Can someone explain the Tim Howard situation?

[johno]

I don't see what his complait is... he has not a leg to stand on. He probably thinks the whole team was responsible for us not going past Porto last year in CL too.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Howard has been poor and deserves his place on the bench. It is HIS INDIVIDUAL errors that have caused it. He should pick up his toys/dummy and concentrate on improving in training to win his place back.

[Motterman]

There's nothing in those quotes to warrant a story like that from the BBC. I frankly expected more from them....

[Andy Bennett]

There's nothing in those quotes to warrant a story like that from the BBC. I frankly expected more from them....
The headline is ' I've been scapegoat, says Howard' and one of the quotes is "A goalkeeper is a very convenient scapegoat" I can't quite see what the problem is with the story. Seems pretty accurate to me.

[Motterman]

The headline is ' I've been scapegoat, says Howard' and one of the quotes is "A goalkeeper is a very convenient scapegoat" I can't quite see what the problem is with the story. Seems pretty accurate to me.
You should read the quotes in the context he made them, which you only get in the SI article.

[BTFOOM]

There's nothing in those quotes to warrant a story like that from the BBC. I frankly expected more from them....

Why would you expect any good reporting from the BBC. They only report their own views, not the actual news.

[Motterman]

Why would you expect any good reporting from the BBC. They only report their own views, not the actual news.
Well, expecting a step up from the Sun and Daily Mirror, at least, I thought was not too much to ask. Apparently, I was wrong.

[prk166]

Timmy!!!

[prk166]

Now that I got that out of my system, I have to say that something is up at Fulham. I love to talk about rumors, especially to put them down. But Cookie benching Van der Saar for Crossley? Crossley's a good GK but at best fit for polishing VdS' boots and cleanin' up after his dog. I really think that Fulham are going to cashin on VdS come the winter window. It's just a matter of who's going to be doing the buying.

[Coach_McGuirk]

Now that I got that out of my system, I have to say that something is up at Fulham. I love to talk about rumors, especially to put them down. But Cookie benching Van der Saar for Crossley? Crossley's a good GK but at best fit for polishing VdS' boots and cleanin' up after his dog. I really think that Fulham are going to cashin on VdS come the winter window. It's just a matter of who's going to be doing the buying.
There will be a long list of suitors should van der Saar come on the market, and I'm pretty sure the braintrust down at Highbury would be in that line.

[ugaaccountant]

What does every 1 think should tickets be prioritised for mancunians?

nope, tickets should go to whoever pays. simple as that.

[Achtung]

I don't see what his complait is... he has not a leg to stand on. He probably thinks the whole team was responsible for us not going past Porto last year in CL too.

The whole team was responsible, IMO. If you can't score more than one goal at home, you don't deserve to go through. Giving up a free kick at the edge of the box that late in the game is foolish as well. Sure, Howard didn't do a great job with the shot, but he was hardly alone in making a crucial mistake that day. Of course it's also not his fault that we've scored all of 11 goals in 12 games. At the end of the day, Howard takes the blame for making goalkeeping mistakes--but the team takes the blame for losing.

[JohnR]

Tim's quote is fine.

Please stop apologizing for Howard. It makes all U.S. fans look bad, like blind homers. He didn't get the job done. So he was swapped out for Roy Carroll, who is doing a better job.

Fergie isn't out to get Tim. He likes Howard. It's just that Fergie is paid to win games and right now Roy gives him a better chance of winning games. Maybe in 2 months, that won't be the case. But right now, yes.

[cleansheetbsc]

I don't see what his complait is... he has not a leg to stand on. He probably thinks the whole team was responsible for us not going past Porto last year in CL too.

Why isn't the whole team responsible? The 'whole team' should be responsible for playing a piss-pour 1st leg of that tie in Portugal, leaving no margin for error on the return leg.

Tim Howard was not the respected team captain who got red-carded in the first leg for stepping on the Porto goalkeeper and thereby letting the 'whole team' down by not leading his team for the return leg. Was he?

He wasn't the 'whole team' that only scored one goal in the second leg, leaving Porto with a chance to win. The 'whole team' and the manager went into a complete defensive shell once they got the lead.

