Donatello Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 why did we sign juanmi? or Romeu we have very similar type of young players with their skill sets. juanmi can hardly get a look in. even with long out injured dont get me started on Martina. complete waste of time and space in the squad for a young player What sort of straw man argument is that? Answer: a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 To my mind we needed a proper no2 keeper all of last season so that should have been a priority for the summer. Gazzaniga is absolute crying out for a loan move to build some confidence and get some experience of mens football. Then Forster got injured, so he needs replacing. We got Stekelenburg which is great. But we should have also made the other move too. Forster will barely feature this season and Stekelenburg won't be here next season so we are stuck with Davis/Gazza as the no2 when, back to the first point, that was probably our weakest squad position last year. Instead of Caulker or Martina if the finances were an issue or instead of a new deal for Gazza, Isgrove etc if its very tight for some bizarre reason. Alex McCarthy would have been ideal and was available very cheaply for someone who has made the England squad. Otherwise the likes of Dan Bentley, Lindegaard (who is WBA's third choice keeper) or as Batman said, someone from anywhere in the world who the scouts have been tracking. Not an issue for Jan as FF may be back possibly before the end of the season, but aside from replacing Mane, Wanyama etc in the summer the backup GK would be my no1 focus squad wise. If we hadn't signed Caulker fans would whinge we only had 3 centre backs with the long term injury to Gardos and if we hadn't had signed Martina everyone would have moaned about having no back up to Soares. Alex McCarthy has been dropped by Palace because he isn't good enough and Lindegaard will be earning probably more than any of our keepers, despite being third choice. The mistake was not made this summer, it was made 2 years ago when for some reason Kelvin was given a 3 year deal when he already had 2 years remaining on his contract, and he quite clearly wasn't up to it. He was given it for non-footballing reasons and it was a mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 My point is that we can't just write him off of that list. He is our player. We still have to pay his wages (which counts towards our FFP total expenditure). In August it was still being reported that the club were hopeful he would be back in the new year. Like many others, I feel this is highly doubtful; but I am not a club doctor, and doubt any of the posters on here are either. We have 4 'keepers on our books. 4 from a squad of 25. I cannot recall hearing us turning down any bids for Kelvin or Gazza in the summer. We can't just cancel their contracts without due reason (see Osvaldo). So we have them on our books. Therefore, I never expected us to sign a 5th 'keeper. Any who did is simply not looking at the bigger picture. Do you think it is reasonable for a club to have a fifth of their squad to be for one specialized position? Can you point to any other club where this is the case? The fact is that yesterday we had our first two 'keepers out injured. Just because one of those is a long term injury doesn't make it any less of a fact. Therefore, the one who played is our 3rd choice. I fail to see how anyone cannot understand such a basic point. What I do agree with though, is that I don't think Kelvin is good enough to play in the prem. I would love for our 3rd choice to be far superior in quality. Indeed, I personally feel that Gazza is better; but then, I'm not the England goalkeeping coach who sees them both in training every day. I guess he should know better than us, don't you think? Newsflash - no one is asking for five keepers. Newsflash 2 - the process of selling players doesn't not entirely consist of sitting around waiting for someone to make a bid which we then accept or not. We have proven to be relatively adept at selling players in the past, and we could have easily moved on either Kelvin or Gazza in the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 If we hadn't signed Caulker fans would whinge we only had 3 centre backs with the long term injury to Gardos and if we hadn't had signed Martina everyone would have moaned about having no back up to Soares. Alex McCarthy has been dropped by Palace because he isn't good enough and Lindegaard will be earning probably more than any of our keepers, despite being third choice. The mistake was not made this summer, it was made 2 years ago when for some reason Kelvin was given a 3 year deal when he already had 2 years remaining on his contract, and he quite clearly wasn't up to it. He was given it for non-footballing reasons and it was a mistake but martina is not realy a back up to soares....it appears yoshida is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrensup Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 If we hadn't signed Caulker fans would whinge we only had 3 centre backs with the long term injury to Gardos and if we hadn't had signed Martina everyone would have moaned about having no back up to Soares. Alex McCarthy has been dropped by Palace because he isn't good enough and Lindegaard will be earning probably more than any of our keepers, despite being third choice. The mistake was not made this summer, it was made 2 years ago when for some reason Kelvin was given a 3 year deal when he already had 2 years remaining on his contract, and he quite clearly wasn't up to it. He was given it for non-footballing reasons and it was a mistake but martina is not realy a back up to soares....it appears yoshida is And what makes you think Lindegaard would be earning that much? surely we don't pay so little to our players that we're out priced by WBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 If someone can point to a few GKs we should have and could have signed - then fine this is a conversation worth having. I suspect there was no one really about and already having maxed out loans buying a 2nd/3rd choice keeper who probably would have not played and certainly not after Forster is back. That's what we've got the lauded black box for pal. The fact is the 2nd choice keeper position has been an issue that is stretching into it's fourth season. We are arguably the weakest in the premier league in that position, the fact that a keeper who was championship level in prime 10 years ago is our 2nd choice is a huge issue which is consistently not being resolved for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 but martina is not realy a back up to soares....it appears yoshida is martina was brought in because one of the kids (debayo?) got injured iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stknowle Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 