a positive tactic or a slightly dodgy move? Do you think that teams look at sides without a replacement keeper on the bench and target the existing keeper for a bit of rough stuff or provocation? Did I see that last night Carlton Cole was throwing himself into KD resulting in a bit of pushing and shoving from Kelv? It could have been a coincidence that he was getting that treatment but I wouldn't put it past Fat Sam. I accept that having to replace the keeper is fairly rare and I love Nigel's positivety, but having no sub keeper bothers me a bit. To any football agony aunts out there....Am I worrying unnessecarily?
Obviously if KD is injured or sent off, there is a problem, but it is rare, and it's nice to have 5 outfield choices on the bench, especially with the depth we have.
To be honest i find outfield players going in goal so exciting/funny i wouldnt mind haha.... Well as long as we are 3 nil up and coasting
Richardson. I personally think it's an ok move, as the chances of a goalkeeper being sent or forced off are probably 5%, but maybe the FL should have 5 outfield players and a GK ruling?
Yep, I remember. He was a good lad. And I'm sure Papa Waigo would have been up for it too. It's a gamble, that Nigel plays. I wonder if he'll continue to play it. It's not as if he can use every substitute he names - only a maximum of three from normally four outfielders, so careful selection is paramount. But he has so many outfield players to choose from now that he obviously doesn't want to waste the opportunity of the play safe back up keeper option. It'll bite him one day. But perhaps not this season. And hopefully, it won't matter next season, with seven subs on the bench.