Yes. Kayal broken leg and Sidwell a 'minor' back operation - can't remember CH's exact words in the press conference but he's going to be out a while.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Vincent Janssen
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
Yes. Kayal broken leg and Sidwell a 'minor' back operation - can't remember CH's exact words in the press conference but he's going to be out a while.
I think there is a chance that Ryan will miss game or two if Australia win the next play-offs
. And Walton is injured and the emergency recall option is not on. Third keeper might be essential
No problem. For a minute there I was worried that I'd been playing against a disabled team unwittingly when I was a kid.
Sorry, I mean with GKs, anywhere in the PL in the last 10 years?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You arent being serious are you?
How many times a season do you need more than one goalkeeper a game?
Even with playing one striker upfront, both Hemed and Murray are usually spent after 70 minutes which would mean we would need at least two per game, Plus do we not want options. Having three keepers is sensible but would you really say it was a preference over another striker.
Lets get serious, a 4th choice striker is likely to play more games than a second choice keeper let alone 3rd choice keeper.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Again, it wasn't an either/or situation. We needed a third gk and a striker. One worked out, one didn't.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
In your squad you will have 20 odd who are good with their feet. Let's call them footballers. Liverpool have one recognised centre forward and he doesn't even start (Daniel Sturridge)
If one of your two strikers are injured, you can input one of these other footballers into that position and it may not prove disastrous.
If you lose 2 keepers (a COMPLETELY specialist position) and are forced to put in a footballer into goal it WOULD be disastrous.
We are not trend setting in making sure we have 3 keepers in our squad. It's a completely logical idea.
I am not questioning having 3 keepers is a bad Idea, but the Idea of Having 3 strikers 2 of which are fit feels a little weak and leaves as vunrable as if we had two keepers.
As you say others could play there, Virgo once did a terrific job, but we are a premier league club not league 1 having to count every penny.
BensGrandad
New member
I think that the situation was compounded by the ridiculous statement by PB about why we didnt sign a striker but we did sign a competent keeper on loan Also many supporters do not consider Ryan to be any better than Maenpaa if even as good as him and certainly not as good as Stockdale in the last season.
The choice and option for a third keeper was far wider in most peoples eyes.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 16,589
i couldnt quote any specific examples, but one does hear of emergency loans for goalkeepers (the only position it can happen) because a club is left with no fit keepers.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
That's because some supporters want a stick to beat Barber with, so adjust their perception to feed their anger.
We've had three keepers in the squad for a long time.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Do you not think we held off signing Krull until the last minute BECAUSE we were keeping the loan position free until the last moment? Didn't we confirm TK quite late in the evening, I think the Janssen offer happened so late, that is why we submitted a deal sheet right on 11pm with the extended period to conclude the deal. Wasn't like TK was signed a few days earlier to scupper a loan deal. We might not have got a call from Levi until 9pm or something...
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I can give you an example of using our third keeper. It wasn't so long ago, Kuszczak broke a finger, Ankergren was ill, so Brezovan played at Huddersfield. http://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/albion/10055369.Buckley_double_wins_it_for_Albion/
Last season Stockdale was injured, Maenpaa played the next game with Ankergren on the bench.
Quite, and that is why I would have gone with Sanchez as third choice and tried to get a forward on loan.
Just a calculated gamble for me......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
The reason we went after Janssen late, was because we were expecting Andone to sign, but his club pulled the plug because another of their players got injured that day, so they wouldn't release him.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
We wanted both. Ignore the loan part of it. We wanted a keeper and a striker. We were buying two strikers on the 31st Aug, and couldn't get either.
Walton went on loan to get experience, but you wanted a younger keeper on the bench? Madness. Experience isn't just playing in goals, but travelling, noise, abuse, crowds, facing world class players etc.
BensGrandad
New member
Yes that is possible in which case we would have signed a 3rd choice stop gap free agent so why confuse the issue about not signing a striker but getting a keeper as if consolation.
I am fully aware of all of that. But what are the odd's of it happening.....:.:..extreme, in the event that Maenppa was required and Sanchez was in the bench, that's fantastic experience.
Being round the first team for any player is fantastic experience, hardly madness.
That is why young players are blooded in this way.
After all you win nothing with youngsters.......
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
It worked well for Hyypia, didn't it? Walton in goal at White Hart Lane.
Played well if I recall. Great experience.
Jordan Pickford did okay as well on loan an at Preston, similar age to Sanchez as well.
Keeping it in context we are talking extreme situations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk