Schmeichel wrote a press piece that competition breeds anxiety and that GK's need the security to know they will start every game. How is that exclusive to goalkeepers? Every single player on the pitch would love nothing more than a guaranteed starting berth, and whether they fail or succeed in the face of competition holds true across all players and all positions. These dynamics are blatantly not exclusive to goalkeeping. You had lots of people getting concern on behalf of Ramsdale when we bought Raya, but where was the concern for White or Partey?
Raya joins Arsenal
daredevil These dynamics are blatantly not exclusive to goalkeeping.
But this is wrong. The dynamics of anxiety, concentration and complacency are different for keepers. That's what the criticisms from keepers such as Schmeichel and Given, or that fella who wrote Raya's signing up for The Athletic have discussed. The reason is that keepers' actions on the pitch have higher risks.
Goalkeepers aren't a borg where they all share the same emotions, feelings, etc. There isn't one way to get the best out of them. What works for one player may or may not work for another. Its up to Arteta to figure how to get the best from his players. If he thinks competing goal keepers is the way to do that then I'm not going to get ahead of myself and criticise him until I see a reason for it.
All I know is Raya and Ramsdale are about a million times better than Turner so we aren't a goal keeper injury away from disaster.
- Edited
Those risks exists whether there is competition or not. and there is nothing to suggest those risks would be higher or lower in the face of competition as it's completely unique to each person. Schmeichel is obviously the anxious type, someone else might respond completely different and welcome the challenge. Having two quality goalkeepers also mitigates two of the three risks you've listed, as it literally gives us more options to solve for deteriorating GK performance.
- Edited
Challenging view from Arteta. Maybe he is right, although I really doubt it.
This equiparation between keepers and other players may be attractive, but may also fall short. Just as an example: you don't see a coach changing the keeper at the minute 70 of the game.
Really complex issue, Jury is still out. Let's see how it works in the next games.
I think we are over complicating this issue.
Who is the better keeper? Raya it looks like.
Therefore play the better keeper, Raya should start on Wed.
As much as like Ramsdale the personality so be it and if he leaves in the summer it is what it is, we are not a charity.
I think most of this debate is because people have an emotional attachment to Ramsdale.
It was the same thing when Zinny replaced Tierney but that proved to be the right move as will Raya being number 1 (imo).
It’s all part of upgrading the quality in the first eleven.
- Edited
daredevil Those risks exists whether there is competition or not. and there is nothing to suggest those risks would be higher or lower in the face of competition as it's completely unique to each person.
You've missed the point so I'll lay it out in more detail.
You say these dynamics are the same for any outfield position and for keepers. I say they're not because things are different for keepers. That's due to the distinctive nature of the position and role. What Ramsdale or Raya is accountable for to our team and our performances is very different from what, say, Rice is accountable for. And what they're accountable for is what they can be blamed for. And what you can be blamed for (or fail at) is what fuels anxiety.
These differences remain the same (although their impact is different) relative to whether a keeper is "the anxious type". They are not "completely unique for each person". However, one would accept the changing role of the keeper in the XI, no longer just a shot-stopper, does slowly alter them without turning them over.
That's one thing Schmeichel and other keepers commentating on Raya's transfer have been articulating (that fella in The Athletic was a good read). As a point it is quite obvious, and is not necessarily decisive as to whether competitive #1s is a good or bad thing.
- Edited
Another piece on this topic from The Athletic, not earth-shattering but it's worth a read.
One more very obvious point as to why it's different for keepers—for any other position, it is possible to accommodate many more options than just "it's him or him (or him)".
For instance, with our current squad we can readily play any two out of Gabriel, Saliba and White across central defence and have a great defensive pairing, so if Gabriel is dropped, he has many other ways to consider it than "I've been judged inferior to Saliba". Same goes for our options for a midfield trio or across the forward line, not to mention all the other options so carefully engineered into our squad.
Not so easy for Ramsdale and Raya, because an XI only has one goalkeeper on the pitch to whom different laws apply.
