Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 He was asking whether Schwarzer should be given a run out. That is a leading question and therefore is suggestive. clutching at straws a bit there mate. Legitimate question to ask and it was worded perfectly fine. The problem arose when people assumed he was bashing Hamer without reading it properly; it only looks like that if you're already foaming at the mouth with anticipation with your eager fingers ready to type yet another "but the clean sheets!" post.
ealingfox Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 Starting to sound to me like Hamer could be becoming the Yakubu of 'keepers here. I can see it now: "Hamer was absolutely useless today. He may have kept a clean sheet with a string of saves, but that's all he did." Technical clean sheets ffs.
CosbehFox Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 Hamer's kicking is horrible and he's also too punchy but he's been superb for a lot of the time for us. Schwarzer would organise the defence and distribute the ball better but right now we're keeping clean sheets so it'd be quite ridiculous to change things. Better punching then feck all. Made a great punch at Anfield and was in good nick collecting late crosses on Saturday. I think it's quite clear even the defence trust him more. Whether that's Kaspers personality or ability is another question.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 Starting to sound to me like Hamer could be becoming the Yakubu of 'keepers here. I can see it now: "Hamer was absolutely useless today. He may have kept a clean sheet with a string of saves, but that's all he did." Technical clean sheets ffs. No, it's literally the opposite. It was Kasper who became a pariah with people on here blaming him almost exclusively for losses and demanding incessantly that Hamer replace him. My remarks are a response to those people, not an impromptu and out-of-the-blue criticism of Hamer. I am not saying Hamer is a bad goalkeeper, I am just saying that he is nowhere near as amazing as some people are making out and he has hardly been tested in the handful of games he has played. I knew some people would try to turn it around and make out as if those noticing that Hamer hasn't been the revelation some people vehemently insisted he would be are the ones being unreasonable and overly critical. I am just adding a bit of perspective to a discussion that seems to have lost all sense of it. And my logic behind the "technical clean sheet" comment is water-tight. Seen lots of people express utter incredulity at it but not a single person has managed to offer a counter-argument. In fact, even the people who strongly disagree with the rest of what I say have stoically admitted that it makes sense. You can't appraise someone's performance just by saying "herrr derrr but there's a zero next to the other team's name derrrr". You already know it's more complicated than that.
ealingfox Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 No, it's literally the opposite. It was Kasper who became a pariah with people on here blaming him almost exclusively for losses and demanding incessantly that Hamer replace him. My remarks are a response to those people, not an impromptu and out-of-the-blue criticism of Hamer. I am not saying Hamer is a bad goalkeeper, I am just saying that he is nowhere near as amazing as some people are making out and he has hardly been tested in the handful of games he has played. I knew some people would try to turn it around and make out as if those noticing that Hamer hasn't been the revelation some people vehemently insisted he would be are the ones being unreasonable and overly critical. I am just adding a bit of perspective to a discussion that seems to have lost all sense of it. And my logic behind the "technical clean sheet" comment is water-tight. Seen lots of people express utter incredulity at it but not a single person has managed to offer a counter-argument. In fact, even the people who strongly disagree with the rest of what I say have stoically admitted that it makes sense. You can't appraise someone's performance just by saying "herrr derrr but there's a zero next to the other team's name derrrr". You already know it's more complicated than that. You're deluded if you think it's some incredible coincidence that as soon as Schmeichel was out of the side things improved at the back. Hamer has been significantly superior to Schmeichel in more or less every respect. That is why we are keeping clean sheets, technical, factual, whatever type of clean sheets you want to invent. It's not people losing sense or perspective or being irrational. It's people using their eyes to see what's going on in front of them. Try it. And there is no counter-argument to your technical clean sheets rubbish because it's not an argument in the first place. When the other team doesn't score that's a clean sheet, when they do score that isn't a clean sheet. Black and white.
