. Brian (the cat) Tinnion took over during an away game and I think there may have been a third game where one of our outfielders took over. If correct that's just three time in fifty years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selred Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, 22A said: This is my fiftieth season of supporting City. Anyone else my age feel free to correct if my memory is slipping. John Galley took over when Millwall crocked Mike Gibson at AG. Brian (the cat) Tinnion took over during an away game and I think there may have been a third game where one of our outfielders took over. If correct that's just three time in fifty years. That’s purely based on there being no subs left so outfit players need to go in goal. That doesn’t include keepers getting injured in games, and substituted with another keeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, Selred said: Watkins isn’t fully fit and we had Eliasson and Taylor who plays in his positions. We had no player on the bench who can cover if MOL got injured. 6 subs should be enough, plus a keeper. No need for unfit unready players when there’s other options So you’re saying that Watkins shouldn’t have been on the bench? It wouldn’t necessarily be a sub that went in goal should a replacement needed. LJ felt he had enough outfield players with keeping experience to play between the sticks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selred Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Robbored said: So you’re saying that Watkins shouldn’t have been on the bench? It wouldn’t necessarily be a sub that went in goal should a replacement needed. LJ felt he had enough outfield players with keeping experience to play between the sticks. Yes. A outfield player is not good enough to be in goal in the Championship. Any professional league to be honest. Goalkeeping takes years and years of learning the craft, training day in and day out. None of our players have any experience in goal. I would rather we had a defender up front, than a defender in goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWred Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Would rather have a sub 'keeper on the bench that could play outfield instead of Watkins anyway to be honest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 36 minutes ago, Selred said: Yes. A outfield player is not good enough to be in goal in the Championship. Any professional league to be honest. Goalkeeping takes years and years of learning the craft, training day in and day out. None of our players have any experience in goal. I would rather we had a defender up front, than a defender in goal. No doubt it’s a gamble.....but should the keeper be injured or sent off then it’s not that likely the outfield player would have to play the entire match. I’d love to know what the stats are regarding goalkeepers having to be replaced during a game. Where’s Davefev with his stats when you need him?.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Fred Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 52 minutes ago, DownendRed97 said: Madness how on Friday we had Watkins on the bench and not a sub keeper...absurd in my opinion I guess Watkins is better between the sticks than the supposed keeper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Dazzler Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 hour ago, 22A said: This is my fiftieth season of supporting City. Anyone else my age feel free to correct if my memory is slipping. John Galley took over when Millwall crocked Mike Gibson at AG. Brian (the cat) Tinnion took over during an away game and I think there may have been a third game where one of our outfielders took over. If correct that's just three time in fifty years. I remember Stefan Maierhofer, a tall striker we had on loan from Wolves in 2010 going in goal, possibly for Dean Gerken. He actually did better in goal than he did as a striker! Also, think this was mentioned yesterday during a thread re us playing Sheffield Weds. a few seasons ago Lee Peacock went in goal at Hillsborough, think he saved a penalty.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Of course it should never happen but with such high stakes at this time of year and people desperate to get result's, is it beyond the realms of possibility that a 'less than scrupulous pro' might seek to take advantage of the situation?. With no specialist sub goalkeeper available for the opposition is the temptation possibly there for an over enthusiastic pro to go in 'a bit hard' on the fella in goal, potentially taking him out of the game? Unlikely I know, but is that a risk worth taking with a play-off spot still up for grabs? literally a £multi million gamble. (or not?