AMB is not a better all round keeper. He can't do anything well aside from saves
Which is one thing more than Isted. I really can't see anything that he does well and as for someone saying that he is organising the defence better, I think that is wishful thinking.
It’s easy to look for other reasons why the results have improved but you can’t dismiss the fact that it does coincide with Isted ousting AMB. Obviously it’s not solely that but it’s a fact nonetheless.
Our defence has been better ever since Hector got injured and stopped playing
He was consistently one of the better-marked players immediately before getting injured. I think the change of manager is a bigger deal probably
I didn't say Hector was the issue. I said our defense is better since he got injured. To use your terminology... "You can't dismiss the fact it does coincide with Hector being injured". Seems you are more keen to dismiss Hector injury but not AMB being ousted.
I actually think our defence is better because Fleming is coaching them well; Jones is a better more motivational manager than Apple's and has them with more confidence. The CBs playing recently have more balance than they had at the start of the season. We are playing more on the front foot. Our wingbacks and miles better. Kanu is keeping teams occupied. I don't think it has a lot to do with Istead/AMB who I think are on a par.
I don’t rate Isted at all. AMB improved us, initially, when he came in for Isted when Isted was injured at the start of the season. Then the entire team’s organization and confidence evaporated as the Appleton effect took hold and AMB’s formed suffered badly in that towards the end.
One of the things that deserted AMB was his decision making but Isted has been just as bad but he’s got away with a few. There’was cross he came for against, I think, Lincoln that he should have been nowhere near but he fortunately dropped it out for a corner. And against, I think, Portsmouth he went chasing out by the corner flag when he should have been nowhere near it and again got away with it. Then there was Northampton.
It’s obviously an exaggeration to say Isted makes no saves, but I haven’t really seen him save anything for us that I wouldn’t expect every keeper to save. And his attempt to stop that shot vs. Cheltenham was pretty weak.
Theres really very little between him and AMB. AMB did need to come out of the side but I think he’s marginally better of the two, when he’s confident and not in two minds about all his decisions.
I think the improved coaching and defensive shape is why the defence looks so much better, not because the goalie has changed.
Also, almost every player has improved under NJ, why could that not be true of AMB if he were to be given another chance?
Isted has made two errors in two games that have cost us goals. AMB would be getting crucified if he’d done the same. You can tell NJ is not happy with Isted so I wouldn’t be totally surprised if AMB does come back in this weekend.
That's an interesting perspective. I thought they both started poorly. AMB had ended the previous season looking questionable and then was bad enough at the start of the season that he was dropped for Isted. Isted was a bit shaky at first but had just started to look like he was settling in when he got injured. We definitely improved when Isted came in for AMB. We won one lost 4 with one clean sheet with AMB and then won two lost one drew with one clean sheet with Isted. We went through a little phase of improved form after that but I think that's more attributable to Chuks than either of the keepers. What is notable is that AMB kept another clean sheet against an abject Reading in October and then didn't keep another one again before being dropped in February. Our next one was against Pompey that month, which was Isted's 4th game back. They've each kept two now, though Isted has done it in fewer games.
What you can take from that is fairly limited, other than that neither have covered themselves in glory this season. There's been 5 different managers across those games, about a billion different defensive line-ups and you can't really attribute too much of our form to the keeper. What I do find interesting is that Holden started with AMB and then dropped him for the Oxford game. He did lose his mind a little bit for that game and then was gone so who knows, but Pearce chose Isted for his one game. He wasn't afraid to completely change formation so I don't think it was just a caretaker going for consistency. Appleton then also picked Isted as his keeper until he was injured, Fleming kept AMB in for his two games where he very much game the impression of a man desperately not trying to do anything exciting (REG in midfield. Help.) and then Jones has chosen Isted as his man as well. It seems like the permanent managers have all gone with Isted in the end which either tells you that Isted is better or AMB is worse. Either way though, I've seen Isted play 12 league games, conceding 14 goals and I'm not sure yet if he's good enough. I've seen AMB play 51 league games, conceding 79 goals and I'm pretty well decided that he isn't.