That's what we've got the lauded black box for pal. The fact is the 2nd choice keeper position has been an issue that is stretching into it's fourth season. We are arguably the weakest in the premier league in that position, the fact that a keeper who was championship level in prime 10 years ago is our 2nd choice is a huge issue which is consistently not being resolved for some reason. This exactly except I don't think there is any argument that we are definitely the weakest in the division in that position. Having a choice of Davis or Gazanigga if our number 1 is injured is the Hobson's choice to end all Hobson's choices. FFS we would be doing better to persuade Brad Friedel out of retirement than have to pick one of those 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Precisely how I feel, as stated in the post-match thread. As for Davis being rated better than Gazza...perhaps it's just Koeman who believes this. A 4 year contract suggests someone (Reed) rates him, perhaps even as our number 2...Ronald thinks otherwise. Why? *shrugs* On match days where Davis/Gazza sit on the bench, Koeman may find it preferable to have a presence like Davis in the dressing room. Then, when an injury occurs, rather than have Gazza usurp Davis (somewhat humiliating), he allows Davis the opportunity to justify his selection. He blew it. It's a pretty flimsy theory, admittedly, but it's a theory all the same. I wouldn't be surprised to see Gazza start if Stek is out next weekend. That could be Gazza's best chance to advance his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 That could be Gazza's best chance to advance his career. perhaps his last chance as well ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 I get the feeling that Davis is picked because not to pick the club captain and players chief fixer is seen as more of a problem than picking him. Possibly his display yesterday may change that. Either way Gazzaniga should be picked as he is a better all round keeper than Davis. You obviously haven't been watching him play for the u21's. He is frozen on his line like a rabbit in the headlights. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlesaint Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 You obviously haven't been watching him play for the u21's. He is frozen on his line like a rabbit in the headlights. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Both our reserve keepers are frozen to their line then ? thats worrying ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjk Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Anyone actually heard anything about Stek,how serious the injury or how long likely to be out ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxford_lou Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Koeman said he'll be back next week... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjk Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Koeman said he'll be back next week... Thank Fck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 For a club that was prepared to spend £10m+ on a first choice keeper it isn't half peculiar that it isn't prepared to spend a few million on a decent prospect for a backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxford_lou Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 At least I thought he said that, but now I can't find the clip. In this one (3:10) he said he had a sore back and we'll have to see in next couple of days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 if forster wasn't out long term would we have taken stekelenberg on loan? if Forster wasn't expected to be out for most if not all of the season we wouldn't have taken stekelenberg on loan. Kelvin is our second choice. When we signed Stek on loan the club were telling us that they hoped Forster would be back at the start of the new year. Therefore, to my mind, Stek was signed to play for the first half of the season and to then be in competition with Forster for the rest of the season. (i.e. No 1 and 2 goalkeepers.) So, maybe, just maybe, we would have signed Stek if Frazer hadn't been injured. Can you prove otherwise? That isn't the point though is it? We still have to pay Forster his 30-40k a week. We are paying Stekelenburg a healthy wage as well and we have a budget to stick to. We can't just continuously sign players every time we get an injury and we have 4 senior goalkeepers on the books. The fact two of them are nowhere near good enough doesn't mean we get to stop paying them their wages Thank you. It is so reassuring to see another sane, non-knee-jerk reactionist, on here. The point is, regardless of Forster's injury, is our second/third choice keepers are sh it. It's now conclusive that Gazza is not up to it if he can't get picked in front of a 39 year old who was not up to it at his peak. That's the point. Stek in for Forster is a straight swap this season. Not difficult. I'll come back to the first bit later. As for the 2nd, I must have missed the bit about Fulham paying Frazers salary this season...... I'm saying it's to do with numbers. We have, this season, 4 senior goalkeepers on the books who we are paying a wage to and I'm suggesting we probably can't stretch the budget to having a fifth. Why KD was given a 3 year contract 2 years ago when he had 2 years remaining anyway is a better question, because if we hadn't have done that he wouldn't still be at the club on a playing contract and we would have freed up room on the wage bill to bring another keeper in permanently. Why PG was given a 4 years contract a few weeks ago when he isn't considered better than KD is also a mystery to me. But for this season specifically it's perfectly understandable why we didn't sign a fifth senior goalkeeper as it's most likely to do with finances At the end of the season Stekelenburg returns and KD's contract is up, so hopefully we will be in a position to sign a solid and reliable keeper to compete with FF with Gazzaniga as number 3. If the club don't do that then I will find it ridiculous just like everyone else Once again..... Thank you!! why couldnt we stretch the budget? how much was gazza on before his new deal? how come we can have 6 or 7 CM or 6 or 7 strikers...... Gazza should have been loaned out or Kelvin 'asked' to hang up his gloves in necessary Jamie, before you changed your user name you used to occasionally post something interesting/worthwhile. Since then everything seems to be just to get a rise out of someone and to increase your post count. Seriously, I know you're not as dense as this particular post makes you look. However, just to humour you (and to give you the buzz you were looking for) do I really have to point out the difference between having 5 players for 1 position and 6/7 players for 3 positions - especially when extrapolated over the course of a season - taking into account injuries and suspensions - different tactics and formations - use of subs - etc, etc?? Yes, yes it does. If FF had got injured after the window had closed you'd have point, but it's well-known since last season that he's out for a long time, very probably for the whole season. Stek wan't brought in as a number 2, he was brought in as a number 1 replacement. A decent number 2 should also have been brought in. KD didn't do a Boruc yesterday, but his inadequacies unnerved the whole team. Compare yesterday's performance vs the one against Chelsea. If we'd had someone like Boruc in goal I bet the team would have gone on to win. It's ok if a back up does an occasional clanger (that's why they are back ups!), as long he's otherwise a solid GK. And for those who argue about wages and having too many goalies spoiling the broth, I'm sure the club could afford to leave Kelvin out of the squad while still paying his wages, or even give him a nice golden parachute. Like they did with that nutjob who left recently. The club gambled and failed last season, and history may be repeating itself. Of course they may be lucky and Stek will be back next week, and fit for the rest of the season. It's still a stupid gamble. How can you possibly compare the fact that you don't rate Kelvin to the actions of an insane Iti-Argie? It even took a lot more than just him assaulting a team-mate before we managed to get him off the books. It really isn't so simple to just off-load a contracted player. And, if you consider last season to have been a failure I will be happy for us to fail the same this season. 7th me up baby! Are you being deliberately obtuse? Yes. Yes, he is! Newsflash - no one is asking for five keepers. Newsflash 2 - the process of selling players doesn't not entirely consist of sitting around waiting for someone to make a bid which we then accept or not. We have proven to be relatively adept at selling players in the past, and we could have easily moved on either Kelvin or Gazza in the summer. Newsflash - Yes, expecting the club to have five senior goalkeepers on the books is exactly what many want. Newsflash 2 - They also don't care how much it costs the club (so long as that extra expense isn't passed on to the fans in any way, and doesn't stop us signing any other players, well, apart from those who they deem not good enough after 20 minutes on the pitch that is). And, in other news, do you believe there is a poster on here who - in the same thread - stated that both Kelvin and Gazza are sh it and who then believes it would be EASY to move them on to another club. Presumably this would be to a club who didn't realise how sh it they were!? (Told you I'd get back to the earlier bit....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 (edited) When we signed Stek on loan the club were telling us that they hoped Forster would be back at the start of the new year. Therefore, to my mind, Stek was signed to play for the first half of the season and to then be in competition with Forster for the rest of the season. (i.e. No 1 and 2 goalkeepers.) So, maybe, just maybe, we would have signed Stek if Frazer hadn't been injured. Can you prove otherwise? I'll come back to the first bit later. As for the 2nd, I must have missed the bit about Fulham paying Frazers salary this season...... Newsflash - Yes, expecting the club to have five senior goalkeepers on the books is exactly what many want. Newsflash 2 - They also don't care how much it costs the club (so long as that extra expense isn't passed on to the fans in any way, and doesn't stop us signing any other players, well, apart from those who they deem not good enough after 20 minutes on the pitch that is). And, in other news, do you believe there is a poster on here who - in the same thread - stated that both Kelvin and Gazza are sh it and who then believes it would be EASY to move them on to another club. Presumably this would be to a club who didn't realise how sh it they were!? (Told you I'd get back to the earlier bit....) Kelvin. Move him on - ie encouraged to retire, moved to coaching the kids/some ambassadorial role, told he won't be in the squad any more. Not that difficult, moved on. Failing that given option to leave and find another club if he still thinks he can play. He is sh it at this level, but moving him on not that difficult. Good pro, will get work. Easy really. Easy. And saying Kelvin Davies, with one full season of abject humiliation at Premier League level a decade ago and no pedigree at, or interest from, Premier League clubs looking for a front line keeper in the ten years since, is not good enough at this level is a "knee jerk" reaciton is it? Knee jerk reaction on ten years worth of evidence. You go girl, you attack those knee jerk reactions. Next. Moving Gazza on. Interesting that by me saying he is sh it for a team in the top half of the premier league makes him sh it for every other team in the world does it? You sure about that? Really sure? Moving Gazza on, not that difficult. Stick him on the transfer list, ring up some League One clubs or on the plane back to Argentina, tout him about a bit, loan him out. Not difficult. Easy in fact. Easy. And Gazza can't get picked ahead of the 39 year old keeper described above. So that's clearly knee jerk reaction from the manager of the club and England's goalie coach. Damn those knee jerkers. Lastly, five keepers. You'll remember the transfer window is shut, we can't actually sign anyone, we're stuck with what we have, so people saying we should have better are talking about what should have happened in the summer, not now. We can't sign any keepers now. It's October. Is it beginning to sink in a little bit that people are not asking for the club to have five keepers on the books? Understand that yet? Pretty much the only person blathering on about having five goalies on the books is, wait for it, you. Just you then. But, hey, I enjoyed your smugger than thou postering about "they don't care how much it costs the club" routine. Jolly well done. Misplaced though, because no one wants five keepers on the books. Just one or two back up keepers that are actually up to it. Edited 18 October, 2015 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Kelvin will be retiring at the end of the season, he won't be leaving before then, just accept it and move on. No point getting apoplectic about it when it isn't going to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 Kelvin. Move him on - ie encouraged to retire, moved to coaching the kids/some ambassadorial role, told he won't be in the squad any more. Not that difficult, moved on. Failing that given option to leave and find another club if he still thinks he can play. He is sh it at this level, but moving him on not that difficult. Good pro, will get work. Easy really. Easy. And saying Kelvin Davies, with one full