it has to be Tim Sills as the "assistant keeper" I think he went in goal for most of the game once when we were in the BSP & kept a clean sheet.
![LOL :lol:](./images/smilies/lol.gif)
![LOL :lol:](./images/smilies/lol.gif)
![Bow :bow:](./images/smilies/bow.gif)
![Clap :clap:](./images/smilies/clap.gif)
![Scarf :scarf:](./images/smilies/scarf.gif)
ah yeah, i think you're right.gullno4 wrote:I think it might be Steve collis, regiment
Not quite.wodger of awabia wrote:Quite obvious I.M.O.!
it has to be Tim Sills as the "assistant keeper" I think he went in goal for most of the game once when we were in the BSP & kept a clean sheet.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
We can only have one keeper on the pitch at a time. And Olejnik has been identified as our Number 1. With that in mind, should we a) Use valuable budget on another keeper, who might very well not take the field all season or b) Get in someone who's expctancy of playing (and wage demands) will be lower, and use the money saved to sign some players who might improve the first 11 in other positions? With crowds of less than 2,000, our budget won't stretch far.brucie wrote:He is useless - but i would not be suprised. The club is a joke.
Yes but what about this one then?Fonda wrote: We can only have one keeper on the pitch at a time. And Olejnik has been identified as our Number 1. With that in mind, should we a) Use valuable budget on another keeper, who might very well not take the field all season or b) Get in someone who's expctancy of playing (and wage demands) will be lower, and use the money saved to sign some players who might improve the first 11 in other positions? With crowds of less than 2,000, our budget won't stretch far.
Nothing quite like a well evidenced post...brucie wrote:He is useless - but i would not be suprised. The club is a joke.
Actually, that's a great idea - when you see bus pull out in front you and not give you the chance to stop,the bog roll can help clean up signs of your inevitable...alarm...before the paramedics show up.ferrarilover wrote:Then why bother with a bench keeper at all, just don't have one if the guy you're gonna have is not good enough to play. That's like making a seat belt out of bog roll, it'll be there, but useless in an accident, so why bother having it?
Matt.
The keeper would be deemed good enough to play by the manager Matt, better than an outfield player trained up to be a keeper but worse than the established Number 1. Thats what i meant. It may still be a good strategy mate.ferrarilover wrote:Then why bother with a bench keeper at all, just don't have one if the guy you're gonna have is not good enough to play. That's like making a seat belt out of bog roll, it'll be there, but useless in an accident, so why bother having it?
Matt.
I still think the best plan would be to train up Joe Oastler, he should have an extra six shillings a week & be granted a half holiday every second wednesday in the month!!ferrarilover wrote:Then why bother with a bench keeper at all, just don't have one if the guy you're gonna have is not good enough to play. That's like making a seat belt out of bog roll, it'll be there, but useless in an accident, so why bother having it?
Matt.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 75 guests