g88ner wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:39 pm
augie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 3:48 pm
It seems that I am the only one who thinks that it is very unfair that our back up keeper is already being written off - he is a new signing trying to get adjusted to new team-mates, new club, and new country, and despite only playing 5 games in 4 months, he is expected to be sharp as a tack at all times
Anyone that knows anything about football will acknowledge that goalkeeper and strikers are the two positions where players need a run of games to be match sharp, but our back up keeper hasnt had that so it is unfair to judge him so quick imo
Are you playing devils advocate or is your defence of Runnarson based on his performances?
Literally everything about his game worries me. His positioning, his handling, shot stopping, crosses, distribution...
He’s 25, can’t get in the Finland team, had lost his place in the Dijon team and when asked about his best qualities, listed distribution but none of the more traditional goalkeeping skills.
I'm generally a positive supporter but I sensed something iffy from the first performance and every performance since has backed up that initial view that he’s miles away from being even half decent.
It strikes me as yet another murky signing that, along with Willian and Soares, weren’t done for entirely footballing reasons. Luiz and Mari too perhaps?
The Kia/Raul/Edu link stinks to high heaven for most of those deals where the player & agent have come out of this far better than Arsenal.
Runnarson looks increasingly like a signing by the goalkeeper coach because of a personal bond rather than having the required quality? If so, the coach should be sacked.
I'll be honest and admit that I didnt see most of the citeeh cup game so have been spared looking at what I am told were shocking fcuk ups.
I'll also say that I didnt realise that he is 25 years old and that would concern me too.
My "defence" of the lad is based on the fact that he is only just in the door and needs to be given some time to settle in. He got blamed for the first goal in the city cup game, and imo the blame for that one should land squarely at the feet of experienced german international (
) mustafi who just watched the ball go past him at the near post. I feel that he has largely been doing ok in the ropey league games and has never had a chance to play with our first choice back 4.
I suppose I also feel that the guy is on a hiding to nothing with the fans cos he is coming in to replace a back up keeper that the vast majority wanted to keep. Runarsson is now being compared with the martinez of 2020, and not with the martinez of the previous 10 years when he was mostly shit, and that isnt fair imo. The guy might well be another karius as nos89 suggests, and if so that is panic stations all around cos that isnt even conference level, but right now I would rather focus attention (and money) on improving the number 8 position (alongside partey) and the right full position before I look at the back up keepers spot
Like I said above though, much of my thinking was based around the guy being 22 or 23 years old, and even though 25 isnt old for a keeper, it is old enough to be better at the basics than he apparently displayed against citeeh
Btw, didnt the goalkeeping coach want us to sign brentford's keeper ? Dont think runarsson was his choice
I get that there are times than signing players on loan might be necessary/beneficial for the club, but for the life of me I cannot understand the logic of signing a young player on loan unless there is an option to sign him permanently at end of loan - you can see an experienced player on loan and get an immediate benefit from signing him, but a young unproven player will take time to settle/adjust to new team/league, and most of that loan time will be lost in that "settling in" period, and if you are willing to show the level of patience needed for that, then why not show the same level of patience to your young homegrown players and see whether they will develop ?
