Just a little thought..........I have had a quick check on missed games by regular first team players. Reid..... 13 games. Boateng.....10 games.......(until Jan 2nd). Carey.....7 games. McCormick.....5 games. McHugh.....2 games. That totals 37 times where we have missed a regular choice player. PS.....Simpson could be added but not sure how many....between 4 & 8 ?
When I saw the thread title I thought it was about games lost. It hurts us because our squad is so thin but every club has injured players and some have loads of them at the same time. Look at our keeper situation. If Luke is injured we have an aging rookie keeper left to fill the gap. I think he is the one we miss most. We have won plenty of games without the others playing.
On a tight budget I think there is a logic to not carrying another keeper: you can always argue that, being a specialist, a keeper is an "emergency loan" which you can't do for outfield players. I bet there are at least a few dozen keepers doing absolutely nothing in the Premier League at any one time!
The specialist position of a goalkeeper is a good argument..... for not having two equal ability players.....we have tried in the past to keep two goalkeepers happy.....maybe a luxury we cannot afford at present.........Adams could have at least a couple of names pencilled in....or even go back to Brighton for Walton.
Problem is our 2nd string is the longest serving bench warmer in history. I understand not having 2 first rate keepers and we have been spoilt in the past quite often by not being able to choose between them. To replace though would probably be a panic job and to be fair Walton wasn't exactly the greatest incoming despite people saying he was one to watch. I love the persistence with the "tight budget". We aren't on any tighter budget than anyone else and should have a better one than most. I refer you to my post reference unbudgeted extra income from gates. I know we went tits up financially previously and don't want to go there again but it's like blaming Harold Wilson for the Banking collapse a couple of years ago. That was then and this is now and spending a couple of quid isn't going to sink the ship. I think using that as an excuse runs out of credibility eventually.
Not sure by "freely" you mean willing or at no cost notdistant. Loans are never at no cost. A good second string keeper would be a youngster with bags of promise. We've had a few of those. You would hope not to need one of course.
I mean available outside the transfer windows under the emergency loan arrangement (correct me if I'm wrong). The EUFA plan is to scrap the emergency loan system next year, which is fine if you are Real Madrid or Man City, not so good if you are in League 2.
The emergency loan thing is a bit of a joke anyway in my book. Seems to me teams have signed players when there hasn't been any emergency at all in the past so not surprised it is going to be scrapped. I think it's different if you have a crisis in players available but not to fill a gap late on because you failed to sign the right players in the windows.