He wasn't the one who gave away a close-ranged free kick as time ticked away. He wasn't the one who poorly marked on the ensuing free-kick. He stopped the free kick, he did his job. Should he have held it or sent it in a different direction? Perhaps. You obviously thought he should have caught it. I differ in that opinion.

Howard has earned the spot on the bench. Carroll earned his by default but hasn't done anything to merit his removal. Point is, yes the whole team does determine the result of a match. If the vaunted Manyoo strike force could muster more than one goal, at most, per game, many of these 'keeper issues would be minor (As in Arsenal's case with their bumbling jeri-curled Aryan in net), instead of being the difference of losing the Premiership or being kicked out of Champions League play.

[johno]

The whole team was responsible, IMO. If you can't score more than one goal at home, you don't deserve to go through. Giving up a free kick at the edge of the box that late in the game is foolish as well. Sure, Howard didn't do a great job with the shot, but he was hardly alone in making a crucial mistake that day. Of course it's also not his fault that we've scored all of 11 goals in 12 games. At the end of the day, Howard takes the blame for making goalkeeping mistakes--but the team takes the blame for losing.

Yes, but when you make a mistake that literally handed the game to Porto you have to take more responsibility than anyone else on the pitch. Was it Phil who gave up the FK? Well, he has to shoulder some of the blame too, but if you remember the incident then you should recall how simple it would have been to hold onto the ball or push it wide instead of into the path of a Porto player.

Yes, but with Carroll in the goal there have been fewer mistakes and fewer goals. Carroll has not barrelled into the same defender twice, he has not dropped balls that come straight to him, in fact - he has made 3 or 4 saves that were game winning.

Yes, the team takes the blame for the losses, but there are times when one player is just a bit more responsible, like when you miss a penalty for example. When a player consistently plays below the standard required he must be replaced, and that's exactly what has been done. Now he is whining about being a scape goat. If he would stop dropping balls and command his area better he would have a starting job, regardless of the team's results. Whining now certainly not helping his cause.

I am not loyal to him like others on this board are, I could not care less if he never plays for United again - I want the best player we have playing in each position. Right now, Howard is not that player, perhaps in the future he will be and then, I'd have no problem with him starting.
While the argument can be made that Howard did not lose us games, the argument that Carroll has won us games or saved us from defeat can also be made.

[johno]

Why isn't the whole team responsible? The 'whole team' should be responsible for playing a piss-pour 1st leg of that tie in Portugal, leaving no margin for error on the return leg.

Tim Howard was not the respected team captain who got red-carded in the first leg for stepping on the Porto goalkeeper and thereby letting the 'whole team' down by not leading his team for the return leg. Was he?

He wasn't the 'whole team' that only scored one goal in the second leg, leaving Porto with a chance to win. The 'whole team' and the manager went into a complete defensive shell once they got the lead.

He wasn't the one who gave away a close-ranged free kick as time ticked away. He wasn't the one who poorly marked on the ensuing free-kick. He stopped the free kick, he did his job. Should he have held it or sent it in a different direction? Perhaps. You obviously thought he should have caught it. I differ in that opinion.

Howard has earned the spot on the bench. Carroll earned his by default but hasn't done anything to merit his removal. Point is, yes the whole team does determine the result of a match. If the vaunted Manyoo strike force could muster more than one goal, at most, per game, many of these 'keeper issues would be minor (As in Arsenal's case with their bumbling jeri-curled Aryan in net), instead of being the difference of losing the Premiership or being kicked out of Champions League play.

A hole lot of arrogance and attitude when none is necessary... chillout.

Poor marking on the FK? What is wrong with you, it was a shot that he could have held, tipped over or out to the side or out of play to his left. It's something that goalkeepers at every level of the sport consistently do. None of the team's errors were as glaring as him patting the ball down with 2 hands straight into the path of a striker. My goalkeeping coach told me that any time you get two hands to a ball you MUST hold onto it - Howard could have or should have done just that, barring that, anything but what he did, there is always a turning point in a match.

Oh, we did score 2 goals by the way, Scholes' legal goal was disallowed. Yes we played poorly in Portugal but we started Saha at LW due to many injuries in the team.

