We've Johnstone Paint trophy to give either of them a run out mid week, I'd play randolph, if he has a 1st half display then play him saterday, if he is indecisive leading to goals then Ikepe.
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]I'd like to know if there's a deal with Wolves - we get Ikeme but (other than the FA Cup match/fitness etc) the deal is that he must play?
BFR - as I've said previously on this thread Wolves would not have sent him to us to sit on the bench. Parky says there's nothing written in the contract that he has to play but I've never heard, for obvious reasons, this ever being the case.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]If Randolph had let that in he'd be crucified.
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]I'd like to know if there's a deal with Wolves - we get Ikeme but (other than the FA Cup match/fitness etc) the deal is that he must play?
BFR - as I've said previously on this thread Wolves would not have sent him to us to sit on the bench. Parky says there's nothing written in the contract that he has to play but I've never heard, for obvious reasons, this ever being the case.
While there might not be anything in the contract I wonder if there's something in the verbal agreement - as in we don't want him sat on the bench for two months...he can do that here.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]If Randolph had let that in he'd be crucified.
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]I'd like to know if there's a deal with Wolves - we get Ikeme but (other than the FA Cup match/fitness etc) the deal is that he must play?
BFR - as I've said previously on this thread Wolves would not have sent him to us to sit on the bench. Parky says there's nothing written in the contract that he has to play but I've never heard, for obvious reasons, this ever being the case.
While there might not be anything in the contract I wonder if there's something in the verbal agreement - as in we don't want him sat on the bench for two months...he can do that here.
I believe Crainie had a clause that he had to play
I must say to both of The AA's I was happy to back Parky's decision with who to play against NV last week.
Randolph made same excellent saves, although could have done better with the goal conceded.
Ikeme last night missed a couple of crosses and should have stopped the 2nd goal.
On that basis I believe Randolph should play on Saturday. However, we of course don't know if there's other issues !
[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]I must say to both of The AA's I was happy to back Parky's decision with who to play against NV last week.
Randolph made same excellent saves, although could have done better with the goal conceded.
Ikeme last night missed a couple of crosses and should have stopped the 2nd goal.
On that basis I believe Randolph should play on Saturday. However, we of course don't know if there's other issues !
Thanks CE. I hope Randolph plays too for all the reasons already stated.
I work with an Accrington fan (we think we've got problems) and he thought that both he and Robbie were good keepers and that there really was nothing between the two of them when they played for the Stanley. Time will tell.
Possibly not much between Elliot and Randolph apart from attitude. And there is no doubt that Elliott's character has a much more positive effect on the team, than Randolph's surly little hissy fits; Mcleod has one or two of those as well whilst neglecting the fact his piss poor runs result in more lost ball.
I'm happy for Randolph to be in the team, as I especially don't want Robbie rushed back to only pull it again. Want Robbie fit for deep December drudgery.
Well Randolph has now featured in 10 matches this season and has yet to let in more than one goal in any game. Having said that we have also failed to score more than one when he's been on the pitch.
Parky said back in October that he was happy to let the stopper go in January and and Randolph clearly needs to add a bit of creativity to his game if he expects to still be with us next season.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Randolph clearly needs to add a bit of creativity to his game if he expects to still be with us next season.
Randolph needs to add creativity?
Sorry I was being ironic.
The irony being that we've had our best run of defensive performances with a Keeper who was dumped earlier in the season for a journeyman with no allegiance to the Club whatsoever. And was told that he could go in January but he will, hopefully, now prove to be our trump card in the Play offs.
No one knows what has gone on behind the scenes, in training etc. Randolph might have changed his attitude, or worked on areas of his game. It does happen, look at Ambrose failing back at Ipswich but a season later scoring regularly for Palace.
Easy to say Parky nearly made a huge mistake but maybe it was Randolph's fault? We don't know either way.
Anyway we've got a keeper playing well and not conceding very often, something we're all happy with.
No one knows what has gone on behind the scenes, in training etc. Randolph might have changed his attitude, or worked on areas of his game. It does happen, look at Ambrose failing back at Ipswich but a season later scoring regularly for Palace.
Easy to say Parky nearly made a huge mistake but maybe it was Randolph's fault? We don't know either way.
Anyway we've got a keeper playing well and not conceding very often, something we're all happy with.
Ikeme has had four clubs this season (played for three of them). At the outset Parky said that it was a toss up between whether he would play Ikeme or Randolph so clearly he "supposedly" did not have, at that time, any issues with playing Randolph. I say "supposedly" because it is clear that Wolves would not have let Ikeme go on loan to warm the bench with us.
That is perhaps why Randolph had an attitude. He was meant to be number two to Elliott and had been waiting for his opportunity only for Parky to take that away from him. What Parky should have done is what he has this time round. Get in a keeper like Warner who would be good enough to do a job in an emergency but stick with the loyal Reserve.
This is not hindsight. The Republic of Ireland may not have a massive pool to pick from but Randolph was their U21 keeper so someone there must have thought he was good enough on that stage. But Parky was happy to risk losing him.
Comments
Unless Wolves insist he does of course.
Shame he undid all the good work with that bit of indecision.
Agreed. After that I don't know who I'd play in goal on Saturday. Probably both :-)
Yeah, like Randolph's bad mistake on Saturday.
Quite simply, neither of them are perfect.
I'm confident of that
BFR - as I've said previously on this thread Wolves would not have sent him to us to sit on the bench. Parky says there's nothing written in the contract that he has to play but I've never heard, for obvious reasons, this ever being the case.
Weggie - that isn't the only mistake he has made in this game. He has made at least three from which Southampton could and should have scored.
Too true, sadly.
While there might not be anything in the contract I wonder if there's something in the verbal agreement - as in we don't want him sat on the bench for two months...he can do that here.
I believe Crainie had a clause that he had to play
Randolph made same excellent saves, although could have done better with the goal conceded.
Ikeme last night missed a couple of crosses and should have stopped the 2nd goal.
On that basis I believe Randolph should play on Saturday. However, we of course don't know if there's other issues !
Thanks CE. I hope Randolph plays too for all the reasons already stated.
I work with an Accrington fan (we think we've got problems) and he thought that both he and Robbie were good keepers and that there really was nothing between the two of them when they played for the Stanley. Time will tell.
I'm happy for Randolph to be in the team, as I especially don't want Robbie rushed back to only pull it again. Want Robbie fit for deep December drudgery.
Parky said back in October that he was happy to let the stopper go in January and and Randolph clearly needs to add a bit of creativity to his game if he expects to still be with us next season.
Sorry I was being ironic.
The irony being that we've had our best run of defensive performances with a Keeper who was dumped earlier in the season for a journeyman with no allegiance to the Club whatsoever. And was told that he could go in January but he will, hopefully, now prove to be our trump card in the Play offs.
Proividing, of course, we do score.
No one knows what has gone on behind the scenes, in training etc. Randolph might have changed his attitude, or worked on areas of his game. It does happen, look at Ambrose failing back at Ipswich but a season later scoring regularly for Palace.
Easy to say Parky nearly made a huge mistake but maybe it was Randolph's fault? We don't know either way.
Anyway we've got a keeper playing well and not conceding very often, something we're all happy with.
Ikeme has had four clubs this season (played for three of them). At the outset Parky said that it was a toss up between whether he would play Ikeme or Randolph so clearly he "supposedly" did not have, at that time, any issues with playing Randolph. I say "supposedly" because it is clear that Wolves would not have let Ikeme go on loan to warm the bench with us.
That is perhaps why Randolph had an attitude. He was meant to be number two to Elliott and had been waiting for his opportunity only for Parky to take that away from him. What Parky should have done is what he has this time round. Get in a keeper like Warner who would be good enough to do a job in an emergency but stick with the loyal Reserve.
This is not hindsight. The Republic of Ireland may not have a massive pool to pick from but Randolph was their U21 keeper so someone there must have thought he was good enough on that stage. But Parky was happy to risk losing him.