David de Gea | 2011-14 Performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
tbf, the criticism of Al-Habsi was also unjustified.

At that range, with the power and shot direction, luck dominates. Sometimes a keeper will parry it to safety, which pundits and commentators generally mistake as a skill that should be repeatable.
 
Eugenius said:
To be fair, it's actually true that De Gea gets a lot of stick that is unwarranted. Mark Lawrenson last week came out with "we all know that he can't deal with crosses" as if he hasn't been watching the lad for the last 12 months, his mistake against Newcastle suddenly brought about people saying his handling is a weakness in his game etc.

It's not personal, it's just that a lot of football coverage is aimed at mass coverage, not the informed caf member who watches most of our games live. It's an easy narrative to make - expensive young goalkeeper from spain struggling to adapt to the English PL. Same reason why Rafael isn't getting any praise because it's an easy soundbite to typecast him as fullback who can't defend.
Click to expand...

He might get a little bit of unwarranted stick but the extent to which he gets it is absurdly exaggerated on here. An analyst spent 11 seconds talking about De Gea parrying the ball to Perch in the Newcastle game, and on here the story was retold as 3 or 4 minutes being spent criticising him while Hart supposedly got far less criticism for a similarly bad mistake.

As for easy narratives, I'll tell you what else is an easy narrative - saying the English media are unfairly slagging him off because he's foreign, despite him actually being brilliant and United fans are the only ones who can see it. It neatly allows you to disregard any criticism of him from neutral sources and believe he's brilliant because United fans are the only people worth listening to him when it comes to De Gea are his team's fans.
 
Silva said:
Commentators do have a penchant for wanting goalkeepers to defy the laws of physics.
Click to expand...
You just need to spend five minutes watching players hit shots from close-in to realise how stupid half these 'he should have done better with that' comments are.
 
peterstorey said:
You just need to spend five minutes watching players hit shots from close-in to realise how stupid half these 'he should have done better with that' comments are.
Click to expand...

Aye, Al-Habsi couldn't do a thing from that range and without seeing Evra's shot.

Sometimes the keepers just done more than enough by saving it.
 
kietotheworld, so you would rather listen to pundits and journos who don't watch United game in and game out simply because they don't support United?
 
Platato said:
kietotheworld, so you would rather listen to pundits and journos who don't watch United game in and game out simply because they don't support United?
Click to expand...

I'd rather listen to pundits who watch a lot of United than listen to United fans who watch every game. Let's take the discussion away from Manchester United for a moment, would you trust more in RAWK's consensus opinion of a Liverpool footballer or the consensus opinion of the country or the world's media?
 
He gets way too much stick. Sure he makes the occasional mistake, but it's not often a costly one. Every single time he shows a little bit of indecisiveness, the commentators go on about it and how that's a weak point, where as when hart makes a blunder (and he does it much more than de gea), the commentators always say a rare mistake from hart, or like against Sunderland even the best make mistakes. It's just ridiculous English bias, constantly putting down de gea and other foreign keepers while constantly praising the English ones like hart just because they finally got a good keeper.

Also, although he hasn't been tested much lately, he's one of the best in the league IMO. He's improved massively in dealing with crosses and has always been amongst the best shot stoppers in the league.
 
kietotheworld said:
I'd rather listen to pundits who watch a lot of United than listen to United fans who watch every game. Let's take the discussion away from Manchester United for a moment, would you trust more in RAWK's consensus opinion of a Liverpool footballer or the consensus opinion of the country or the world's media?
Click to expand...

RAWK is full of members who are deluded and anyone who does not share the opinion of the moderators is instantly banned.

Each to their own I suppose. Personally I would rather listen to the opinions of fans who regularly watch their club and are able to form judgements based on long term performances rather than forming an opinion and sticking to that as if it's the gospel truth.

