the rest are still het straight at him,
No. Simple. None of those were on the keeper, they were all reflex saves. I don't think you understand what "shot straight at the keeper" actually means. It's not "shot straight at the keeper" if it's 1-1,5m away from him from short distance with little time to react for the gk.
Shot at the keeper means, the goalkeeper was already positioned in a way he didn't have to do much and could just bodyblock it. Which of the 4 exampless you picked out here does that apply to?
Correct:
None.
3 of those links are from his own blunders
Which is the third one? Does that not make them amazing saves anymore? You were arguing his shot stopping ability, not his distibution. Completely irrelevant how those chances were created, the saves fit your example. Period. If you want to argue that he's also now shit with the ball on his feet, then go on, make everyone laugh.
lolol, one was from 2 years ago, vs byern,
oh yeah "lolol" indeed. Instead of 7 saves from the 4 asked for, I only gave you 6 very recent ones, and you have 1 extra bonus link. What was i thinking.
In 5 minutes search time I provided you with enough materual. But from the very start it was already clear that a response to "give me 4 great saves" would be a waste of time because you would have never accepted a single one of them. It's an internet classic:
Person X cynically asks for examples
Person Y gives examples
Person X thinks of arbitrary arguments to dismiss every single argument shown. Will not accept a single one, no matter what is shown. Then argues that his demands cannot be fulfilled and he has therefor won the argument.
You were already convinced of your own reactionary narrative, you were not allowing anyoneor anything to offer a different one. I could say what I want, you are already above reasoning.
hopefully Germany exit early and it fires MaTS up for next season
