Big Fraser

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
Not really sure why you seem so intent on trying to bust my balls here. I've never said that the defense might not draw confidence from having a better keeper in goal.

All I said was that Arsenal was really the first game where one could truly appreciate what Forster brings to the team... and the fact that it took this long was not a reflection on Forster, just that we have a very good defense regardless so Forster doesn't have that many opportunities to show his skill.

You said yourself that whatever confidence he brings to the team is unquantifiable. So I have no idea what you're even trying to argue. Apparently you think I'm being negative by not being able to quantify the unquantifiable.
Click to expand...

It appears to me that you are the one arguing with more than one person. I've lost the will on it now. Have a good evening. Over and out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Missing Lambo
SaintinSerbia said:
Forster is very good. Fonte is very good. Both believe in each other and play better together. In any sport and in anything in life in you believe in your partner the result is much more than the sum of the 2 parts. Conversely, if you have no confidence in your partner your game goes to ****, no matter how good you are.
Click to expand...

That's fine. No one is arguing any different. I understand the logic, and I don't disagree at all.

Except that we are first or second in shots allowed no matter whether it is Boruc, Forster, or Steklenberg playing keeper. We have always had a good defense. So to that extent the defense must be confident in all three. And I suppose the keepers must all be confident in the defense.

It's a pretty regular pattern that our players who transfer don't enjoy the same success as they do here. So obviously there's something going on-- good communication/man management, team unity, confidence, the right system. I'm not denying that happens at all.

The question is, how do you know what Forster adds without looking at his save percentage or actually seeing him make some great saves? Saying "I can't tell how much difference it makes" is not the same as saying "It doesn't make a difference."

When you actually see him have a game like against Arsenal, then it becomes easy to say "Wow. He's great back there. It must fill the team with confidence." But if you don't see that, you're just left with circular logic.

How do you know that Forster is a great keeper who helps the defense play better?
Because we allow very few shots when Forster is playing and the defense looks quite good.

Why do we allow so few shots and look good when Forster is playing?
It must be because Forster is a great keeper.
 
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
That's fine. No one is arguing any different. I understand the logic, and I don't disagree at all.

Except that we are first or second in shots allowed no matter whether it is Boruc, Forster, or Steklenberg playing keeper. We have always had a good defense. So to that extent the defense must be confident in all three. And I suppose the keepers must all be confident in the defense.

It's a pretty regular pattern that our players who transfer don't enjoy the same success as they do here. So obviously there's something going on-- good communication/man management, team unity, confidence, the right system. I'm not denying that happens at all.

The question is, how do you know what Forster adds without looking at his save percentage or actually seeing him make some great saves? Saying "I can't tell how much difference it makes" is not the same as saying "It doesn't make a difference."

When you actually see him have a game like against Arsenal, then it becomes easy to say "Wow. He's great back there. It must fill the team with confidence." But if you don't see that, you're just left with circular logic.

How do you know that Forster is a great keeper who helps the defense play better?
Because we allow very few shots when Forster is playing and the defense looks quite good.

Why do we allow so few shots and look good when Forster is playing?
It must be because Forster is a great keeper.
Click to expand...

If we all say "You're right" will you stop?

No, I thought not. I think you are right to say that Forster's influence is difficult to measure. However, moving beyond your insistence on quantitative data you might consider the qualitative. The circular logic doesn't help, it's true. I was watching the body language of our defenders at Arsenal, and for old subjective me there seemed to be a difference in their responses compared to when they had a lesser mortal behind them. I commented on this to a bloke next to me, and we agreed that they were simply exuding a confidence and belief in each other that had been missing at, for example, Norwich. Was Forster responsible or was it that they were on this very nice little run? I don't know. But having seen a few keepers over the years I'm glad we've got this one. I reckon if I can feel confident hat we have a keeper who is in control then this might well be shared by the defenders. Soft data? Highly subjective? Yes, of course. But life is like that sometimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatletiss
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
That's fine. No one is arguing any different. I understand the logic, and I don't disagree at all.

Except that we are first or second in shots allowed no matter whether it is Boruc, Forster, or Steklenberg playing keeper. We have always had a good defense. So to that extent the defense must be confident in all three. And I suppose the keepers must all be confident in the defense.

It's a pretty regular pattern that our players who transfer don't enjoy the same success as they do here. So obviously there's something going on-- good communication/man management, team unity, confidence, the right system. I'm not denying that happens at all.

The question is, how do you know what Forster adds without looking at his save percentage or actually seeing him make some great saves? Saying "I can't tell how much difference it makes" is not the same as saying "It doesn't make a difference."

When you actually see him have a game like against Arsenal, then it becomes easy to say "Wow. He's great back there. It must fill the team with confidence." But if you don't see that, you're just left with circular logic.

How do you know that Forster is a great keeper who helps the defense play better?
Because we allow very few shots when Forster is playing and the defense looks quite good.

Why do we allow so few shots and look good when Forster is playing?
It must be because Forster is a great keeper.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I'm coming back in but hey!

It is perfectly reasonable to read between lines and use what we see on the pitch (you tell us you do this) and make a comment (I said comment, not a statement in a court of law) that Forster brings added confidence to the defence.

I am happy to accept that it is something I see and that may be you don't, or you do but won't accept it without a stat or fact to back it up.

I am also happy to accept that a set of players can appear more confident based on who they play with, how well they slept, how well the relationship is with the wife and a whole host of other things. It isn't all about facts, logic and stats.
 
fatletiss said:
I am also happy to accept that a set of players can appear more confident based on who they play with, how well they slept, how well the relationship is with the wife and a whole host of other things. It isn't all about facts, logic and stats.
Click to expand...

Are you well-informed as to the state of the players' spousal relationships or their sleeping arrangements? Because if you're not, it would be rather foolish to conjecture that if Fonte played well today it must be because he had a great romantic evening with his wife.
 
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
Are you well-informed as to the state of the players' spousal relationships or their sleeping arrangements? Because if you're not, it would be rather foolish to conjecture that if Fonte played well today it must be because he had a great romantic evening with his wife.
Click to expand...

In Jose's case it's whether he had a near-miss with Fran during the week or not. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatletiss
So, England's no. 1 and 2 keepers both let in 3 today, whereas our Fraser kept his 5th consecutive clean sheet.

Just saying...
 
As long as he remains fit, Forster will be called into the squad, but he won't be number one choice. And we don't want him to be.....recognition but no chance of injury will do for me. Isn't it amazing how many good keepers we have....only a few years ago the dearth of English keepers was a talking point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back