Most pundits who 'watch a lot of Utd' still think Scholes is our best midfielder, Rafael cannot tackle, DDG has failed to show any improvement over the past 18 months and is still the dodgiest GK in the PL & Valencia still is the best winger at the club. Do you share their wise opinion?
 
kietotheworld said:
I'd rather listen to pundits who watch a lot of United than listen to United fans who watch every game. Let's take the discussion away from Manchester United for a moment, would you trust more in RAWK's consensus opinion of a Liverpool footballer or the consensus opinion of the country or the world's media?
Click to expand...

ookaaay???? are you equating RAWK with the caf? who are these pundits anyway? Do they show any type of expert analysis?

The world's media? :lol: what the hell man.

I don't watch much television nowadays but anytime I go to the pub and see pundits spout their opinions, it's usually dross.

Nonetheless, I think you have to give some credence, especially the ones on here, to the fans who watch just about every game. At least they can somewhat offer a decent opinion on a player's progress or how their team is doing.
 
ha_rooney said:
RAWK is full of members who are deluded and anyone who does not share the opinion of the moderators is instantly bad day.

Each to their own I suppose. Personally I would rather listen to the opinions of fans who regularly watch their club and are able to form judgements based on long term performances rather than forming an opinion and sticking to that as if it's the gospel truth.

Most pundits who 'watch a lot of Utd' still think Scholes is our best midfielder, Rafael cannot tackle, DDG has failed to show any improvement over the past 18 months and is still the dodgiest GK in the PL & Valencia still is the best winger at the club. Do you share their wise opinion?
Click to expand...

On this forum you are only allowed into the publicly viewable forums if the staff decide they like you - that's from the old description of the Newbie forum, although I'm not sure what it reads now the principle's the same. There's no good reason to put any more stock on what RedCafe's mains posters say about United players than what RAWK's surviving posters say about their club.

On what basis do you say most pundits think that? I haven't heard any pundit say any of that, except perhaps the Valencia bit, which is fair enough really.
 
kietotheworld said:
On this forum you are only allowed into the publicly viewable forums if the staff decide they like you - that's from the old description of the Newbie forum, although I'm not sure what it reads now the principle's the same. There's no good reason to put any more stock on what RedCafe's mains posters say about United players than what RAWK's surviving posters say about their club.

On what basis do you say most pundits think that? I haven't heard any pundit say any of that, except perhaps the Valencia bit, which is fair enough really.
Click to expand...

Sky pundits (Souness in particular) regularly say Rafael cannot tackle. Commentators still gush about Scholes even though its clear he shouldn't be starting. All pundits still question DDG's quality and whether he should be playing for us - just look at the idiots on Soccer Saturday. Just because they watch a lot of United games and are meant to be 'neutral' doesn't make their opinion any more valid than fans'.
 
kietotheworld said:
On this forum you are only allowed into the publicly viewable forums if the staff decide they like you - that's from the old description of the Newbie forum, although I'm not sure what it reads now the principle's the same. There's no good reason to put any more stock on what RedCafe's mains posters say about United players than what RAWK's surviving posters say about their club.

On what basis do you say most pundits think that? I haven't heard any pundit say any of that, except perhaps the Valencia bit, which is fair enough really.
Click to expand...

...except common sense. Come on, Kieto, you must realise that that's bollocks. I don't disagree with your basic point, that the caf's opinions about United would not make for good football journalism because at the end of the day we're predominantly United fans. But anyone in their right mind can see that the caf is a thousand times more objective than RAWK's insanity. Occasionally you get the odd person on here spouting nonsense about RVP being equal with Messi, but on RAWK those sort of opinions are held by the majority, and anyone who disagrees is banned.

And you must also be able to see, with a bit of common sense, that the Newbie system is working really well at only allowing in good posters without becoming a bias-encouraging RAWK-esque process. Look at the sorts of posts that get credit - they tend to be the more objective, less red-tinted ones, and it is almost always their articulacy and common sense that earns the rep, not anything to do with the stated opinion itself.
 
