Jump to content
IGNORED

Two Keepers


Hampshire reds

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Hampshire reds said:

Sorry if i have missed something but why did we have two keepers on the bench. 

Steve can’t afford to sack him, Steve can’t be arsed to sack him, Steve ain’t sacking him. That might disappoint you but you (and a few others) really need to accept that and deal with it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hampshire reds said:

 Brittan. Danny Simpson. Pearson. Morton. just to name a few

Are you ok?

How do you know if any of the above were available or not? Man C named 2 keepers fri night so maybe even they struggle to name 9 subs during a time of the season where injuries are common & you can add Covid into that mix of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because why not? It is a cup game and if the worst was to happen and Max was injured, why not throw the young lad on and see how he does? No point risking Bentley at that point as you’d need him for the league. Pretty sure he has basically been involved in every match day anyway. Not on bench but always there home and away helping in warmups. Maybe just a little incentive for being so professional? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nige said of Bents, "He knows the rules" and I guess he may have broken one of them, e.g. putting on weight over Christmas or arriving late/pissed for training or something like that.

Max has done well enough to keep his place and Bents may not get his chance until he loses those Chriatmas pounds and/or if Max's form dips.  We shall see.

Of course there is also speculation that Southampton are going to pay us a load of dosh for him during the January window.

Edited by wendyredredrobin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Because why not? It is a cup game and if the worst was to happen and Max was injured, why not throw the young lad on and see how he does? No point risking Bentley at that point as you’d need him for the league.  

 

In which case, why have Bentley sat there as well?

For once, I do agree with HR that it seems a bizarre and curious thing to do.

The likelihood of having two keepers injured in a game is almost zero, however the likelihood of having several outfield players crocked is much higher and we had people there available as emergency back-up but not on the bench because we chose two goalies.

In the end, it makes no difference because existing players performed well and we didn't even need to make our fifth sub until the last half of E/T. 

It still strikes me as odd though. As did the starting line-up of the Millwall game.

You can support the positive progress Pearson is having here and still question his judgement at times.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

The likelihood of having two keepers injured in a game is almost zero,

Not saying this was the rationale, but guess a sending off and an injury, whilst very unlikely, maybe plausible and given a game that could well end in penalties, being confident of having a fit keeper on the pitch maybe more important. Given 7 other subs to cover 10 positions, not necessarily madness, particularly as also gave Wiles-Richards the matchday experience others have alluded to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday, I think it was Blackburn who played their #2 on the basis that they could not be sure that the #1 would not go down with COVID at any stage. I’d guess something similar here - there was probably no intent to play Wiles-Richards but it was to have him involved in the match day squad (I know he already joins in the warm up) in case he is needed for real, either on the bench or starting, of which the chances are higher than normal currently 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Yesterday, I think it was Blackburn who played their #2 on the basis that they could not be sure that the #1 would not go down with COVID at any stage. I’d guess something similar here - there was probably no intent to play Wiles-Richards but it was to have him involved in the match day squad (I know he already joins in the warm up) in case he is needed for real, either on the bench or starting, of which the chances are higher than normal currently 

Also, Sam Pearson aside (no idea why it wasn’t him) I don’t think there were too many other options.

Towler was cup tied, Bakinson has COVID, Cundy is just making his way back from long term absence & Tanner, Baker & Williams are all injured.

Seems clear that Simpson, Britton & Morton (who might be injured anyway) have no future with us, so highly unlikely one of them would be involved.

Edited by GrahamC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Also, Sam Pearson aside (no idea why it wasn’t him) I don’t think there were too many other options.

Towler was cup tied, Bakinson has COVID, Cundy is just making his way back from long term absence & Tanner, Baker & Williams are all injured.

Seems clear that Simpson, Britton & Morton (who might be injured anyway) have no future with us, so highly unlikely one of them would be involved.

Pearson been with u23s for weeks.

So, toss-up between Simpson or Wiles-Richards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Pearson been with u23s for weeks.

So, toss-up between Simpson or Wiles-Richards?

Yep- I think we should assume Simpson’s absence, so he can’t even make a 9 man subs bench when the 6 I mentioned above are all absent, effectively confirms he isn’t going to feature for us again.

I doubt we will go as far as ending his contract early but to me it has already happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I miss the days of the stand in keeper.

Tinnion's worldy in front of the East End against Shrewsbury Town? I seem to remember.

Proper football days. I ******* hate so much about the modern game and all its self-importance bollocks.

The game has been over thought, over examined, and it's much the poorer for it, if you ask me.

 

Edited by AppyDAZE
  • Thanks 1
  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Yep- I think we should assume Simpson’s absence, so he can’t even make a 9 man subs bench when the 6 I mentioned above are all absent, effectively confirms he isn’t going to feature for us again.

I doubt we will go as far as ending his contract early but to me it has already happened.

I wonder whether a little transition into the coaching staff sometime between now and the summer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Davefevs said:

I wonder whether a little transition into the coaching staff sometime between now and the summer?

Not sure, if I had money on someone doing that in time I’d think Andy King is the more likely.

Simpson already does media stuff for BT, doesn’t he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...