New 3 year deal for George Long

[Satriales 994]

Just been announced 

 

 

Edited October 4 by Satriales

[TIL 1010 5,246]

Have to say I raised my eyebrows when I read it.

[essex canary 622]

He lives up to his name.

[Satriales 994]

1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

Have to say I raised my eyebrows when I read it.

Same here. Clearly they don't think the youngsters are ready to step up yet. 

[AJ 1,359]

Kinda makes sense really, if there's questions over Gunn's future then it gives us some stability by having an experienced keeper on the books. If he's happy to be here as a no2 then that's fine. Will be interesting to see what happens with all our young keepers - most are meant to be very exciting prospects.

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

6 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Have to say I raised my eyebrows when I read it.

Indeed. Although reserve goalkeeper is one of the most difficult positions to fill in terms of finding an experienced backup who's happy to spend most of his life on the bench. Perhaps Long's attitude and (presumably) low wages make him a good candidate for this role, as McGovern was for many years?

Obviously I'd be surprised and concerned if he was first choice, but I'm fine with this as long as either Gunn signs a new deal, or Hoff has a new number one lined up to replace him.

EDIT: Interesting that this would be announced so soon after Tony Roberts joined the club. One would assume he must have signed off on the decision?

Edited October 4 by Feedthewolf

[Channon’s Windmill 416]

Must be a bit frustrating being a young goalkeeper at Norwich, think Long has two clean sheets in 15 odd games for us. 

[sonyc 6,145]

6 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Obviously I'd be surprised and concerned if he was first choice, but I'm fine with this as long as either Gunn signs a new deal, or Hoff has a new number one lined up to replace him

I can now see you FTW going into the Contracts Conundrum thread and adding in 2027 with gritted teeth 😅

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

1 minute ago, sonyc said:

I can now see you FTW going into the Contracts Conundrum thread and adding in 2027 with gritted teeth 😅

Yeah, it's done.

I'M FINE WITH IT OKAY

[Fen Canary 1,456]

Makes sense to me. A keeper who is happy to be the 2nd choice (and likely to never play) so the young lads can be loaned out to gain valuable experience 

[TheGunnShow 7,377]

14 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Indeed. Although reserve goalkeeper is one of the most difficult positions to fill in terms of finding an experienced backup who's happy to spend most of his life on the bench. Perhaps Long's attitude and (presumably) low wages make him a good candidate for this role, as McGovern was for many years?

Obviously I'd be surprised and concerned if he was first choice, but I'm fine with this as long as either Gunn signs a new deal, or Hoff has a new number one lined up to replace him.

EDIT: Interesting that this would be announced so soon after Tony Roberts joined the club. One would assume he must have signed off on the decision?

Exactly this. Ideally your back-up goalie is a solid, experienced reserve. Youngsters need first-team football and it's truest of all amongst goalkeepers simply as the position comes with far more mental pressure than anywhere else on the pitch.

Promising youngsters need lower league loans, or if they're judged ready for first-team action, to get the gig. They're not getting past Gunn at the moment, so do what is with Reyes and get him lower league football.

[daz 137]

Rather my nan in goal 🙈

[Nuff Said 5,964]

As I remember it, Long got better after some game time, which is hardly a surprise, but people seem to have rushed to judge him on his earliest performances. We’re never going to have an excellent keeper sitting unused on the bench game after game, so to me this seems like a reasonable deal.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,531]

I guess it means youngsters can go out on loan and not rot on the bench but….but underwhelmed tbh. Always looks a bit dodgy when he plays and I would worry if Gunn was injured 

[king canary 8,757]

Very weird decision, clearly the club see something from him that most don't because he looks dreadful every time he plays. 

Just hoping he's not seen as the starter if Gunn leaves.

[NWC 315]

Goes under the file "Must be good in training" for me!

[FenwayFrank 2,717]

13 minutes ago, daz said:

Rather my nan in goal 🙈

Can she play up front if Sarge gets injured?

Edited October 4 by FenwayFrank

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

7 minutes ago, king canary said:

Very weird decision, clearly the club see something from him that most don't because he looks dreadful every time he plays. 

Just hoping he's not seen as the starter if Gunn leaves.

Bit of an overreaction. Looked very shaky the first couple of games where he deputised for Gunn, but thereafter I thought he was OK. No better than you can expect for a journeyman backup goalkeeper, really, but certainly not 'dreadful' in my eyes.

EDIT: Absolutely no way he's a starter, agreed!

Edited October 4 by Feedthewolf

[Satriales 994]

1 minute ago, Feedthewolf said:

Bit of an overreaction. Looked very shaky the first couple of games where he deputised for Gunn, but thereafter I thought he was OK. No better than you can expect for a journeyman backup goalkeeper, really, but certainly not 'dreadful' in my eyes.