season of abject humiliation at Premier League level a decade ago and no pedigree at, or interest from, Premier League clubs looking for a front line keeper in the ten years since, is not good enough at this level is a "knee jerk" reaciton is it? Knee jerk reaction on ten years worth of evidence. You go girl, you attack those knee jerk reactions. Next. Moving Gazza on. Interesting that by me saying he is sh it for a team in the top half of the premier league makes him sh it for every other team in the world does it? You sure about that? Really sure? Moving Gazza on, not that difficult. Stick him on the transfer list, ring up some League One clubs or on the plane back to Argentina, tout him about a bit, loan him out. Not difficult. Easy in fact. Easy. And Gazza can't get picked ahead of the 39 year old keeper described above. So that's clearly knee jerk reaction from the manager of the club and England's goalie coach. Damn those knee jerkers. Lastly, five keepers. You'll remember the transfer window is shut, we can't actually sign anyone, we're stuck with what we have, so people saying we should have better are talking about what should have happened in the summer, not now. We can't sign any keepers now. It's October. Is it beginning to sink in a little bit that people are not asking for the club to have five keepers on the books? Understand that yet? Pretty much the only person blathering on about having five goalies on the books is, wait for it, you. Just you then. But, hey, I enjoyed your smugger than thou postering about "they don't care how much it costs the club" routine. Jolly well done. Misplaced though, because no one wants five keepers on the books. Just one or two back up keepers that are actually up to it. Kelvin had the opportunity to join West Ham n the PL but Cortese persuaded him otherwise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 (edited) Kelvin had the opportunity to join West Ham n the PL but Cortese persuaded him otherwise Quite aware of that - specifically to be back up keeper, not first choice. Which is mainly why he didn't go. No Premier League club have ever wanted him as their number one since his nightmare season at Sunderland. Edited 18 October, 2015 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 (edited) How can you possibly compare the fact that you don't rate Kelvin to the actions of an insane Iti-Argie? It even took a lot more than just him assaulting a team-mate before we managed to get him off the books. It really isn't so simple to just off-load a contracted player. And, if you consider last season to have been a failure I will be happy for us to fail the same this season. 7th me up baby! It is easy to loan out a player, unless he's a Tommy Fourpast (who even the Skates wouldn't want). If no-one in the lower leagues wants to have Kelvin on loan then he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team for us anyway. The other club probably wouldn't want to pay all his wages, but some of it would be offset. No-one says the whole season was a failure. The gamble that FF would not get injured was wrong. We picked up 1 point per game when he was out. A place or two higher in the table would mean direct entry into the Europa group stage, along with a couple of million extra pounds in position money. Luckily he didn't get injured earlier. Edited 18 October, 2015 by Dark Munster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrensup Posted 18 October, 2015 Share Posted 18 October, 2015 When we signed Stek on loan the club were telling us that they hoped Forster would be back at the start of the new year. Therefore, to my mind, Stek was signed to play for the first half of the season and to then be in competition with Forster for the rest of the season. (i.e. No 1 and 2 goalkeepers.) So, maybe, just maybe, we would have signed Stek if Frazer hadn't been injured. Can you prove otherwise? Thank you. It is so reassuring to see another sane, non-knee-jerk reactionist, on here. I'll come back to the first bit later. As for the 2nd, I must have missed the bit about Fulham paying Frazers salary this season...... Once again..... Thank you!! Jamie, before you changed your user name you used to occasionally post something interesting/worthwhile. Since then everything seems to be just to get a rise out of someone and to increase your post count. Seriously, I know you're not as dense as this particular post makes you look. However, just to humour you (and to give you the buzz you were looking for) do I really have to point out the difference between having 5 players for 1 position and 6/7 players for 3 positions - especially when extrapolated over the course of a season - taking into account injuries and suspensions - different tactics and formations - use of subs - etc, etc?? How can you possibly compare the fact that you don't rate Kelvin to the actions of an insane Iti-Argie? It even took a lot more than just him assaulting a team-mate before we managed to get him off the books. It really isn't so simple to just off-load a contracted player. And, if you consider last season to have been a failure I will be happy for us to fail the same this season. 7th me up baby! Yes. Yes, he is! Newsflash - Yes, expecting the club to have five senior goalkeepers on the books is exactly what many want. Newsflash 2 - They also don't care how much it costs the club (so long as that extra expense isn't passed on to the fans in any way, and doesn't stop us signing any other players, well, apart from those who they deem not good enough after 20 minutes on the pitch that is). And, in other news, do you believe there is a poster on here who - in the same thread - stated that both Kelvin and Gazza are sh it and who then believes it would be EASY to move them on to another club. Presumably this would be to a club who didn't realise how sh it they were!? (Told you I'd get back to the earlier bit....) *slow claps...