This morning (at least it's morning here in Vietnam) I can see that I reacted too strongly in my criticisms of Bunn last night. It had been a nailbiting game and my emotions were still a bit raw. He was certainly at fault for the disallowed 'equaliser', which could easily have been given in my opinion, but overall he looks an adequate temporary replacement for Ruddy. I just don't think his decision making and his positioning are anywhere near as good.
It's morning here too, what a strange world! Of course he's not as good as Ruddy, who has become one of the best keepers in the land, if not THE best. Bunn though has excelled as a temporary replacement. I'm sure I'm not alone in wondering why we bought him. I for one, am starting to see why.
He simply needs a few games to find his feet... as did Ruddy. The pressure and fine line between winning and losing in the PL though means it's very unforgiving period. Bunn has already shown that he's a quality keeper in the making though and I hope he see's this as an opportunity to give Ruddy a run for his place in a couple of months.
Seriously? Looked an absolute clear as day, bang on foul to me - he was clearly elbowed full in the face so what part of that isn't a foul? Couldn't believe Hansen was so nice about us only to undo his good work by also saying there was no foul. Not sure if my eyes work differently to everyone else's but to me it was 100% an elbow in the face and therefore 100% a foul
I think what Hansen said was that Holt's challenge was exactly the same and so it was harsh that the same decision wasn't made. Although to even suggest that wasn't a foul was strange - they both were with a clear arm up to the keeper. As for Bunn... well I thought he did OK. He didn't make any real mistakes (I don't count the disallowed goal as an error, because he was fouled). I think he looks reliable and makes good saves. However, we now have to accept that we don't have a keeper that can single-handedly (hoho!) keep (hoho!) us in a match. Ruddy would not have let that third goal pass him, would definitely have saved the second goal, either by collecting the initial delivery or simply getting there and probably would have saved the first one, which wasn't right in the corner. All that tells us is, with Ruddy, we've been living in luxury. Bunn can't be blamed for that though. Three points is three points.
I have faith that Bunn is good enough and it was definitely a foul on him. However I think he had a poor game yesterday.
Don't see where you are coming from on the disallowed goal the attacker lead into him with his elbow was a clear foul which stopped him catching the ball
Funnily enough I was going to start a thread today on this very topic. My point was going to be simply that up to now I think he has been a fantastic replacement and his handling in the second half last week was exemplary. However yesterday he looked to be uncertain at times and mad a couple of errors. As has been said above thought, even big John was prone to errors in his earlym days (The first Leicester goal at CR for one) but as we all now know, he certainly came good, hopefully Mr. Bunn the bake wll do the same.
Yes, I'm guess I'm not being fair by comparing him with Ruddy, who I feel (although obviously I am biased) has been probably the best keeper in the Prem this season until his injury. Bunn just doesn't seem to read the game as well, which is my point. And therefore he's not quite saving stuff that I think Ruddy would have tipped around the post and (more seriously) he sometimes misjudges when to come for crosses and when to stay on his line.
It made more sense to copy my Bunn comment to this thread from another one... I'm not here to bash Bunn because I have been impressed with his performances to date. He is an able deputy to Ruddy but I can empathise with Vietnam in the sense that I do see chinks in his armour. There were a lot of crosses pinged into the box today and I cannot remember him stepping more than three paces from his line in each case. Now part of me thinks it is better for the defence to know that he will come for nothing, therefore they must deal with it. That is better than never knowing when or if your goalie is coming or staying put. However it does allow the attacking team the chance to put crosses right into the six yard box and cause all manner of havoc. It is a nightmare to defend as a result. I am guessing it is because he is not that tall a keeper, not when you compare him to the likes of other imposing figures between the sticks. Perhaps this is what has always seen his progress hampered and his inability to nail down a starting spot - after all he appears to be a decent shot-stopper.
If I may offer my four pennyworth, when JR came to us, he was a bit "hit and miss" at the beginning of his Norwich stewardship, but I always felt that, given time, he would settle down and become the sort of player that he now is! Mr. Bunn has also had a shaky start to hjis first-team tenure, but, unfortunately, he doesn't inspire me with the same confidence in his ability to step up in the same manner! He's not a bad keeper, he's just an adequate stand-in!
I agree that Bunn is not Ruddy; no one is. But I've just watched the extended highlights of the game, and, while outstanding Ruddy might have saved two of those goals, he would certainly have had a word or two to say to his defence. Once Swansea got into their stride they were pulling our back four all over the place. They have some top, top attacking players who can open up all sorts of holes in the best of defences, even ours! I don't believe that Bunn was any better or worse than his back four.
thought he was adequate except for his failure to complete his move to deflect the cross for the third goal. this left him stranded out of goal. but compared to Petr Cechs howler his was a minor blemish.
As I said in another thread, this was only Bunn's 3rd or 4th game in the premier league. To compare him to John Ruddy, who has only missed a handful of games in over 2 years, is a bit unfair. Will admit he has been shaky on one or two occassions, but he will only get better.
I like Bunn, but there was a goal yesterday which I felt he could have dealt with much better. I can't remember which goal but he should have had his arms outstretched to make him self bigger and give him more of a chance of punching away the cross. But you learn from your mistakes and I'm sure he will.
By the way the disallowed goal was the correct decision, michu led with his arm into bunns face As for Bunn, he's our back up keeper and for one of those hes prob one of the best in the league... You're not going to have a keeper as good as ruddy in reserve! I like him, he's good enough for the reasons I've stated already and he will do an adequate job while JR recovers.
I'm starting to feel a bit guilty. Believe me, I did not intend to start a Bunn-bashing thread. He really is a very adequate replacement for Ruddy and seems to be an excellent shot-stopper. And I agree with gorleston girl that the whole back four were getting pulled all over the place and that may just reflect the fact that it was a new mix. I also feel I've been a bit grudging overall in my reaction to the match. The first half was possibly the best I have seen City play in the whole three and a half year rise from the bottom of Division One and I shouldn't allow the problems caused us by an excellent Swansea team in the second half to detract from that. That wasn't backs to the wall and it wasn't just discipline - it was classy and a joy to behold.
The difference between their 'goal' and ours was michu led with his elbow on Bunn whereas Tremmel was being challenged by Holt and Williams.
Think Bunny is doing ok, settling into his role and the PL was always going to take a few games. I note that the Swansea fans are critical of their own reserve goalie, Tremmel, and the number of near post goals against yesterday. So who would you rather have Bunn or Tremmel?
