Celtic v. Hamilton, Sun 2 Aug, 4.30pm ko, Sky Sports

3-5-2

Forster

Elhamed
Julien
Ajer

Forrest
Christie
Brown
NcGregor
Elyonoussi

Eddy
Griffiths

7-0.

 

Is this the lovechild of Ntcham and McGregor?

 

Agree re stats, just pointing out that "nowhere near good enough" was a bit harsh.

 

I've nothing against the guy and maybe it was a little harsh

 

woops.

 

Definitely not No 1.

 

Plenty choices !!!!!!!!!!! Please explain as he was only here for 18 months and for 12 of them Gordon was 1st choice. Let's look at facts. After being signed by Rat Rodgers He came in to the team mostly after Lenny came back to the club and played 31 games that season. The same player was also signed by Lenny for Hibs, but released so he could sign for celtic. He's played 38 games and can't think of loads of games we're he was either * or to blame for goals. So to say he's not good enough is unfair to a degree. Every single keeper makes mistakes just if your a celtic keeper it's magnified 100 times

 

So according to some a close on 6 games out of 10 is a clean sheet is not good enough. Ffs Foster was a good goalie but probably no better than those statsc

 

So he has played 46 games for celtic, for me that is enough to make an opinion on whether he is good enough or not. You even mention he played 31 in a season, so you kind of proved yourself wrong.

Scott Bain is not good enough to be our number 1 GK. The league cup final would have been lost by 2 or 3 goals had he started.

Would you be happy with him as our number 1 for a champions league campaign?

 

Just cracked my first can for this.

 

Are you trying to suggest Bain is as good as Forster?

 

Exactly what I thought when I read this

 

The season he played 31 games he replaced Gordon because the latter's kicking was horrendous. And correct me if I'm wrong that one if the features at the time was how impressed people were at his distribution. He went on to have the 6 clean sheets out of 10 ratio which in a 38 game season would be in the region of 24 clean sheets which was what Gordon and Bain did in the previous season. He did have a couple of dodgy moments but goalkeepers at 40 million quid do as well. My poi t is hes a good keeper with stats that back that up, no worse than either Gordon or Forster. As far as the cup final went Foster had a game and half no denying that. Some great reflex saves but you can't say we would have lost if Bain was in goal either. I'm not saying Bain should be number one but he was good enough in 2018/2019 to get a 60% shut out rate so not the worst keeper, like De Vries was that's for sure

 

No not at all. What I'm getting at is his shut out rate in games played compares as well as either Foster or Gordon, 6 clean sheets every 10 games, which isn't the worst is it.

 

Can't wait the first game for the 10 begins.. Downside we have to watch it on sky every fckin game.. Commons Boyd and to top it off that bafoon mcqueen is back hosting

 

Aye maybe but watching the big monster munching half wit make an * of himself on live TV is worth it if its him. Is Sutton not involved then as he was on BT last season alongside so is he on our home games. I would have thought Sutton would have been a bigger expert than that *. After all suttie managed more goals in one game against us than Boyd in his whole career with the dead ones

 

Stats for a Celtic keeper in scottish football isn't a good measure of performance and can easily be misleading, especially as we have been so dominant the last few years

 

Nonsense!!

Absolute cert to be sunny.

 

So just ignore them. That's like saying if you score goals in Scotland then don't buy a player!! You can use stats as a guide to buying a player as it tells you what level of player they are. Look at say Foster before his first spell. Nothing of note really but came on bundles. Bain has been here a while and been working with Stevie Woods so I would think he's probably improved in that time. As for being dominant your right but your goalkeeper still has shots to deal with and mistakes that defenders in front of him make. Look I think Foster would have been ideal but Bain will do a decent job or at least not be written off as not good enough when the stats for us show he's on a par with clean sheets to both Foster and Gordon..

 

If the stats were more in depth rather than surface stats, you could get a better idea of his performances. How many saves per clear goal scoring opportunity as an example and without looking up the stats I'm sure we can clearly see Forster is ahead on that. His stats for European football is played 2 lost 2, I dont think he played bad in those games or was specifically at fault, as I say stats can be misleading.

Basically you can make stats say whatever your point of view is, politicians do so every day.

Do I think Bain is good enough for number 1? No I don't, especially when we are going for 10.
Good enough as a back up? Yes.

It was pointed out to me in a previous post that maybe when I said he was nowhere near good enough that I may have been harsh and I accepted that but still for me he isn't and shouldn't be considered a number 1 and I think Lenny and Woods agree