Brown is a good League 2 keeper, he will certainly do. Not as talented as Blackman or as physically gifted, but experienced and capable.
No we don't need cover on the bench. If a good young goalkeeper becomes available, sure, snap them up. But I'm not sure why they'd want to sign for a club with no youth development and no reserve team. We have a good record of development with Ingram, but then he was first choice keeper.
Is it right that we can just name a 6 man bench or does there have t be a 7th eligible man named even if he never plays, isn't fit to play, isn't even necessarily actually there?
I'm still amazed there's even a debate about having a reserve keeper. It was only a few seasons ago, in the days when the Trust were scrabbling about to keep the club afloat, when we had three keepers - Ingram, Lynch and Horlock. None would have been particularly expensive and I imagine all benefited from training and developing together. Given it's such an important role in the team I don't understand why we wouldn't want a cheap reserve keeper with the prospect of developing into a first teamer down the line; someone who isn't loaned out but helps with Brown's training during the week and also when the team play against each other in training, learning the quirks of the defenders he may be called at any minute into playing behind during a match.
@aloysius it was different then, as we still had the youth system, and its fruit. Those 3 all came through from there.
To go out and bring some young prospect in, with no youth or reserve teams and to be as backup wouldn't necessarily be a great set up.
Unless we were allowed to let them play games elsewhere, as I believe is possible with Premier youngsters now. But then which Premier team would believe training with us in the week was more beneficial than being with them, if no playing competitively here?
@aloysius There are two separate things here. Are we bringing in another keeper because concerned about having cover on the bench? Or are we looking at future development? The two are, as I see it, mutually exclusive. A young keeper needs games to develop, which would mean them going out on loan, which would mean Richardson on the bench in any case. Why would any young goalkeeper with the potential to make it in the game be happy to sign for Wycombe with basically no chance of first team football and no chance of being loaned out to learn their trade either. It would stunt their development.
I'm happy as SB sounds like a sound keeper for League Two level...how good he will be for us next season will depend on how good he is for us next season. I do agree we need a Lynch type cover though...surely we can afford one to not depend on Bazza again.
As Chris points out, it is hard to see what the young GK would get out of the arrangement beyond a very sore backside and no playing time whatsoever. Would also presumably prevent a decent keeper being brought in on loan if the number 1 keeper had a long term injury.
And all just in case the No 1 GK gets injured/sent off in a game we would have got at least a point from AND the young keeper would have preserved that point ABD Richardson wouldn't.
My opinion is that that is a remote possibility that doesn't justify the cost although I am more open to the idea if it is a young cheap keeper than if it was an established more expensive GK as it is suggested was the intention for Scott Brown.
I am amazed that most people are happy to go with one keeper, thereby effectively guaranteeing Brown will play in every game of the season regardless of any loss of form. It cannot be healthy to have no one challenging your place in the team.
Dev's comment that it is simple to get a keeper in on loan in the event of injury may be correct. However say Brown gets injured in training on friday the quality of keeper you could get for Saturday would probably be limited. Surely it is not ideal to have only one keeper on the training pitch thus making it more likely that Brown will get injured or subsequently play carrying an injury. It would be interesting to know how many other league teams only have one keeper in their squad other than a 48 year old coach.
Not wishing to get rid of Richardson, but the ideal answer would be to get in a younger goalkeeping coach who could provide more effective cover.
@moneyman but that is just about goalkeeping - he IS NOT (as richie points out) PULLING UP TREES!!!
At least read richie's posts properly before you start cyberbullying.
he didn't even play half the season and is too small for the football league. yes he was excellent in the playoffs for us but Im sure that the way we controlled the game especially at home to plymouth baize could have played and we would have won.
I was blissfully unaware that the Football League had introduced height restrictions for goalkeepers. If Alex Lynch is too small at 6'1.5", we will have a problem with Scott Brown who is a mere 6'1". And thank goodness there were no such restrictions 20 years ago when Martin Taylor graced the plain green jersey at a short-arsed 5'11". Arguably Wycombe's best over the last quarter of a century.
@Chris said:
I don't believe Alex Lynch is over 6 feet tall. Don't trust everything you read on Wikipedia.
I don't but, from observation and from comments on here last year about Alex's stature, I think the broad comparisons I have made are sufficiently valid to justify my little leg-pull.
Unfortunately, irony and dry humour don't always come across in writing, especially on social media.
Wendover man tends to do it much better.
Comments
What use would the 18 YO young keeper after 24 hours. If the no1 keeper is injured, surely we then sign a decent loan GK to cover the next match.
Brown is a good League 2 keeper, he will certainly do. Not as talented as Blackman or as physically gifted, but experienced and capable.
No we don't need cover on the bench. If a good young goalkeeper becomes available, sure, snap them up. But I'm not sure why they'd want to sign for a club with no youth development and no reserve team. We have a good record of development with Ingram, but then he was first choice keeper.
And we can just name a 6 man bench instead of having a club developed player in the squad - something we tend to do fairly regularly anyway.
Hopefully WW SET can bridge the gap for this rule at some point
http://www.wwset.co.uk/ - interesting website if you've not seen it before.
