Shillzz Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Anyone seriously regret signing Friedel? Because this is a carbon copy transfer, and the original one seemed to work out pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Admit it steak, whatever Lerner/McLeish/Villa do, you're going to find fault with it. Only when I see us going backwards. Given has limited shelf life.. And your telling me our scouts/manager can only find players that are common knowledge to 8 year old kids? Where's the scope, adventure, vision and future in this signing? I just want Villa to move forward into the future, not just get by for a season in midtable. We knew Friedel was getting on a bit and we have had at least 2 years to be spying on, scouting, looking for a replacement..And all we come up with is Shay Given? Its like no work is being done at the club and we just grab what we can from the rejects box.. Errrr, we've had 3 different full time managers in place who have their own thoughts and own team. Whoever we scouted 2 years ago or even 6 months ago has little meaning now. The new manager has his own ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 8, 2011 Moderator Share Posted July 8, 2011 Sure - so weigh it up on other factors. Ok I don't think at his age I would pay the fee or the wages all things considered. In ability every time Given has appeared in the last few years he's been the same quality, whether that was for Man City or Ireland. Fans of those sides will tell you as much. There appears no real drop off in his ability. Actually it hasn't. He played 1 domestic game last season, just one so no judgement on this can be made. Before that people were talking about him not being the same keeper following the injury caused by Harewood. I know he has played for RoI last season but playing sporadic international games is no bench mark of someones ability to play week in week out in the PL. For me Given's the best keeper we could get, so worth the risk. People will feel differently - or about Foster or whoever - but I don't think anyone has been consistently as good as Shay. As Shay was and that really is the main point. Personally I would rather Foster. Like I said - I can't help but feel his spell on the bench has made everyone forget just how good he is but I'm confident he'll prove his ability at VP. I remember how good he was. I could just as easily say that his year on the bench has made people forget that people were talking about his ability being on the slide 12 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Just because one or two keepers are fine at 40 doesn't really mean anything in relation to other keepers. And there are plenty of goalkeepers in their thirties playing or played at the top schwarzer, seaman, buffon, robinson, howard those are just the ones off the top of my head. Likewise there are plenty of shit goalkeepers knocking around in their 20's. Givens injuries aside he is a more solid keeper than Foster who is just a slightly better Carson. Fergie gave Foster plenty of chances and all he did was **** them up. Also many people bemoan the fact we have Ireland here on the back of one good season well the same could be levelled at Foster and even then he made some howlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knoppy1987 Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Do not see what all the moaning is about on this one. Injuries aside, Given is one of the better keepers I have seen play in the Premier League and I think his career in the top flight has proved that. I personally don't want a younger, fitter goalkeeper for the simple reason that over the years I think an older proven goalkeeper has become more popular. I could name quite a few and so could many of you for justifiable reasons. If the risk does exist, which in my mind it doesn't, this is one definitely worth taking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 8, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted July 8, 2011 Anyone seriously regret signing Friedel? Because this is a carbon copy transfer, and the original one seemed to work out pretty well. Don't agree. I feel Friedel at the time was a far better transfer by way of being a better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Anyone seriously regret signing Friedel? Because this is a carbon copy transfer, and the original one seemed to work out pretty well. Don't agree. I feel Friedel at the time was a far better transfer by way of being a better player. Fair enough, only time will tell. My personal opinion is that prior to last season, Given was held in higher regard than Friedel was at the time of his transfer to us. Whether that makes him better now, no one actually knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brittain22 Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Whats the point in signing a keeper we will be looking to replace again this time next year? Stop your moaning child. Given is 35. Friedel and van der Sar were still top 'keepers at 40. Yes they were, But its still rare to see keepers still playing at top level beyond 35 years old. Just because Friedel managed it, dosnt necessarily mean every keeper we sign in the future will all still be playing up to 40 years old. Schmeichel was a top keeper(better than Given) yet still finished at the top come 37 years old.. I think it is now common place, off the top of my head Van Der Sarr, Friedel, Schwarzer, James, Jaaskelainen, Hahnemann and Lehmann (1st time). I think Given is best value and offers much needed pedigree/confidence to our faultering back line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 8, 2011 Moderator Share Posted July 8, 2011 Just because one or two keepers are fine at 40 doesn't really mean anything in relation to other keepers. And