Thracian Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 So who is voting for Hemderson, and why? It's a fair question. a) Henderson is a contract player with our club and should only be displaced by a loanee who is categorically better. b) Henderson has not conceded a goal in his two games this season. Martin conceded three last night and three more I believe in the reserves defeat against Derby. c) Unlike our other signings Martin has had little time here acclimatising and has been rushed into the team without offering any evidence that he represents an improvement. d) Henderson is known to be a good shot stopper and to be fundamentally reliable. Martin remains a largely unknown quantity. e) Both goalkeepers seem to be poor kickers so there is no special benefit in choosing one over the other. f) Martin does seem to launch attacks better from the back but, bearing in mind point (b) is that really enough to warrant him displacing Henderson? * None of the above is meant to suggest that Henderson is necessarily a better goalkeeper than Martin. But why we need to be so hasty in dropping a goalkeeper who hasn't conceded in favour of a goalkeeper who's conceded six times in two games I don't know, unless it's to do with his loan terms, and if that's the reason I think it a poor do.
dandannieldanok Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 It's a fair question.a) Henderson is a contract player with our club and should only be displaced by a loanee who is categorically better. b) Henderson has not conceded a goal in three game this season. Martin conceded three last night and three more I believe in the reserves defeat against Derby. c) Unlike our other signings Martin has had little time here acclimatising and has been rushed into the team without offering any evidence that he represents an improvement. d) Henderson is known to be a good shot stopper and to be fundamentally reliable. Martin remains a largely unknown quantity. e) Both goalkeepers seem to be poor kickers so there is no special benefit in choosing one over the other. f) Martin does seem to launch attacks better from the back but, bearing in mind point (b) is that really enough to warrant him displacing Henderson? * None of the above is meant to suggest that Henderson is necessarily a better goalkeeper than Martin. But why we need to be so hasty in dropping a goalkeeper who hasn't conceded in favour of a goalkeeper who's conceded six times in two games I don't know, unless it's to do with his loan terms, and if that's the reason I think it a poor do. Some very good points there, I don't care how 'shaky' Henderson has appeared to be, it seems very strange and slightly farcical to drop a keeper who hasn't conceded.
FilboFox Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 Some very good points there, I don't care how 'shaky' Henderson has appeared to be, it seems very strange and slightly farcical to drop a keeper who hasn't conceded. It was a League Cup game and against Premiership opposition... would Henderson necessarily have done any better? As for the reserve game, Martin would have been playing with a weaker defense and against a better reserve team (?). I'm not sure about the reserves at all so correct me if I'm wrong but I think that it's a little unfair to be saying that just because he's conceded 6 goals in two vastly different games and Henderson hasn't conceded any against lesser opposition and with a strong defense in front of him for the division, that Henderson should be the first choice keeper... if he is so much better and stronger in goal, why isn't Pearson selecting him over Martin? I'm just trying to put across points to support Martin, not really looking to shoot down Hendo or anyone who has supported him as you all have valid points too.
dandannieldanok Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 It was a League Cup game and against Premiership opposition... would Henderson necessarily have done any better?As for the reserve game, Martin would have been playing with a weaker defense and against a better reserve team (?). I'm not sure about the reserves at all so correct me if I'm wrong but I think that it's a little unfair to be saying that just because he's conceded 6 goals in two vastly different games and Henderson hasn't conceded any against lesser opposition and with a strong defense in front of him for the division, that Henderson should be the first choice keeper... if he is so much better and stronger in goal, why isn't Pearson selecting him over Martin? I'm just trying to put across points to support Martin, not really looking to shoot down Hendo or anyone who has supported him as you all have valid points too. I don't care how many goals Martin has conceded, it just strikes me as odd to start the season with Henderson and drop him after 3/4 games having conceded no goals whatsoever.
Mickyblueeyes Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 Lars Hirschfeld! Who by the way is about to play in the champions league with CFR CLUJ!!!
DB11 Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 Hendo. Martin is shocking and should return to Liverpool ASAP as he is taking up one of our possible loan spots.
Jimmy Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 It's a fair question.a) Henderson is a contract player with our club and should only be displaced by a loanee who is categorically better. b) Henderson has not conceded a goal in three games this season. Martin conceded three last night and three more I believe in the reserves defeat against Derby. c) Unlike our other signings Martin has had little time here acclimatising and has been rushed into the team without offering any evidence that he represents an improvement. d) Henderson is known to be a good shot stopper and to be fundamentally reliable. Martin remains a largely unknown quantity. e) Both goalkeepers seem to be poor kickers so there is no special benefit in choosing one over the other. f) Martin does seem to launch attacks better from the back but, bearing in mind point (b) is that really enough to warrant him displacing Henderson? * None of the above is meant to suggest that Henderson is necessarily a better goalkeeper than Martin. But why we need to be so hasty in dropping a goalkeeper who hasn't conceded in favour of a goalkeeper who's conceded six times in two games I don't know, unless it's to do with his loan terms, and if that's the reason I think it a poor do. Hendo has only played twice this season, the other clean sheet was kept by Martin
Thracian Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 Hendo has only played twice this season, the other clean sheet was kept by Martin That's another reason. Constantly changing goalkeepers creates confusion.
Jimmy Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 That's another reason. Constantly changing goalkeepers creates confusion. yet you're advocating changing the keeper yet again, surely then in the interests of a settled side, Martin should be left in place ...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 yet you're advocating changing the keeper yet again, surely then in the interests of a settled side, Martin should be left in place ... Not at all. I wouldn't have changed him in the first place and certainly not until Martin or any other alternative was fully integrated.
Jimmy Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 Not at all. I wouldn't have changed him in the first place and certainly not until Martin or any other alternative was fully integrated. how do you "fully integrate" someone without actually playing them
Thracian Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 how do you "fully integrate" someone without actually playing them There are opportunities via reserves matches, training ground matches, training sessions and the first team bench which can all be taken in over a five/six week period. Where's the problem and why the need to rush? It wasn't as if we were conceding goals anyway. But doubtless there are reasons.
Jimmy Posted 28 August 2008 Posted 28 August 2008 There are opportunities via reserves matches, training ground matches, training sessions and the first team bench which can all be taken in over a five/six week period. Where's the problem and why the need to rush? It wasn't as if we were conceding goals anyway. But doubtless there are reasons. don't you think if Liverpool were insisting he played then Hobbs would of played every minuet of every game as he is a lot closer to their 1st team then Martin
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 29 August 2008 Posted 29 August 2008 how do you "fully integrate" someone without actually playing them Trip to La Manga? Night out on the Fosse? They're put in a metal bin and rolled down a big hill?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.