* PS. So you're fine with our goalkeeping options then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Saint Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 You obviously haven't been watching him play for the u21's. He is frozen on his line like a rabbit in the headlights. I think that is a coaching thing, FF many times last season staying close to his line just an intimidating massive unit between the sticks (when he did make a dash for it called it wrong) Stek this season seems wary of exiting the 6 yard box, Kelvin who also liked to steam off his line seemed caught betwixt and between on Saturday. When he did confusion reigned in our defence which is possibly why staying close to home is being coached. The one thing with Gazza over Kelvin is his distribution from his feet is superior, Kelvin has never been great at that which is probably why we went to playing out from the back more often than not, as we saw on Saturday most of our players were upfield positioned for the ball only to see the punt upfield take them out of the game as the ball landed 20-30 yards away from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 why did we sign juanmi? or Romeu we have very similar type of young players with their skill sets. juanmi can hardly get a look in. even with long out injured dont get me started on Martina. complete waste of time and space in the squad for a young player wouldn't toally disagree with your comments.. BUT ....there aren't too many U21 lads who are consistant enough to make our first team squad at present. The players you named aren't first-choice but they certainly have more experience. You can introduce a young player into a successful side, but it's the wrong time to try giving a youngster a run of games, when we don't yet have a stable first choice side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Anyone actually heard anything about Stek,how serious the injury or how long likely to be out ? Back spasm in training, so shouldn't be major. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the saint in winchester Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 In every scenario in my mind, we need Stek to be signed on a perm contract either sooner or later. If FF comes back this season, we will have 2 quality GK. It's just until then we have to 'make do and mend'. We can't go spending loads for a few months cover. It's KD and PG until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Kelvin. Move him on - ie encouraged to retire, moved to coaching the kids/some ambassadorial role, told he won't be in the squad any more. Not that difficult, moved on. Failing that given option to leave and find another club if he still thinks he can play. He is sh it at this level, but moving him on not that difficult. Good pro, will get work. Easy really. Easy. And saying Kelvin Davies, with one full season of abject humiliation at Premier League level a decade ago and no pedigree at, or interest from, Premier League clubs looking for a front line keeper in the ten years since, is not good enough at this level is a "knee jerk" reaciton is it? Knee jerk reaction on ten years worth of evidence. You go girl, you attack those knee jerk reactions. Next. Moving Gazza on. Interesting that by me saying he is sh it for a team in the top half of the premier league makes him sh it for every other team in the world does it? You sure about that? Really sure? Moving Gazza on, not that difficult. Stick him on the transfer list, ring up some League One clubs or on the plane back to Argentina, tout him about a bit, loan him out. Not difficult. Easy in fact. Easy. And Gazza can't get picked ahead of the 39 year old keeper described above. So that's clearly knee jerk reaction from the manager of the club and England's goalie coach. Damn those knee jerkers. Lastly, five keepers. You'll remember the transfer window is shut, we can't actually sign anyone, we're stuck with what we have, so people saying we should have better are talking about what should have happened in the summer, not now. We can't sign any keepers now. It's October. Is it beginning to sink in a little bit that people are not asking for the club to have five keepers on the books? Understand that yet? Pretty much the only person blathering on about having five goalies on the books is, wait for it, you. Just you then. But, hey, I enjoyed your smugger than thou postering about "they don't care how much it costs the club" routine. Jolly well done. Misplaced though, because no one wants five keepers on the books. Just one or two back up keepers that are actually up to it. I think you're in the wrong job. You should, surely, be the chairman of some top football club. You have all the answers and know how easy everything is. Yes, it is EASY to make someone with a nice big contract at a premier league club go out on loan to a league one club (who, presumably, could EASILY afford to pay all of his salary) or, even, to sell said player to a lower league club. I mean, he obviously would be more than willing to forego his nice fat salary and earn far less just because you don't want him around any more. EASY! Quite aware of that - specifically to be back up keeper, not first choice. Which is mainly why he didn't go. No Premier League club have ever wanted him as their number one since his nightmare season at Sunderland. So, it is a fact that the MAIN reason Kelvin didn't go to West Ham is because he didn't want to be a back-up keeper is it? Wow! How do you know this? Where is the quote that says so? Are you a friend of his? And, if he didn't want to be a back-up keeper, why did he sign a new contract with us knowing he was only going to be a back-up keeper? Oh, and you are obviously definitely wrong with your last sentence. One premier league club DID want him as their number one keeper after his season at Sunderland - SAINTS! It is easy to loan out a player, unless he's a Tommy Fourpast (who even the Skates wouldn't want). If no-one in the lower leagues wants to have Kelvin on loan then he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team for us anyway. The other club probably wouldn't want to pay all his wages, but some of it would be offset. No-one says the whole season was a failure. The gamble that FF would not get injured was wrong. We picked up 1 point per game when he was out. A place or two higher in the table would mean direct entry into the Europa group stage, along with a couple of million extra pounds in position money. Luckily he didn't get injured earlier. Yes, it is easy IF another club want him AND are prepared to pay for all (or some, if Saints agree to the percentage they are willing to go to) of his wages AND the player agrees to go. *slow claps...* PS. So you're fine with our goalkeeping options then? If you read all of my post you would have clearly seen that, no, I am not happy with our goalkeeping options. Nor would I play Kelvin ahead of Gazza. However, I am pragmatic enough to see why we are in the situation we are in. As opposed to some (not necessarily you) who have their heads so far up their own ar ses that they can't see anything except their own over-valued opinions. Quite simply, there are some people who are only happy when they are unhappy and slagging others off. You know the ones, the big girl's blouses; it's EASY to spot them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 19 October, 2015 Author Share Posted 19 October, 2015 So, it is a fact that the MAIN reason Kelvin didn't go to West Ham is because he didn't want to be a back-up keeper is it? Wow! How do you know this? Where is the quote that says so? Are you a friend of his? And, if he didn't want to be a back-up keeper, why did he sign a new contract with us knowing he was only going to be a backup keeper http://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/09/kelvin-davis-southampton-west-ham