David de Gea | 2011-14 Performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pogue Mahone said:
I think Fergie starts each season wanting to win the league as badly as he ever did before. It's how he's maintained all this success for so long. Anything less than 100% commitment is never an option.
Click to expand...

Do you think I don't know that or something?

I just think it's a shame that we're rebuilding certain areas of the team just as City are peaking - I'd hate us to gift City a league title.

Clearly Ferguson doesn't like losing to anyone but I still think he'll be especially reluctant to lose to City. Seems obvious to me.
 
How many in here seriously believe that the goalkeeper has been a bigger problem then our defense? We've coped as well as we could have with all our injuries.
I don't think we'd still be in the CL or not still be in 2nd place or if we'd still be in either of the cups if Friedel had been in the goal the whole time. A new goalkeeper couldn't have gotten a worse 1st season with the defense being what it's been. We've been practically been missing a leader there and in midfield the whole time. And don't give this crap about Lindegaard being a great organizer. Our defense has been the same with him there or DDG. Yelling at defender after he does something stupid is not being a great organizer or communicator.

I think a lot of people here have a hard time looking at things from different perspectives and really want to have a scapegoat. It's so easy and simple if it's the fault of an individual.
 
Commadus said:
That is true but says more about the side overcoming his other errors or the errors not resulting in goals like his mistake against Tottenham.
Click to expand...

When did we have to overcome his error? I can only recall West Brom.
 
BaldwinLegend said:
I guess you'd never have believed we'd beat Arsenal away without either Rio or Vidic at the start of the season though, right?

Smalling, Evans and Jones are fantastic deputies to have in Vidic's absence.
Click to expand...

Well, you're right and wrong. I wouldn't say Jones ia a fantastic deputy, not quite yet. He's not ready for our level as a centerhalf. I've no problem with Smalling and Evans, though. And still, we're talking about replacing possibly the best centerhalf in the world, probably the best centerhalf partnership in recent years. There's bound to be a drop in the level of the backline.

You can't put it all on the defence. De Gea's mistakes like against West Brom, Benfica or Blackburn were all his own, it didn't matter who was infront of him. But up until Blackburn, how many were talking about them? Forget the media who were always looking to get him, most here were quite comfortable with him.
 
Commadus said:
What sets DDG apart is his football skills and passing. There are many good young shot stoppers out there. Where he lacks is dealing with the aerial threat and commanding his area. A keeper who impressed me was the Basel Keeper Yann Sommer in the way he commanded his area.
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot and he does look good on teh ball, but surely the command of the area and being able to catch are fundamental with the footballing ability a nice to have?
I expect he will become more commanding with experience and confidence, does need to bulk up though, and to start hurting people...
 
BaldwinLegend said:
Do you think I don't know that or something?

I just think it's a shame that we're rebuilding certain areas of the team just as City are peaking - I'd hate us to gift City a league title.

Clearly Ferguson doesn't like losing to anyone but I still think he'll be especially reluctant to lose to City. Seems obvious to me.
Click to expand...

It's not ideal but it is what it is.

When Scholes, Giggs, Neville and VdS all hit retirement age at the same time (not to mention Hargreaves being sold for glue) it's inevitable that our squad would need a major overhaul. If this means giving City a better chance than they would have had otherwise, so be it. Nothing Fergie can do about that.

Were I think we disagree is that I don't think the fact we're re-building in one area of the squad means we should take a short-term view in others. I'd much rather Fergie handed his successor a squad of his own making - that will only need minor tweaks in the coming years - than sign a load of stop-gap players because he wanted to defer City's first league title as long as possible and/or try to avoid a trophyless season in his final years as manager.

It's far better that we ride out as much of this transition as possible with Fergie in charge than have a new manager come in and face the same kind of horrible initiation that AvB is going through at Chelsea.
 
friendlytramp said:
I hear this a lot and he does look good on teh ball, but surely the command of the area and being able to catch are fundamental with the footballing ability a nice to have?
I expect he will become more commanding with experience and confidence, does need to bulk up though, and to start hurting people...
Click to expand...

Commanding your area and taking crosses is all about judgement - you can be built like Neuer and still be weak on crosses.
 
His transfer fee isn't 100% confirmed. I imagine a lot of it has to do what he does in the future. Don't think we paid it in all cash all up front.

Manuel Neuer is the 2nd most expensive keeper.

That's not saying much though. Muslera is the 5th, Gordon is the 6th, Coutois is the 7th and Roberto (current Zaragoza gk) is 9th.

Keepers generally haven't gone for big fees.

