Craig Gordon

Douglas was just *. Gordon has lost form/confidence. He is a good goalie when he is playing how he can.
He's no Forster that's indisputable, but for what we pay him and what it would cost us to get an equivalent he's good.

We've been spoiled a bit with goalkeepers over the last decade, that's not Gordon's fault.
O'Neill's biggest failing was not managing to spot a keeper.

 

I actually think Gordon's shot stopping is either overrated or has gone down hill. Never knows a goalkeeper to get beaten at his near post as much .

 

Absolutely. The one thing that side massively lacked .

 

If that team had a top keeper we could have won the European Cup. I dont care if I get pelters but I believe it. Our home form was unreal and if we had a good goalie and with a bitta luck we could have went all the way.

 

Brilliant last season, rotten this season. Seems to have regressed, much like Lustig, he looks fragile.

His kicking yesterday was ridiculous, I don't think he found a Celtic jersey the whole first half.

 

Well they never got out of the group stages, doubt that was just Rab's fault :smiley-laughing002:

 

They finished with 9 points a few times and a decent goalie may have seen us nick a crucial point in an away game making all the difference. Look at us in European knockout football under Martin, Seville need I say more? Could we have grinded our way through top sides in knockout football? I honestly think we could have. Big Rab was a good honest pro but he was not a top keeper by any stretch, had we had a top keeper that team could have done the business. I honestly believe that.

 

I think Gordon has been * all year. His distribution is woeful, he is indecisive at crosses and he get's beat too often at the near post.

Last year he was my player of the year, this year I've been crying out for Bailey to be given a shot.

 

Gordon's a quality keeper. No doubt about it.

 

Just want to say I'm not just pointing this out because you're og1, it's something that's been posted a good few times and always bothers me:

We didn't get 9 points under O'Neill in the group stages "a few times". It was once- his first CL campaign.

2001/02- 9 points
2003/04- 7 points
2004/05- 5 points

Actually did worse each time.

 

Well didnt oldco qualify one time with 7 points? A top keeper would have been the makings of that team.

The first season we missed out by a point. The second season by 2 points and the final season by 4 points. The final season maybe not but certainly the first two seasons were our margin was less than one game, a top keeper could certainly have made the difference. People who disagree are just disagreeing for the sake of it.

 

They are disagreeing because that is their opinion. The points you are making are made on assumption and not fact. Someone else may make a completely different assumption and by definition will have a different opinion. No one is correct because no one knows how it would have turned out.

A top keeper may well have made the difference, and quality often does, but there are no guarantees that it would have been the case.

 

Bla. I dont have time for tip toeing around peoples opinions. People who think that having a top keeper would not have been the makings of that team are simply wrong. I personally think they could have won a European Cup had we had a top keeper and that is an opinion that is debatable unlike my first point which is a case of true and false.

 

They are not simply wrong. They disagree with you on a point that is not fact. Your opinion is no more valid than theirs as they are both based on assumptions. Douglas pulled off some great saves on the way to the UEFA final in 2003 - there is no guarantee that ANY other keeper would have made the same saves. Maybe we wouldn't have got to the final at all with another keeper.

You wouldn't make much of a lawyer. "Your honour, it is a case of true or false!"

"No it's not, it's hearsay!"

"Bla, I don't have time for tip-toeing around your opinion, M'Lud"

You can't dismiss other peoples view on points that aren't fact. You can debate them, but to pass your own opinion off as fact is factually incorrect. True or false?

 

What would you have a quality keeper and a * defence? Or a * keeper and a decent defence??????

 

People slagged off forsters kicking