Post-Match Reaction: Chelsea 1-1 SAINTS

[Whitey Grandad]

He could have come for the cross and he should have come off his line more often throughout the game. The one where Fonte nearly gave away a penalty is a perfect example. He expected Forster to come and he didn't which could have been very costly on another day.

 

He would not have reached the cross and Costa would have headed into an empty net.

[Kingsland Red]

He would not have reached the cross and Costa would have headed into an empty net.

 

He would have done if he had been positioned on the edge of the six yard box.

[Dig Dig]

He would not have reached the cross and Costa would have headed into an empty net.

 

We can debate this specific situation in isolation, but in general he lacks confidence when needed to come off his line. There is quite a big difference between his usual starting position and that of other prem keepers. He has his qualities, this ins't one of them.

[S-Clarke]

If he had all the qualities everyone wanted, he.would.not.be.here.

 

End of story. Enjoy what you have, stop wishing for more.

[Dig Dig]

If he had all the qualities everyone wanted, he.would.not.be.here.

 

End of story. Enjoy what you have, stop wishing for more.

 

Sorry, that's complete BS. He can and should get better regarding the command of his area. Some of it is quite basic and I'm sure the club are working on it. Suggesting that no one should mention something as obvious as this on a football forum is bizarre.

[VectisSaint]

He would not have reached the cross and Costa would have headed into an empty net.

So he might as well have come for it anyway, the result would have been the same. Disagree completely with your assessment that he would not have reached it, he would easily have reached it if he had been positioned better and had anticipated the flight of the ball. He also would not have had a problem physically reaching it, would not have even needed to jump to punch the ball away off Costa's head. Forster had a great second half, but still people will not see that he has significant shortcomings, which have cost us a few times this season.

[Smirking_Saint]

He would have done if he had been positioned on the edge of the six yard box.

 

Maybe, the worst part for me was that Tadic failed to stop the cross and presumeably Davis should have done a better job marking, or atleast making life harder for Costa considering both CBs were pre-occupied.

 

Perhaps he could have come off his line yes, but Id say an unchallenged cross and header were worse. That said, he is hesitant to coming off his line, and he needs help with that.

 

All in all though it was an excellent performance from everyone and pointing blame at anyone is a bit harsh.

[Wes Tender]

So he might as well have come for it anyway, the result would have been the same. Disagree completely with your assessment that he would not have reached it, he would easily have reached it if he had been positioned better and had anticipated the flight of the ball. He also would not have had a problem physically reaching it, would not have even needed to jump to punch the ball away off Costa's head. Forster had a great second half, but still people will not see that he has significant shortcomings, which have cost us a few times this season.

I agree. Had he come for it, at the very least a hulk of a player such as him could at least have put Costa off. As you say, his height advantage would mean that he would have been favourite in the air over even the tallest or most athletic of strikers.

 

Yes, he produced a number of excellent saves to keep us in the match during the second half, but for me his reluctance to leave his line and the potential for a goal from his failure to come for the ball to relieve Fonte is enough to weigh heavier against his man of the match award.

[Micky]

Got to agree with Dig Dig - he should have come. Fraser is a good goalkeeper, no two ways about it, but as Dig Dig says - he lacks in some areas. He is a great shot stopper and has proved that over the course of the season - yesterday in particular.

 

But he isn't great at commanding his 6 yard box and often looks very flat footed. If his starting position was good, he could have come and got the cross. He doesn't actually have to catch it - but he has to influence it at least - and did neither. It resulted in a free header effectively. Look back at United at SMS - Rooney's cross comes from a long way out and goes all the way to the back post where RVP get a connection probably less than a yard from the goal line. Again, he doesn't have to catch the ball - but if he at least gets a glove or fist on it, it goes away, if he goes for it and misses completely - again at that point then it probably puts RVP off and the ball goes dead. In short - in his box, he has to be more commanding.

 

It's not a rant, he's going to be a top, top stopper - but at the moment I think he has some limitations - hopefully the club are working on them.

