Pray tell
The myth around Shay Given
- Thread starter Brwned
- Start date
What does that mean???
Who are the certain overhyped players?
Before yesterday's match, City had conceded 9 goals in 3 games, 3 each against Bolton, City and Sunderland.
That's nine goals in three matches. A lot of people in this thread say that Shay Given is a massive part of the reason City's defence can't defend. Looking at these goals, it is clear that City simply can't defend. Absolutely none of the goals were Given's fault and he couldn't have done anything about any of them.
I do not believe this theory that Shay Given is in fact an average goalkeeper.
That's nine goals in three matches. A lot of people in this thread say that Shay Given is a massive part of the reason City's defence can't defend. Looking at these goals, it is clear that City simply can't defend. Absolutely none of the goals were Given's fault and he couldn't have done anything about any of them.
I do not believe this theory that Shay Given is in fact an average goalkeeper.
How about this thead is closed
There is no myth around Shay Given, he is actually a good goalkeeper
There is no myth around Shay Given, he is actually a good goalkeeper
In general - the difference between Foster and Given is that Given has been a top keeper for the last decade and has the confidence of the players in front of him to do a job. That is earned by consistent performances over a long time.
May be he could have done better fopr the goal referred to above but for the most part that goal was caused by shambolic defending.
Given has been great for Newcastle fighting fires for the most part and has looked even better than city, making world class saves time and again, despite the defenders in front of him being largely awful for most of the season.
Petr Cech - who most would put in the world class bracket (whatever that is) has made more mistakes than given this year and also has the benefit of a great defence in front.
Credit where it's due - Given was a top signing.
Ah now here we go again with putting words in my mouth.
I never said he wasn't a good goalkeeper, nor did I say he was an average one. I've said plenty of times Shay Given is a good goalkeeper, although I realise that as I was focussing on his(supposed) faults, and his faults entirely, people may have missed that point.
He's a good goalkeeper, better than most in the league. He's got fantastic reactions and that makes him a great shot stopper.
I just don't think he's a world class keeper.
Nor do I, or many, think Cech's a world class keeper.
As I've said before, I think Reina and VDS are both better keepers in this league, although I don't think I'd call them both 'world class'. They both might get into the top 5 in the world.
No, but you did try to argue that the reason the teams he's played in concede bucketloads because he can't communicate or something, using the reason that defenders play much better when they leave the career graveyard that is Newcastle United. Which is bollocks and ignores the fact that the defenders at Newcastle United and Manchester City have a history of, quite frankly, not being very good.
His communication's poor. Maybe the rest of it was wrong but I still believe that's true. He's not vocal enough and nor is Casillas.
Pretty obviously if you have someone who communicates well, like VDS, it'll have a calming influence on the defenders. More calm = less individual mistakes.
I'll accept I'm wrong there, but why you seem to be focussing on that one point baffles me.
Pretty obviously if you have someone who communicates well, like VDS, it'll have a calming influence on the defenders. More calm = less individual mistakes.
I'll accept I'm wrong there, but why you seem to be focussing on that one point baffles me.
That is the only argument I could see from your first post.
The main argument was Shay Given was a good, not top class, keeper.
Would you disagree?
Would you disagree?
I don't believe that's the main point you're trying to make.
You tried to make the first point (red) justify the second (blue). But your premise is wrong in the first place.
No he's not world-class but don't think that that isn't the main point.
So I was trying to elaborate to justify my main point.
Yes, thanks for pointing that out.
'The myth about Shay Given' - the myth being he's world class. Whether you choose to believe that or not is upto you but I know for one Name Changed knows that was my main point, as I said to him I'd make a thread about how silly it was to call Given world class whenever he goes to a bigger club yet not the biggest because no big team would go in for him when he's available.
Yes, thanks for pointing that out.
'The myth about Shay Given' - the myth being he's world class. Whether you choose to believe that or not is upto you but I know for one Name Changed knows that was my main point, as I said to him I'd make a thread about how silly it was to call Given world class whenever he goes to a bigger club yet not the biggest because no big team would go in for him when he's available.
It's like saying Chelsea are top of the Premier League because they're the worst [sic] team in the league - then having a go at anyone who doesn't agree with your faulty reasoning including those who come to a different conclusion. Why else do you think this thread is so long and everyone is getting worked up?
I don't recall a single poster saying he's average. But plenty do not agree with a world class tag.
Because they disagree with my conclusion, rather than my reasoning?
That's usually the reason. I doubt many even read past the first couple of lines.
People called you out on why Citeh's massive defence isn't so massive (and why it was unfair to blame Given) and why Bramble and Boumsong were crap, not Given.
From rubbish, or falsity, you can infer anything. Why else do you think people called you out on this post?
Not necessarily your conclusion. I see a lot of people posting confused replies because you're blaming Given for Adebayor's own-goal, and because Given doesn't "organise" enough. They may agree with your conclusion, but your reasoning was bollocks, which is why so many replies are incredulous.
You were saying that is was not a coincidence that both Newcastle and City concede so many goals and you said that Shay Given was a big reason for that. You said that the defences were not that bad and that Given was a big reason for so many goals going in. I simply said that I did not believe that at all and that it was because of shite defending. So then I used the example of City letting in 9 goals in 3 matches. I looked at all the goals and most come from defensive mistakes and have absolutely nothing to do with Shay Given. There is nothing to back up your claim that Shay Given is not a quality goalkeeper, he makes feck all mistakes, he makes unbelievable saves. Any manager/player that has ever worked with him think he is fantastic. Any evidence directly contradicts what you say about him.
In complete disagreement. How do you explain his consistent exceptional form when playing for Ireland?
That question seems to be ignored every time it is asked.
Besides the fact that we've been looking for a keeper for at least half of this decade and not once have we went in for Given.
Arsenal have brought in two new keepers from abroad rather than get Given since replacing Seaman.
The fact that each of the fop four, as well as Spurs, Villa etc. have ignored Given time and again despite needing a keeper at various points would indicate managers have similar concerns.
I'll admit I've probably looked into things too deep to prove a point, everyone does it when they strongly disagree with something - they look into things too much - and I'd very rarely made such outlandish statements but I just find it very hard to understand why anyone sees him as world class, and why people tend to think that if a keeper hasn't made a blunder or a fool of himself then he's not at fault for the goal. It's like saying a striker's not at fault for not scoring goals if he doesn't miss loads of easy chances, which obviously isn't the case as it's his job to get into positions to score the goals as well as finish them.
He's looked more vocal in the past two games though, I'll give him that.
So Berbatov's a world class striker?
Producing at club level's always been the best barometer for judging players.
I find it hard calling a keeper top class that's conceded so many goals year in, year out, is all. That's lead to plenty of unusual, possibly absurd, assumptions and me looking into things too much seemingly.
I think if he is actually a world class keeper he's pretty unique in the sense that he's one of the very few ones to concede so many goals. Surely there aren't many other similar cases?
Maybe it's the unusualness of his case that's led to me making wrong assumptions, and my logic in this case is flawed.
Who knows, I was just hoping someone could prove me wrong and show me the right way, or someone could prove me right and vindicate the opinion, sadly neither's happened.
Great shot stopper but poor in the air. Seems to be stuck on his line. He's too small as well. By no means anywhere near world class. And to be honest the only people who are arguing he is are Irish.
Your logic is flawed. Given is almost universally acclaimed as a solid goalkeeper so if you make the assertion he's not very good, the burden of proof is on you to prove so - not on others to prove the opposite.
Your reasoning is flawed and therefore any conclusion you make from it is immaterial - falsity implies anything. That is the "counterproof" that is required - we don't need to find some elaborate argument like your original post. This is the whole point about the burden of proof.
Your post reeks of "Oh, nobody has managed to change my mind that Given isn't very good, so he's not very good." Maybe that's fine in your little bubble. But if nobody can vindicate nor vilify your opinion, then it doesn't make your opinion right nor wrong, and certainly does not suddenly make the universal (and justified) opinion that Given is good - suddenly wrong.
How many people do you need to point out to you that it's back fours containing the likes of Bramble, Boumsong, Cacapa, Babayaro, Moore, and more recently Lescott, Toure, Richards and Bridge which have led to him conceding more goals than you apparently expect from a world class keeper?
No need to feel too bad about this thread - your wish came true and you've been proven categorically wrong. Given - great keeper, perhaps the best of the decade in the PL, but he chose to stay at Newcastle and as such played behind a succession of muppets.
This post is bang on for me.
Yeh but he's not "unversally acclaimed", is he? A bunch of commentators and the no-marks down the pub think he is, but no top club or manager has ever taken a chance on him. People point to his loyalty, but that's bollocks. If he was as good as some people like to claim he is he would have been snapped up long ago.
And are you not doing exactly what you're complaining about? "Sorry, mate, you can't simply say your opinion is right and you need evidence to prove you wrong; that's ridiculous and unfair. No, my opinion is right and you need evidence to prove me wrong."
And it's more than a coincidence that Given's most vehement supporters in this thread tend to be... wait for it... Irish.
Who's supporting him that's Irish? Neither X2nb6, Brad or me are Irish...
You do talk an inordinate amount of bollocks. But I suppose you're gotten your reaction, which tends to be what floats your boat on here.
As said above, some of his strongest supporters in this thread aren't even Irish. But why let the facts get in the way of a glib comment like that?
It's far from universal, I don't think he's a top class keeper nor do many other good judges.
So you don't think the Irish over-rate Given in any way, shape or form? Because I can tell you, knowing a fair number of Irish people, they really, really do.
The same way the English football fan horribly over-rates Rooney, or Gerrard, which I'll freely admit but wasn't relevant at the time.