Anyway, Arteta implies he's going to rotate and substitute Raya and Ramsdale and it's gonna be interesting seeing how the approach works. If he rotates the two or makes substitutions "between the 60th and 85th minute" as his presser after Everton suggested, and we see an improvement in overall results, it'll be impressive stuff. Otherwise he's just signed Ramsdale's replacement, and dropping a £30m bag is not an innovation in today's football.
Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert Wonder which two matches he has those regrets for?
Remember last season it was Turner.
Not subbing Turner on for Rambo got us knocked out of the UEL.
Brighton under De Zerbi
2022-23
Robert Sanchez - 23 league appearances
Jason Steele - 15 league appearances
2023-24 so far
Jason Steele - 3 league appearances
Bart Verbruggen - 2 league appearances
Yeah, it was definitely not rotation. Sanchez was dropped completely.
This season, he’s basically been alternating. Steele has 3 games and Verbruggen two games. Makes sense when you consider how insistent Brighton are on build out from the back. They’re the only team in the league with no long goal kicks after 5 matches. So a lot of stress on the goalie.
- Edited
No, I got your point. There's a difference between, these dynamics are the same for each position vs these dynamics exist for each position. The first implies that risk exists equally across each position. I didn't say that, of course the impact of each risk is different for each position. I said that these risks aren't exclusive to goalkeepers, which they aren't because players in all positions are subject to anxiety, concentration and complacency.
- Edited
I think it's a stretch to think that outfielders take it more easily on the chin, because there's more than one reason as to why they were dropped. Whether it's me vs him or me vs x, y, and z is neither here nor there. Generally, players like to play and they don't like to sit on the bench. Determining whether Gabriel would be less pissed than Ramsdale because there can be more than one reason why an outfielder is dropped vs a GK is splitting hairs. Notwithstanding, that even with our various permutations or tactical variations, it's almost always Nketiah vs Jesus, Martinelli vs Trossard, Vieira vs Havertz, Zinchenko vs Tomiyasu. It's almost always a case of me vs him.
It's also the case that CBs rotate less than MFs who rotate less than forwards. I think this has to do with the combination of perceived effect on fitness (not just who runs how far, but who sprints the most etc; GKs are perceived as being able to play every match without it ever becoming a fitness issue) and an inherent conservatism for how we think about defense as opposed to offense (we all privilege stability in defense whereas changing it up is a constant of attack). So if you're a GK or CB and don't start, you're likely only coming on in case of injury. If you're a forward and you don't start, you still have a relatively good chance of seeing some minutes.
Of course the idea that Arteta, whose single weakness for me is his unwillingness to use the whole squad, is going to be the one who introduces GK rotation seems slightly absurd.
daredevil No, I got your point.
No, you didn't. I know you didn't, because you're still saying things like this:
daredevil I said that these risks aren't exclusive to goalkeepers, which they aren't because players in all positions are subject to anxiety, concentration and complacency.
I'm not talking about the risk of a player feeling anxious, mate. I'm talking about the risks of the sport of football itself.
With apologies, but you're more or less forcing me to do this … if there are eleven players on a football team and a penalty is given against this team, which of the eleven players is at risk of failing to save this penalty, to "keep" the goal as one might term it? Is it all eleven of them who face this risk equally? Or is there perhaps among them some sort of specialist player who has additional responsibility for goal "keeping", a specialist "keeper of goals" one might say, although the term would be somewhat awkward and in need of refinement?
- Edited
Whenever anyone tries to innovate anything (usually Pep), there's often a lot of resistance to the idea. Usually it's because they start looking at the risks and drawbacks without giving much weight to the benefits. Great example is passing out the back, commentators and pundits would rile against the idea in the PL because all they saw were the errors and struggles. Now it's the norm, even for relegation battlers.
Every idea will have it's draw backs and Pep has had his share of failures, but what makes him brilliant is that he's always looking for ways to improve things. So I'm all for Arteta trying to use having two very good keepers to his advantage.
I'll tell you two very tangible risks we face with not having equals in goal though, and that's that you're at the mercy of injury and poor form.