there are plenty of goalkeepers in their thirties playing or played at the top schwarzer, seaman, buffon, robinson, howard those are just the ones off the top of my head. Likewise there are plenty of shit goalkeepers knocking around in their 20's. Givens injuries aside he is a more solid keeper than Foster who is just a slightly better Carson. Fergie gave Foster plenty of chances and all he did was **** them up. Talk about missing the point. Anyway why do people keep saying "injuries aside" like they don't matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwanVsDalton Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I remember how good he was. I could just as easily say that his year on the bench has made people forget that people were talking about his ability being on the slide 12 months ago. Who and how? Given's been pretty much consistent to my mind - what could be considered small dips in form are easily attributable to injury. To suggest his form or ability is on the slide is guesswork - he played more than once last season, and every time he was solid and better. But you'd rather ignore when he did play and speculate on a lessening on form based on - what? I'm not really sure. I'm basing my opinion on what I've seen in the last year and before. You appear to be guessing - not necessarily a bad thing (maybe you have a feeling in your water) but I've seen no evidence of a drop in ability and it's an opinion borne out, I believe, by the people who've watched him play regularly for ROI or sporadically for Man City. As for Foster, I think Given's a better keeper. If you disagree that's fine, but I find it baffling people are ignoring evidence to the contrary to insist his ability is on the wane based on a hunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 disagree, sub gk is hardly a starring role that the club can sell, especially without European football, I don't think smithies or another young keeper would come here so we won't actually do that much better than guzan Westwood went to Sunderland I think.. on a free too. not to be a number 2 he hasnt, gordon is always injured and IMO sunderland are replacing him, mingolet whilst at times showed he's got alot of potential (more than guzan) made too many mistakes to cement a number 1 spot, westwood will be sunderlands number 1 next season and with no prem experience is a bigger risk than given Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 8, 2011 Moderator Share Posted July 8, 2011 To suggest his form or ability is on the slide is guesswork - he played more than once last season, and every time he was solid and better. But you'd rather ignore when he did play and speculate on a lessening on form based on - what? I'm not really sure. No I don't believe he did, I believe he played one domestic game for Man City last season in the league cup. I'm not ignoring anything, you seem to be making a judgement based on games he didn't play. Listen, I've always thought Given was massively over rated. A good but never great keeper, you don't have to agree with me, some will some won't that is football and the point of the site. That he has hardly played in the last 12 months, that he is knocking on and that he prior to being dropped was not the keeper he had previously been prior to injury make me even less keen on him. If you think otherwise that is fine but I'm not going to stop expressing my view or illustrating just how little football he played last season. I'm basing my opinion on what I've seen in the last year and before. You appear to be guessing - not necessarily a bad thing (maybe you have a feeling in your water) but I've seen no evidence of a drop in ability and it's an opinion borne out, I believe, by the people who've watched him play regularly for ROI or sporadically for Man City. You aren't forming an opinion on anything you saw from him in City's colours in domestic football last season that is for sure unless you are doing it from one game. You and I are both stating our personal opinions based on what we've seen on him. Your opinion holds no more or less factual basis than mine does no matter how you would like to claim otherwise. As for Foster, I think Given's a better keeper. If you disagree that's fine, but I find it baffling people are ignoring evidence to the contrary to insist his ability is on the wane based on a hunch. Once again, you are going on a hunch that his ability is the same. There is little difference in the weight of opinion so please stop with this line of arguement that you are speaking fact against groundless hunches or feelings because its nonesense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwanVsDalton Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 No I don't believe he did, I believe he played one domestic game for Man City last season in the league cup. But that's what I'm saying - you're disingenuously suggesting he played one game. He didn't. He played eight domestically, in Europe and internationally. I'm sure you'll laugh that off, but I'm asserting that over those games he did well and basing my opinions on those games. Evidence. I'm not ignoring anything, you seem to be making a judgement based on games he didn't play. Actually I think that's exactly what you're doing. I've only commented on the games he HAS played in. Listen, I've always thought Given was massively over rated. A good but never great keeper, you don't have to agree with me, some will some won't that is football and the point of the site. That he has hardly played in the last 12 months, that he is knocking on and that he prior to being dropped was not the keeper he had previously been prior to injury make me even less keen on him. Fine, no problem with that. Except on the last part - why do you think that? I asked previously