Back from the game - Bristol

[Snowball]

Have to say it was keepers ball. Eithes stay' or come,and keep coming. Kick the ball,or at least put the striker off. Him standing 6 yards away in no mans land had no affect whatsoever on the lob.

which failed to go in.

The point being, that Fed had ZERO influence on the lob being missed; to say, as you have done, that he "stopped" the lob from going in is staggering - by that token, all a keeper has to do is be on the pitch, and then every attempt at goal that fails to go in, even if its a shot that has gone closer to the corner flag than the goal, is claimed by the keeper as a save!

Not at all. Feds had a few decisions to make.

First, he saw the problem and could have rushed from his area and tried to clatter the ball. If you watch the replay he has loads of time to do it, and "HAS TO" stop. Had he tried a lame stop outside the area he'd've been skinned or more probably fouled and got sent off.

Because he has to stop (having made decision 1) he is in an unusual situation. Keepers when they come rushing out have momentum and put the striker under decision pressure (not to say fear). But Feds was STILL, so he made himself big and invited the lob, more in hope than anything else, but it was "already a goal"

Had the break been ten yards nearer the goal he'd've just rushed out at the players feet and hoped.

IMO he did the best job possible and DID stop the goal. He stopped it by making the attacker take the not-perfect percentage option.

[Man Friday]

I tend to agree.

[SLAMMED]

Surely everyone knows Federici has telekinetic powers to prevent the ball from going in when he's nowhere near it...

[Mr Angry]

Every single person in the ground knew, the nano-second that Fed came steaming out and then stopped, exactly what the Bristol player was going to do; Fed didn't calculate anything. He simply stood there, watching the ball sail over his head, and (like all of us) hoped the guy would miss.

Clearly you don't know what stopping a goal actually means, and rather than admit that you are talking nonsense, you continue to dig yourself into a hole.

So, from my years of being sat next to Woodcote, I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore.

[loyalroyal4life]

Surely when a keeper comes rushing out the aim is to close down the striker and attack the ball as it is deeemed a better option than standing on your line.... Feds did neither

[Royalee]

Not at all. Feds had a few decisions to make.

First, he saw the problem and could have rushed from his area and tried to clatter the ball. If you watch the replay he has loads of time to do it, and "HAS TO" stop. Had he tried a lame stop outside the area he'd've been skinned or more probably fouled and got sent off.

Because he has to stop (having made decision 1) he is in an unusual situation. Keepers when they come rushing out have momentum and put the striker under decision pressure (not to say fear). But Feds was STILL, so he made himself big and invited the lob, more in hope than anything else, but it was "already a goal"

Had the break been ten yards nearer the goal he'd've just rushed out at the players feet and hoped.

IMO he did the best job possible and DID stop the goal. He stopped it by making the attacker take the not-perfect percentage option.

You're a moron, he should have either clattered the striker or stayed at home, the striker should have buried the first chance given how much goal Federici gave him.

[biscuitman]

Stop talking about Bristol's goal. We scored three more. The're the ones with problems and their crap, boring fans had the audacity to slag off Coppell with that rubbish banner. Special mention to Mr Alex Pearce, he was solid along wth Mills and I cant believe he's still 23. I feel they both complimate each other so well.