Mignolet - third best premier league keeper last season


Status
Not open for further replies.
By saying exactly the same thing as you said on a previous post doesnt make it any more correct ;) Mignolet is good, I know hes good and O'Neill knows hes good. Thats why a top class manager will select him as first choice keeper for the second successive season in a row while internet experts paw over perceived flaws in his game every week.

Just because O'Neill doesn't change things and keeps him in, doesn't mean he massively rates him. O'Neill has always tended to have a keeper and more or less stick with him through thick and thin unless they're completely error prone as Sorensen was when he first went to Villa and I dont think that's any different with Mig.

I also think O'Neill was impressed with him playing on through injury when Westwood cried off and then it bought him time when he didn't deserve to be playing last season. If there's one thing you can't fault Mig with it's a lack of bravery or a bad attitude and he's half way their with impressing O'Neill, but that doesn't necessarily mean O'Neill thinks he's this amazing prospect people on here are peddling. And he'll be 'steady' when he's consistent in his game, not when he's too often indifferent.

he's a great shot stopper and made some excellent saves to keep us in games. the amount of excellent saves he's made from shots/headers more than make up for the few times he's cocked up a cross and we've conceded.

He isn't. He's good, but not agile enough to be 'great' as a shotstopper.
 
Perryqhill said:
Just because O'Neill doesn't change things and keeps him in, doesn't mean he massively rates him. O'Neill has always tended to have a keeper and more or less stick with him through thick and thin unless they're completely error prone as Sorensen was when he first went to Villa and I dont think that's any different with Mig.

I also think O'Neill was impressed with him playing on through injury when Westwood cried off and then it bought him time when he didn't deserve to be playing last season. If there's one thing you can't fault Mig with it's a lack of bravery or a bad attitude and he's half way their with impressing O'Neill, but that doesn't necessarily mean O'Neill thinks he's this amazing prospect people on here are peddling. And he'll be 'steady' when he's consistent in his game, not when he's too often indifferent.

He isn't. He's good, but not agile enough to be 'great' as a shotstopper.

Sorry fella, but I have to agree to disagree. Plain and simple. When we concede and it's his fault every time I will agree with you. As it stands, the records will look favourably on a young Belgian lad in his first full season playing top level football.
 
Sorry fella, but I have to agree to disagree. Plain and simple. When we concede and it's his fault every time I will agree with you. As it stands, the records will look favourably on a young Belgian lad in his first full season playing top level football.

I watch football, I don't decide how good a player is by his 'records' (though goal records aren't a bad thing to start with) and though he's a decent keeper there's certainly room for improvement. This percentage saved stat having De Gea at the top says how reliable it is, because it only tells you he made a save, not how, the quality of it, or the shot etc etc. As a one off seasonal stat it could make any keeper look good.
 
Just because O'Neill doesn't change things and keeps him in, doesn't mean he massively rates him. O'Neill has always tended to have a keeper and more or less stick with him through thick and thin unless they're completely error prone as Sorensen was when he first went to Villa and I dont think that's any different with Mig.

I also think O'Neill was impressed with him playing on through injury when Westwood cried off and then it bought him time when he didn't deserve to be playing last season. If there's one thing you can't fault Mig with it's a lack of bravery or a bad attitude and he's half way their with impressing O'Neill, but that doesn't necessarily mean O'Neill thinks he's this amazing prospect people on here are peddling. And he'll be 'steady' when he's consistent in his game, not when he's too often indifferent.



He isn't. He's good, but not agile enough to be 'great' as a shotstopper.


You speak a lot of sense in general but what sort of argument is that FFS. O'Neill is an excellent manager and he wont play a goalkeeper next season on a sympathy vote or one that that he thinks is any less than very good. He would be an idiot to do that. He will play Mignolet next season as first choice because he rates him highly its ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

If you disagree with O'Neill that of course is your prerogative.

I watch football, I don't decide how good a player is by his 'records' (though goal records aren't a bad thing to start with) and though he's a decent keeper there's certainly room for improvement. This percentage saved stat having De Gea at the top says how reliable it is, because it only tells you he made a save, not how, the quality of it, or the shot etc etc. As a one off seasonal stat it could make any keeper look good.

