Some Saints fans have been very vocal on social media in their criticism of Fraser Forster, however it is emerging that the keeper has been playing even though not 100% through necessity.

Some Saints fans have been very harsh on Fraser Forster who seems to have become the latest scapegoat for those who always seem to have to have a player to blame whether Saints are winning or losing.

But it seems that Forster could well be more hero than villain as reports from soureces close to the football club are suggesting that the England stopper has been playing through the pain barrier for a number of months due to the fact that Saints had no viable alternative to replace him.

Certainly Forster has not been as mobile as he has been in the past, although those that blame him for certain goals have often been too harsh in their criticism, especially those who say he should have stopped a point blank header from Ibrahimovic on Sunday for the United winner.

But without Forster playing through the pain, Saints would surely not have been in the League cup final and indeed may well have lost several games that they have gained points from of late, although Forster is not 100% his presence is still enough to help inspire and motivate his team mates as well as deter the opposition, therefore Claude Puel opted to use the England keeper rather than the alternatives.

If Alex McCarthy has been fit then he would almost have certainly have been in the side to give Forster the time to recover from his injury, but with McCarthy on the long term list himself the only other options were Stuart Taylor who to be blunt has barely played in a decade or Harry Lewis who is still not experienced enough to be thrown into the Premier League.

That meant that Saints had to wait till the transfer window to sign a keeper and this they did with Mouez Hassan arriving during the window.

Of course they weren't going to throw Hassan into the deep end with Forster having gritted his teeth through a mountain of games in quick succession, he was not going to miss the final, but now gives the club a chance to rest the number one keeper between the sticks.

For obvious reasons this was an issue that the club had to keep under wraps, so as to not give any opponents an advantage.

So I would expect Hassan to be in to face Watford on Saturday and Forster rested, this would then give him three clear weeks of rest between Wembley and our trip to Tottenham, if a little more was needed if he was again rested for the trip to White Hart Lane then he would have another fortnight of recuperation.

So those who have been slating Forster of late should reflect on the fact the keeper has been unable to get 100% fit out of necessity to play games thick and fast over the past 3-4 months, indeed when a keeper knows he is not right that can affect all parts of his game, goalkeeper is a confidence position and when you have an injury that affects all parts of your game, not just areas directly influnced by an injury.

But o his credit Fraser has not shirked the task, he has not hid and now he can get a well earned rest and come back 100% and able to get back to his old form.

Photo: Action Images

patred added 11:39 - Mar 2 it has become more noticeable over the last month that all was not right with Fraser. He was very close to being subbed in the 2nd half at Wembley. Now we have the young French keeper, perhaps Fraser can be rested...
7

OldRed added 12:07 - Mar 2 It's not that he should have saved a point-blank header from Ibrahimovic he should have taken it off his head, nevertheless, if he has been forced to play through injury then credit to him.
5

steve73 added 12:12 - Mar 2 ".....seem to have to have a player to blame whether Saints are winning or losing." Like Yoshida you mean 😑
10

redandwhitedee added 12:37 - Mar 2 Well done Nick for giving Watford coaching staff the heads-up ..
-1

LordDZLucan added 12:40 - Mar 2 Well that explains a lot because he really hasn't been at the races for 2/3 months now and the signing of Hassan at the time didn't make a lot of sense. The question I would ask then is why did we sign Stuart Taylor if he's not good enough to play in the first team and therefor enable Frazer to have a rest. It all comes down again to a transfer policy that went badly wrong over the summer and left us short in key positions.

6

dirk_doone added 12:43 - Mar 2 There has to be something very wrong with our club's transfer policy when we are forced to go into a Wembley final with an injured goalkeeper and an inexperienced central defender as there were no alternatives.
4

SaintBrock added 12:46 - Mar 2 Your self righteous tone does you little credit Nick, especially when you make it sound as 'though the whole fan base with the exception of yourself is playing the blame game. You are doing it all the time so come off your high horse. The real question is not about Forster but why we have landed ourselves with three back up keepers who seem not good enough or even fit enough to take over when he is injured and needs to be rested.Why on earth did we recruit the young French bloke if he's not ready?