[Whitey Grandad]

So he might as well have come for it anyway, the result would have been the same. Disagree completely with your assessment that he would not have reached it, he would easily have reached it if he had been positioned better and had anticipated the flight of the ball. He also would not have had a problem physically reaching it, would not have even needed to jump to punch the ball away off Costa's head. Forster had a great second half, but still people will not see that he has significant shortcomings, which have cost us a few times this season.

 

I think your view of it has been foreshortened by the TV angle. It was not his job to cover Costa and if he'd come out to him then the ball may have gone to someone else. It was a freee header from an unchallenged cross. The whole defence was at fault.

[SaintTex]

Forster had a good game.

 

the good - I am not sure how you can complain about his positioning in the second half. For every stop he was in perfect position. He had to react quickly to well struck balls, but he didn't have to dive or leave his feet to do so.

 

the bad - I felt like he completely gave up on the Costa goal. 9 times out of 10 that ball is going to go be headed to the far post. Forster was leaning to the near post. Plus, his body language during the play was as if he was griping at the bad defensive positioning (which there was)

 

but hey, you know, make the save, and then gripe at your defense. I almost feel like he sold out the team on his effort, as he knew it would mostly be blamed as a defensive error. Make the play Forster!

 

That being said... I think he is a very good goalkeeper and only going to get better. Who, not in the Big6, would you trade him out for?

[hughieslastminutegoal]

All of his penalties have been poor though.

They have, and it is a bit of a worry that we have no one else seeming to want to take them.

Someone must be able to hit them better than Tadic did yesterday - fairly weakly straight down the middle and hit feet. A bit lucky really.

[CeeBee]

Great atmosphere. Exciting game. We should have been a couple up at half time. Second half we could have conceded a couple. A draw left me reasonably happy. So good to see 2 quick men up front with Long and Sadio. Ran Chelsea ragged in first half.

Agree about Tadic being so much better on the left. Think that could be our strongest eleven at this time.

[VectisSaint]

I think your view of it has been foreshortened by the TV angle. It was not his job to cover Costa and if he'd come out to him then the ball may have gone to someone else. It was a freee header from an unchallenged cross. The whole defence was at fault.

Of course the defence was at fault, thats not the issue. But to try to claim that the TV angle foreshortened the distance FF would have needed to come, come on Whitey I expect better of you than that. It was hardly more than a stride for a giant who is on his toes, to punch a floated cross (maybe catching would have been expecting a bit too much). I said it when it happened and was heartened to hear two of our former managers saying exactly the same, and Ronald hinting also that he could have done better. I'm sure that Lloris or even Joe Hart would have punched that away instead of standing rooted watching a soft goal pass them by.

[Leicestersaint]

It amazes me that so many on here are such experts on goalkeeping and they know so much more than the pundits or the rest of us! Forster is a very good goalkeeper who has let in fewer goals than anyone else in the division. If any of our strikers could do as well in terms of scoring goals I, for one, would be delighted.

[Whitey Grandad]

Of course the defence was at fault, thats not the issue. But to try to claim that the TV angle foreshortened the distance FF would have needed to come, come on Whitey I expect better of you than that. It was hardly more than a stride for a giant who is on his toes, to punch a floated cross (maybe catching would have been expecting a bit too much). I said it when it happened and was heartened to hear two of our former managers saying exactly the same, and Ronald hinting also that he could have done better. I'm sure that Lloris or even Joe Hart would have punched that away instead of standing rooted watching a soft goal pass them by.

 

When I was watching it live I never at any time thought 'that's the keeper's ball'. Forster has to cover the whole of the goal area and I think you have underestimated the time it would have taken him to get to Costa and puch the ball clear. Of course, we don't know how the defence has been coached, it may be that Forster has been told to leave this type of cross to the central defenders. I think you're being very harsh on him.

 

Edit: I've just watched the goal again and I can see what you are saying. I still don't think that Forster would have got there in time but what is most obvious is that Costa gets a completely free run from outside the area almost to the 6-yard line.

