Because he had some culpability for it I assume
It doesn't make him a bad keeper like, and he's played well before and since, but why pretend something didn't happen?
I'm not pretending anything didn't happen, I posed the question why do people blame him for THAT goal?
If it had gone straight in, under him, over him, if it was straight at him, or if he had fumbled it in, I could understand, but he's essentially being blamed for not saving an awkward shot that wasn't on target.
Its less a goalkeeping error and more a testament to their unending luck and hold over us.
Pickford, who is heralded as the next big thing, fumbled more on Saturday than Joel has since he's been back in the team. Granted, none led to goals, but If Joel had made any of those same mistakes, he'd have been crucified.
I've had the argument with other people, when they say Joel "has a mistake in him", like there's some magical goalkeeper out there who doesn't. They tend to equate our improved cleansheet records on our tighter defence, and Joel just happens to be the beneficiary, when is the 3rd time in 3 years he has came in to a team struggling defensively, and it has miraculously improved.
They also point to the stunning saves Stek made and how most of the saves Joel makes are "saves he should be making". But that's what good goalkeepers do. Their positioning is better, they make the saves look easier.
I believe the defence is more organised with him there, and they seem more confident in him as well, which helps an untold amount. His distribution is much better too, all things that chop away with needing to make the "worldies" in the 1st place.
As you can see by the rest of my points, I happen to like Joel, so maybe I'm biased.
He seems like a likable guy and I think he's got the makings of a really, really good keeper. I'm not saying he never makes or has made mistakes, but i just cannot see how attaching any blame on that goal to him is anything other than trying to find fault were there is none.