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 hour ago, 22A said: This is my fiftieth season of supporting City. Anyone else my age feel free to correct if my memory is slipping. John Galley took over when Millwall crocked Mike Gibson at AG. Brian (the cat) Tinnion took over during an away game and I think there may have been a third game where one of our outfielders took over. If correct that's just three time in fifty years. Didn’t Max come in for Maenpaa v Brentford if memory serves ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalcub Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Too not have a keeper on the bench is an unnecessary risk, but it shows how little lj thinks of the kiwi , j bet when maenpaa is back him and o'leary will be in every squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 2 hours ago, Robbored said: No doubt it’s a gamble.....but should the keeper be injured or sent off then it’s not that likely the outfield player would have to play the entire match. I’d love to know what the stats are regarding goalkeepers having to be replaced during a game. Where’s Davefev with his stats when you need him?.......... The stats are it could happen. That's enough for me. Stop being (not so) clever, Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 2 hours ago, Robbored said: No doubt it’s a gamble.....but should the keeper be injured or sent off then it’s not that likely the outfield player would have to play the entire match. I’d love to know what the stats are regarding goalkeepers having to be replaced during a game. Where’s Davefev with his stats when you need him?.......... Haha, Robbored is wrong again, knows it and he's wriggling on the hook.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said: Haha, Robbored is wrong again, knows it and he's wriggling on the hook.. What?..........ffs............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Robbored said: What?..........ffs............ Practically every City fan you speak to thinks no sub keeper is stupid at best, but no not Robbored Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 minute ago, AppyDAZE said: Practically every City fan you speak to thinks no sub keeper is stupid at best, but no not Robbored We really don’t know if Kalas or other players have been having keeping coaching in the unlikely event that they would be needed. LJ stands or falls by the decisions he makes . Those decisions are not made blindly I’m sure as he is such a stickler for the details. To us outsiders it seems odd but we have to trust the coaching staff who are doing a good job . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 3 hours ago, ashton_fan said: Max is young and less likely to be injured than the other two, have to say I'm no longer worried about him being in goal, doing a great job. How does being young stop you getting clattered and knocked unconscious by an opposition centre back at a corner? In the age of 7 subs, it’s madness. If the best argument in favour of this is someone saying that Kalas, Pack and Kelly are apparently decent keepers (how the hell he knows that is beyond me), then that only confirms again what madness it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said: Practically every City fan you speak to thinks no sub keeper is stupid at best, but no not Robbored I understand what LJ thinking was behind it - unlike the majority of posters on here......... Thats not to say that it’s a calculated gamble. As I posted earlier, I’d love to see the stats when a keeper has been replaced during a match. I imagine it’s very very rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: We really don’t know if Kalas or other players have been having keeping coaching in the unlikely event that they would be needed. LJ stands or falls by the decisions he makes . Those decisions are not made blindly I’m sure as he is such a stickler for the details. To us outsiders it seems odd but we have to trust the coaching staff who are doing a good job . Normally I agree that the coaches are best placed to make judgements on the form and fitness of players. But in this case, it’s an objective fact that we are electing to not pick a goalkeeper amongst 7 substitutes, when we have one who’s played 100s of professional games sat in the stands. I don’t need any knowledge beyond these facts to know that’s stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Robbored said: I understand what LJ thinking was behind it - unlike the majority of posters on here......... Thats not to say that it’s a calculated gamble. As I posted earlier, I’d love to see the stats when a keeper has been replaced during a match. I imagine it’s very very rare. We all know it’s rare. Maybe 1-2%. But it does happen, and if it happens without a sub keeper on the bench you are taking an enormous and avoidable risk. Frankly, taking this chance in order to include an unremarkable player like Watkins on the bench - who adds nothing that you don’t get from Eliasson, Palmer and Taylor - simply does not stack up as a sensible decision. It’s madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeRed Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 Keepers being shown a red card is not that uncommon - Accrington keeper sent off yesterday for 2 yellows for example - if an opposition player is through on goal and GK brings him down ( or more likely the player "goes down" at the slightest contact) then it's a red......far too big a risk IMO not to have a sub. The NZ keeper must be as cheap in training as he was in his one appearance for LJ to take the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted April 21, 2019 Report Share Posted April 21, 2019 THis is entirely a decision made by someone who looks at stats but probably doesn't have the best grasp of their meaning. You probably only need your sub keeper on a small % of games, hence it seems an attractive gamble to not use a sub keeper. But, when you need a sub keeper, you desperately need one. As we saw, Reading are a decent side and our keeper put in a worldie performance in the previous game. What would the score been if we'd had an outfield player in goal at Villa? As someone said, if you can't give yourself enough cover and options from 6 outfield subs then what are you doing and don't tell me the 7th outfield sub makes a big difference. It doesn't. Mental if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.