|
|
Post by tbonegas on Sept 9, 2024 7:25:58 GMT
A lesson to be learned?
Barrow never had a keeper on the bench Saturday.
Keeper gets sent off for handball in the first half.
One of the outfield players had to go into goal, although he made one decent save, he let in a shot that would have been routine for a regular keeper.
And that was in the 98th minute, it cost them 2 points
|
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas on Sept 9, 2024 7:37:20 GMT
Happened to us at Wrexham.Mc Chrystal went in goal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirt Dogg on Sept 9, 2024 8:16:48 GMT
Happened to us at Wrexham.Mc Chrystal went in goal. Think we could only have 5 players on the bench in the conference days, so made abit more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by neilv93 on Sept 9, 2024 8:34:15 GMT
The chances of a goalkeeper getting sent off or injured to the point of requiring substituting are so slim that it's just a basic case of risk v reward. The difference between us having, say, another striker on the bench to affect the game v Matt Hall is sizeable enough that I think it's worth it. If the keeper gets injured/sent off, so be it - you just potentially sacrifice that result. I'd rather have seven players that can positively impact the game on the bench than a goalkeeper who, in all likelihood, is almost never going to be required.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Sept 9, 2024 10:10:15 GMT
The chances of a goalkeeper getting sent off or injured to the point of requiring substituting are so slim that it's just a basic case of risk v reward. The difference between us having, say, another striker on the bench to affect the game v Matt Hall is sizeable enough that I think it's worth it. If the keeper gets injured/sent off, so be it - you just potentially sacrifice that result. I'd rather have seven players that can positively impact the game on the bench than a goalkeeper who, in all likelihood, is almost never going to be required. Damn you and your logic. It'll never work on Gaschat. |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 9, 2024 11:21:10 GMT
The chances of a goalkeeper getting sent off or injured to the point of requiring substituting are so slim that it's just a basic case of risk v reward. The difference between us having, say, another striker on the bench to affect the game v Matt Hall is sizeable enough that I think it's worth it. If the keeper gets injured/sent off, so be it - you just potentially sacrifice that result. I'd rather have seven players that can positively impact the game on the bench than a goalkeeper who, in all likelihood, is almost never going to be required. That logic made more sense when we were only allowed 3 subs , now there’s so many on the bench I don’t even know how many we’re allowed!? |
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Sept 9, 2024 11:49:40 GMT
Totally agree with o p.
If (back in the day) you had 2 or 3 subs, I would understand it for the odd match.
Surely it's possible to find a keeper within the amount allowed these days...?
|
|
|
|
Post by toggsy2 on Sept 9, 2024 12:12:52 GMT
Give it time, before long it will be part of the rules that you have to have a Goalkeeper on the bench.
In all fairness I'm surprised its not been made a rule wether the keeper is used is entirely different situation
|
|
|
|
Post by neilv93 on Sept 9, 2024 12:20:33 GMT
The chances of a goalkeeper getting sent off or injured to the point of requiring substituting are so slim that it's just a basic case of risk v reward. The difference between us having, say, another striker on the bench to affect the game v Matt Hall is sizeable enough that I think it's worth it. If the keeper gets injured/sent off, so be it - you just potentially sacrifice that result. I'd rather have seven players that can positively impact the game on the bench than a goalkeeper who, in all likelihood, is almost never going to be required. , now there’s so many on the bench I don’t even know how many we’re allowed!? If anything, that helps my point. Nowadays we have 7 on the bench and you can make up to 5 subs to chase/protect a result. Why waste a slot on a goalkeeper that is almost never going to be needed? |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 9, 2024 12:23:28 GMT
That logic made more sense when we were only allowed 3 subs , now there’s so many on the bench I don’t even know how many we’re allowed!? If anything, that helps my point. Nowadays we have 7 on the bench and you can make up to 5 subs to chase/protect a result. Why waste a slot on a goalkeeper that is almost never going to be needed? Don’t agree it helps your point because with 7 places there’s more than enough places for attacking players. Don’t disagree with needing a keeper though , probs worth the gamble not having one |
|
|
|
Post by neilv93 on Sept 9, 2024 12:33:20 GMT
If anything, that helps my point. Nowadays we have 7 on the bench and you can make up to 5 subs to chase/protect a result. Why waste a slot on a goalkeeper that is almost never going to be needed? Don’t disagree with needing a keeper though , probs worth the gamble not having one But we've had 7 on the bench for the best part of 15 years, barring that one year in the Conference. The point being that because we can now use 5/7 subs, the goalkeeper is even more pointless. When it was 3/7, you'd be able to argue having a goalkeeper, that utility defender or the young kid who's trained well all week. With three subs, less than half of the bench weren't going to be used whereas now 71% of the bench can be used. I'll have to just agree to disagree with the opposing views on here (not you specifically Yatton, I acknowledge your non-bolded words above). |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 9, 2024 12:36:24 GMT
Don’t agree it helps your point because with 7 places there’s more than enough places for attacking players. Don’t disagree with needing a keeper though , probs worth the gamble not having one But we've had 7 on the bench for the best part of 15 years, barring that one year in the Conference. The point being that because we can now use 5/7 subs, the goalkeeper is even more pointless. When it was 3/7, you'd be able to argue having a goalkeeper, that utility defender or the young kid who's trained well all week. With three subs, less than half of the bench weren't going to be used whereas now 71% of the bench can be used. I'll have to just agree to disagree with the opposing views on here (not you specifically Yatton, I acknowledge your non-bolded words above). Agree to disagree??? What is this nonsense 🙄 😃 |
|