Roy's act was bad, but I don't think it was as bad as people made it out to be. Yes, I hold him responsible for missing the return leg. However - the outfield players did what was necessary to win the game on the day, but Howard coughed it up.

Bayern's keeper Khan has had similar efforts against Roberto Carlos last year and against Rivaldo in the WC Final that similarly cost his team the match. There are actions that lead to a loss. So perhaps maybe Tim Howard himself is not to blame but letting that goal in? Sure it is.... is this fair? Maybe not, because GK's can't really do much but let in goals right? Nope, the Great Dane was a matchwinner for us and many keepers have had that priviledge. You blame a player who misses a penalty or a clear cut chance ala Ruud vs. Arsenal last year, Giggs in the last game for his easy chance that he missed, or Forlan on numerous occasions.

I still think Howard was poor and deserved to be benched and in the end that's all I was saying - he claimed he was a scape goat, but it seems to me he thinks he was blameless or faultless and that's just silly.

[Achtung]

Johno, I agree with most of what you said above. I also want the best available players on the pitch for us, and while I admit there is a little pride for us Americans in seeing Howard out there, I wouldn't want him out there if Roy is a better keeper, which he seems to be right now. If he's making mistakes in goal, it hurts the team and hurts their chances to win.

That said, read the SI article and you'll see he isn't making excuses. He isn't feeling sorry for himself or blaming anyone else. He's calling out the people who are blaming him alone for the team's dip in form (scapegoating him), as well as the tabloids who are calling him a flash in the pan. He's also got good perspective in saying, "Sitting on the bench, and being one play away from being a starter again, there's a lot worse things going on in this world right now." I still get the feeling he'll get another chance at United, but if not, I wish him the best wherever he ends up.

[Achtung]

but it seems to me he thinks he was blameless or faultless and that's just silly.

Here's where I have to disagree. He states, "I'm a big believer in looking yourself in the mirror, and I'm always going to own up to my mistakes. Did I lose us games? No, no. Did I contribute to it? Yes." He is not going to accept full blame for the team, nor should he. But he seems to accept that he made mistakes that hurt his team badly. I don't see him thinking he is blameless at all.

[Andy Bennett]

You should read the quotes in the context he made them, which you only get in the SI article.
I think you're being somewhat disingenuous.

The SI article was a 'feel-good' or 'human interest' piece, explaining his current situation to people who may find it more difficult to follow than most people over here. Frankly, it may come as news to some people that it rains in Manchester but most Brits, (the BBC's target audience), pretty much already know that. The fact that his dog drags blankets around the house doesn't really alter the effectiveness of United's back four with Carroll in goal, does it.

No - the only noteworthy things in the article from a football perspective were the points he made about the background to his current position at ManU and how he felt about it together with how likely he thought he would be to get the starting spot back. In that context statements such as he made can be summed up by the article presented by the BBC.

Personally I wouldn't like to say which way things are going to go. I doubt that SAF wants to get rid of him because he was extremely effective for a long period last season and, let's be honest, good keepers don't exactly fall into a managers lap very often. Look at the number of keepers that United have tried. Apart from Barthez, who at least had a certain amount of success for a few years, there's been Taibi, Bosnich and I think a couple of others.

I tend to think that SAF will persevere with him.

[Soccerholic]

However - the outfield players did what was necessary to win the game on the day, but Howard coughed it up.


Did Tim cough up the ball against Porto and not make the play he should have? Yes.
Does he deserve to sit on the bench for this and other errors? Yes.
Is Carroll doing a better job? Yes.

However, Johno, I just don't agree that Howard is alone to blame for the goal against Porto. Phil made an eggregious error when he fouled the player in an excellent free kick position when there was absolutely no danger on the play. Wes was caught ball watching on the free kick. He let the striker run past him to the ball and knock it into the net. Any defender knows to follow the ball and clear it if the ball comes back in play. All three players made serious errors that led to the goal. If any one of the players makes the play he is supposed to, United win the game.

I know you don't like the blind homerism that comes from Yanks on this board regarding Howard, but that doesn't mean that he alone was to blame for United exiting the CL. Surely you can understand that national pride can affect judgements about players. Perhaps this happened to you when your countyman Dwight Yorke was clearly ineffective yet inexplicably continued to get starts from Sir Alex.