We'll never know if the #1 would have made the saves either. Still a random decision. If not why haven't other manager's done the same thing if it was such a good decision
World Cup
- Thread starter Beezerk
- Start date
Slime
Tour Winner
There always has to be a first time and this was it.
Van Gaal had confidence enough and the courage of his convictions, he can't be criticised for that, surely.
Slime.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Did Holland win the penalty shootout after the manager swapped goalies - yes
Did the goalie save two of those penalties - yes
How can it be anything other than a good decision ?
Maybe other managers didnt have a keeper on the bench they thought could save penalties or give them a better edge , maybe the manager on the bench had no subs left to make ( normal situation )
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
What happens when Krul saves none in the semi final shoot out and they go out?
Has that happened yet ?
richy
Journeyman Pro
What happens when Krul saves none in the semi final shoot out and they go out?
What happens if the match doesn't go to penalties because Holland concede a penalty during normal play and the #1 keeper doesn't save it?
What happens if it does? Krul comes on gets nowhere near the pens and they go out.
Masterstroke tactical genius then or a gamble for a bit of luck that didny pay off?
You'll argue your point ad infinitum. I still think it was a bizarre decision which fortunately for Van Gaal paid off. How he could have been 100% certain the outfield players would have scored is beyond me. If they had missed (and some world class players have done so in WC shoot outs) then whoever he put in goal would have become academic. What if he'd had to use three subs during the match.
It worked but I still don't think it was a great decision. I'm done
What happens if the match doesn't go to penalties because Holland concede a penalty during normal play and the #1 keeper doesn't save it?
What happens if number 1 gets sent off, Krul comes on and gets red carded,3rd comes on and is crap at pens too?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
What if the world blew up tomorrow etc etc etc - its all what ifs - how about what actually happened
Van Gaal made a choice - his choice saved two penalties to enable them to win and go through - his choice worked and his team won the game. Can call it lucky etc etc but at the end of the day he made a choice and it worked.
It was the players poor choices that cost Costa Rica.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
I dont think anyone has suggested he couldnt have been 100% certain of anything - no one can in sport - managers make choices they believe could make a difference - some dont work and some do - this one did - then next one may not.
Again why discuss "what ifs" when they didnt actually happen.
Or maybe he didn't use three subs so he could swap the goalie?
Look i agree it was bizarre, but you keep saying people are stubborn for sticking to their opinions, but you concede nothing. Everyones pretty much agreed that luck is involved (not solely responsible), but surely it is at the least a brave decision? He had the balls to do it knowing he'd gett battered if it went wrong.
If the get to pens again he may not do it, as the trick has been seen now, but surely his logic, bigger goalie was sound? Or when you were a goalie did you just close your eyes and dive whenever a team had a penalty as the end result was beyong your control?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
The gk went the right way and saved the pen - the GK made the right choice.
Slime
Tour Winner
Read the above, forget who posted it, just read it.
If you can fault the logic, you're a better man than I am ......................... because he's correct, 100% correct!
Slime.
But did the takers not make the wrong choices?
Come on you'll know the answer,you're never wrong......
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Did Holland win because their keeper made two saves - yes they did - you can look for who is at fault etc etc but it wont change any facts that a keeper came onto the pitch and made two crucial saves.
I know you're only bear baiting, but, if Kruil wasn't in goal or anyone else for that matter. Would they have missed? Nope, these were't waddle penalties. They weren't missed, they were saved.
Actually your right. Why discuss because no matter what I think you're at the opposite end of the scale..not just on this. It worked but I still think it was a strange decision and one that coud just as easily backfired. I just find it funny that a keeper with just two PL saves to his name is brought on just because he's big. Hardly got any other attributes to bring to the table in terms of stopping penalties
The most accurate three words on here for a while