And my view is the complete opposite of yours. I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper. What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position. I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Neither is top 6 standard, but of the 2, Isted to me is a more rounded keeper than AMB, who's a good reaction shot stopper but doesn't impress otherwise. Neither compares with Hamer, Amos or Dillon.
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
I'll bet it's a very short list
Bolton finished 9th in league one in the 21-22 season and last season had James Trafford and Conor Bradley on loan.
Trafford was getting England U21 call ups and Bradley had been capped by Northern Ireland, so it is possible to get good prospects on loan at this level.
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
I'll bet it's a very short list
Christian Walton would be a significant improvement for one and is on a free.
Any delusions of grandeur are generally because of the hype our SMT have given around signing Championship quality players.
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
I'll bet it's a very short list
Not a goalkeeper but Connor Coventry shows it can be done
I don’t rate Isted at all. AMB improved us, initially, when he came in for Isted when Isted was injured at the start of the season. Then the entire team’s organization and confidence evaporated as the Appleton effect took hold and AMB’s formed suffered badly in that towards the end.
One of the things that deserted AMB was his decision making but Isted has been just as bad but he’s got away with a few. There’was cross he came for against, I think, Lincoln that he should have been nowhere near but he fortunately dropped it out for a corner. And against, I think, Portsmouth he went chasing out by the corner flag when he should have been nowhere near it and again got away with it. Then there was Northampton.
It’s obviously an exaggeration to say Isted makes no saves, but I haven’t really seen him save anything for us that I wouldn’t expect every keeper to save. And his attempt to stop that shot vs. Cheltenham was pretty weak.
Theres really very little between him and AMB. AMB did need to come out of the side but I think he’s marginally better of the two, when he’s confident and not in two minds about all his decisions.
I think the improved coaching and defensive shape is why the defence looks so much better, not because the goalie has changed.
Also, almost every player has improved under NJ, why could that not be true of AMB if he were to be given another chance?
Isted has made two errors in two games that have cost us goals. AMB would be getting crucified if he’d done the same. You can tell NJ is not happy with Isted so I wouldn’t be totally surprised if AMB does come back in this weekend.
That's an interesting perspective. I thought they both started poorly. AMB had ended the previous season looking questionable and then was bad enough at the start of the season that he was dropped for Isted. Isted was a bit shaky at first but had just started to look like he was settling in when he got injured. We definitely improved when Isted came in for AMB. We won one lost 4 with one clean sheet with AMB and then won two lost one drew with one clean sheet with Isted. We went through a little phase of improved form after that but I think that's more attributable to Chuks than either of the keepers. What is notable is that AMB kept another clean sheet against an abject Reading in October and then didn't keep another one again before being dropped in February. Our next one was against Pompey that month, which was Isted's 4th game back. They've each kept two now, though Isted has done it in fewer games.
What you can take from that is fairly limited, other than that neither have covered themselves in glory this season. There's been 5 different managers across those games, about a billion different defensive line-ups and you can't really attribute too much of our form to the keeper. What I do find interesting is that Holden started with AMB and then dropped him for the Oxford game. He did lose his mind a little bit for that game and then was gone so who knows, but Pearce chose Isted for his one game. He wasn't afraid to completely change formation so I don't think it was just a caretaker going for consistency. Appleton then also picked Isted as his keeper until he was injured, Fleming kept AMB in for his two games where he very much game the impression of a man desperately not trying to do anything exciting (REG in midfield. Help.) and then Jones has chosen Isted as his man as well. It seems like the permanent managers have all gone with Isted in the end which either tells you that Isted is better or AMB is worse. Either way though, I've seen Isted play 12 league games, conceding 14 goals and I'm not sure yet if he's good enough. I've seen AMB play 51 league games, conceding 79 goals and I'm pretty well decided that he isn't.
And my view is the complete opposite of yours. I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper. What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position. I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Yeah, I've got to say ignoring the fact that AMB has conceded more goals, has a lower save percentage and calling the stats meaningless because you reckon you've figured out who is better from the stands is genuinely very funny and a good summary of this forum and football discussion in general. AMB is worse on just about every metric and Isted has been chosen over him repeatedly. He's not even that young either, he'll be 25 in the summer, old enough to not play like a kid anymore, which he does.