I'd say Peruzzi was the 2nd most expensive considering the amount he went for 12 years ago.
 
He is getting stupid stick. He could have done better for the first but the second is a stupid mistake by Evra. As has been pointed out, he's been identified as a weak link now and so he's focussed on regardless of how much blame is his. It's the same with the midfield, no one really in the media has painted a fair picture of the injuries we've had there and just say typical things, like it's not been addressed etc, it's the problem etc, it is a problem sure, but there have been other bg factors. When we brought in De Gea I'm sure Fergie didn't envisage having so many injuries at the back, or having the best defender in the world out for the season. These things make big differences. De Gea could have been eased in to English football, with Vidic around and Ferdinand fit more often he would have had others around him to be able to take control of the situation, set up markers and help aerially. But he hasn't, he's been surrounded by youngsters who are almost as raw as him. All talented but they haven't got that experience yet.

It's not been ideal but we need to recognize that he's been put under more pressure then he should have really with all the defensive problems and also the lack of stability in the midfield. We just need to back him, especially now we're getting players back.
 
despite his mistakes I think he deserve more chances...how many goalies at his age impresses in the last 20 years...Bufon, Casilias, Valdes, Hart...not too many
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's not ideal but it is what it is.

When Scholes, Giggs, Neville and VdS all hit retirement age at the same time (not to mention Hargreaves being sold for glue) it's inevitable that our squad would need a major overhaul. If this means giving City a better chance than they would have had otherwise, so be it. Nothing Fergie can do about that.

Were I think we disagree is that I don't think the fact we're re-building in one area of the squad means we should take a short-term view in others. I'd much rather Fergie handed his successor a squad of his own making - that will only need minor tweaks in the coming years - than sign a load of stop-gap players because he wanted to defer City's first league title as long as possible and/or try to avoid a trophyless season in his final years as manager.

It's far better that we ride out as much of this transition as possible with Fergie in charge than have a new manager come in and face the same kind of horrible initiation that AvB is going through at Chelsea.
Click to expand...

I'm actually only complaining about one thing - buying two young goalkeepers with no PL experience at the same time to replace Van Der Sar.

I've nothing against signing De Gea, but knowing what we know now I doubt Ferguson would have bought Lindegaard as well - rather a keeper with experience playing in England. I just think we've left ourselves unnecessary vulnerable, and given Ferguson a real headache of a selection dilemma, that we could have spared ourselves.

Have you heard the Guardian lot sticking the knife in yet? Honigstein seems totally unimpressed.
 
Ash_G said:
He is getting stupid stick. He could have done better for the first but the second is a stupid mistake by Evra. As has been pointed out, he's been identified as a weak link now and so he's focussed on regardless of how much blame is his. It's the same with the midfield, no one really in the media has painted a fair picture of the injuries we've had there and just say typical things, like it's not been addressed etc, it's the problem etc, it is a problem sure, but there have been other bg factors. When we brought in De Gea I'm sure Fergie didn't envisage having so many injuries at the back, or having the best defender in the world out for the season. These things make big differences. De Gea could have been eased in to English football, with Vidic around and Ferdinand fit more often he would have had others around him to be able to take control of the situation, set up markers and help aerially. But he hasn't, he's been surrounded by youngsters who are almost as raw as him. All talented but they haven't got that experience yet.

It's not been ideal but we need to recognize that he's been put under more pressure then he should have really with all the defensive problems and also the lack of stability in the midfield. We just need to back him, especially now we're getting players back.
Click to expand...

I agree with all this, except for the bolded bit.

I don't see how he could possibly be blamed for the first. No keeper could've gotten near that given the number of players in and around him.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's not ideal but it is what it is.

When Scholes, Giggs, Neville and VdS all hit retirement age at the same time (not to mention Hargreaves being sold for glue) it's inevitable that our squad would need a major overhaul. If this means giving City a better chance than they would have had otherwise, so be it. Nothing Fergie can do about that.

Were I think we disagree is that I don't think the fact we're re-building in one area of the squad means we should take a short-term view in others. I'd much rather Fergie handed his successor a squad of his own making - that will only need minor tweaks in the coming years - than sign a load of stop-gap players because he wanted to defer City's first league title as long as possible and/or try to avoid a trophyless season in his final years as manager.

It's far better that we ride out as much of this transition as possible with Fergie in charge than have a new manager come in and face the same kind of horrible initiation that AvB is going through at Chelsea.
Click to expand...

Good post
 
BaldwinLegend said:
Have you heard the Guardian lot sticking the knife in yet? Honigstein seems totally unimpressed.
Click to expand...