Is it right that we can just name a 6 man bench or does there have t be a 7th eligible man named even if he never plays, isn't fit to play, isn't even necessarily actually there?
I'm still amazed there's even a debate about having a reserve keeper. It was only a few seasons ago, in the days when the Trust were scrabbling about to keep the club afloat, when we had three keepers - Ingram, Lynch and Horlock. None would have been particularly expensive and I imagine all benefited from training and developing together. Given it's such an important role in the team I don't understand why we wouldn't want a cheap reserve keeper with the prospect of developing into a first teamer down the line; someone who isn't loaned out but helps with Brown's training during the week and also when the team play against each other in training, learning the quirks of the defenders he may be called at any minute into playing behind during a match.
@aloysius it was different then, as we still had the youth system, and its fruit. Those 3 all came through from there.
To go out and bring some young prospect in, with no youth or reserve teams and to be as backup wouldn't necessarily be a great set up.
Unless we were allowed to let them play games elsewhere, as I believe is possible with Premier youngsters now. But then which Premier team would believe training with us in the week was more beneficial than being with them, if no playing competitively here?
@devc you can just have a blank space.
@aloysius There are two separate things here. Are we bringing in another keeper because concerned about having cover on the bench? Or are we looking at future development? The two are, as I see it, mutually exclusive. A young keeper needs games to develop, which would mean them going out on loan, which would mean Richardson on the bench in any case. Why would any young goalkeeper with the potential to make it in the game be happy to sign for Wycombe with basically no chance of first team football and no chance of being loaned out to learn their trade either. It would stunt their development.
I'm happy as SB sounds like a sound keeper for League Two level...how good he will be for us next season will depend on how good he is for us next season. I do agree we need a Lynch type cover though...surely we can afford one to not depend on Bazza again.
Thanks Chris. I didn't know that.
Wendover - For what purpose?
For the purpose of going in goal if the No 1 keeper gets injured @DevC. It's only an opinon.
You are entitled to your opinion.
As Chris points out, it is hard to see what the young GK would get out of the arrangement beyond a very sore backside and no playing time whatsoever. Would also presumably prevent a decent keeper being brought in on loan if the number 1 keeper had a long term injury.
And all just in case the No 1 GK gets injured/sent off in a game we would have got at least a point from AND the young keeper would have preserved that point ABD Richardson wouldn't.
My opinion is that that is a remote possibility that doesn't justify the cost although I am more open to the idea if it is a young cheap keeper than if it was an established more expensive GK as it is suggested was the intention for Scott Brown.
I am amazed that most people are happy to go with one keeper, thereby effectively guaranteeing Brown will play in every game of the season regardless of any loss of form. It cannot be healthy to have no one challenging your place in the team.
Dev's comment that it is simple to get a keeper in on loan in the event of injury may be correct. However say Brown gets injured in training on friday the quality of keeper you could get for Saturday would probably be limited. Surely it is not ideal to have only one keeper on the training pitch thus making it more likely that Brown will get injured or subsequently play carrying an injury. It would be interesting to know how many other league teams only have one keeper in their squad other than a 48 year old coach.
Not wishing to get rid of Richardson, but the ideal answer would be to get in a younger goalkeeping coach who could provide more effective cover.
The quality of loanee would likely be higher than the quality of benchwarmer.
Shame we let Lynch go.
hardly pulling up trees at Chester !!!
Richie is back in the room...now the transfers can begin!
Ah yes. Richie, one time emergency bar staff member turned Ainsworth's primary confidant.
@rmjlondon - For your information Lynch is well thought of at Chester.
http://m.leaderlive.co.uk/mobile/msport/177306/chester-fc-goalkeeper-alex-lynch-taking-nothing-for-granted-ahead-of-new-season.aspx
@moneyman but that is just about goalkeeping - he IS NOT (as richie points out) PULLING UP TREES!!!
At least read richie's posts properly before you start cyberbullying.
Always thought he was a great feller.
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=31465;article=774761
he didn't even play half the season and is too small for the football league. yes he was excellent in the playoffs for us but Im sure that the way we controlled the game especially at home to plymouth baize could have played and we would have won.
That's a bit unfair on Baize, the might often seem snookered, but he's still a bit green.
I'll get my coat...
I was blissfully unaware that the Football League had introduced height restrictions for goalkeepers. If Alex Lynch is too small at 6'1.5", we will have a problem with Scott Brown who is a mere 6'1". And thank goodness there were no such restrictions 20 years ago when Martin Taylor graced the plain green jersey at a short-arsed 5'11". Arguably Wycombe's best over the last quarter of a century.
I think we all need to start using Micra's magic ruler. Could be quite flattering
I don't believe Alex Lynch is over 6 feet tall. Don't trust everything you read on Wikipedia.
Ah Martin Taylor. What a keeper!!
I'm his dad he just under 6"2 so wiki is pretty close bud good luck for the season however tall your keeper is!! Still follow your results
I don't but, from observation and from comments on here last year about Alex's stature, I think the broad comparisons I have made are sufficiently valid to justify my little leg-pull.
Unfortunately, irony and dry humour don't always come across in writing, especially on social media.
Wendover man tends to do it much better.