• You're viewing a limited version of PNE Online. Only the PNE Discussions forum is open to guests.

    Sign Up – It’s Free!

    Already a member? Log in here.

    After registering, you can also become a Patron to unlock even more features and help keep the forum ad-free.
  • Gentry Tifo Update
    The Gentry Tifo will now be displayed next season to ensure it receives the platform and impact it deserves.
    Names and donations remain open this season.
    In memory of Brian Jolly (LIS), donations during this period will be split between the Tifo fund and a charity chosen by his family, also honouring The Warehouse (Dave B).

Matchday Thread PNE v Oxford United | 06.03.26 | KO:8PM | Championship

Matchday Thread PNE v Oxford United | 06.03.26 | KO:8PM | Championship

Hoz ' said:
Oxford are home to Blackburn next!

Their fixtures are really tough but you need Leicester and West Brom to pick up points
Click to expand...
West Brom have got a very tough run in on paper…..

They still have to play : Southampton, Hull, Bristol City, Wrexham, Millwall, Watford and Ipswich…
 
Regardless said:
You’re right that a lot of things hit us at the same time and we haven’t had the resilience to cope. I still think the pitch has been a much bigger sap on our season than most seem to believe.

Iversen is clearly a better keeper than Dai, with spreading himself self in close range one-on-ones being his speciality. So last night, maybe he’d have stopped the first… maybe (or maybe not) his starting position would have been different but a stretch to say he would have prevented that goal.
The second goal clearly beats either of them - and I really don’t see how you think Iversen stops the third.
Click to expand...


I’m going off this. I didn’t notice at the time, but look at Cornell’s positioning for the third. Why is he man-marking the near post? He doesn’t need to be that far across at all. He also practically dives out the way of the first one.

I’m not saying it’s a given that Dan saves them, but I think he would have.
 
Regardless said:
aye - he’s in right right position at first but lingers on the front post too long.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I mean. It’s close range, to be fair, but it’s down the middle, and he’s not actually far off it.

If he takes a couple of steps to the left earlier, like he should, then I think he saves it.
 
Doyler said:
Exactly what I mean. It’s close range, to be fair, but it’s down the middle, and he’s not actually far off it.

If he takes a couple of steps to the left earlier, like he should, then I think he saves it.
Click to expand...
That’s the point I was trying to make yesterday. He doesn’t move quickly across his line. So if you aim a shot either side of him, you’re probably going to score
 
I’ve said it before, many times. It makes me laugh when people describe a goalkeeper as “a good shot stopper”. Surely that’s the bare minimum requisite for the position? However, Dai is actually a poor shot stopper. Watch him in the warm up, as @OB1 says, unless it’s straight at him he simply doesn’t save anything.

Am I missing something with the second goal? I’m a grassroots junior keeper coach, and the first thing I coach into them is never give up something as a lost cause. Even if you think you won’t get there, dive after it as sometimes you will actually get there. And that one, it was struck so slowly, any other champ keeper saves it.

I’m so tired of this and boring myself. It’s pathetic that we employ two Step 8 level goalkeepers as senior professional footballers. So pissed off.
 
Doyler said:
Exactly what I mean. It’s close range, to be fair, but it’s down the middle, and he’s not actually far off it.

If he takes a couple of steps to the left earlier, like he should, then I think he saves it.
Click to expand...

Sure, if his positioning is better, he improves his chances but I still think a powerful header from such close range scores at least 8 times out of ten, no matter who’s in the nets. We know Dan’s a better keeper but In practice, we’re arguing only about marginal differences regarding those two goals.

You say that Dan would have prevented both goals. IMO it remains that 8 or 9 times out of ten, Dan would also have conceded them both. Maybe it’s only 1 in 20 times where he’d have saved them both of them IMO. All focus should be on the shit defending.
 
Regardless said:
Sure, if his positioning is better, he improves his chances but I still think a powerful header from such close range scores at least 8 times out of ten, no matter who’s in the nets. We know Dan’s a better keeper but In practice, we’re arguing only about marginal differences regarding those two goals.

You say that Dan would have prevented both goals. IMO it remains that 8 or 9 times out of ten, Dan would also have conceded them both. Maybe it’s only 1 in 20 times where he’d have saved them both of them IMO. All focus should be on the shit defending.
Click to expand...
Don't completely disagree. FWIW I'm on record saying that Cornell has done alright since coming in. I blame last night on Gibson, and then our lack of guile to get in positions to work the goalkeeper in the second half (although we did put in some good crosses, and the pitch certainly doesn't help in that respect).

Like you say, Iversen might not have saved them. But I'm confident he'd have saved the first, and he'd certainly have given himself a better chance of saving the third.
 
Back
Top