I did hear it. I think Barry Glendenning was a lot fairer. Honigstein didn't really say anything perceptive; he is hit and miss when it comes to analysis outside the German leagues anyway.

The media decided on the De Gea narrative after the Community Shield. The narrative is that Fergie has a dodgy record with keepers, and De Gea is too young to replace the great VDS. "He is susceptible to shots from long range" was the first trend; the "can't command his area" and "he's got no confidence" shouts followed. These statements may have a grain of salt to them, but really they've been exaggerated and highlighted totally out of proportion to the reality.

The reality - that's he done all right, made some errors, but needs time to develop - doesn't fit the narrative and is too even-handed to have a place in English football media.
 
marcus agrippa said:
I agree with all this, except for the bolded bit.

I don't see how he could possibly be blamed for the first. No keeper could've gotten near that given the number of players in and around him.
Click to expand...

True but I think he was far too focussed on Carroll and pushing him out of the way then setting himself to save the shot. He might not have stopped it but he would have had a much better chance then trying to go for a ball that was never there to be won. At the same time the marking has to be questioned. Again an issue down to the fact we were missing a lot of senior players, esp at the back.
 
marcus agrippa said:
I agree with all this, except for the bolded bit.

I don't see how he could possibly be blamed for the first. No keeper could've gotten near that given the number of players in and around him.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but in hindsight, he should have just stayed on his line then. I don't know how the corner was taken and if there was a strange curve or something, but if you see you can't reach the ball, you have to stay on your line.

Although that doesn't necessarily mean he'd have stopped the goal if he did stay on his line. The biggest culprits are still the defenders in my opinion.

I think the criticism this time is really over the top. He made a small mistake that many, if not all, PL goalkeepers make on a regular basis. He was just unlucky that the defence didn't do anything to make it hard for Agger to have a header at goal.
 
King_Eric said:
I think the criticism this time is really over the top. He made a small mistake that many, if not all, PL goalkeepers make on a regular basis. He was just unlucky that the defence didn't do anything to make it hard for Agger to have a header at goal.
Click to expand...

I agree, and this is important to note.

After we lose a match, people look for reasons why. In the urgency and heightened emotion of the post-match, reasons are given: Evra out of position, our midfield didn't impose itself, no creativity up front blah blah blah... and the keeper had a shocker.

As these topics get debated, sometimes the general thread becomes fact, and from that point on people agree that De Gea had a shocker, even when the truth is a bit more nuanced than that.

So in future De Gea discussions, this game will be added to the list of "games De Gea cost us", when in reality he made an error that was one of several reasons we lost. And it strengthens the idea that De Gea is a dodgy keeper.

It's how stuff like this gains credence :

ralphie88 said:
Apart from the ones he lets in through his legs, under his body, at his near post, yes, he's a great shot stopper.
Click to expand...

So now all the other evidence - like his fantastic saves against Chelsea and in the league match at Anfield, for example - is trumped by the notion that De Gea is a vulnerable keeper, which is based on maybe 4-5 incidences.

In short, it's how Daniel Taylor writes his articles!
 
Gazza said:
So now all the other evidence - like his fantastic saves against Chelsea and in the league match at Anfield, for example - is trumped by the notion that De Gea is a vulnerable keeper, which is based on maybe 4-5 incidences.

In short, it's how Daniel Taylor writes his articles!
Click to expand...

All goalkeepers have good games. All goalkeepers make good saves. At the top level that's not what it's about, it's about consistency, presence, communication and obviously good technical ability. Maybe De Gea will go on to prove his has those in time, but at the moment he should not be allowed near games like Liverpool away.

As for people suggesting he wasn't at fault for the first goal at Anfield.... get a grip please. He didn't just fail to challenge for the ball after deciding to come, he actually ducked! :nervous:
 
ralphie88 said:
All goalkeepers have good games. All goalkeepers make good saves. At the top level that's not what it's about, it's about consistency, presence, communication and obviously good technical ability. Maybe De Gea will go on to prove his has those in time, but at the moment he should not be allowed near games like Liverpool away.

As for people suggesting he wasn't at fault for the first goal at Anfield.... get a grip please. He didn't just fail to challenge for the ball after deciding to come, he actually ducked! :nervous:
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't he be allowed? How else will he develop those skills?
 
this is a bit unprecendented for us.

We have invested a fair bit of money on a 20 year for the position of goalkeeper and thrown him at the deep end.

...and just in case we have got a pretty darn good keeper as cover for him.