Too many pundits are obsessed with repeating conventional wisdom. It became conventional wisdom to flog De Gea as a crap keeper and it remains conventional wisdom, even though it could hardly be alled wisdom any longer.
 
kietotheworld said:
He might get a little bit of unwarranted stick but the extent to which he gets it is absurdly exaggerated on here. An analyst spent 11 seconds talking about De Gea parrying the ball to Perch in the Newcastle game, and on here the story was retold as 3 or 4 minutes being spent criticising him while Hart supposedly got far less criticism for a similarly bad mistake.

As for easy narratives, I'll tell you what else is an easy narrative - saying the English media are unfairly slagging him off because he's foreign, despite him actually being brilliant and United fans are the only ones who can see it. It neatly allows you to disregard any criticism of him from neutral sources and believe he's brilliant because United fans are the only people worth listening to him when it comes to De Gea are his team's fans.
Click to expand...

I don't see why you're surprised or why it's a big deal. It's a Utd forum, and supporting a football team isn't neccesarily a rational thing, people get protective of our players amongst other things.

Clearly the caf opinion isn't ever going to be 100% accurate due to in built bias, case-in-point the RVP vs Rooney debate. Prior to this season, most of the caf would probably have rated Rooney over RVP because we see what Rooney does week-in week-out and maybe RVP a few times a season. Now we have both, a lot of people are seeing they used to underrate RVP, myself included.

Nonetheless, no respected member of the caf can claim that DDG is the finished article and top 5 in the world etc. To ignore his upside however is foolish, he's only fecking 22, his temperment, distribution and shot stopping are all top class. He's improving on dealing with crosses but needs to come for more crosses, needs to improve his communication with the defence and cut out stupid mistakes that can cost us. Despite that he's one of the better keepers in the league despite his young age.

If you were to believe the media however, you'd think that he's constantly parrying the ball out into dangerzones and that he's never had a good run of form. Also Fergie's been rotating him because he's dodgy (recently it was because of his wisdom teeth, it wasn't due to form) and wants to sign Begovic in January. Clearly a lot of that is bullshit and is immediately obvious to anyone who follows Utd closely. It's not a narrative, it's a fact that the media need to fill column inches and that is one of the easier ways to do it.
 
Brightonian said:
...except common sense. Come on, Kieto, you must realise that that's bollocks. I don't disagree with your basic point, that the caf's opinions about United would not make for good football journalism because at the end of the day we're predominantly United fans. But anyone in their right mind can see that the caf is a thousand times more objective than RAWK's insanity. Occasionally you get the odd person on here spouting nonsense about RVP being equal with Messi, but on RAWK those sort of opinions are held by the majority, and anyone who disagrees is banned.

And you must also be able to see, with a bit of common sense, that the Newbie system is working really well at only allowing in good posters without becoming a bias-encouraging RAWK-esque process. Look at the sorts of posts that get credit - they tend to be the more objective, less red-tinted ones, and it is almost always their articulacy and common sense that earns the rep, not anything to do with the stated opinion itself.
Click to expand...

I don't know that we're the right people to make a judgement like that. If you ask a RAWK member who is more biased or deluded - RAWK or RedCafe he will probably tell you that RAWK speaks sense and that it's obviously bollocks that RedCafe is the normal forum. The majority opinions on RAWK aren't anything like what gets posted in the RAWK meltdown thread, their lunatic fringe gets highlighted on here. The majority there certainly don't believe things as outlandish as RVP = Messi.

Again, I don't know if we're the right people to make a judgement on the newbie system, we're the ones who've come through it, if it rewards any biases we'd be likely to hold those biases, and chances are we wouldn't realise it. Deluded people don't know that they're deluded. I don't doubt that the Newbie system improves the general quality of the main forums mind, but I find it very difficult to say that it filters out any bias.
 
RK said:
tbf, the criticism of Al-Habsi was also unjustified.

At that range, with the power and shot direction, luck dominates. Sometimes a keeper will parry it to safety, which pundits and commentators generally mistake as a skill that should be repeatable.
Click to expand...

The more I hear about the commentating you've got the more I think that some of the Icelandic ones are more competent. I know for sure that one of our commentators is better than anything you've got. He's as liked here as Neville is as a pundit.

