Keiren Westwood G Crewe Alexandra b.1984

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I thought the same for the winner. Could he have taken a step forward and collected it? Good ball but by no means undefendable.

---

To be fair those ones which drop in no man's land between the keeper and the forwards are very hard to judge and I'd be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt for that one. However, it is a weakness in his game I think. Superb shot stopper but rooted to his line perhaps a bit too much.

Yep, I was being very very picky, as has been the trend here in the last year regarding everything both he and Randolph do!

I like Westwood and have no real concerns. I have been turned by Randolph since Germany and I think he deserves credit for gaining his place at WHAM and for being part of a notable turnaround in fortunes. He hasn't been consistently brilliant, but he has shown signs of brilliance and generally he has been of a good PL standard. That's not damned with faint praise, it's genuine praise.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/footb...tion-1-8376102

I would've thought it's self-explanatory.

Because there's another keeper playing at a higher level?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Because there's another keeper playing at a higher level?

---

That, and I suspect a few of the comments directly following the article jive with what O'Neill thinks about Westwood.

Fifth home clean sheet in a row for Wednesday, first time that's happened since the early nineties apparently.

I don't think there is much difference between the two in terms of quality.

Different strengths perhaps. I think Westwood has better positioning and decision making, but I have to say I love Randolph's swagger in goal and he's great at catching crosses, making a lot of dangerous balls look like casual catches.

He oozes confidence and I think that rubs off the rest of the team, especially the back line.

Ultimately I think it is the commitment issue though -- Westwood as mentioned has pulled out of some squads whereas Darren always shows up. When you've got very close competition for your place, you have to prove your dedication. Westwood hasn't done that for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irishfan86

I don't think there is much difference between the two in terms of quality.

Different strengths perhaps. I think Westwood has better positioning and decision making, but I have to say I love Randolph's swagger in goal and he's great at catching crosses, making a lot of dangerous balls look like casual catches.

He oozes confidence and I think that rubs off the rest of the team, especially the back line.

Ultimately I think it is the commitment issue though -- Westwood as mentioned has pulled out of some squads whereas Darren always shows up. When you've got very close competition for your place, you have to prove your dedication. Westwood hasn't done that for me.

---

Two things in Randolph's favour - He's playing regularly in the Premier League and those awesome Cruyff turns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oCzdmsGomM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks

http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/footb...tion-1-8376102

I would've thought it's self-explanatory.

---

Yes, but it goes back to even when Randolph was warming his ars+ on the West Ham bench and wasn't getting regular Prem football at the time and Westwood was keeping a record number of clean sheets for Wednesday in a season. There is no doubt that Westwood wasn't happy (I think a 105 year old Given was starting ahead of him as well) not to be No. 1, and I can't blame him, but that is history now and Randolph is the man in possession. I don't have any complaints about that NOW but I still think Westwood is the better keeper :)

He is a good goalkeeper . Why can't Martin and Keiren just get along..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Yes, but it goes back to even when Randolph was warming his ars+ on the West Ham bench and wasn't getting regular Prem football at the time and Westwood was keeping a record number of clean sheets for Wednesday in a season. There is no doubt that Westwood wasn't happy (I think a 105 year old Given was starting ahead of him as well) not to be No. 1, and I can't blame him, but that is history now and Randolph is the man in possession. I don't have any complaints about that NOW but I still think Westwood is the better keeper :)

---

Randolph is just three games away from overtaking Westwood in Premier League appearances.

Has given away a penalty at the City Ground, getting hurt in the process. Received an yellow card for his troubles but has saved the resultant penalty, a tame effort from Ross McCormack.

Edit- and Abdi gives Wednesday the lead a minute later.

Is he staying on then in spite of the injury? I'm guessing it's not that serious?

Yeah, according to Charlie Nicholas it looked as though he was going to come off, but hobbled back to his line to save the penalty instead. :)

Highlights here.

Penalty incident on 0:47. Perhaps a little lucky not to see red but the referee obviously felt that the ball was running away from Brereton and there was cover nearby. Probably the right call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Perhaps a little lucky not to see red but the referee obviously felt that the ball was running away from Brereton and there was cover nearby. Probably the right call.

---

Okay so the decision had nothing to do with that but instead the referee deemed the foul to be 'accidental', according to this!

First I've heard of this new rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Highlights here.

Penalty incident on 0:47. Perhaps a little lucky not to see red but the referee obviously felt that the ball was running away from Brereton and there was cover nearby. Probably the right call.

---

I think it's the double punishment rule now brought in. A yellow card and penalty are regarded as sufficient punishment. If it had happened outside the box with no penalty, I think he might have been given a red.

Yeah, just spotted that above. Does it have to be deemed accidental though to escape the double punishment? Doesn't look accidental to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Yeah, just spotted that above. Does it have to be deemed accidental though to escape the double punishment? Doesn't look accidental to me.

---

Further info on the rule-change, which resulted from an IFAB meeting in Cardiff about eleven months ago, here: http://the18.com/news/IFAB-changes-controversial-rule

The article is from March of 2016.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James Hansen

It's called the triple punishment. When a goalkeeper or defender brings down an attacking player in the box, and is punished with a red card, a penalty, and a ban for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity. It has been a subject of debate for a long time, with most thinking that the law is overly harsh especially in cases where the defending player is genuinely going for the ball.

It appears that the International Football Association Board, or IFAB, has listened and that is all about to change this summer.

The International Football Association Board met last week in Cardiff to discuss future changes to the laws of the game. The committee, which comprises four members of FIFA and the heads of each British FA, spoke about the future testing of video technology, the possibility of "sin bins" and fourth substitutions in extra time.

But the most substantial change that was accomplished during the meeting was the change made to the law regarding the denial of a clear goal-scoring opportunity.

Players shall now be cautioned with a yellow card instead of a red except when the player is found guilty of:

• Pushing, pulling, holding
• Not attempting to play the ball, or where there is no possibility to play the ball
• The foul is worthy of a red card regardless of the situation (violent conduct etc.)

The law will be applied starting June 1 and will be in use for Euro 2016 and the Copa America Centenario. There will be a two-year trial period to ensure that the law is working as intended.

---

Of course, whether or not a player is deemed guilty is still a very subjective matter left to the judgment of the referee.

• Not attempting to play the ball, or where there is no possibility to play the ball

Under this criteria I think Westwood was definitely guilty. That said, do they actually know why the referee didn't send him off? Maybe my previous conclusion was the correct one but Westwood just assumes it was because of the new rules.