I don’t rate Isted at all. AMB improved us, initially, when he came in for Isted when Isted was injured at the start of the season. Then the entire team’s organization and confidence evaporated as the Appleton effect took hold and AMB’s formed suffered badly in that towards the end.
One of the things that deserted AMB was his decision making but Isted has been just as bad but he’s got away with a few. There’was cross he came for against, I think, Lincoln that he should have been nowhere near but he fortunately dropped it out for a corner. And against, I think, Portsmouth he went chasing out by the corner flag when he should have been nowhere near it and again got away with it. Then there was Northampton.
It’s obviously an exaggeration to say Isted makes no saves, but I haven’t really seen him save anything for us that I wouldn’t expect every keeper to save. And his attempt to stop that shot vs. Cheltenham was pretty weak.
Theres really very little between him and AMB. AMB did need to come out of the side but I think he’s marginally better of the two, when he’s confident and not in two minds about all his decisions.
I think the improved coaching and defensive shape is why the defence looks so much better, not because the goalie has changed.
Also, almost every player has improved under NJ, why could that not be true of AMB if he were to be given another chance?
Isted has made two errors in two games that have cost us goals. AMB would be getting crucified if he’d done the same. You can tell NJ is not happy with Isted so I wouldn’t be totally surprised if AMB does come back in this weekend.
That's an interesting perspective. I thought they both started poorly. AMB had ended the previous season looking questionable and then was bad enough at the start of the season that he was dropped for Isted. Isted was a bit shaky at first but had just started to look like he was settling in when he got injured. We definitely improved when Isted came in for AMB. We won one lost 4 with one clean sheet with AMB and then won two lost one drew with one clean sheet with Isted. We went through a little phase of improved form after that but I think that's more attributable to Chuks than either of the keepers. What is notable is that AMB kept another clean sheet against an abject Reading in October and then didn't keep another one again before being dropped in February. Our next one was against Pompey that month, which was Isted's 4th game back. They've each kept two now, though Isted has done it in fewer games.
What you can take from that is fairly limited, other than that neither have covered themselves in glory this season. There's been 5 different managers across those games, about a billion different defensive line-ups and you can't really attribute too much of our form to the keeper. What I do find interesting is that Holden started with AMB and then dropped him for the Oxford game. He did lose his mind a little bit for that game and then was gone so who knows, but Pearce chose Isted for his one game. He wasn't afraid to completely change formation so I don't think it was just a caretaker going for consistency. Appleton then also picked Isted as his keeper until he was injured, Fleming kept AMB in for his two games where he very much game the impression of a man desperately not trying to do anything exciting (REG in midfield. Help.) and then Jones has chosen Isted as his man as well. It seems like the permanent managers have all gone with Isted in the end which either tells you that Isted is better or AMB is worse. Either way though, I've seen Isted play 12 league games, conceding 14 goals and I'm not sure yet if he's good enough. I've seen AMB play 51 league games, conceding 79 goals and I'm pretty well decided that he isn't.
And my view is the complete opposite of yours. I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper. What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position. I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Yeah, I've got to say ignoring the fact that AMB has conceded more goals, has a lower save percentage and calling the stats meaningless because you reckon you've figured out who is better from the stands is genuinely very funny and a good summary of this forum and football discussion in general. AMB is worse on just about every metric and Isted has been chosen over him repeatedly. He's not even that young either, he'll be 25 in the summer, old enough to not play like a kid anymore, which he does.
I don’t rate Isted at all. AMB improved us, initially, when he came in for Isted when Isted was injured at the start of the season. Then the entire team’s organization and confidence evaporated as the Appleton effect took hold and AMB’s formed suffered badly in that towards the end.
One of the things that deserted AMB was his decision making but Isted has been just as bad but he’s got away with a few. There’was cross he came for against, I think, Lincoln that he should have been nowhere near but he fortunately dropped it out for a corner. And against, I think, Portsmouth he went chasing out by the corner flag when he should have been nowhere near it and again got away with it. Then there was Northampton.
It’s obviously an exaggeration to say Isted makes no saves, but I haven’t really seen him save anything for us that I wouldn’t expect every keeper to save. And his attempt to stop that shot vs. Cheltenham was pretty weak.
