I don't need to add more to this as I completely agree with John e. I think he has been encouraged to always play from the back and with an inexperienced team like ours we will often be put under pressure for it.
As I and others have said, the error on Saturday was unarguable Amavi's. In isolation Guzan's part was negligible at best. But therein lies the problem, this isn't an isolated incident and his form, in my opinion, has been on a downward trajectory for some considerable time now. We're talking about a keeper with 119 first-team games and 79 International caps. To simply say suggest that him being encouraged to play out from the back is an excuse for playing Amavi into trouble like that isn't good enough.
I don't think they are thick aj I think they have not learned to be mentally strong and fully focused to the final whistle. That is why we concede so many late goals.
Quote from: RussellC on August 24, 2015, 03:58:38 PMAs I and others have said, the error on Saturday was unarguable Amavi's. In isolation Guzan's part was negligible at best. But therein lies the problem, this isn't an isolated incident and his form, in my opinion, has been on a downward trajectory for some considerable time now. We're talking about a keeper with 119 first-team games and 79 International caps. To simply say suggest that him being encouraged to play out from the back is an excuse for playing Amavi into trouble like that isn't good enough. The number of games and caps is irrelevent. Even if he'd played 500 hundred games he will still have his instructions whether to pass it short to the defence or send it long to the front men, based on the tactics we're using at the time. It's not an excuse - he's clearly being encouraged to go short at the moment, he did so and the person that he passed to (who was in plenty of space at the time) took a couple of touches and lost the ball. As for the bit in bold, was his part negligible at best or did he play Amavi into trouble? Because surely it can't be both?Edit: just to add the caveat, that doesn't mean that there isn't an issue - his distribution is clearly his weak point. It's that Palace's winner on Saturday isn't further evidence of it.