He said it himself. Being a backup with us was about 4 years later so his mind obviously changed and it suited him by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 However, I am pragmatic enough to see why we are in the situation we are in. As opposed to some (not necessarily you) who have their heads so far up their own ar ses that they can't see anything except their own over-valued opinions. Quite simply, there are some people who are only happy when they are unhappy and slagging others off. You know the ones, the big girl's blouses; it's EASY to spot them. Maybe I have missed something but pragmatically speaking why do you think we're in the situation we're in with the goalkeepers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 I think that is a coaching thing, FF many times last season staying close to his line just an intimidating massive unit between the sticks (when he did make a dash for it called it wrong) Stek this season seems wary of exiting the 6 yard box, Kelvin who also liked to steam off his line seemed caught betwixt and between on Saturday. When he did confusion reigned in our defence which is possibly why staying close to home is being coached. The one thing with Gazza over Kelvin is his distribution from his feet is superior, Kelvin has never been great at that which is probably why we went to playing out from the back more often than not, as we saw on Saturday most of our players were upfield positioned for the ball only to see the punt upfield take them out of the game as the ball landed 20-30 yards away from them. Not sure why you coach a keeper not to catch a ball in the 6 yard box - both goals Man City and Sunderland were both less than 3 yards out and he just stood and watched. Caulker didnt help against Sunderland but it was keepers ball and he is the only one who is allowed to use his hands! Thats surely down to poor goalkeeping? Absolutely baffled why he got another 4 year contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Kint Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Maybe I have missed something but pragmatically speaking why do you think we're in the situation we're in with the goalkeepers? 2 reasons. Firstly because Forster has a long term injury, but probably more importantly because Davis is still at the club on a playing contract. He's a good bloke to have around the club and I can understand why the club were very keen to keep him here as long as possible, but he shouldn't have been given a 3 year deal 2 years ago. They should have allowed his previous contract to run down to this summer just gone and offered him a non playing role at the club. That would have allowed us this summer to bring in another keeper. Despite the comical post of CB Fry it is not 'easy' to 'move on' a player like Davis nearing the end of his contract when no club interested in him could afford him and he would have no interest in uprooting his family having been here for so long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Oh, and you are obviously definitely wrong with your last sentence. One premier league club DID want him as their number one keeper after his season at Sunderland - SAINTS! Except we were a Championship side when we signed him, not a PL one. He served us well in the Championship and League One, but he was 8 years younger then and he was more than adequate at that level. The Club made a big mistake when we were promoted not bringing in better backup in this position and continuing to extend Kelv's contract. It appears we thought we were improving by signing Gazza, but clearly this has backfired since now even Ronald doesn't consider our young up and coming keeper to be better than Davis. If Gazza is that bad (and personally I don't think he is and he should have played Saturday) then we should have already signed a better keeper as backup initially for Boruc, then for Forster, but for some reason the club have remained blinkered in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Oh, and you are obviously definitely wrong with your last sentence. One premier league club DID want him as their number one keeper after his season at Sunderland - SAINTS! . we had already been in the championship for a season....so a no there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Someone please tell me Kelvin is out of contract in the summer???!?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 (edited) Someone please tell me Kelvin is out of contract in the summer???!?!?!?! Why wait? Edited 19 October, 2015 by Whitey Grandad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 I think you're in the wrong job. You should, surely, be the chairman of some top football club. You have all the answers and know how easy everything is. Yes, it is EASY to make someone with a nice big contract at a premier league club go out on loan to a league one club (who, presumably, could EASILY afford to pay all of his salary) or, even, to sell said player to a lower league club. I mean, he obviously would be more than willing to forego his nice fat salary and earn far less just because you don't want him around any more. EASY! So, it is a fact that the MAIN reason Kelvin didn't go to West Ham is because he didn't want to be a back-up keeper is it? Wow! How do you know this? Where is the quote that says so? Are you a friend of his? And, if he didn't want to be a back-up keeper, why did he sign a new contract with us knowing he was only going to be a back-up keeper? Oh, and you are obviously definitely wrong with your last sentence. One premier league club DID want him as their number one keeper after his season at Sunderland - SAINTS! Yes, it is easy IF another club want him AND are prepared to pay for all (or some, if Saints agree to the percentage they are willing to go to) of his wages AND the player agrees to go. If you read all of my post you would have clearly seen that, no, I am not happy with our goalkeeping options. Nor would I play Kelvin ahead of Gazza. However, I am pragmatic enough to see why we are in the situation we are in. As opposed to some (not necessarily you) who have their heads so far up their own ar ses that they can't see anything except their own over-valued opinions. Quite simply, there are some people who are only happy when they are unhappy and slagging others off. You know the ones, the big girl's blouses; it's EASY to spot them. 1. At least you've laid off the "people want us to have five keepers" garbage. Progress. 2. We signed Kelvin in the Championship which as I recall is different from the Premier League. 3. Kelvin said himself that he didn't want to be second fiddle at West Ham, he's quoted saying it. 4. What has the decision he made in 2009 to stay at Saints have to do with subsequent contract he signed in 2013? 