Apologies I didn't realise thats what your opinion was - it sounded to me a short while ago that you were arguing that he wasnt good enough.
 
I think he is quality, and one of our best assets.

Belgium number 1, seeing as though that the Chelsea lad played int he Uefa cup final, is no easy thing.
 
I suppose Mignolet is better than his biggest critics would suggest but not as good as his major admirers believe.

That would make him competent without being a world beater, I reckon.
 
You speak a lot of sense in general but what sort of argument is that FFS. O'Neill is an excellent manager and he wont play a goalkeeper next season on a sympathy vote or one that that he thinks is any less than very good. He would be an idiot to do that. He will play Mignolet next season as first choice because he rates him highly its ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

If you disagree with O'Neill that of course is your prerogative.

Who's saying he would play him on a sympthy vote? I'm saying he'll play him as he's the man in possesion and he's been loyal and put himself out, whilst being in and out of form, which has probably bought him time, being young and all that.

Fuck off man :lol: You're saying because O'Neill plays him, that it automatically means he rates him highly and that's not necessarily true. It's also as much a presumption on your part as mine that it's because he's the man in possesion of the shirt and has proven he wants it more than Westwood and is less of a fitness gamble than Gordon, who was on big wages. Nice try like.

Apologies I didn't realise thats what your opinion was - it sounded to me a short while ago that you were arguing that he wasnt good enough.

I think he's decent, but not the steady keeper with massive potential people are talking about at the moment. He may become steady with experience and there's nothing wrong with a steady keeper, but people keep talking about how he'll improve and how good he'll be and for me there's too many areas in his game which will stop him achieving it.
 
Who's saying he would play him on a sympthy vote? I'm saying he'll play him as he's the man in possesion and he's been loyal and put himself out, whilst being in and out of form, which has probably bought him time, being young and all that.

Fuck off man :lol: You're saying because O'Neill plays him, that it automatically means he rates him highly and that's not necessarily true. It's also as much a presumption on your part as mine that it's because he's the man in possesion of the shirt and has proven he wants it more than Westwood and is less of a fitness gamble than Gordon, who was on big wages. Nice try like.



I think he's decent, but not the steady keeper with massive potential people are talking about at the moment. He may become steady with experience and there's nothing wrong with a steady keeper, but people keep talking about how he'll improve and how good he'll be and for me there's too many areas in his game which will stop him achieving it.

No I said if o'Neill plays Mignolet week in, week out next season having been here a season himself and not attempting to replace him then he clearly rates him as a really good keeper. I'm certain that will be the case. O'Nell really rates Mignolet and you dont.

Fair enough your entitled to your opinion but its not half as educated as his.
 
Fair enough your entitled to your opinion but its not half as educated as his.

True enough. Though I wouldn't have spent £8m or so on Heskey and Harewood, £8m or so on Curtis Davies and £8.5m on Reo coker. He may be a good manager and have a more educated opinion on many footballers, but it doesn't always means he's right....
 
True enough. Though I wouldn't have spent £8m or so on Heskey and Harewood, £8m or so on Curtis Davies and £8.5m on Reo coker. He may be a good manager and have a more educated opinion on many footballers, but it doesn't always means he's right....

Agreed and that should have been your line of argument from the off ;)
 
Who's saying he would play him on a sympthy vote? I'm saying he'll play him as he's the man in possesion and he's been loyal and put himself out, whilst being in and out of form, which has probably bought him time, being young and all that.

Fuck off man :lol: You're saying because O'Neill plays him, that it automatically means he rates him highly and that's not necessarily true. It's also as much a presumption on your part as mine that it's because he's the man in possesion of the shirt and has proven he wants it more than Westwood and is less of a fitness gamble than Gordon, who was on big wages. Nice try like.



I think he's decent, but not the steady keeper with massive potential people are talking about at the moment. He may become steady with experience and there's nothing wrong with a steady keeper, but people keep talking about how he'll improve and how good he'll be and for me there's too many areas in his game which will stop him achieving it.

So he's a decent, unsteady keeper?:eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top