Agree.
We were blinded by his shot-stopping because the poor bastard was basically the last line of defence who was constantly bombarded and he dealt with it impressively.
But in reality, he only has one impressive aspect to his game; shot-stopping. It's the most important for a keeper but when every other facet of his keeping is piss-poor then he can't be in contention for best keeper in the world.
- Communication with his backline is non-existent.
- Command of the area, he has none.
- He is extremely weak in the air.
- His passing is atrocious.
- He has such a weak personality that he lost the captaincy after what, a month?
- Penalties are a harsh area to criticise a keeper but when De Gea is as useless as he is with them, he deserves it. He should've fecking fluked a few more by now.
Yet, still somehow, people still don't think this is a huge factor in why literally every centre back we have signed since he became our keeper has struggled.
Being a good shot stopper (which is highly debatable now anyway) simply isn't going to compensate for the goals a keeper will let in if he's that bad at those other aspects of keeping.
To be clear, I'm not saying that it's all De Geas fault, some of these players have just been bad signings but the common denominator throughout is the keeper.
Its a pretty big coincidence that we sign these highly rated defenders because that are playing well elsewhere, they come here and struggle, and then fade away or in some cases, such as Jonny Evans and Chris Smalling, leave and look good again.
Fair enough if it was one or two but, as I said, we're talking about literally every centre back that has played regularly with De Gea.
We could sign Van Djik and Koulibaly and we'd still struggle to keep clean sheets if De Gea was in goal IMO.
Our response: Make him the highest paid keeper in the world.
In other words, we deserve to be were we are.