5. I think clubs transfer and loan players all the time. I reckon loaning or selling player is perfectly possible. Really rather strange that you don't get that. You think we should play Paulo Gazzaniga in our Premier League campaign but think it impossible that any other club in the world could take him on loan or transfer. Pragmatic stuff, I'm sure. Such fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/09/kelvin-davis-southampton-west-ham He said it himself. Being a backup with us was about 4 years later so his mind obviously changed and it suited him by then. No where in that article does he say THE MAIN REASON for remaining at Saints was that he didn't want to be a number 2. His exact words were, "The decision for me was between the opportunity of first-team football at Southampton or the chance to play Premier League football and I have made my choice to stay at Southampton," Nice try though. Maybe I have missed something but pragmatically speaking why do you think we're in the situation we're in with the goalkeepers? See below. 2 reasons. Firstly because Forster has a long term injury, but probably more importantly because Davis is still at the club on a playing contract. He's a good bloke to have around the club and I can understand why the club were very keen to keep him here as long as possible, but he shouldn't have been given a 3 year deal 2 years ago. They should have allowed his previous contract to run down to this summer just gone and offered him a non playing role at the club. That would have allowed us this summer to bring in another keeper. Despite the comical post of CB Fry it is not 'easy' to 'move on' a player like Davis nearing the end of his contract when no club interested in him could afford him and he would have no interest in uprooting his family having been here for so long Thanks VK, I'm glad there is someone else out there who sees things exactly as I do. To add further, for the benefit of LLP, we have 4 senior goalkeepers on our books. We are paying their wages. This eats into our FFP allowance. It isn't as easy as saying, 'I don't player X here any more. I'm going to ship him out somewhere.' Do move someone on there has to be (a) a club who wants him and willing to pay his salary and (b) the player has to agree to the move. As I mentioned before, 4 of our 25 man squad are goalkeepers - it would be insane for that to be 5, or 20% of the squad. (Not that we could sign another goalkeeper now anyway.) The pragmatism is simply looking at the facts: all four of those keepers were given contracts by the club; those contracts are still running; either no one has tried to sign any of them or the players didn't want to move; our first and second choice keepers were injured on Saturday - I have yet to see proof that we wouldn't have signed another keeper even if Frazer had been fit to start the season. 1. At least you've laid off the "people want us to have five keepers" garbage. Progress. 2. We signed Kelvin in the Championship which as I recall is different from the Premier League. 3. Kelvin said himself that he didn't want to be second fiddle at West Ham, he's quoted saying it. 4. What has the decision he made in 2009 to stay at Saints have to do with subsequent contract he signed in 2013? 5. I think clubs transfer and loan players all the time. I reckon loaning or selling player is perfectly possible. Really rather strange that you don't get that. You think we should play Paulo Gazzaniga in our Premier League campaign but think it impossible that any other club in the world could take him on loan or transfer. Pragmatic stuff, I'm sure. Such fun. 1. Thanks for reminding me - corrected above. And yes, there were those who were calling for us to sign a fifth keeper in July/August. I just can't be bothered to go and find the quotes. 2. Yes, well done, we did sign Kelvin when we were in the Championship. I didn't state otherwise. It was you who said that he has never been the first choice keeper at a premier league club since Sunderland. That, I dispute. Are you stating that he has never been our first choice keeper since we returned to the premiership? 3. As above, Kelvin was quoted as saying that he chose to stay at Saints. Please show me where he said he didn't want to be a back-up keeper and that that was his MAIN reason for staying here. 4. Was he our first choice keeper or was he 'playing second fiddle' when he signed the new contract in 2013? 5. I am fully well aware that clubs transfer and loan players all the time. Additionally, far more proposed transfers and loans don't go through due to lack of agreement on fee, salary, player not wanting the move, etc. Rather strange that you don't get that! Oh, and I don't WANT Paulo Gazzaniga to play for us in the premier league; I would much prefer de Gea, or Cech, or Forster, or Stekelenburg, or any one of dozens of other keepers, but I would prefer him to play if the choice is him or Kelvin. Such tedium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 19 October, 2015 Author Share Posted 19 October, 2015 LOL, we all agree we have a backup GK issue anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 How good do we reckon Davis' jokes and banter are to make him such a fundamental member of the club? Might he get his own tv series when he finally hangs up his gloves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Appy Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 How good do we reckon Davis' jokes and banter are to make him such a fundamental member of the club? Might he get his own tv series when he finally hangs up his gloves? They could call it "the near post" or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 No where in that article does he say THE MAIN REASON for remaining at Saints was that he didn't want to be a number 2. His exact words were, "The decision for me was between the opportunity of first-team football at Southampton or the chance to play Premier League football and I have made my choice to stay at Southampton," Nice try though. See below. Thanks VK, I'm glad there is someone else out there who sees things exactly as I do. To add further, for the benefit of LLP, we have 4 senior goalkeepers on our books. We are paying their wages. This eats into our FFP allowance. It isn't as easy as saying, 'I don't player X here any more. I'm going to ship him out somewhere.' Do move someone on there has to be (a) a club who wants him and willing to pay his salary and (b) the player has to agree to the move. As I mentioned before, 4 of our 25 man squad are goalkeepers - it would be insane for that to be 5, or 20% of the squad. (Not that we could sign another goalkeeper now anyway.) The pragmatism is simply looking at the facts: all four of those keepers were given contracts by the club; those contracts are still running; either no one has tried to sign any of them or the players didn't want to move; our first and second choice keepers were injured on Saturday - I have yet to see proof that we wouldn't have signed another keeper even if Frazer had been fit to start the season. 