Theres really very little between him and AMB. AMB did need to come out of the side but I think he’s marginally better of the two, when he’s confident and not in two minds about all his decisions.
I think the improved coaching and defensive shape is why the defence looks so much better, not because the goalie has changed.
Also, almost every player has improved under NJ, why could that not be true of AMB if he were to be given another chance?
Isted has made two errors in two games that have cost us goals. AMB would be getting crucified if he’d done the same. You can tell NJ is not happy with Isted so I wouldn’t be totally surprised if AMB does come back in this weekend.
That's an interesting perspective. I thought they both started poorly. AMB had ended the previous season looking questionable and then was bad enough at the start of the season that he was dropped for Isted. Isted was a bit shaky at first but had just started to look like he was settling in when he got injured. We definitely improved when Isted came in for AMB. We won one lost 4 with one clean sheet with AMB and then won two lost one drew with one clean sheet with Isted. We went through a little phase of improved form after that but I think that's more attributable to Chuks than either of the keepers. What is notable is that AMB kept another clean sheet against an abject Reading in October and then didn't keep another one again before being dropped in February. Our next one was against Pompey that month, which was Isted's 4th game back. They've each kept two now, though Isted has done it in fewer games.
What you can take from that is fairly limited, other than that neither have covered themselves in glory this season. There's been 5 different managers across those games, about a billion different defensive line-ups and you can't really attribute too much of our form to the keeper. What I do find interesting is that Holden started with AMB and then dropped him for the Oxford game. He did lose his mind a little bit for that game and then was gone so who knows, but Pearce chose Isted for his one game. He wasn't afraid to completely change formation so I don't think it was just a caretaker going for consistency. Appleton then also picked Isted as his keeper until he was injured, Fleming kept AMB in for his two games where he very much game the impression of a man desperately not trying to do anything exciting (REG in midfield. Help.) and then Jones has chosen Isted as his man as well. It seems like the permanent managers have all gone with Isted in the end which either tells you that Isted is better or AMB is worse. Either way though, I've seen Isted play 12 league games, conceding 14 goals and I'm not sure yet if he's good enough. I've seen AMB play 51 league games, conceding 79 goals and I'm pretty well decided that he isn't.
And my view is the complete opposite of yours. I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper. What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position. I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Yeah, I've got to say ignoring the fact that AMB has conceded more goals, has a lower save percentage and calling the stats meaningless because you reckon you've figured out who is better from the stands is genuinely very funny and a good summary of this forum and football discussion in general. AMB is worse on just about every metric and Isted has been chosen over him repeatedly. He's not even that young either, he'll be 25 in the summer, old enough to not play like a kid anymore, which he does.
You also can’t base your entire assessment of a player or situation on stats. AMB had to play behind an absolutely dire defence and midfield that played for months with no desire, organization, or commitment. Maybe AMB was part of the problem or maybe he was just caught in the cross fire a bit. He let in some goals he shouldn’t have, but so has Isted. You can’t relay blame AMB when week after week after week he was left totally exposed to the kind of shooting opportunities no keeper can be expected to save. Take our propensity for leaving strikers unmarked 6 to 10 yards out and allowing unchallenged pulls backs to those strikers, or how rarely we were blocking shots on the edge of the area. Really nothing AMB can do about that.
I would argue that Isted has only been exposed to that kind of defending once since returning to the team under NJ and that was vs. Cheltenham and it led to him spilling a simple save and costing a goal.
The save percentage stats and goals conceded don’t really factor in the difficulty of the saves made or the performance of the defence in front of the keeper.
If you want to talk on stats, if a keeper concedes 2 but the xG was 3 then that is probably better than conceding 1 when the xG was 0.5.
I guess I’m defending AMB a bit but not because I think he is a particularly great keeper, but I’ve seen a lot of stuff about how great Isted has been since he came back in and I just can’t agree with that. I think he has been bang average and there were warning signs of his two recent errors in earlier matches.
We need to pick one as backup next season and move the other one on while signing a true no.1 who is top 6 quality.
Some of our fans have delusions of grandeur I'm afraid, I see comments like "we need better" "sign an established championship keeper" or "loan in a top prospect keeper from the Prem" and I'd like to ask what established championship keepers, or top prospects out there will be willing to sign for a team firmly entrenched in the lower reaches of League 1?