The majority of Irish people I have come across think that Given is the bestest goalkeeper on the planet ever, fact.
Circumstances haven't allowed big teams to take him on, simply. He's (as asserted previously) not an improvement on Reina, van der Sar, Cech or Almunia. Why will a big team need to take a gamble on him when he'd at his extreme best be offering equal service?
He doesn't have to be playing for a top team to be a good goalkeeper. There's more than 4 top goalkeepers in England.
The difference is: I'm not asserting Given is good. I am arguing against Brwned's assertion "he's not that good". No, they are not the same - intuitionally, "not 'not good'" and "good" are not the same.
We see this all the time in courts of law - the prosecution needs to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant has committed a crime, while the defendant doesn't necessarily have to establish beyond reasonable doubt they are innocent (innocent until proved guilty; proving a negative; etc.). Here Brwned is trying to "prove" Given isn't very good, something his defenders don't necessarily have to detract from.
Is it fair? Well unless Brwned can show that he's not actually in the minority and that he's merely restating what is "common knowledge", i.e. he's not asserting anything and those who think he is good are actually asserting something - then yes, it is fair.
Not necessarily universal, but the majority will say "Given is at least a solid goalkeeper".
Brwned could have put the cure for AIDS at the bottom of his opening post - his reasoning is flawed, and anyone will criticise him for it - despite the fact he has the cure for AIDS at the bottom.
There are better ways of establishing Given is not world-class rather than trying to defend Bramble and Boumsong. That is all.
I'm Irish, and I overrate him. In fact, I've admitted as much on here a few times. It's difficult not to when he's the best player in your national team.
But that doesn't change the fact that in this thread, many of his strongest supporters aren't even Irish. Which somewhat scuppers the notion that it's just us Irish who are championing him. His being rated as a top keeper isn't some sort of project undertaken by the Irish media-mafia.
For what it's worth, I don't think he's in the very, very top bracket of keepers, nor will he ever be. But he's in and amongst the group after them. All keepers have weaknesses (the vast majority relate to crosses, as do his). As an overall package though he offers as much or more than most keepers both in Europe, save for the elite band of maybe six or seven.
surely you are joking.Seems like someone's taken things a bit personally.
I mean, I've came out and said that there's every chance I am wrong, and that my logic is based on false assumptions, and you come out with something like this?! Seems a bit unnecessary if you ask me.
Oh, and I was never implying, not in the slightest, that my opinion was right and everyone was else's was wrong. In fact I thought I made it blatantly clear that the opposite was more likely.
Think it's pretty clear our definition of 'top' isn't quite the same, and that's the key point.
Stick Buffon in there and I think he'd have conceded less goals, all I'm saying.
And I'm telling you your logic is wrong in your original post.
Newcastle United have ruined or stagnated several other players, not just defenders. Damien Duff, Charles N'Zogbia and Obafemi Martins, for example. Milner has improved after leaving, Scott Parker is playing for a better team and doing well, Albert Luque was Albert Luque, Michael Owen went backwards...
The Massives also made stupid mistakes - they broke up two solid back fours (Everton and Arsenal) and took the worst components (Touré vs. Gallas; Lescott vs. Jagielka) and combined them, jettisoning their best centre-back (Dunne) in the process. They then put Richards who has such terrible positional sense he probably gets lost on his way to matches, and Bridge who will be nothing more than transition to a proper top left-back. Is it any surprise they shot themselves in the foot?
It's individual mistakes which have cost Newcastle and Citeh matches. Look at Bramble and Boumsong videos - those are the sort of mistakes they made time and time again. Oddly enough we never blame Casillas for Marcelo and Sergio Ramos going AWOL in defense. They're simply crap at defending. That is why Given is so rated - he has to make do with atrocious defending and inevitably he will make mistakes of his own. As someone said, in several matches now, Given has not been responsible for any of Citeh's goals conceded. It's individual mistakes.
If it is so clear the opposite is more likely, why did you entitle this thread "The myth around Shay Given"?
And surely by saying:
Brwned said:
Brwned said:
Brwned said:
This certainly doesn't look like someone who is unsure about whether their opinion is correct or not.
No. I hope this is obvious from one of the quotes above.
Seems like you've kind of missed the point, and wasted your time repeating yourself(for about the 100th time).
Seems like you're desperately trying to prove a point I've already conceded is entirely possible, and seemingly more likely to be true.
Whether you want to accept that I've admitted there's every chance I'm wrong or not is upto you, but it seems like you're the only one who has a problem with it. I thought something before, people have made decent arguments, I've admitted my logic was in all likelihood flawed.
Think it's about time you let it go.
Seems like you're desperately trying to prove a point I've already conceded is entirely possible, and seemingly more likely to be true.
Whether you want to accept that I've admitted there's every chance I'm wrong or not is upto you, but it seems like you're the only one who has a problem with it. I thought something before, people have made decent arguments, I've admitted my logic was in all likelihood flawed.
Think it's about time you let it go.