10

saintsnutcase added 12:55 - Mar 2 This explains a hell of a lot -- he has looked completely immobile for weeks. I wish we could have last year's FF back!
6

bstokesaint added 13:09 - Mar 2 Fraser definitely does appear to have been digging deep and gritting his teeth in recent games, so to me it sounds perfectly plausible. As I said before he was instrumental in turning our season around last year so it seems inconceivable that he has suddenly become bad. So, even more the reason to get behind him and the rest of our players instead of getting stuck into them. As others have said there are questions to be asked about why we don't have adequate cover.

3

highfield49 added 15:44 - Mar 2 Sorry guys i think you're being more than a bit harsh on the club's recruitment. Like everyone else I'm mystified why Taylor is on the books but is it realistic to expect the club to sign another keeper in the summer when there was McCarthy as back up to FF and Lewis on the books as well? McCarthy's injury has to be much more severe than everyone first thought otherwise we wouldn't now be signing Hassan as cover. Harry Lewis played in place of FF and the club were criticised by some for practically terminating his career by shattering his confidence! Time to cut some slack for Reed and co imo. Anyone complaining about Gabbiadini or Caceres yet?

1

deanosfc8 added 16:15 - Mar 2 I have never been a fan of Forster, his positioning for the first goal was nothing to do with him carrying an injury. The pathetic attempt to kick the ball at palace is nothing to do with an injury, if I could be bothered I can sit here for an hour going through games mishaps or mistakes that has nothing to do with injury. Every time the ball goes back to Forster or into the box I say "oh here go"! Anyway the sooner our 2nd 3rd or under 18s keeper is in the sticks the better.

1

SanMarco added 16:41 - Mar 2 At his very best FF would have had a shout at saving the winner. I am in Dirk Doone's camp rather than Highfield's on this. We should have brought in a match ready keeper if we knew FF was injured. FF and JS cost us the final and those were both avoidable issues. If back-ups are not good enough for the first team then they aint really back-ups are they? It is not too much to ask to have a competent CB and GK in reserve.

5

Jesus_02 added 17:07 - Mar 2 Very well, I'm happy to believe that FF is injured if it affords him the opportunity to be dropped and come back better without being publicly ridiculed. I'm assuming its a toe injury , that would explain why he has been on his heels when facing free kicks
-1

allsaint54 added 17:10 - Mar 2 Have been highly critical of FF of late as he can only save shots straight at him & sometimes even that is questionable. But why have 3 backup keepers plus one out on loan who cannot be relied upon when needed. Not sure that injury explains all of his lack of form but it does go a long way. I was of the view to sell him in the summer but should hold fire & get in a decent back up.

3

Jesus_02 added 18:07 - Mar 2 @ allsaint54 how about a new No1 and have FF a a back up. GK seems to be the only position where we are happy to make signings that don't improve the team. Don't forget we let Boruc go on a free
4

saintmark1976 added 18:52 - Mar 2 To be frank Nick this sounds like a "false flag" story to me. "Sources close to the football club" being who exactly?
1

allsaint54 added 19:30 - Mar 2 Have been highly critical of FF of late as he can only save shots straight at him & sometimes even that is questionable. But why have 3 backup keepers plus one out on loan who cannot be relied upon when needed. Not sure that injury explains all of his lack of form but it does go a long way. I was of the view to sell him in the summer but should hold fire & get in a decent back up.

1

allsaint54 added 19:33 - Mar 2 @jesus 02 would agree but don't believe Les Reed would spend the necessary funds
2

Letiss7 added 20:17 - Mar 2 Fraser Forster has had mobilty issues all season and having had both groin and abdominable strains recently then one of these will be the problem for his loss of form. It is pertinent to note that form is temporary and class premanent.
1

aceofthebase added 20:38 - Mar 2 Claude Puel has rubbished these injury stories that Nick has dug up about FF. Simple truth is that he a very immobile keeper whether it's staying on his line or diving for a save. We kept plenty of clean sheets when the defense played well and prevented both crosses and shots on goal. The less FF had to do meant more cleen sheets. However I expect his bad form is down to playing Yoshida in fron of him eh Nick

1

perazi added 22:58 - Mar 2 Injury or not - he's not that good a keeper. Doesn't come off his line enough and always slow to get down to low shots.
1

saintfrance added 15:10 - Mar 3 Tend to agree with perazi on this one, also think he has problems placing a wall and doesn't talk enough.
3

Blogs 31 bloggers

Arsenal Polls