MUFC07
Full Member
You set the wall up to cover one side of the goal. If you subsequently get beaten on the side you are supposed to be covering, it's poor.
You haven't got a clue of goalkeeping.
You set the wall up to cover one side of the goal. If you subsequently get beaten on the side you are supposed to be covering, it's poor.
He should have seen the ball, he's a goalkeeper and that's his job. Also that the ball wasn't high, so he shouldn't have conceded that.What did Nev say?
Uses his feet to make saves far too often for my liking.
Uses his feet to make saves far too often for my liking.
You haven't got a clue of goalkeeping.
You set the wall up to cover one side of the goal. If you subsequently get beaten on the side you are supposed to be covering, it's poor.
Uses his feet to make saves far too often for my liking.
In February such a step helped him to save THAT Mata free-kick.He could have saved the freekick if not for that step - but it was so perfect you can't fault him for that.
You set the wall up to cover one side of the goal. If you subsequently get beaten on the side you are supposed to be covering, it's poor.
I reckon he would've saved it if he didn't take that sidestep
Uses his feet to make saves far too often for my liking.
I'm guessing you've never played as a keeper, no offence intended.
You set up the wall to cover for one side, true, but the wall cannot do anything about the curling effort. That is why the keeper takes a step towards the position of the wall to cover for the curler. In this case, Van Persie and Torres got into a mini-shoving contest in the wall, which blocked De Gea's view. He took a step too far towards the wall in order to see the ball, which was the exact same moment Mata struck the ball. It didn't help with the free kick being so close to the penalty box which means he had less time to adapt to the shoving contest in the wall. He would have definitely saved that shot if the wall had stood still.
If Mata goes the other way though, and De Gea saves it, we're raving about it. He didn't have a clear sight so he took a gamble. Unfortunately for him, Mata shoved it right in the corner with power... but I don't blame De Gea at all for it.
Where are his bashers now then? He didn't recklessly come out for any crosses today, he didn't leave the defense hanging. He did his job and he did it fecking superbly.
Are you actually disagreeing with me?
Yes. You're saying he shouldn't concede on his right hand side, I'm saying this scenario justified him conceding on his right hand side because it wasn't his fault.
I reckon he would've saved it if he didn't take that sidestep
Because it was a "curler?" What a load of shit.
Educate me.
Poor positioning for the free kick. Couldnt see the ball at all.
No, not because it's a curler for fecks sake. Cool down for a bit and read the post properly. It's not his fault he conceded on his right because he couldn't see the ball due to the shoving in the wall. The curler bit was to try to say shots that go over the wall curling away from the goalkeeper.
More often than not, the FK taker will try to send the ball behind the wall, therefore, when you're a GK, you should take a step towards that post in order to save it (like DDG did last time with Mata's free-kick). Now, when the FK is as close as it was this time, the keeper has to think that the taker might take it behind the wall, and if he doesn't take the step he won't reach it. Now, when Mata decides to take it to the Keeper's post, it should be a very well struck kick for it go in, as the keeper, even though he has already taken a step, is close to it, so the shot must have great power, and if it has a curve as well, as Mata's shot, it is impossible.
Free-kick takers don't decide to kick it towards the Keeper's post just to see if the keeper will make a blunder, they do it because they know the keeper will take a step towards the other post, and they trust themselves to take it with the right power and curve.
It's not as easy as: "if it goes in your post it's your fault".
Not De Gea's fault.