Fair point by ralphie.

but this kid is the real deal for me. He will eventually be a much better keeper than Lindegard.

His mistakes are not that he has not got the ability...it is purely lack of experience.

to pull him out and play Lindegard is the worst thing you can do.

Fergie gives them both fair playing time cause he dioes not want Lindegard to get frustrated..and it is good to have a quality back up like him with playing time under his belt.
 
ralphie88 said:
All goalkeepers have good games. All goalkeepers make good saves. At the top level that's not what it's about, it's about consistency, presence, communication and obviously good technical ability. Maybe De Gea will go on to prove his has those in time, but at the moment he should not be allowed near games like Liverpool away.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree that you can't let the great saves hide the mistakes. The difference between a good goalkeeper to a great keeper - one who could play for United - starts by making very few mistakes.

I wouldn't say he shouldn't be allowed against this or that, though. He already played at Anfield, in a match when we played far worse and he was quite busy, and did very well. Just a month ago, prior to the Blackburn game, most of us didn't think there was anything wrong, he was considered our number 1 by many. I'd like to see him rebuild his confidence, but it certainly should not have started at a match like this.
 
Gazza said:
It's how stuff like this gains credence :

<Ralph's Hyperbole, Non-sequiturs and miscellaneous collections of selective memory>

So now all the other evidence - like his fantastic saves against Chelsea and in the league match at Anfield, for example - is trumped by the notion that De Gea is a vulnerable keeper, which is based on maybe 4-5 incidences.

In short, it's how Daniel Taylor writes his articles!
Click to expand...

Ralph's a well-known (to me at least!) culprit when it comes to this. He's taken a dislike to DDG, and I doubt any evidence will moderate him. I once had to do a blow-by-blow analysis of a match by De Gea (against Spurs, I believe) just to show how woefully short of the facts he was, but that doesn't stop him.

Ralph...I know you dislike Americanisms so, but: you ain't gon' never change, son.
 
Amir said:
I definitely agree that you can't let the great saves hide the mistakes. The difference between a good goalkeeper to a great keeper - one who could play for United - starts by making very few mistakes.
Click to expand...

The problem is, Ralph also cites: consistency, presence, communication and good technical ability.

Consistency - a novel concept for a 21 year-old footballer;

Presence - fair point, but mitigated by the fact that where he comes from (i.e. where he's played all his professional life) goalkeepers are treated differently/more protected. It is a new league for his point of view; we typically expect foreign outfield players to bed in, why not goalkeepers?

Communication - yeah, let the Spanish lad speak English first, will we? Also, VDS had a very good quotation about the difference between younger and older keepers regarding this very point.

Good technical ability - does he have a problem in this area?

Maybe I'm wrong. But I honestly see a lot of potential in De Gea. Just as I see the frankly ridiculous way in which he is being scrutinized in the media.
 
ralphie88 said:
All goalkeepers have good games. All goalkeepers make good saves. At the top level that's not what it's about, it's about consistency, presence, communication and obviously good technical ability. Maybe De Gea will go on to prove his has those in time, but at the moment he should not be allowed near games like Liverpool away.
Click to expand...

Well, your earlier post was purely about his shot-stopping and you concluded that he wasn't actually a good at it; so you're changing your point.
 
I'm not even sure he's made enough great saves to hide the mistakes. I don't think he's made a single world class "how the feck did he do that?" save all season. That near post save against Stoke was very good but nothing that at least half the keepers in the league couldn't have pulled off.

That happens, though. As a United keeper he has had to make fewer saves (once teams started taking pot shots against him from anywhere!) so had less opportunities to impress. What I like about him is exactly what ralphie seems to think he lacks. I think he's got a great presence. Really cool and composed. He has had some bad games and when he's not playing well he can look a bit flustered. He's had a lot of good games too. When he's on his game he has a real air of calm about him, especially with the ball at his feet. Which is probably one of the main reasons we signed him. Van der Sar's composure was one of his greatest strengths. As he gets older we should expect more good games and fewer bad ones. Just because he's a keeper doesn't make him immune from the inconsistency of youth.
 
marcus agrippa said:
Maybe I'm wrong. But I honestly see a lot of potential in De Gea. Just as I see the frankly ridiculous way in which he is being scrutinized in the media.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. It is also very disappointing that our own supporters are involve in this. Nobody expected him to be a finished article. Even Ronaldo when he came over was too much of a showboat and had to be developed. Give him some time - he needs to see some support, and he's getting it from SAF and the team too.
A run in the team with a settled defence will make wonders.
 
