To be clear - I wasn't saying he was that good
. (Incidentally, I seem to recall he is a specialist penalty saver, might have made that up. If that's the case he is a good bench option for that reason.)I was simply saying what he has is experience, which is invaluable as a goalkeeper.
And, on top of that, he has a very good temperament to be a back-up 'keeper, because he seems happy to sit on the bench for weeks, but he's focused and sharp when obliged to step in.
All I meant was that it is very harsh to suggest he is a dreadful 'keeper, when he clearly is not and, more to the point, served us extremely well at a very difficult time. He just has major shortcomings which mean he will never be a first choice. I think he's better suited to being a second choice 'keeper than Rudd for exactly the reasons highlighted elsewhere - Rudd will be good enough to be a starting goalkeeper and therefore will itch to be the "number 1".