and you ignored it. I'd say it's an opinion held by a minority, although I'm happy for you to prove me wrong. If you think otherwise that is fine but I'm not going to stop expressing my view or illustrating just how little football he played last season. Don't want you to, haven't asked you to - no need to be defensive. You aren't forming an opinion on anything you saw from him in City's colours in domestic football last season that is for sure unless you are doing it from one game. See above on the one game thing. But I am basing my opinion on what I've seen. You and I are both stating our personal opinions based on what we've seen on him. Your opinion holds no more or less factual basis than mine does no matter how you would like to claim otherwise. Where did I claim mine holds more factual basis? I haven't, not once. Just asserted my opinion based on what I've seen of the goalkeeper. I've asserted his ability remains sharp, explained why, you've said otherwise and I've asked why...so far as I can tell your answer is limited to he didn't play much last season and you don't fancy him much. As I've said before, fair enough but I think it's a baffling assertion to make given his solid performances to date (including those he made last year). Once again, you are going on a hunch that his ability is the same. There is little difference in the weight of opinion so please stop with this line of arguement that you are speaking fact against groundless hunches or feelings because its nonesense. No I'm not. I'm going on the fact that I've been watching Given closely throughout his career and I've seen no sign in the last season or two that his ability is in anyway diminished. You say you have, I ask why and you say he hasn't played much - you see where I'm going here? My opinion, based on games he's played. Your opinion appears based more on the games he hasn't played. Look as you've said, you don't really rate him which is fine but I've asked repeatedly for you to offer a more detailed view on why he's losing ability and you haven't. You've just gotten defensive. He only played eight times last year. Not a great number. But he seemed plenty able in those games. So somebody tell me - how can the conclusion he's losing ability be made? Who talked about him being on his way out a season ago and why? When has his form dipped really badly? What part of his game has really deteriorated from ten years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Just because one or two keepers are fine at 40 doesn't really mean anything in relation to other keepers. And there are plenty of goalkeepers in their thirties playing or played at the top schwarzer, seaman, buffon, robinson, howard those are just the ones off the top of my head. Likewise there are plenty of shit goalkeepers knocking around in their 20's. Givens injuries aside he is a more solid keeper than Foster who is just a slightly better Carson. Fergie gave Foster plenty of chances and all he did was **** them up. Talk about missing the point. Anyway why do people keep saying "injuries aside" like they don't matter? Not sure why you deleted my post, I did not insult nor post on poster. But just to clarify I don't think I missed the point but I guess I won't find out with little explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_Tony_Daley Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I'm all for people having personal opions & respecting them, but I really dont see a major issue with Given, if it is 3.5 mil its a decent price even at his age, now for his age it doesnt matter its not even about age with players its about how you look after your body, look at Giggs..even with all his extra bedroom activities he's still going strong n hes an outfield player, goalies tend to have longevity which we all should know as we've had a guy in goal recently aged 40, as for his injury he'd still have been diving round in training for the past year and as far as i know he hasnt been re-injured. In a nutshell for me this is a good signing if it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Nice little video I do not think anyone has posted... http://tinyurl.com/6esb9tg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I still for the life of me cant see how some people think this is a bad idea? He is still a top top keeper, i suppose there is just no pleasing some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 8, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted July 8, 2011 I suspect it may be because some people question quite how much of a top top keeper he is , and also wonder about how much he will be paid (given his current 90k) . And there are questions about whether dropping £xm on an aging keeper is a good idea for a club apparently tightening it's belt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_The_Villan Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Surely you can see why people have doubts Wiggy? Im not totally against this signing but i certainly have my doubts about it. Could go tits up very quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tezzaleed Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Anyone seriously regret signing Friedel? Because this is a carbon copy transfer, and the original one seemed to work out pretty well. Don't agree. I feel Friedel at the time was a far better transfer by way of being a better player. Fair enough, only time will tell. My personal opinion is that prior to last season, Given was held in higher regard than Friedel was at the time of his transfer to us. Whether that makes him better now, no one actually knows. I agree an in form Given is a better keeper all round than an in form Friedel. I'll be amazed if we get him relatively cheaply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts