Personally I wouldn't be too worried to see Connor Gough on the bench on Saturday, he's 17 - didn't Joe Hart make his debut quite young? It's not as though he has some growing to do!
so Worner to play unless we sign a keeper from a Club who will only loan them on the basis he plays. Confirms why Ikeme was preferred over Randolph last season, Wolves insisted he play so he played. Simples.
The rule relating to one month deals is an absolute nonsense! I'm assuming Richard Wright is one of those effected by that.
Worner is a prospect, but dont think he is ready. A month if he struggles could hurt us. Elliot seems like he is going to pick up injuries. Two extended breaks last year. One short and an extended already this season. Personally think we should be looking at someone in till January if we can find the money.
[cite]Posted By: Clem_Snide[/cite]The rule relating to one month deals is an absolute nonsense! I'm assuming Richard Wright is one of those effected by that.
Worner is a prospect, but dont think he is ready. A month if he struggles could hurt us. Elliot seems like he is going to pick up injuries. Two extended breaks last year. One short and an extended already this season. Personally think we should be looking at someone in till January if we can find the money.
Finding the money is the problem, I am sure the club would rather not be in this situation
It's amazing how things that were rubbished at the time subsequently turn out to be true.
Those who suggested that Wolves must have insisted that Ikeme played ahead of Randolph were told on here in no uncertain terms that no, we would never let another club dictate our side to our us.
I also remember Parky saying on the Thurs before Ikeme made his debut that it was a close run thing between the two players and he hadn't yet decided which of them would play.
Now he seems to admit that wasn't quite the case : ''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
I can only presume he's talking about Ikeme - and I take him to be saying Wolves only let us have him on the condition that he played.
OK, it's water under the bridge. But it would be interesting to dig up that quote from Parky last year, which he now seems to be contradicting...
[cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]It's amazing how things that were rubbished at the time subsequently turn out to be true.
Those who suggested that Wolves must have insisted that Ikeme played ahead of Randolph were told on here in no uncertain terms that no, we would never let another club dictate our side to our us.
I also remember Parky saying on the Thurs before Ikeme made his debut that it was a close run thing between the two players and he hadn't yet decided which of them would play.
Now he seems to admit that wasn't quite the case : ''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
I can only presume he's talking about Ikeme - and I take him to be saying Wolves only let us have him on the condition that he played.
OK, it's water under the bridge. But it would be interesting to dig up that quote from Parky last year, which he now seems to be contradicting...
I've put it on the Ikeme thread but here it is:
Parkinson added: “Obviously Wolves want him to play, but there’s nothing written in the contract and I don't want to reveal my team to you today.
“We’ve brought a keeper in, we think he’s a very good keeper and we'll make a decision before the weekend.
“Carl can’t play in the Cup next week.
“Darren is going to play live on ITV, a big game for himself and for us. Darren understands the situation and we’ll just make a decision tomorrow after we’ve looked at both keepers in training.”
Parky went on to say that Randolph could go in January but instead we lost the most reliable Keeper we had at the Club in the Summer for nothing. And now we're scrambling to find someone to go between the sticks on Saturday.
[quote][cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]It's amazing how things that were rubbished at the time subsequently turn out to be true.
Those who suggested that Wolves must have insisted that Ikeme played ahead of Randolph were told on here in no uncertain terms that no, we would never let another club dictate our side to our us.
I also remember Parky saying on the Thurs before Ikeme made his debut that it was a close run thing between the two players and he hadn't yet decided which of them would play.
Now he seems to admit that wasn't quite the case : ''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
I can only presume he's talking about Ikeme - and I take him to be saying Wolves only let us have him on the condition that he played.
OK, it's water under the bridge. But it would be interesting to dig up that quote from Parky last year, which he now seems to be contradicting...[/quote] Absolutely bang on IA.
''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
It says SOMETIMES the loan club insists they have to play, not always. Given that Ikeme is now playing for Leicester City, and Randolph is playing for Motherwell, you could argue it was the correct call anyway.
[cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
It saysSOMETIMESthe loan club insists they have to play, not always. Given that Ikeme is now playing for Leicester City, and Randolph is playing for Motherwell, you could argue it was the correct call anyway.
Wolves obviously stated he had to play.........no way was it a correct call, Randolph should be our No 1 now!
No chance getting Deano if he's WBA's goalkeeping coach
[cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
It saysSOMETIMESthe loan club insists they have to play, not always. Given that Ikeme is now playing for Leicester City, and Randolph is playing for Motherwell, you could argue it was the correct call anyway.
Dabos - I've replied to this on the Ikeme thread. He made a short term call for long term harm.
Former Charlton keeper Paul Smith, who is currently at Nottingham Forest on the bench, would be worth considering. He is not even getting regular reserves games at the minute up there and only made 3 1st team league starts last season. I think that a 4 week loan is a distinct posibility. He is a decent keeper from what I recall, but has been overlooked by Billy Davies who prefers Lee Camp.
[cite]Posted By: PaulCAFC[/cite]Former Charlton keeper Paul Smith, who is currently at Nottingham Forest on the bench, would be worth considering. He is not even getting regular reserves games at the minute up there and only made 3 1st team league starts last season. I think that a 4 week loan is a distinct posibility. He is a decent keeper from what I recall, but has been overlooked by Billy Davies who prefers Lee Camp.
Good shout if available, one of my fave keepers he has been for a while sign him up, best by far out of everyone who has been mentioned in terms of ability, experiance
Comments
Worner is a prospect, but dont think he is ready. A month if he struggles could hurt us. Elliot seems like he is going to pick up injuries. Two extended breaks last year. One short and an extended already this season. Personally think we should be looking at someone in till January if we can find the money.
Finding the money is the problem, I am sure the club would rather not be in this situation
Those who suggested that Wolves must have insisted that Ikeme played ahead of Randolph were told on here in no uncertain terms that no, we would never let another club dictate our side to our us.
I also remember Parky saying on the Thurs before Ikeme made his debut that it was a close run thing between the two players and he hadn't yet decided which of them would play.
Now he seems to admit that wasn't quite the case : ''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
I can only presume he's talking about Ikeme - and I take him to be saying Wolves only let us have him on the condition that he played.
OK, it's water under the bridge. But it would be interesting to dig up that quote from Parky last year, which he now seems to be contradicting...
I've put it on the Ikeme thread but here it is:
Parkinson added: “Obviously Wolves want him to play, but there’s nothing written in the contract and I don't want to reveal my team to you today.
“We’ve brought a keeper in, we think he’s a very good keeper and we'll make a decision before the weekend.
“Carl can’t play in the Cup next week.
“Darren is going to play live on ITV, a big game for himself and for us. Darren understands the situation and we’ll just make a decision tomorrow after we’ve looked at both keepers in training.”
Parky went on to say that Randolph could go in January but instead we lost the most reliable Keeper we had at the Club in the Summer for nothing. And now we're scrambling to find someone to go between the sticks on Saturday.
That there was nothing in the contract - but Parky knew full well Wolves would recall him asap if he didn't play?
I'm not really interested in rehashing past history. Except that Parky has raised it all again in the context of our current keeping problems...
Those who suggested that Wolves must have insisted that Ikeme played ahead of Randolph were told on here in no uncertain terms that no, we would never let another club dictate our side to our us.
I also remember Parky saying on the Thurs before Ikeme made his debut that it was a close run thing between the two players and he hadn't yet decided which of them would play.
Now he seems to admit that wasn't quite the case : ''I was in this situation last year where sometimes you get a loan keeper and the only reason you can get him is because the club wants him to play.''
I can only presume he's talking about Ikeme - and I take him to be saying Wolves only let us have him on the condition that he played.
OK, it's water under the bridge. But it would be interesting to dig up that quote from Parky last year, which he now seems to be contradicting...[/quote]
Absolutely bang on IA.
We can dream
would be some dream come home deanooooooooooooo
It says SOMETIMES the loan club insists they have to play, not always. Given that Ikeme is now playing for Leicester City, and Randolph is playing for Motherwell, you could argue it was the correct call anyway.
Wolves obviously stated he had to play.........no way was it a correct call, Randolph should be our No 1 now!
No chance getting Deano if he's WBA's goalkeeping coach
Dabos - I've replied to this on the Ikeme thread. He made a short term call for long term harm.
Good shout if available, one of my fave keepers he has been for a while sign him up, best by far out of everyone who has been mentioned in terms of ability, experiance