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.
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
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.
I didn't say you had anything against De Gea so no need for you to repeat whatever
You said
I said this is short-term thinking and to suggest it wasn't "right" that we sign him is bizarre. Everyone of a rational mind knew he would make mistakes this season and take time to settle, so what we've seen this season isn't unexpected or cause for concern.
I've not implicitly said it was wrong to sign him and it would hardly be 'bizarre' if I had.
Totally disagree with you when you say what we've seen 'isn't unexpected or cause for concern' - I seriously doubt United thought this would happen, and I seriously doubt they thought we'd have to switch over to Lindegaard, make him our Nr 1 and play him in our most important games after having spent a Premier League record fee on a goalkeeper at a time when we're clearly reluctant to make big outlays on players.
I couldn't tell you right now if signing him was wrong or right - the only opinion I'll give is that I think signing both of them looks like a bad move to me. We should have signed someone with bags of experience to cover for De Gea.
Fair enough
I think United would have expected it, and that's exactly why we signed Lindegaard.
And of course it would be bizarre if anyone says it's not "right" that we didn't sign De Gea. It would suggest someone doesn't understand the concept of long-term squad building at all.
Sorry, that's nonsense. It's perfectly possible to understand and believe in long term planning and not think De Gea is the right player. Nothing bizarre in that at all.
As for Lindegaard - he was so raw at the beginning of the season and so inexperienced that I just won't believe Ferguson was expecting him to play such a pivotal role for us this year. It seems obvious to me that he expected De Gea to look more comfortable and play the majority of games for us this year. I think what happened is that Lindegaard, who gets very pumped up for games, squeezed some performances out of himself that surprised United, and then talked himself up and showcased this great confidence he has, thus making a case for himself as a viable alternative to De Gea. If you look at his pre-United cv though, it would have been suicide to go into this season thinking that we could place such responsibility on him.
It is bizarre to me that someone thinks a player making mistakes early in his career is a reason not to sign him, especially considering SAF's reasoning is that he will be our goalkeeper for the foreseeable once he gets it together. You are welcome to disagree, it's not nonsense though.
As for the 2nd paragraph, none of that is wrong really but clearly we expected De gea to make mistakes and planned accordingly; Fergie was happy to use Lindegaard on a regular basis or he wouldn't have signed him.
Look at SAF's comments earlier in the season about DDG though - he reiterated, many times, that De Gea was his Nr 1 and even grew tired of questions on it.
It was clear to me he wanted to give De Gea a chance to establish himself and he offered him a lot of support in public. That's gone now, and it seems they're treated on a more equal basis, with Lindegaard having become more important to us.
Looking at Ferguson's earlier handling of it proves to me that he had no intention, early on, to drop De Gea for Lindegaard and that what's happened IS unexpected and rather forced upon him. I don't think Lindegaard was signed as a Nr 1 - there was a very clear hierarchy at the start of the season.
ITV do Manchester United, De Gea and football no favours
In the absence of players communicating the newly-intensified rivalry between the two clubs by kicking each other and using terminology that belongs in a movie based in America’s Deep South at the start of the last century, ITV needed something to talk about. Liverpool and Manchester United’s FA Cup 4th Round tie sizzled and threatened to take off, but largely involved shadow boxing mixed with bursts of the real thing. In the 21st minute came the chance.
Liverpool, in an almost Pulis-esque stroke of maximising an advantage over an opponent, crowded around David De Gea prior to a corner kick. It was football’s version of survival of the fittest with De Gea clearly identified as the weakest of the herd. The cross came into that sort of grey area where commentators presume the goalkeeper can saunter off his line and pluck it out of the air and people who have played the position at any level know it’s never that straightforward. There was a shamozle – a comedy word carefully chosen to communicate the general disorder of the situation – and Daniel Agger rose unchallenged to head the opening goal. The replays showed United players falling over each other and the Dane converting the surprisingly facile chance. All that was lacking was a Benny Hill soundtrack and some canned laughter.
The uncertainty of De Gea’s panicky run didn’t flatter him. In the eyes of the commentators the fact none of the United defenders mustered even a faint challenge to Agger could be ignored and the goalkeeper singled out as the culprit – clueless, weak and an object to be bullied. Sadly, there were plenty of things to criticise De Gea for – the overall lack of command of his penalty area; the fumbly handling of the ball we rarely saw at Atletico Madrid; the strange mix of silly overconfidence on some occasions and the obvious lack of confidence on others – both of which lead to some poor choices. Despite some decent saves, he didn’t have a good game. Any decent analysis would have highlighted this and not just focused on one supposed howler. Criticism was warranted, but what we got was a shallow attack which skirted around the actual problems.
In the studio, the producers pointed their pundits to the incident like dog-handlers directing their famished charges to prime ribeye. It was seized upon it and the opinions for hire duly obliged. Paul Ince mumbled some comments about it not being good enough in that geezer-ish manner of talk that seems to undermine his points regardless if they’re valid or not. Roy Keane – licking his lips at the free rein to have a go at United – was arguably the least helpful, suggesting that De Gea’s confidence would get the requisite boost if he could only go out there “and nail somebody”. Wise words for someone suffering a drought in the bedroom department, less so for a young goalkeeper trying to find his feet in the Premier League.
