@Wilfordpie "but I am puzzled as to why Sam Slocombe remains our second choice, despite his obvious flaws and injury issues."

@Chris "Stone is a better option over Sam Slocombe. "

100% agree. Slocombe cost us the cup tie at Shrewsbury by coming and missing collecting the cross. He missed a cross the other night at Burton. Although I wasn't present, 2 gaffs pre season at Peterborough too.

@TheSkipper "It makes you think that Tom Weal paid the price for Stone failing."

I also believe like you  @TheSkipper that this may have been the case. 

 

 

I just wonder if it not just about talent & how good a player is or is not.

Could it be that the player doesn't hit it off with the coaches, his fellow players or simply doesn't show enough on the training ground?

I'm not saying that is the case here. It just may be a factor generally within football.

 

On 27/09/2024 at 18:08, BromPie said:

This is the best decision for him and the club. Having Aidan Stone on our books but not playing is never going to do his confidence any good. It’s funny how Sam Slocombe was phased out last season, and now it’s his replacement.

Footballs a funny old game, can go from not being wanted to be part of the plans. ????

To be honest I never thought he was that convincing. I can't recall him making a proper dive or really getting off the ground.

I think its a good move for him to get some game time and hopefully build confidence. Although I do think Notts should have a third keeper, whether that's Slocombe at second or third and I still think that we should have kept Brooks.

Edited September 30, 20242 yr by Pies79

@Pies79

I'm in full agreement with you regarding Tiernan Brookes, Notts Should have kept hold of him, having both him and Bass at the Club I feel would have pushed both players forward. However Tiernan may have sought the move wanting to be first choice or the Club decided to do what they normally do and sell the young Notts Talent for an Undisclosed Fee.