SAF: van Der Sar is the new Schmeichel

IIRC, it was also said of TH...whom i really think should go elsewhere on loan....

 

Yep, the same argument that ignores the fact that many of the blunders came at critical moments in high profile games, which is why SAF made it his first priority to sign VDS this summer.

 

Which has ??? to do with my original post (its as if you are trying to post to me- but have a different, separate conversation). I was happy with the first one I was having (with nico)..

 

????

Do high profile matches count more than 3 points for a win????

Now, if you're just talking about the CL, then your response makes sense. Almost as much sense as the counterresponse...THEY DIDN'T SCORE IN 180 MINUTES AND SO THEY LOST.

Again, let me repeat. The EPL figures to be a 3 team race. Any team coming in last in GF has no chance to win the league, and a team coming in last in GA has only a ghost of a chance.*

*I'm being a bit loose with my terms here; by last, I don't mean last-but-virtually-tied. Last year, there were clear gaps between each of the teams in GF and GA. But if Arsenal had come in "last" in GA by conceding one more than ManU, they might well have beaten out Chelsea.

But such a scenario is letting stats obscure the reality. The reality is, in the meaningful league, the 3 team league, ManU had an average defense and a bad offense. Maybe injuries are mostly responsible for the latter. If so, then ManU's defense and offense are equally worthy of attention. If not, SAF had the wrong first priority.

I still come back to the same thing...ManU, fans and management, have a weird, mystical obsession with the goalkeeping position. EDIT: Yossarian, this is the thing. Errors by ManU Gks, post-Schmeichel, are imbued with a mythological import on par with Helen being stolen by Troy. Just wait, VDS will soon make a mistake, and join the long list of "failures."

 

Just like "Wonder boy" Rooney can do no wrong. As good as he was last year- and he was very good- he didn't show up at all in some big games. He didn't put the ball in the onion bag (or close). If you want to criticize keepers for not coming up big in big games (which is more than fair game), you should be able to do the same for $$$ offensive talent that Man. U bought- and were lame when it counted.

 

I'd also like to point out that the reason they didn't lose by more is that ManU's offense proved so anemic that Milan didn't bother to push hard for a 2nd, concerned that the counterattack would provide more of a risk than the benefit of a likely goal, given how much control they had of the ball in both matches. ManU got outplayed on the field through both games, and that the score was 1-0 was mostly charity.

 

Yes, the 6 goals they scored in two league games against Arsenal was a low number.

 

I could do exactly the same exercise for Chelsea this past season. That ManUtd needs to score more is not the point. They have an excellent offense, its just not as good as Arsenal's or Chelsea's. That leaves them less margin for error.

 

That's right, SHARES. With - the keeper that made the crucial mistake. So that's why you upgrade both.

 

Why don't you take the numbers over, say, a 3 year period, and then get back to me.

 

VDS has played plenty of "high profile" games in his career, both for club and country. If he had had a pattern of blunders in these games (and in 'regular' games as well) then he would have come under the same kind of microscope as Carroll/Howard. You are right, however, that all 'keepers make blunders, including the very best.

 

Crap. We have homework assignments now?

 

Man Utd got outplayed in the first leg at Old Trafford, so a 0-0 draw would have been a 'victory' for them. Carroll's blunder in that game completely changed the complexion of the second leg, which is why that mistake was so significant.

 

Rooney isn't a YA so this isn't the place for lengthy discussion about him. But, you are correct that he didn't show up for some games or allowed his petulance get the better of him in others. Otoh, his sheer brilliance won other games for them: I don't remember a single game where I could point to Howard or Carroll last season and say that a victory was down to them.

 

They are both worthy of attention, although the return of a fit Van Nistelroy may do a lot to address the latter.

There's nothing weird or mystical about wanting a keeper that doesn't have propensity to blunder, particularly at critical moments in big games. What you can criticize Man Utd for is bringing in a succession of 'keepers who weren't a good match for their needs: a cocaine addict, a clown who happened to have a WC winners medal, and an American who really wasn't ready for prime time in the Premiership when thrust into the spotlight etc. Oh, and Mr Taibi.

 

Is this board reserved for Van Der Sar comment? I see that ManU just finished signing Foster.

Does Howard still have a home?

 

I have no problem with that statement, and never have. I see enough blame to go around, even SAF (if he's willing to look in the mirror).

In fact, I think its going to take that kindof commitment to dethrone Chelsea- improve in several areas...

 

Given the way they played in the 2nd leg, if Carroll's blunder "didn't" occur, Milan would have just won the game in the 2nd leg. If Manchester United would have beaten Milan, to do it they would have had to get past 240 minutes of play where Milan was on the attack and controlled play without a goal. Just to get to a shootout, btw. That this goal happened to occur on the blunder does not mean the odds that, if it didn't come on the Carroll blunder, that the shootout would have occurred. Milan would have just pressed its advantage stronger and converted another goal. Soccer is not a game that plays so calmly to stats that you could make the inferences you are trying to make.<br><br>PS you readily admit that ManU got outplayed at home in a CL series. While its very easy to point to one specific blunder made by the goalkeeper (ah, the fun of the spotlight) as a reason they lost a game they should have lost, the players on the field WERE OUTPLAYED AT HOME. While I've already conceded that VDS is an upgrade at a position that they, given unlimited resources, should upgrade, it doesn't show that the subpar goalkeeping was anymore to blame than the subpar field play across the board. If you're looking for a Schmeichel to win games for you that you don't deserve to win, let me point out that when Brad Friedel won goalkeeper of the year for his Schmeichel-like year two years ago, he didn't get a mediocre Blackburn team into Europe.

 

It's certainly quite possible that that would have transpired. But at the same time it's conjecture, of course, even more so at the time of the blunder in the first leg. But that's really not the point - that Milan away goal significantly reduced the odds of Man Utd progressing, regardless of any other factors.

The hallmark of a good team is that they hang in there whilst being outplayed and don't give up a loss through a stupid mistake. Arsenal in last season's FA Cup final would be a good example: largely outplayed yet didn't make a mistake to gift Man Utd a goal and eventually won the cup on penalties.

He may have saved it from relegation, however.

 

Why would I? The question is how best for ManU to catch first Arsenal and then Chelsea next year.

 

See, to me, THIS is the problem. You, for some reason, see it differently. I honestly can't figure out why.

 

'Cause yur un American. We like to 'win', not 'not lose'.

Having said, I hope we all can agree that the chick in your avatar is smokin'..

 

Check out post 71.