The sense of mindlessly kicking a man when he’s down wasn’t helped later in the game when – clearly riding the wave of unwarranted viciousness – co-commentator, Jim Beglin decreed that the young Spaniard should have done better in preventing Kuyt’s winner. Perhaps getting De Gea confused with Mr. Potatohead or any other toy with detachable limbs, Beglin suggested the goalie ‘could have thrown a leg at it’. If there is a hierarchy of knee-jerk comments, this was at the lower end of the scale just a step above ‘the complete drivel’ label. The keeper could have done nothing about it. Evra was sleeping. The ball fell perfectly for Kuyt on his stronger foot. Talking a conservative estimate, he would have hit the ball at a speed of about 60mph at a distance of about 6 yards from the goalkeeper who was a couple of yards off his line. That gives De Gea an approximate reaction time of around one fifth of a second, the point where any save is almost entirely down to dumb luck rather than superhuman reactions. Not for the first time in his punditry career, Beglin’s analysis was overly simplistic and hinted towards populist pandering.
The benefit of time and increased hindsight hadn’t brought much enlightenment to the highlights show. Gordon Strachan and Neil Warnock – the latter looking like life outside management has given him a new lease of life and Brylcreem – toed the line and blurted out what they were told to with the absence of genuine balanced critique. Not dissimilar to his post-match rants, Warnock focussed on an incident that didn’t decide the game and ignored the numerous issues that did decide the game. Again the incident for the 1st goal was the centre of attention and the various other errors largely swept under the carpet – chiefly the silly fumbles that gave Liverpool hope when they were rendered largely toothless by an industrious United midfield. Considering that both Warnock and Strachan have both been at various times considered hot managerial property in the British game, it doesn’t reflect well on how some managers approach the role of the custodian. If this is how respected figures are happy to talk about young goalkeeping talent, is it any wonder that the Premier League has a string of indigenous talent between the posts that has already been knocked down repeatedly throughout their careers?
There is a point to all this grumbling and once again it’s the lack of understanding of the goalkeeper’s role. ITV are an entertainment business and their obligation is to deliver profit for their shareholders. They are free to take as short-sighted and sensationalist a view as they see fit. The pundits however are under no obligation to mindlessly take the bait. It was saddening that not one of the experts took an opposing view or declined the opportunity to slate De Gea for an offence his defenders were at least partially to blame. De Gea clearly has his problems, but he’ll eventually get over them. The problem of the media misunderstanding the goalkeeper may be something that’s harder to eradicate and have far more damaging consequences.
From a site dedicated to goalkeeping.
The thing is, some of our own fans are getting caught up in this nonsense.
Good article, i pretty much agree with all of it. It's true, too many United fans actually listen to this and take it on board because the "lads on the tele" said so.
Sadly, there were plenty of things to criticise De Gea for – the overall lack of command of his penalty area; the fumbly handling of the ball we rarely saw at Atletico Madrid; the strange mix of silly overconfidence on some occasions and the obvious lack of confidence on others – both of which lead to some poor choices. Despite some decent saves, he didn’t have a good game. Any decent analysis would have highlighted this and not just focused on one supposed howler. Criticism was warranted, but what we got was a shallow attack which skirted around the actual problems.
From a site dedicated to goalkeeping.
The thing is, some of our own fans are getting caught up in this nonsense.
Not sure what your point is
All keepers let in goals like the ones you've described
He's clearly a very good shot-stopper, there is plenty of evidence of that from his time at Atletico and already a few examples of it at United
My point is merely that he's had a stinking start to his United career and that it's not just been his dealing with crosses that has been the problem but also his shot-stopping, which has been decidedly dodgy.
For me he's only had one really good game, which was at Anfield in the league - which I assume is the reason Fergie brought him back at the weekend.
That article is actually highly critical of his performance. Just disagrees with the emphasis put by the pundits on the two goals conceded, whilst ignoring his other errors.
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.
I have absolutely no problem with De Gea starting vs stoke. a continuous run with lindegaard out could do wonders for him.
So is he sick now, is that it?
This is your bloody chance De Gea, you'll reclaim that place in goal with Lindegaard out. I can't believe he's sick now.
I don't want a ginger goalie.
It's funny how people don't remember his performance at Birtannia and only remember Stoke's physical style.Sick or "sick" because its Stoke?
My point is merely that he's had a stinking start to his United career and that it's not just been his dealing with crosses that has been the problem but also his shot-stopping, which has been decidedly dodgy.
Here we go with the conspiracy theories...So apparently he's at the game, doesn't really make a whole lot of sense if he's sick.
Here we go with the conspiracy theories...
So apparently he's at the game, doesn't really make a whole lot of sense if he's sick.
According to Fergie he is actually injured.
According to Fergie he is actually injured.