I'll bet it's a very short list
Agreed, but to have a decent keeper can be as important as a striker scoring 25 goals a season.
I had similar arguments/discussions with people who were defending MacGillivray's performances and we all know how that ended. I have no doubt that this will go the same way.
I agreed on MacGillivray after 30-40 games. Wanted to give him a chance but it became clear after that season that he wasn't the answer.
Just think it's kind of insane to judge Isted on no more than a dozen games where he's not played more than six in a row and the entire team has been a mess this season in front of him.
I agreed on MacGillivray after 30-40 games. Wanted to give him a chance but it became clear after that season that he wasn't the answer.
Just think it's kind of insane to judge Isted on no more than a dozen games where he's not played more than six in a row and the entire team has been a mess this season in front of him.
I think that it's easier to judge a goalkeeper than an outfield player. They have to do the basic things well - save the shots that they should save; don't spill the ball when they should hold it; catch the ball when it's there to be caught; deal with the ball competently when it is played back to them. After that you can look at how they deal with things like more difficult shots; positioning; how they deal with one-on-ones; how they cope with pressure from the opposition players crowding them at corners and so on. For me Isted doesn't do the basics well and when you ask more of him he is sadly found wanting. I think that he is particularly bad when the ball is in the air and he is put under pressure by the opposition. 6ft 1in is too small for a goalkeeper, especially when you're light bodied. He just has no physical presence and gets bullied.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse. My eyes tell me that and the stats back it up. 6 of us go and all think Isted is average and AMB is worse.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't confirm anything unless you analyse every shot that they have faced. Saving a shot that was straight at you would count the same as a shot that was heading for the top corner. Doesn't mean that your opinion of our two keepers is wrong though, even though I think that it's the other way round.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't confirm anything unless you analyse every shot that they have faced. Saving a shot that was straight at you would count the same as a shot that was heading for the top corner.
Nathan Jones also dropped AMB for Isted. I think I trust his judgement as well.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't confirm anything unless you analyse every shot that they have faced. Saving a shot that was straight at you would count the same as a shot that was heading for the top corner.
Nathan Jones also dropped AMB for Isted. I think I trust his judgement as well.
Maybe, but I doubt that Nathan Jones looked at those stats and thought that Isted must be the better keeper.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't confirm anything unless you analyse every shot that they have faced. Saving a shot that was straight at you would count the same as a shot that was heading for the top corner.
Nathan Jones also dropped AMB for Isted. I think I trust his judgement as well.
Maybe, but I doubt that Nathan Jones looked at those stats and thought that Isted must be the better keeper.
I assume he realised the same as the vast majority of fans, that AMB was a massive liability and Isted should be give a chance. Isted is also a liability but not as bad. We need a better No 1 there is no doubt whatsoever about that.
I don’t rate Isted at all. AMB improved us, initially, when he came in for Isted when Isted was injured at the start of the season. Then the entire team’s organization and confidence evaporated as the Appleton effect took hold and AMB’s formed suffered badly in that towards the end.
One of the things that deserted AMB was his decision making but Isted has been just as bad but he’s got away with a few. There’was cross he came for against, I think, Lincoln that he should have been nowhere near but he fortunately dropped it out for a corner. And against, I think, Portsmouth he went chasing out by the corner flag when he should have been nowhere near it and again got away with it. Then there was Northampton.
It’s obviously an exaggeration to say Isted makes no saves, but I haven’t really seen him save anything for us that I wouldn’t expect every keeper to save. And his attempt to stop that shot vs. Cheltenham was pretty weak.
Theres really very little between him and AMB. AMB did need to come out of the side but I think he’s marginally better of the two, when he’s confident and not in two minds about all his decisions.
I think the improved coaching and defensive shape is why the defence looks so much better, not because the goalie has changed.
Also, almost every player has improved under NJ, why could that not be true of AMB if he were to be given another chance?
Isted has made two errors in two games that have cost us goals. AMB would be getting crucified if he’d done the same. You can tell NJ is not happy with Isted so I wouldn’t be totally surprised if AMB does come back in this weekend.
