Is being beaten at the near post a bad thing for a keeper. If so is Rodak at fault for at least three goals in the last four matches or is that being harsh.
There are those on here that say a keeper should never be beaten at the near post. The sheer pace of a shot can beat a keeper. Even the greatest keeper can get beaten at the near post as he is trying to cover the whole goal. If he protects his near post he could then be beaten at the far post. Kasper Schmeichel wrote a a great piece on this and well worth a read for the uneducated in goalkeeping.
Not sure Rodak would have made this near post save either:
Magnificent save from the Banks of England in 1970 from the great Pele.He made Goalkeeping look easy.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on January 22, 2022, 11:41:30 PM
Magnificent save from the Banks of England in 1970 from the great Pele.He made Goalkeeping look easy.
What a game that was - can still remember exactly where I watched it some 50+ years on
I think its an old trope that a keeper should 'never' be beaten but keepers with good positioning should be beaten far less BUT will still be beaten in specific circumstances. Its just a part of the game. I don't think Rodak has maintained the levels I'd expect from him to be honest but he's not been a disaster. Competition is healthy and I'd probably like Gazz to get a game. Rodak performs super well when he's got a kick up the backside and dropped. He's still a good keeper for me.
Muniz's goal was also at the near post. But I don't think a keeper on the planet would have saved it.