Blanesta Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 No, it's literally the opposite. It was Kasper who became a pariah with people on here blaming him almost exclusively for losses and demanding incessantly that Hamer replace him. My remarks are a response to those people, not an impromptu and out-of-the-blue criticism of Hamer. I am not saying Hamer is a bad goalkeeper, I am just saying that he is nowhere near as amazing as some people are making out and he has hardly been tested in the handful of games he has played. I knew some people would try to turn it around and make out as if those noticing that Hamer hasn't been the revelation some people vehemently insisted he would be are the ones being unreasonable and overly critical. I am just adding a bit of perspective to a discussion that seems to have lost all sense of it. And my logic behind the "technical clean sheet" comment is water-tight. Seen lots of people express utter incredulity at it but not a single person has managed to offer a counter-argument. In fact, even the people who strongly disagree with the rest of what I say have stoically admitted that it makes sense. You can't appraise someone's performance just by saying "herrr derrr but there's a zero next to the other team's name derrrr". You already know it's more complicated than that. How many people have said Hamer is amazing? he's our number two keeper, new at the club so people were unsure of his ability, he's come into the team and not played any worse than our established no 1 keeper, I know Kasper had 5 more saves to make in those 5 games you looked at but Hamer had let in less goals, I'd say for his first proper stint in the team is pretty good, The argument for the number of saved made could have so many variable conditions, poor shots, penalties, defender mistakes, so stats don't always show a true reflection of a players game, you'd need to review every shot in every game and work out the difficult of the saves being made, and i'm sure the club probably do that in some capacity.
Jace Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 3 out of our 4 wins with Hamer with our other win conceding 3 goals, Schmeichel could end up 3rd choice at this rate
sylofox Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 Not upto it? Kept a clean sheet vs Newcastle, Villa and Stoke earlier in the season... And Liverpool bar two dodgy peno's. I am not going down the they don't count route but not his fault we gave them away. And not a lot a keeper can do with them a save is more luck than anything else.
Guest Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 What's he done wrong? Not enough actual clean sheets. Much like penalties, technical clean sheets are null and void.
placidcasual Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 I think the OP must have been banned from the Mercury site or something.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 12 January 2015 Posted 12 January 2015 You're deluded if you think it's some incredible coincidence that as soon as Schmeichel was out of the side things improved at the back. Hamer has been significantly superior to Schmeichel in more or less every respect. That is why we are keeping clean sheets, technical, factual, whatever type of clean sheets you want to invent. It's not people losing sense or perspective or being irrational. It's people using their eyes to see what's going on in front of them. Try it. And there is no counter-argument to your technical clean sheets rubbish because it's not an argument in the first place. When the other team doesn't score that's a clean sheet, when they do score that isn't a clean sheet. Black and white. On your first point: It's called regression toward the mean. Look it up. We went through an anomalously bad period which statistically was likely to be followed by at least some semblance of positive results closer to the average. This isn't some theory I've pulled out of my aris, it's a known fact: "Regression to the mean (RTM) is a statistical phenomenon that can make natural variation in repeated data look like real change. It happens when unusually large or small measurements tend to be followed by measurements that are closer to the mean." This is the same logic that leads people to believe that they got better better because they drank a homeopathic remedy or that car accidents were reduced when a speed camera was put at the roadside. Both occur after a statistically anomalous series of events so whatever follows is likely to be closer to the mean anyway regardless of what measures were taken. I stated several times that this would happen before Kasper got injured and replaced by Hamer. I just knew people would do it because they do it ALL the time on here and have been for years. On the "significantly superior" statement, I literally don't know how you've reached that conclusion (and so far nobody has actually explained why this is true). The stat comparisons that some (including me although I have conceded several times that they are not massively informative on their own) have alluded to put them more or less on an even keel in most departments, and where one leads it is by a fairly insignificant margin, though once again it must be said that there is not a large enough pool of data to form any meaningful conclusions on stats alone. Again, I can't stress enough that this is not an unprompted attack on Ben Hamer. When we were going through the terrible run of bad results, many on here were utterly convinced that this was largely down to Kasper - he doesn't come for crosses, can't save anything, can't kick it out etc. As a result, Hamer's introduction was demanded on here by many