Is there anyone here who really doesn't see the potential? I have every faith that he's got the ability to make it here. It will just take time, which is kind of the worry. There's a limit to how long United can wait for a player - and that goes double for a keeper - to come good.

Telegraph is saying Lindegaard was injured in training on Monday and is unlikely to play tonight. I'll be happy to see De Gea again, hopefully restake his claim for number 1.
 
de Gea has been abused by a pretty inconsistent defense in front of him. Teams are creating far more chances against us.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
The same Honigstein who said Ribery would be playing for "a team in the North West that play in red" this season?

I like him but he's not averse to talking shite.

Do you think De Gea is good enough for United?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I don't think he is at the moment, and I hate saying it. I don't think Lindegaard is either.

I agree with and accept all the reasons used by those defending De Gea here - he is promising, he is only 21 etc. That doesn't make signing him right though and I blame those who believed he'd be good enough to look comfortable this season - I seriously doubt this has gone to plan and that means someone's cocked up. Again, not De Gea's fault at all.

I find it really depressing that I catch myself thinking that maybe Fergie might just be able to manage us through this situation this year in the league. He might, but United should have aspirations to be playing big European games and right now I'd be nervous going in to them with De Gea.

He might turn out to be exceptional, but he isn't right now and there's enough keepers out there who could be doing a better job for us right now and thats what we should have gone for - one young keeper, and one calm, classy, experienced alternative. We're essentially in a situation like Arsenal were after Lehman, juggling two young keepers and waiting for them to come good. I just hope it doesn't cost us.
 
BaldwinLegend said:
Unfortunately I don't think he is at the moment, and I hate saying it. I don't think Lindegaard is either.

I agree with and accept all the reasons used by those defending De Gea here - he is promising, he is only 21 etc. That doesn't make signing him right though and I blame those who believed he'd be good enough to look comfortable this season - I seriously doubt this has gone to plan and that means someone's cocked up. Again, not De Gea's fault at all.

I find it really depressing that I catch myself thinking that maybe Fergie might just be able to manage us through this situation this year in the league. He might, but United should have aspirations to be playing big European games and right now I'd be nervous going in to them with De Gea.

He might turn out to be exceptional, but he isn't right now and there's enough keepers out there who could be doing a better job for us right now and thats what we should have gone for - one young keeper, and one calm, classy, experienced alternative. We're essentially in a situation like Arsenal were after Lehman, juggling two young keepers and waiting for them to come good. I just hope it doesn't cost us.
Click to expand...

You seem to be thinking purely in the short-term though. Why is it not right to sign a keeper who may have one problematic season if there is a chance he could hold down the position for the next 10+ years? Surely that is what Fergie has always done: look beyond the obvious, look past the next few games, and build a squad that will need very little work in future because he did all the groundwork now.

It's not that different from what we did with C Ronaldo. He was not really a Premiership-ready player for his first 2.5 years here, and by your logic we would not have signed him on that basis. Is that a fair reading of your post? I don't want to misinterpret your argument, but it just seems criminally simplistic and short-termist.
 
Gazza said:
You seem to be thinking purely in the short-term though. Why is it not right to sign a keeper who may have one problematic season if there is a chance he could hold down the position for the next 10+ years? Surely that is what Fergie has always done: look beyond the obvious, look past the next few games, and build a squad that will need very little work in future because he did all the groundwork now.

It's not that different from what we did with C Ronaldo. He was not really a Premiership-ready player for his first 2.5 years here, and by your logic we would not have signed him on that basis. Is that a fair reading of your post? I don't want to misinterpret your argument, but it just seems criminally simplistic and short-termist.
Click to expand...

Heh? My only comment really is that I regret us signing two such raw keepers as its left us in this dilemma. I reckon if there was a poll about which keeper should play our next game on here there'd be a 50/50 split down the middle every week - its turned into a real juggling act for Ferguson.

I'm bored of repeating this now but here goes again - I've nothing against signing De Gea, I just think we should have signed decent cover for him, not someone who looks just as inexperienced and without the potential De Gea has.

I'm all for long term planning but signing both of them seems excessive to me.
 
Gazza said:
Well, your earlier post was purely about his shot-stopping and you concluded that he wasn't actually a good at it; so you're changing your point.
Click to expand...

I simply said that on the evidence of what we've seen this season he's not a brilliant shot stopper as everyone seems to be claiming. That's not to say he won't improve on that part of his game, but he's let in some very sloppy ones.

For what it's worth (and I don't think this lad is the answer to our goalkeeping issue either), I think the best save from any keeper in the PL I've seen this season was actually from Lindegaard at City in the cup.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.