jackyboy Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Can anyone explain why Roeder played an old man in goal, a man who hasn't played at the top level in more than a decade, when we have the option of playing youg Krul who proved his worth in the european game. By putting Pav in goal Roeder created indecision in what is a very young inexperienced back four. When Pav was at his best he frightened the life out of me with some of his decisions, dribbling around attackers, rushing out of his goal when he should have stayed put etc. He was a great favourite with the fans and still is but I think the decision to play him yesterday cost us at least a point and could well have damaged confidence and moral. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Donnymag Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 All our other keeper's are injured aren't they? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Krul has only been in training for a week since coming back from surgery. Probobly not fit yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest teepee Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Krul has only been in training for a week since coming back from surgery. Probobly not fit yet. that was the reason given - he had no choice really! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Roeder had no choice at the time, but if he hadn't of signed Pav in the first place - he wouldn't have had to play him. We could have loaned someone like Pompey, Villa, Everton, etc have done in the past when their goalkeeper situation has become critical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Roeder had no choice at the time, but if he hadn't of signed Pav in the first place - he wouldn't have had to play him. We could have loaned someone like Pompey, Villa, Everton, etc have done in the past when their goalkeeper situation has become critical. Because Gabor Kiraly is a GREAT keeper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Roeder had no choice at the time, but if he hadn't of signed Pav in the first place - he wouldn't have had to play him. We could have loaned someone like Pompey, Villa, Everton, etc have done in the past when their goalkeeper situation has become critical. Because Gabor Kiraly is a GREAT keeper. Kiraly, Walker, Kiely all keepers we could of loaned if we didn't have Pav, all better than him, all in and about the EPL. Pav was a joke for the 1st goal, people can blame Ramage as much as they like, but Pav looked like he hadn't played (indecision, bad judgment, flapping, no communication) in the EPL for several years... Oh shit, he hadn't :roll: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Pav is well past it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hibbits left foot Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Ramage admits it was his fault for the 1st goal , lay off Pav hes fab Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 what were we thinking employing someone with half a talent, plenty of experience and 100% commitment to the club as a 4th choice keeper? someone should be resigning for this incompetence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Ramage admits it was his fault for the 1st goal , "lay off Pav hes fab" missed the quote marks... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Ramage admits it was his fault for the 1st goal , lay off Pav hes fab He's shite man. But he is 38 and beggars can't be choosers. Its actually nice to see his face again, top man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TampaToon Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 yeah, let's string roeder up for not having the foresight to sign a quality 4th keeper. every prem team has to play their 4th choice at some point, how dare he not be top prem quality? Can anyone explain why Roeder played an old man in goal, a man who hasn't played at the top level in more than a decade, when we have the option of playing youg Krol who proved his worth in the european game. By putting Pav in goal Roeder created indecision in what is a very young inexperienced back four. When Pav was at his best he frightened the life out of me with some of his decisions, dribbling around attackers, rushing out of his goal when he should have stayed put etc. He was a great favourite with the fans and still is but I think the decision to play him yesterday cost us at least a point and could well have damaged confidence and moral and how does playing a 19-year-old in goal (if he happened to be fit) an appropriate decision to solidify the "young, inexperienced back 4" that you mention? sound like a damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of scenario if your solution to save him from this criticism is to add youth and inexperience into the equation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Don't get me wrong... i'm not slating Roeder for bringing Pav in if he wants him to be a coach, and it's not a particularly bad idea to have a fourth choice goalkeeper. But, like i said previously, if he wanted Srnicek to be a coach - he should have been a coach - not a player. It isn't an uncommon thing to loan a goalkeeper if your situation becomes critical, many teams have done it - and i think i'd rather we did that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hibbits left foot Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Divvent knock Pav reet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Fact is Krul might not be ready to play against the successful physical sides such as Bolton. To concede a poor goal against Bolton as a consequence of clever Bolton players targetting him in a physical manner, and then losing his place to Given a game or so later without really getting a chance to prove that he is a good keeper is likely to be damaging to his career. Would definitely rather play Srnicek over Krul against Everton as Krul will get a rough ride during Everton set pieces. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 what were we thinking employing someone with half a talent, plenty of experience and 100% commitment to the club as a 4th choice keeper? someone should be resigning for this incompetence Finally, someone with sense. It's not like he was signed as 2nd choice keeper. Srnicek is still better than 2/3s of the rest of the league's 3rd choice keepers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Srnicek is still better than 2/3s of the rest of the league's 3rd choice keepers. According to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Srnicek is still better than 2/3s of the rest of the league's 3rd choice keepers. According to? His opinion? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Srnicek is still better than 2/3s of the rest of the league's 3rd choice keepers. According to? His opinion? I'd just like to know why he thinks that, thanks. Not saying he is wrong or right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Srnicek is still better than 2/3s of the rest of the league's 3rd choice keepers. According to? His opinion? I'd just like to know why he thinks that, thanks. Not saying he is wrong or right. Well I would agree with him, but only because I can't think of many teams in the PL who have an ex 1st choice keeper as their 3rd choice keeper* *And I can't name many 3rd choice keepers in the PL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Man Utd Chelsea Liverpool Arsenal Portsmouth Have better 3rd choices easily imo, don't really know with the rest as I can't really speak for Pav now! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aimaad22 Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 But Pav is fourth choice isnt he? Im sure Krul would have started if he was fully fit, especially after that performance against Palermo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Toon Barmy Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Strange that NO ONE complained at the time when we got PAV. Now all those legs are in spasm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Strange that NO ONE complained at the time when we got PAV. Now all those legs are in spasm. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,29790.0.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now