Edited 16 March, 2015 by Whitey Grandad

[Goalie66]

It amazes me that so many on here are such experts on goalkeeping and they know so much more than the pundits or the rest of us! Forster is a very good goalkeeper who has let in fewer goals than anyone else in the division. If any of our strikers could do as well in terms of scoring goals I, for one, would be delighted.

 

Some of us have actually played in goal at a high level.!!! Leicester Saint. I was at the game yesterday and Forster is flat footed and does not read the game well that is why he is slow off his line.In my view he was at fault for their goal and second half he should have dived on the ball when Fonte was trying to turn and clear. Notwithstanding those comments he did make some great saves second half. I feel that the defense has shielded Forster this season and his faults are very fundamental for a keeper. He is big but I get the impression he is somewhat timid. He is not a great communicator either. He is not talking to his defense and shouting for the ball when needed.

 

Good keepers like Smeichal (father) Shilton are vocal but read the game well.They get in position early to AVOID making saves or make the saves look easy.The make the goal big and intimidate forwards. Will Forster reach those standards. I doubt it

[VectisSaint]

When I was watching it live I never at any time thought 'that's the keeper's ball'. Forster has to cover the whole of the goal area and I think you have underestimated the time it would have taken him to get to Costa and puch the ball clear. Of course, we don't know how the defence has been coached, it may be that Forster has been told to leave this type of cross to the central defenders. I think you're being very harsh on him.

 

Edit: I've just watched the goal again and I can see what you are saying. I still don't think that Forster would have got there in time but what is most obvious is that Costa gets a completely free run from outside the area almost to the 6-yard line.

If I am being harsh then I'm afraid its not just me. Professional managers/pundits have the same view, ex Saints managers as well. There is an irrational idea on here (not from you) that any Saints player, and in this case Forster, is above criticism. Like every player he has his strengths and his weaknesses. He is beginning to prove that he is a good shot stopper, his kicking is good, he usually deals well with crosses (certainly better than some of his predecesors). But so many times he is found wanting when it comes to coming out for the ball. But some on here cannot deal with this, usually by saying "he is faultless, he must be because he has conceded the least goals in the league" or words to that effect. The guy is good, but he could be even better, maybe in time he will learn to be better at claiming the ball in some situations.

[Toadhall Saint]

He is not in command of his own 6 yard area - once he sorts that out he'll be top notch

[Whitey Grandad]

He is not in command of his own 6 yard area - once he sorts that out he'll be top notch

 

Fair comment.

[Stepgar]

I hbe no doubt that FF SHOULD HAVE CONE FOR THE BALL. It was floated in giving him plenty of time to claim. It's not like is was powered in to the area around the penalty spot. It was floated to the 6 yard line.

[Saint86]

I dont think people really appreciate that cross or the quality of Chelsea's play. Costa starts on the outside of the area and runs in to the end of that cross during the balls flight. Its doesn't hang in the air as some say. Its kicked and Costa is not there. He then runs onto it and attacks it into the back of the net. Our defence and keeper had no chance. The cross, timing and quality of movement were inch perfect. From the second that ivanovic kicked it and costa started running it was a free header on goal.

 

Watch it again, look at costa's starting position and watch how he just runs into the spot its going. In comparison our defence push in and then out to track the play. By the time they know where the ball is going costa is already has the momentum and position ahead of them.

 

It is always easy to blame the keeper, but this was not his fault. That cross was perfect as was costa's movement.

 

If you want to blame anyone then pick any of our defenders who failed to read the cross as well as the oppositions key threat and left him unmarked for the header... because seriously, the oppositions only target man getting a free header is the defences fault before it is the keepers.

 

But if you watch that section of play and almost psychic play between hazard, costa and ivanovic I find it hard to blame davis for being slightly out of position and the losing out to an already set Costa.

 

Most pundits I've read seem to agree that Forster couldn't do much about it also.

[the saint in winchester]

Bit of an odd suggestion IMHO that Forster should have come for the cross. Where was Fonte? It was his job to mark Costa and prevent the header. FF could have dived maybe, but it should have been prevented by the central defenders.

[shurlock]

I dont think people really appreciate that cross or the quality of Chelsea's play. Costa starts on the outside of the area and runs in to the end of that cross during the balls flight. Its doesn't hang in the air as some say. Its kicked and Costa is not there. He then runs onto it and attacks it into the back of the net. Our defence and keeper had no chance. The cross, timing and quality of movement were inch perfect. From the second that ivanovic kicked it and costa started running it was a free header on goal.

 

Watch it again, look at costa's starting position and watch how he just runs into the spot its going. In comparison our defence push in and then out to track the play. By the time they know where the ball is going costa is already has the momentum and position ahead of them.

 

It is always easy to blame the keeper, but this was not his fault. That cross was perfect as was costa's movement.

 

If you want to blame anyone then pick any of our defenders who failed to read the cross as well as the oppositions key threat and left him unmarked for the header... because seriously, the oppositions only target man getting a free header is the defences fault before it is the keepers.

 

But if you watch that section of play and almost psychic play between hazard, costa and ivanovic I find it hard to blame davis for being slightly out of position and the losing out to an already set Costa.

 

Most pundits I've read seem to agree that Forster couldn't do much about it also.

 

Quick question: were you at the game?

[Smirking_Saint]

I dont think people really appreciate that cross or the quality of Chelsea's play. Costa starts on the outside of the area and runs in to the end of that cross during the balls flight. Its doesn't hang in the air as some say. Its kicked and Costa is not there. He then runs onto it and attacks it into the back of the net. Our defence and keeper had no chance. The cross, timing and quality of movement were inch perfect. From the second that ivanovic kicked it and costa started running it was a free header on goal.

 

Watch it again, look at costa's starting position and watch how he just runs into the spot its going. In comparison our defence push in and then out to track the play. By the time they know where the ball is going costa is already has the momentum and position ahead of them.

 

It is always easy to blame the keeper, but this was not his fault. That cross was perfect as was costa's movement.

 

If you want to blame anyone then pick any of our defenders who failed to read the cross as well as the oppositions key threat and left him unmarked for the header... because seriously, the oppositions only target man getting a free header is the defences fault before it is the keepers.

 

But if you watch that section of play and almost psychic play between hazard, costa and ivanovic I find it hard to blame davis for being slightly out of position and the losing out to an already set Costa.

 

Most pundits I've read seem to agree that Forster couldn't do much about it also.

 

You could blame the keeper, Tadic, Davis and both CBs if you wanted to. As a coach you can find fault with all of them. And Id argue most coaches will have different ideas of who was primarily to blame due to their philosophies.

 

This echo's fans in general. We all see the game differently. I think the cross should have been stopped at source first, Costa made to work harder second and Forster doing better third. (I could analyse it further if I wanted to)

 

What is in question is his confidence leaving his line. And hopefully Watson can work with him on this as he is an intimidating prescence. Regardless of the defensive shield many teams have breached it this year and Forster has been there to mop up. I cant see a better GK we could sign for reasonable money TBH and apart from a few issues I think he has been a good signing

[spyinthesky]

Some of us have actually played in goal at a high level.!!! Leicester Saint. I was at the game yesterday and Forster is flat footed and does not read the game well that is why he is slow off his line.In my view he was at fault for their goal and second half he should have dived on the ball when Fonte was trying to turn and clear. Notwithstanding those comments he did make some great saves second half. I feel that the defense has shielded Forster this season and his faults are very fundamental for a keeper. He is big but I get the impression he is somewhat timid. He is not a great communicator either. He is not talking to his defense and shouting for the ball when needed.

 

Good keepers like Smeichal (father) Shilton are vocal but read the game well.They get in position early to AVOID making saves or make the saves look easy.The make the goal big and intimidate forwards. Will Forster reach those standards. I doubt it

 

Think this is a good summary

In my experience one thing that is particularly relevant to 'keepers is the fact that they mature later and actually hit best form in in their thirties

I reckon Forster will definitely improve his communication and positioning with age.

However I fully agree that he positions himself too close to the goal line at the moment maybe because, with his height, he is not as fleet of foot as the likes of Lloris, Howard, etc