EDIT: Absolutely no way he's a starter, agreed!

Hopefully he and Gunn will also improve under the coaching of Tony Roberts. 

[king canary 8,757]

7 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Bit of an overreaction. Looked very shaky the first couple of games where he deputised for Gunn, but thereafter I thought he was OK. No better than you can expect for a journeyman backup goalkeeper, really, but certainly not 'dreadful' in my eyes.

EDIT: Absolutely no way he's a starter, agreed!

Agree to disagree I guess.

Every single game I've seen him play there has been a goal where I've thought he should have done better with it. I get he's a backup but I don't think he's a starter at League One level even. 

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

He’s clearly rated much higher by those at the club than by many supporters.  I don’t think he’d be a first choice but is nowhere near as bad as is made out - many are ready to bash him at any opportunity.

[Google Bot 3,934]

Long really isn't up to it, and he always seems to carry an arrogance about him which I think restricts his progression.

I guess this extension is related to the new GK coach coming in? In which case he's obviously seen something about him, or their paths may have crossed in the past.... Or there's a very genuine feeling that Gunn could be off end of season, if not before?!

I really don't want to see him goal for us ever again.

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

Great news to start an exciting weekend. 

[ROBFLECK 134]

Disappointed to read this... I don't rate him at all...

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

38 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

As I remember it, Long got better after some game time, which is hardly a surprise, but people seem to have rushed to judge him on his earliest performances. We’re never going to have an excellent keeper sitting unused on the bench game after game, so to me this seems like a reasonable deal.

What, knee jerk reactions on the Pinkun ! Whatever next !!

[king canary 8,757]

I do find it funny that whenever posters are negative about a player it is almost always dismissed by some as being knee jerk, scapegoating or rushing to judgement. I don't think it is that in this case, it is that he's not very good.

I know there is more too it than this but Long has started two games in which he's faced a total of 8 shots on target and 6 of those have become goals. 

Similarly last season he conceded 16 goals in his 600 minutes on the pitch- so averaging a goal conceded every 37 minutes. If you want to look statistically there was only one keeper who had more than one league start who had a worse expected goals vs goals conceded stat. In that ranking he is 47th out of 51 keepers in the league last season and 3 of the 4 below him only played one game.

He was objectively terrible last season, it isn't knee jerking or scapegoating. 

 

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

All I remember is Millwall fans saying he's the worst keeper they've had in years and then watching him play for us like he's never played as a goalkeeper before

[Worthy Nigelton 1,301]

He might be a good lad to have around the place, because he is not a very good keeper (even as no.2).

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Glad’ just shouted me…

”This wuntuv ‘appened on Daylia’s watch! Wair gorn to hull inna handcart”

I guess she has a point..,

[Ian 1,212]

21 minutes ago, king canary said:

I do find it funny that whenever posters are negative about a player it is almost always dismissed by some as being knee jerk, scapegoating or rushing to judgement. I don't think it is that in this case, it is that he's not very good.

I know there is more too it than this but Long has started two games in which he's faced a total of 8 shots on target and 6 of those have become goals. 

Similarly last season he conceded 16 goals in his 600 minutes on the pitch- so averaging a goal conceded every 37 minutes. If you want to look statistically there was only one keeper who had more than one league start who had a worse expected goals vs goals conceded stat. In that ranking he is 47th out of 51 keepers in the league last season and 3 of the 4 below him only played one game.

He was objectively terrible last season, it isn't knee jerking or scapegoating. 

 

You're telling me that around 6 and a half games is a sufficient enough sample size to make valid statistical claims? Who were the opponents in those games? What was our general form like at that period? How many came in cups where there was probably not a full-strength starting line up in front of him?

Here's the actual results from the 2023/2024 season where he played his longest run of games (Gunn being the orange matches).



Looking at this, by my maths we conceded 13 goals in the 7 games leading up to Long's stint, with our opposition's average league position being 13th, and 16 in the 7 games during Long's tenure, with our opposition's average league position being 10th. Therefore, you could "objectively" argue that we were on a terrible run of form and shipping goals even before Long came into the squad, and then faced better opposition in general any way. Of course he conceded more goals than Gunn in that direct comparison, but you would probably expect that given the circumstances at the time.

That all said, nobody at all is suggesting that Long is a top keeper who we should keep at all costs, but perhaps it's a bit more nuanced than that; factor in that this is a *reserve goalkeeper position*, what is the alternative? To spend money and time recruiting someone who is really going to spend most of their time on the bench anyway? Good luck with that.

I would suggest that taking limited stats which prove the point you want to make, but aren't really representative, is probably not as objective as people think it is.

Edited October 4 by Ian