contributors. All I am doing is saying that Hamer's performances since coming in don't really lend any credence to Kasper's detractors who said that Hamer was obviously the better option. His kicking really is terrible and he has got away with making a hash at several crosses; I have all of our games in full and I'll happily make a compilation of every goalkeeper involvement from both if I get the time. On your final point: what I said is by definition an argument. If it's wrong, it is wrong because of facts and evidence that demonstrates that I am wrong. I haven't somehow managed to craft a claim that falls outside the definition of "argument" - it's still an argument even if it's completely crazy and nonsensical; in that case it would just be a bad argument, and bad arguments are easily susceptible to counter-arguments. If you read my posts (something tells me you haven't), then you'll see that I have outlined perfectly why drawing inferences about Ben Hamer's performance based on the fact that the other team had a zero next to their name is an example of failed reasoning. We both agree that "clean sheet" means that the other team did not end the game with more than zero goals judged to be legitimate by the referee, but this is not where your claim ends. You're smuggling in some conclusions about Hamer's performance with that which, as I have already explained, doesn't make any sense if you're a rational, thinking adult. He let a perfectly legitimate goal in against Newcastle which was wrongly judged to be offside, and his technique trying to save it was terrible. Against Villa, without knowing the flag was about to be raised he threw himself on the floor against Benteke and got skinned with ease. You are right that the goals didn't count but you can't draw grand conclusions from the presence of a "clean sheet" if your aim is to demonstrate Hamer's shot-stopping ability, because he ostensibly didn't stop them. This is so easy, how can you not understand it?
Guest ttfn Posted 13 January 2015 Posted 13 January 2015 QPR's second goal against us still makes me cross.
Blanesta Posted 13 January 2015 Posted 13 January 2015 If someone says a player needs a run out I've always taken that as a place on the pitch, not sitting on the bench.
Lovejoy Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 Why is the jury still out on Hamer? He's been brilliant since he stepped in. People keep saying "he's a able replacement for Kasper" but to me, he isn't a replacement he is better than Kasper. Precisely. But I would be all for giving Schwarzer a run out in the cup. Be interesting to see how the three keepers all fit in when fit.
Xen Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 With regards to the 'technical' clean sheets... Our defence has been far more organised with Hamer behind them - that's clear to see. As a result, we've been able to utilise the offside trap much better, and one consequence of this is that Hamer will be exposed to more one on ones and as a result, the ball will end up in the back of the net more often. The fact that they've so far been disallowed shouldn't be used to negate Hamer's clean sheets (even kasper who's great at 1-on-1s wouldn't save them every time), but instead used to praise him and the defence for the much better organisation and communication which causes opposition strikers to be caught offside now frequently.
Benji Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 I don't think it's just a coincidence that Hamer has come in and we don't look like conceding from every cross and set piece.
Captain... Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 Schwarzer will get his chance in the FA cup, not before. Whether he keeps his place in the league will be down to his and Hamer's performances in training and in matches. I have seen nothing of Schwarzer for about a year and he shouldn't get in the side based solely on reputation.
Oadby Fox Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 I agree with fox92 Hamer has been very good since stepping in for injured Schmeichel, but if this fella becomes available!
okie fox Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 Schmeichel is better than Hamer when forwards are clean through on goal. And lets face it, Villa, Newcastle and Hull (apart from last 15 minutes) barely threatened our goal so don't put too much stock on clean sheets. Jury is still out on who's the better keeper.
Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 Had my doubts but he's come in and been excellent bar one poor attempt at a save against Spuds. Definitely a better goalkeeper all round. My eyes and the stats say so.
Suffolk exile Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 There is no need to drop Hamer, no reason at all! This. I cannot see why NP would drop him in favour of Schwarzer - in all honesty I think it is going to be a tough call when Kasper is fit again..........
brookeslcfc Posted 16 January 2015 Posted 16 January 2015 Always rated Hamer. He has been class so far, Pearson should think twice about dropping him even when Kasper is back. I love Kasper but in my opinion Hamer has performed much better than he did in his games. Trust the beard.
Guy Posted 19 January 2015 Posted 19 January 2015 I have a feeling Schwarzer will be blooded against Spurs next Saturday to keep Hamer fresh for the following league game against Man. Utd. This in a game that now well may not be given much priority against Spurs in the wider scheme of things.....especially after the massive set back that was against Stoke at the weekend. Any ideas on what's happening with Schmeichel? Hamer has been great btw.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.