Bevan Happy To Stay Longer

I used to be with you on that one Dave. I thought that with 5 named subs, not naming a sub goalie was ridiculous. HOWEVER, the idea of naming 5 out field players is growing on me, to the point of thinking it should continue as it is (with the exception of knowing that your current keeper is carrying a knock).

My reasons for going with the 5 outfield players as Bucks is doing now is that one of our strongest points this year is the strength in depth of the squad. We really have a good 16 (+) at the moment who could all slot in and do the job whenever called upon, which has not always been the case. The other emerging feature is PB's increasing tactical nous. We have played a few different formations to start games and even changed this during a game to suit. Recently this has worked very well. My point is that this can be achieved better with more of a choice of outfield players on the bench, it gives PB more options.

You could even argue that this flexibility and strength of the squad is actually contributing to more points than the potential of losing any if we lose a keeper again this season. Some might argue that this is likely, but i would hazard a guess (unless Jon can come up with a figure) that its unlikely we have substituted our goalie more than once a season in the last few years, i certainly don't remember any?? (That does not include the ridiculous decision to take off Nathan Abbey the other season, to try and prove some point).

Like i said before the idea of having 5 outfield players on the bench is growing on me. The increased number of options this gives you, in my opinion, outweighs the chances of Sills (or Hodges) taking another turn in goal before the end of the season.