That's an interesting perspective. I thought they both started poorly. AMB had ended the previous season looking questionable and then was bad enough at the start of the season that he was dropped for Isted. Isted was a bit shaky at first but had just started to look like he was settling in when he got injured. We definitely improved when Isted came in for AMB. We won one lost 4 with one clean sheet with AMB and then won two lost one drew with one clean sheet with Isted. We went through a little phase of improved form after that but I think that's more attributable to Chuks than either of the keepers. What is notable is that AMB kept another clean sheet against an abject Reading in October and then didn't keep another one again before being dropped in February. Our next one was against Pompey that month, which was Isted's 4th game back. They've each kept two now, though Isted has done it in fewer games.
What you can take from that is fairly limited, other than that neither have covered themselves in glory this season. There's been 5 different managers across those games, about a billion different defensive line-ups and you can't really attribute too much of our form to the keeper. What I do find interesting is that Holden started with AMB and then dropped him for the Oxford game. He did lose his mind a little bit for that game and then was gone so who knows, but Pearce chose Isted for his one game. He wasn't afraid to completely change formation so I don't think it was just a caretaker going for consistency. Appleton then also picked Isted as his keeper until he was injured, Fleming kept AMB in for his two games where he very much game the impression of a man desperately not trying to do anything exciting (REG in midfield. Help.) and then Jones has chosen Isted as his man as well. It seems like the permanent managers have all gone with Isted in the end which either tells you that Isted is better or AMB is worse. Either way though, I've seen Isted play 12 league games, conceding 14 goals and I'm not sure yet if he's good enough. I've seen AMB play 51 league games, conceding 79 goals and I'm pretty well decided that he isn't.
And my view is the complete opposite of yours. I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper. What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position. I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Yeah, I've got to say ignoring the fact that AMB has conceded more goals, has a lower save percentage and calling the stats meaningless because you reckon you've figured out who is better from the stands is genuinely very funny and a good summary of this forum and football discussion in general. AMB is worse on just about every metric and Isted has been chosen over him repeatedly. He's not even that young either, he'll be 25 in the summer, old enough to not play like a kid anymore, which he does.
You also can’t base your entire assessment of a player or situation on stats. AMB had to play behind an absolutely dire defence and midfield that played for months with no desire, organization, or commitment. Maybe AMB was part of the problem or maybe he was just caught in the cross fire a bit. He let in some goals he shouldn’t have, but so has Isted. You can’t relay blame AMB when week after week after week he was left totally exposed to the kind of shooting opportunities no keeper can be expected to save. Take our propensity for leaving strikers unmarked 6 to 10 yards out and allowing unchallenged pulls backs to those strikers, or how rarely we were blocking shots on the edge of the area. Really nothing AMB can do about that.
I would argue that Isted has only been exposed to that kind of defending once since returning to the team under NJ and that was vs. Cheltenham and it led to him spilling a simple save and costing a goal.
The save percentage stats and goals conceded don’t really factor in the difficulty of the saves made or the performance of the defence in front of the keeper.
If you want to talk on stats, if a keeper concedes 2 but the xG was 3 then that is probably better than conceding 1 when the xG was 0.5.
I guess I’m defending AMB a bit but not because I think he is a particularly great keeper, but I’ve seen a lot of stuff about how great Isted has been since he came back in and I just can’t agree with that. I think he has been bang average and there were warning signs of his two recent errors in earlier matches.
We need to pick one as backup next season and move the other one on while signing a true no.1 who is top 6 quality.
I don't think anyone's been saying that Isted has been great. Just that he's better than AMB.
Backs up what I said that the Lincoln goalie was outstanding against us. Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't confirm anything unless you analyse every shot that they have faced. Saving a shot that was straight at you would count the same as a shot that was heading for the top corner.
Nathan Jones also dropped AMB for Isted. I think I trust his judgement as well.
Maybe, but I doubt that Nathan Jones looked at those stats and thought that Isted must be the better keeper.
I assume he realised the same as the vast majority of fans, that AMB was a massive liability and Isted should be give a chance. Isted is also a liability but not as bad. We need a better No 1 there is no doubt whatsoever about that.
