By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I've asked my Gemini, and he came back with (point 3 underlines why the Gaffer is doing so - all about ringing out every last advantage possible):
"To analyse this, we have to look at Probability vs. Utility.
1. The Probability of the "Disaster Scenario" Statistically, the chance of a goalkeeper being forced off (red card or injury) is approximately once every 35 to 40 matches.
The Danger: If it happens in the 10th minute, you play 80 minutes with an outfielder in net. You almost certainly lose the game and possibly take a massive hit to your Goal Difference.
The Reality: For Rochdale, as you noted, it hasn’t happened in years. If you go an entire 46-game season without a keeper injury, a sub keeper has provided zero value for 4,140 minutes of football.
2. The Utility of the "Extra Outfield Option" This is where the benefit is extrapolated. By leaving out a keeper, McNulty gets a 7th outfield option on the bench.
Tactical Flexibility: In a 5-sub system, having 7 outfielders means you can swap 50% of your starting outfield 10.
Specialisation: Instead of just a "defender" and a "midfielder," you can carry a "defensive specialist," a "creative spark," a "speed merchant," and a "target man."
The Benefit: We’ve seen this season (like with the 4th/5th sub goals from Henderson and Amantchi) that Dale often wins games in the final 15 minutes. Having that extra attacking profile on the bench—who wouldn't be there if a keeper took the spot—directly leads to points.
3. Extrapolating the Value (The "Points-at-Risk" Model) If we look at a 46-game season:
The "Extra Outfield" Gain: If having that 7th outfield option helps turn just two draws into wins or one loss into a draw, that is a 3 to 4 point gain over the season.
The "No Keeper" Loss: If the disaster happens once, you likely lose 3 points in that specific game.
The Math: If the disaster happens once a year, but the extra sub wins you two games, the gamble has a +3 point net profit.
4. Why it works for Rochdale specifically Ball Retention: Dale plays a high-possession, technical game under McNulty. By keeping the ball, you lower the number of high-speed collisions your keeper is involved in, statistically lowering his injury risk.
The "Emergency" Plan: Most teams who do this have an outfield player (often a tall defender or a former youth keeper) who trains in net once a week "just in case."
The Verdict McNulty is playing the "Accumulated Gains" game. He is betting that the marginal advantage of having one more tactical tool on the bench in every game outweighs the catastrophic cost of a keeper crisis in one game.
In a title race with York City that might be decided by a single point, that extra attacking sub could be the difference between League Two and another year in the National League."
Edit: I further asked him how long since a Dale in-game keeper change and he came back with:
"The Last Notable Instance: Josh Lillis (2018/19) The last time a keeper was forced off during a competitive match was during the 2018/19 League One season.
The Game: Rochdale vs. Blackpool (August 2018).
The Event: First-choice keeper Josh Lillis suffered a knee injury in the first half.
The Sub: Brendan Moore came on in the 43rd minute.
Since that moment, Dale have gone nearly seven full seasons without a goalkeeper being forced off mid-game due to injury or a red card."
Was made clear in the most recent forum that they're not worried at all about it. General concensus is one of the regular outfield team is a"dab hand" in goal.
No laughter from me; it is a thought I've had since the takeover. Try to get him back at Dale as a local success, a talisman to build the local community club around in its rebirth infancy.
A huge factor in this is the gaffer: it's clear the players will run through a brick wall for him and are totally on board with the project - it will have a magnetic effect on them staying here and "finishing what we started".
It was evident the last time we had a bright star manager who gets Rochdale - the players we were able to sign and their subsequent performance levels, were above our means - based on the manager's 'pull'.
The difference now is we are not a selling club; or if we are to sell a player, we are financially able, for the 1st time in my known history of the club, able to dictate/hold out for the real value of the player.
I'm even relaxed about the possibility of the gaffer leaving - the way he carries himself, his openness, honesty and how he speaks about the club; it's gonna take a really special offer/club to turn his head before we have reached our ceiling.
Never mind staying off the mulled wine, you need to give the turps a rest for a bit. The gaffer has got us squeezing every last bit of advantage where we can - right up to the laws of the game and just before the line of sh!thousery.
I am proud of our respectable history, I am proud of our current team being able to win games, be successful and be role models for our younger generations.
I do not want to be cheering on gobshytes "getting in the face of the referee" and looking for a fight.
You only have to look at rugby to see that tough, hard, fooking monsters of men can play sport with all that aggression but be respectable.
What a game! Well done to them, looked like it had slipped away but they kept going and got it in the end. Fingers crossed for a good draw for them and the other home nations - would be fantastic to see them there with us next year!
Eyup Chaff lad, this board, including its previous incarnation, has been around since year dot.com (I've been clocking on for 25ish years), and I for one am grateful for your hard work in keeping it going, mate.
I'd proffer that as much as Jim and the players are doing to get us up the league and (re)attract fans through the gates, these sort of things, as understandable as it was today, are gonna have a fair negative impact on that.
There will be a tipping point in time when the cost of getting the pitch sorted properly is outweighed by the loss of gate receipts (Sat - Tue rearrangements) and the unreliability of watching football at Dale (alternative venues suggested/just can't be sure if it rains a lot), putting people off.
I'm actually surprised that the negative impact of the pitch on our season last was not enough to warrant getting it done close season; it must be the most critical component required to have a functioning football club.
I'm fully aware of the legal 'battle' with the last company to work on it, and the cost of work needing to be done.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