How many commentators are ex-professionals? I know most, if not all, of the co-commentators are.
 
ha_rooney said:
Sky pundits (Souness in particular) regularly say Rafael cannot tackle. Commentators still gush about Scholes even though its clear he shouldn't be starting. All pundits still question DDG's quality and whether he should be playing for us - just look at the idiots on Soccer Saturday. Just because they watch a lot of United games and are meant to be 'neutral' doesn't make their opinion any more valid than fans'.
Click to expand...

I haven't noticed that recently. I still gush about Scholes, I love watching him play, it doesn't necessarily mean I want him starting though. DDG's starting position is in question mainly because he's been dropped on a number of occasions this season, some of them with an excuse that he had a toothache or something.

Obviously I'm not going to agree with everything they say, but generally they're going to be right more often than us.

Orton said:
Why is this thread active? He didn't even have to do anything today...
Click to expand...

Someone decided to use Al-Habsi parrying to a striker as a reason for De Gea being good.
 
Snow said:
The more I hear about the commentating you've got the more I think that some of the Icelandic ones are more competent. I know for sure that one of our commentators is better than anything you've got. He's as liked here as Neville is as a pundit.

How many commentators are ex-professionals? I know most, if not all, of the co-commentators are.
Click to expand...

The commentators in England are horrible.......90% of them have got no clue how difficult it is for goalkeepers especially with shots from close range. The one that peeves me the most is when they say "Stoke players didn't complain so the referee must have made a good decision". These are the same fools who would go on a ******** that players shouldn't resort to dissent and respect the referee!
Damned when players complain...damned if they don't!
 
Nice quite game from him against Wigan. Didn't really have to do anything of not.

I did have to laugh at the commentator I had for the match talking about how the Wigan keeper should have done better by pushing the ball away. Made me just think about when DDG from the point blank shot and it was highlighted as an error. Made me just think that the commentator was just looking for someone to blame for the goal.
 
How many pundits are properly neutral in their analysis these days anyway? I can only think of two really.

One of them used to play for us, the other is Mark Lawrenson (I used the word analysis loosely)
 
Yep, Lawro's too busy moaning & making puns which would even shame me and Crackers.
 
I know that stats tend to be decried (unless they agree with your point of view) but they should at least be unbiased. The Prem's player rating system has De Gea by far the best keeper in the Prem - just shy of 16 points per game (don't ask me how the rating points are derived), ahead of Lloris on 14 1/2 and Lindegaard, Szczesny, and Cech on 13 1/2. Hart is the top English keeper on just over 12. The whoscored.com rating system agrees that De Gea is the top keeper in the Prem. Given that the ratings both agree with my somewhat biased opinion, I think they must be correct.
 
After seeing that de Gea is the top rated goalkeeper in the premiership on whoscored I have been checking his rating to try and get an indicator of how it's worked out. It looks like the goalkeepers rating is heavily biased toward busier goalkeepers, which is obviously reflective of the defence they are behind rather than their individual qualities.

That said, whoscored is a great source for stats for outfield players- I like the site, just don't trust the rating system, especially for goalkeepers.
 
Yeah I read something about De Gea being the keeper who's had the most shots at him or something, which should boost his stats.

I don't think it's outrageous to claim he's having a very good season though. For me the best thing is he's improved his work in the area. Will only get better as well.
 
marjen said:
Yeah I read something about De Gea being the keeper who's had the most shots at him or something, which should boost his stats.

I don't think it's outrageous to claim he's having a very good season though. For me the best thing is he's improved his work in the area. Will only get better as well.
Click to expand...

Facing more shots only helps your rating if you save a lot of them. De Gea saves about 75% - compared to Hart at 69% and Reina at about 61%. (Cech, Szczesny, Begovic, Jaasko and Tremmel all have save ratios higher than De Gea's - although the differences aren't enormous).
 
marjen said:
Number of saves made aren't taken into account then?
Click to expand...