1. Thanks for reminding me - corrected above. And yes, there were those who were calling for us to sign a fifth keeper in July/August. I just can't be bothered to go and find the quotes. 2. Yes, well done, we did sign Kelvin when we were in the Championship. I didn't state otherwise. It was you who said that he has never been the first choice keeper at a premier league club since Sunderland. That, I dispute. Are you stating that he has never been our first choice keeper since we returned to the premiership? 3. As above, Kelvin was quoted as saying that he chose to stay at Saints. Please show me where he said he didn't want to be a back-up keeper and that that was his MAIN reason for staying here. 4. Was he our first choice keeper or was he 'playing second fiddle' when he signed the new contract in 2013? 5. I am fully well aware that clubs transfer and loan players all the time. Additionally, far more proposed transfers and loans don't go through due to lack of agreement on fee, salary, player not wanting the move, etc. Rather strange that you don't get that! Oh, and I don't WANT Paulo Gazzaniga to play for us in the premier league; I would much prefer de Gea, or Cech, or Forster, or Stekelenburg, or any one of dozens of other keepers, but I would prefer him to play if the choice is him or Kelvin. Such tedium. The drivel keeps coming. Kelvin stayed at Saints to play, and he didn't move to WHU because he wanted to be playing, not reserve keeper. Awfully sorry that makes so upset but there you go. Stop obsessing about Kelvin's contract signed in 2013 when he was four years older and SFC was in a completely different situation. Not relevant, stop asking questions about it. Weird. Kelvin's Premier League record at Saints - 10, 2, 7 appearances. First choice me up. And after all that, you don't want Paulo either. Comedy gold. Funny that. Maybe we should have shipped him out in the summer and/put Kelvin out to grass, but obviously all of that ranks alongside the water fuelled car as the world's greatset challenges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint IQ Posted 19 October, 2015 Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Forster will not play for us this season. Why on earth would they bother naming him in the 25 man squad then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 19 October, 2015 Author Share Posted 19 October, 2015 Why on earth would they bother naming him in the 25 man squad then? They have to unless you have more than 25 eligible players, which we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 20 October, 2015 Share Posted 20 October, 2015 Thanks VK, I'm glad there is someone else out there who sees things exactly as I do. To add further, for the benefit of LLP, we have 4 senior goalkeepers on our books. We are paying their wages. This eats into our FFP allowance. It isn't as easy as saying, 'I don't player X here any more. I'm going to ship him out somewhere.' Do move someone on there has to be (a) a club who wants him and willing to pay his salary and (b) the player has to agree to the move. As I mentioned before, 4 of our 25 man squad are goalkeepers - it would be insane for that to be 5, or 20% of the squad. (Not that we could sign another goalkeeper now anyway.) The pragmatism is simply looking at the facts: all four of those keepers were given contracts by the club; those contracts are still running; either no one has tried to sign any of them or the players didn't want to move; our first and second choice keepers were injured on Saturday - I have yet to see proof that we wouldn't have signed another keeper even if Frazer had been fit to start the season. I have a different perspective to you though: 1. I refuse to believe that FFP would prevent us spending £3m+ wages on a goalkeeper who is far better than Kelvin Davis and Paulo Gazzaniga. Remember in the summer we paid Osvaldo a lot of money just to go away. We spent £5m on Juanmi who is the definition of a fringe player. £1m on Martina for what appears to be just a few games. £5m+ on Romeu who now appears to be bench fodder and (in my opinion) no better than Harry Reed. So for me, there is money about. That we didn't spent it on a backup keeper is a big failure. 2. The idea that Kelvin is third choice is very silly - we would not have signed Stekelenburg had Forster not been injured. Depending on who you believe he is out for the season or out until Christmas. I personally believe he is done for the season but I cannot substantiate that but likewise no-one on here really knows either. But regardless, what could have stopped us signing another keeper and not registering Gazanigga? That way we have Stekelenburg first choice, the new signing as backup, and Kelvin as third choice (which allows him to continue to be in and around the first team squad and fulfil his role off the pitch)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastic Posted 20 October, 2015 Share Posted 20 October, 2015 we have one for the future, at least... http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20150831-announcement-harry-lewis-southampton-shrewsbury-town-2659086.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 20 October, 2015 Share Posted 20 October, 2015 we have one for the future, at least... http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20150831-announcement-harry-lewis-southampton-shrewsbury-town-2659086.aspx Although interestingly he has not played in the last 2 U18 games, and was not even on the bench at the weekend. Last appeared for the U18s in the 5-1 defeat by Leicester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 20 October, 2015 Share Posted 20 October, 2015 2. Yes, well done, we did sign Kelvin when we were in the Championship. I didn't state otherwise. It was you who said that he has never been the first choice keeper at a premier league club since Sunderland. That, I dispute. Are you stating that he has never been our first choice keeper since we returned to the premiership? He was possibly our first choice keeper from August to October 2012 (though Gazza also got a look in), when the Club belatedly realised the obvious and brought in Boruc. So thats 3 years since Saints realised Kelv was not good enough, and yet he is still seen as 2nd choice, and our 3rd choice who we have given a new extended contract to is still here and still is not deemed better than Kelv. It is a shocking indictment of Saints perspective on the goalkeeping position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 20 October, 2015 Share Posted 20 October, 2015 They have to unless you have more than 25 eligible players, which we don't. That's a pretty bold statement. Where did you get that from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now