AMB was keeping behind the worst Charlton defence that I can ever remember. Isted is lucky that the defence in front of him has been improved (but still not great). Isted has cost us goals in the last 2 games. Let's see what he does going forward to see if you still feel the same.
Comments
I didn't say Hector was the issue. I said our defense is better since he got injured. To use your terminology... "You can't dismiss the fact it does coincide with Hector being injured".
Seems you are more keen to dismiss Hector injury but not AMB being ousted.
I actually think our defence is better because Fleming is coaching them well; Jones is a better more motivational manager than Apple's and has them with more confidence. The CBs playing recently have more balance than they had at the start of the season. We are playing more on the front foot. Our wingbacks and miles better. Kanu is keeping teams occupied.
I don't think it has a lot to do with Istead/AMB who I think are on a par.
I take no notice of those stats, as a lot of that can be down to what happens in front of the keeper.
What I do take note of is what I see with my eyes. AMB is still a young goalkeeper and has scope for improvement. Isted doesn't have the same scope for improvement. He's 27 and has never held down a position.
I doubt that either will ever be good enough to be first choice in a promotion chasing League One side or a Championship side, which is what we need, but I'd rather have AMB as back-up than Isted, who just looks physically unimposing , as a goalkeeper, to me.
Isted 12 games, 1.2 goals per game conceded, 2.7 saves per game (70%), 2 clean sheets
AMB 25 games, 1.6 goals per game conceded, 3.2 saves per game (66%), 2 clean sheets
Jensen (Lincoln) 76%
Roberts (Barnsley) 75%
Baxter (Bolton) 74%
Norris (Portsmouth) 74%
Crocombe (Burton) 73%
Stevens (Cambridge) 72%
Brynn (Orient) 71%
Sinisalo (Exeter) 70%
Tickle (Wigan) 70%
Ashby-Hammond (Stevenage) 70%
Southwood (Cheltenham) 69%
Grimshaw (Blackpool) 69%
Wildsmith (Derby) 69%
Beadle (Oxford) 68%
Marosi (Shrewsbury) 66%
Ripley (Port Vale) 65%
Lynch (Fleetwood) 65%
Bilokapic (Peterborough) 63%
Button (Reading) 62%
Stryjek (Wycombe) 62%
I'll bet it's a very short list
Trafford was getting England U21 call ups and Bradley had been capped by Northern Ireland, so it is possible to get good prospects on loan at this level.
Christian Walton would be a significant improvement for one and is on a free.
Any delusions of grandeur are generally because of the hype our SMT have given around signing Championship quality players.
So neither good enough by those stats? Not sure anyone is arguing differently.
I would argue that Isted has only been exposed to that kind of defending once since returning to the team under NJ and that was vs. Cheltenham and it led to him spilling a simple save and costing a goal.
The save percentage stats and goals conceded don’t really factor in the difficulty of the saves made or the performance of the defence in front of the keeper.
I guess I’m defending AMB a bit but not because I think he is a particularly great keeper, but I’ve seen a lot of stuff about how great Isted has been since he came back in and I just can’t agree with that. I think he has been bang average and there were warning signs of his two recent errors in earlier matches.
I have no doubt that this will go the same way.
Just think it's kind of insane to judge Isted on no more than a dozen games where he's not played more than six in a row and the entire team has been a mess this season in front of him.
After that you can look at how they deal with things like more difficult shots; positioning; how they deal with one-on-ones; how they cope with pressure from the opposition players crowding them at corners and so on.
For me Isted doesn't do the basics well and when you ask more of him he is sadly found wanting. I think that he is particularly bad when the ball is in the air and he is put under pressure by the opposition. 6ft 1in is too small for a goalkeeper, especially when you're light bodied. He just has no physical presence and gets bullied.
I'd not blame the keeper for not saving that.
Also confirms my thoughts that Istead is bang average and AMB is worse.
My eyes tell me that and the stats back it up.
6 of us go and all think Isted is average and AMB is worse.
Doesn't mean that your opinion of our two keepers is wrong though, even though I think that it's the other way round.
I think I trust his judgement as well.
Isted is also a liability but not as bad.
We need a better No 1 there is no doubt whatsoever about that.
Isted has cost us goals in the last 2 games. Let's see what he does going forward to see if you still feel the same.