If it was, Jaasko, Al Habsi and Mignolet should be up there along with Guzan and Schwartzer. Among the 'top' keepers, Cech has the most saves although if you correct for minutes played De Gea and Jaasko are pretty much tied at the top.

[Edit: EA give De Gea 16 points per while Jaasko gets 10 per game - same number of saves per game and Jaasko has a slightly higher percentage. There's obviously a lot more that goes into the rating.]
 
ravelston said:
I don't see any of the same "bias" in the EA system, in which De Gea is even more dominantly the top keeper.
Click to expand...

The naked eye also tells you David De Gea has been the most dominant keeper in the English prem, at least so far, this season.

But it's nice to have the stats handy to end all debate.
 
Ruud10 said:
The naked eye also tells you David De Gea has been the most dominant keeper in the English prem, at least so far, this season.

But it's nice to have the stats handy to end all debate.
Click to expand...

Nah wouldn't go that far for this season. Begovic has probably been the most consistently dominant keeper this season. Not just saying that because I'm bosnian as well. For what its worth, I would have De Gea over him any day and IMO he will be one of the best keepers in the world easily, and is probably in the top 3 keepers in the prem but this season I wouldn't have him as the best goalie.
 
De Gea is very good but can improve. Which is hardly surprising given how young he is. Most keepers don't hit top form until they are 5 years older than he is now so we have to be patient. He has the potential to be the best in the world IMO. Of course that doesn't mean that he is (he isn't) or will be for sure.
 
There is no doubt DDG gets more slack in general from pundits who actually don't even back it up with facts.
 
kietotheworld said:
I'm trying to refute this paranoia-fuelled myth that De Gea gets a hard time from pundits and commentators. People write this sort of crap all the time "Goalkeeper X did this and didn't get any criticism, but when De Gea did it he got pulled up on it", it goes completely unchallenged even when it's completely inaccurate.
Click to expand...

It's not a myth. It's literal truth. Undisputable.

But yeah, Al Habsi was getting panned. The situations were different and I thought Al-Habsi's was more of a mistake than De Gea's against Swansea.

De Gea's was a full blown shot on target from 6-7 yards. Not a cross like Evra's.
 
kietotheworld said:
I don't know that we're the right people to make a judgement like that. If you ask a RAWK member who is more biased or deluded - RAWK or RedCafe he will probably tell you that RAWK speaks sense and that it's obviously bollocks that RedCafe is the normal forum. The majority opinions on RAWK aren't anything like what gets posted in the RAWK meltdown thread, their lunatic fringe gets highlighted on here. The majority there certainly don't believe things as outlandish as RVP = Messi.

Again, I don't know if we're the right people to make a judgement on the newbie system, we're the ones who've come through it, if it rewards any biases we'd be likely to hold those biases, and chances are we wouldn't realise it. Deluded people don't know that they're deluded. I don't doubt that the Newbie system improves the general quality of the main forums mind, but I find it very difficult to say that it filters out any bias.
Click to expand...

Do you read RAWK? For the most part their assessment of their own players seems accurate; far more in-depth, up-to-date and informed than anything you get from a commentator or MOTD pundit.

When it comes to club politics, delusions of grandeur or conspiracy theorising, RAWK is fecking mental, but in regards to proper analysis of the playing aspect of the game they're clued-up and know their players inside out.
 
I can't say it enough, but we have spoken of his ceillingless potential but I still think he will come out with a little 'I have always dreamed of playing for RM', I really hope not,
I can just see it being so, or maybe Barca cause of his spanish ties already
 
No doubt in a few years when he wins a few things with United, He will come out with "Dream of playing for Barca".

He will want to go back to Spain, there is not doubt about it and understandable.

5-6 years I hope he stays at least.
 
Cold_Boy said:
No doubt in a few years when he wins a few things with United, He will come out with "Dream of playing for Barca".

He will want to go back to Spain, there is not doubt about it and understandable.

5-6 years I hope he stays at least.
Click to expand...

For me, I HOPE he stays for his career to tell the truth, has he ever spoken much of his plans for future?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.