reynard Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 It seems to me that the position of a keeper on the bench hampers our options. Now I realise that if Fulop or whoever is injured or sent off during the game that we would be in trouble but how many times has that happened in the last 3 or4 seasons? If we dropped henderson from the bench we could have more options to change the way we play during a match. for eg bench could contain 3 attackers 1 midfielder and 1 defender at home or indeed 2 attackers 2 midfielders and 1 defender away fropm home. I'm not saying we should do this in games that really matter but at the moment for most games we could risk it. After all how many times have we neede an extra attacker/defender etc only to have a place on the bench occupied by a keeper?
dandannieldanok Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Personally I wouldn't like to see us take the risk, it isn't like when Sheff Utd had Phil Jagielka to call upon who could at least do the basics of goalkeeping.
reynard Posted 20 September 2007 Author Posted 20 September 2007 Personally I wouldn't like to see us take the risk, it isn't like when Sheff Utd had Phil Jagielka to call upon who could at least do the basics of goalkeeping. I appreciate your view but I would be interested to know how many times a keeper has actually been needed to come off the bench. I suspect the potential gains may outweight the potential losses.
Joe. Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 In a short answer, yes. It'd be a bit stupid not to.
Zingari Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 its a very high risk strategy not to have a keeper on the bench ; i would not take the risk
Brainy Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 As long as we have some kind of specialist from the outfield.
Geo V Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 I dont think that we have played a game this season and made changes and wished we had an extra player on the bench. Maybe we have made changes and hoped we had the chance to make 4 substitutions or something but even against QPR we brought on a striker in the 90th minute! One good thing about our squad is that players like Kish, Stearman, Chambers and others can play in quite a few positions so I wouldn't worry about dropping a sub GK from the bench.
Churchill Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Maybe a good idea against a defensive team but probaly would not take the risk because that one game we try it fulop could get injured or sent off
Simi Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 To risky especially with our luck. 4 Subs is enough I think.
Mark Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 It seems to me that the position of a keeper on the bench hampers our options. Now I realise that if Fulop or whoever is injured or sent off during the game that we would be in trouble but how many times has that happened in the last 3 or4 seasons? True but in Fulops case just last week for Hungary
The Stig Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Short answer, Yes. Say our keeper got injured in the first 10 minutes we'd be buggared, however on Fifa no as they never get injured
Moreton Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 It seems to me that the position of a keeper on the bench hampers our options. Now I realise that if Fulop or whoever is injured or sent off during the game that we would be in trouble but how many times has that happened in the last 3 or4 seasons?If we dropped henderson from the bench we could have more options to change the way we play during a match. for eg bench could contain 3 attackers 1 midfielder and 1 defender at home or indeed 2 attackers 2 midfielders and 1 defender away fropm home. I'm not saying we should do this in games that really matter but at the moment for most games we could risk it. After all how many times have we neede an extra attacker/defender etc only to have a place on the bench occupied by a keeper? Yes i completley agree, i play Football Manager and Championship Manager and have never included my 2nd choice goalie on the bench, there is only a small chance that the goalie would get injured and i totally agree with reynard if we dropped hendo from the bench we could have another player to fill the gap that would make more of a difference is subbed on.
The Stig Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Yes i completley agree, i play Football Manager and Championship Manager and have never included my 2nd choice goalie on the bench, there is only a small chance that the goalie would get injured and i totally agree with reynard if we dropped hendo from the bench we could have another player to fill the gap that would make more of a difference is subbed on. The chance of a keeper getting injured / sent off is much bigger compared to a game, you cannot compare games with real life. I'm aware I mentioned Fifa but that was as a joke!
Ozwin Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Knowing our luck, he'd get sent off or injured 20 seconds into the game. Seriously, I don't think our kind of bad luck happens to anyone else. [Me 89th minute of the game] "Hold on hold on hold on, we can win this" *Leicester consede a goal* "****ING HELL!" ^ Happens on a regular basis as you all know.
Wasyls Pec Deck Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 god forbid Levi might end up in goal one day!!!
demon_dog Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Yes, you should include a keeper on the bench. Have seen games where there has not been one, the opposition strikers then take full advantage in trying to 'accidentally' injure the keeper. Knowing that if someone else has to go in goal they have a better chance of scoring. It's not worth the risk.
filbertway Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 If it would benifit us over the season having say, another attacking option on the bench then why not? It's going to happen once maybe twice a season that the keeper has to come off.
MC Prussian Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 If it would benifit us over the season having say, another attacking option on the bench then why not?It's going to happen once maybe twice a season that the keeper has to come off. Do we actually have a field player that could fill in that position in such an unlikely case?
filbertway Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Do we actually have a field player that could fill in that position in such an unlikely case? I woudln't know, I don't watch them train. I assume big MDV would be Handy as would HUme for some reason
Bluefoxtim Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 Sod's law that the first time you do this, your keeper gets injured/sent off within the first 10 minutes
Bryn Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 I don't think it's all that hard for us to cover ourselves with 4 players.
Anish Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 I'd definitely take the risk. I'd rather have Fryatt/Kaebi/Ferreira/Hayes/Djeziri on the bench than Henderson. How many times have we needed an attacking midfielder on the bench this season only to see the likes of Stearman, Chambers and Newton sitting there? If worst comes to worst we'll lose one match, but having an extra attacking player who could change the game could win us more than one match. People say it's not worth the risk - but calculate the risk: when was the last time a City goalkeeper got injured/sent off and had to be replaced? Fortune favours the brave I say.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 20 September 2007 Posted 20 September 2007 4 outfeild players is enough defender/midfeilder/winger/forward all you really need
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.