Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Rozay, Dec 3, 2016.
Best goalkeeper in Europe now official.
He gets unnecessary hate because of the confidence he has in himself but he's proven that he's well worth the no1 jersey.
He's an excellent goalkeeper, you guys can't really complain. Sure, not a full package keeper, but those keepers are quite rare.
so just a coincidence that City have become far more successful after he was dumped. sorry but he was a liability.. that moment of signing the National Anthem at the top of his voice summed up how over-hyped he got and that allowed him to lose concentration. often shaky, often making bad decisions and affecting his fellow defenders. as for Henderson, I'm afraid that shows how deluded you are. Not saying he isn't good (he is) but he won't be England No1 for some time (if ever)
I think he is not as good as he believes he is ; this is also shown through his comment on Alisson. The fact that he himself makes an equally big blunder later on has hopefully humbled him a bit.
He's really not that good. Rarely holds shots, rarely comes off his line to deal with aerial balls, little command of his box.
Nothing wrong with players with self confidence, some people seem to have a problem with it, it's bizarre.
He's Joe Hart mk 2 for me. Just way more likeable.
I get a little scared every time this thread is bumped.
Shit I thought the same thing..
Don't dispute he's had a good career and hit a lofty peak earlier in the decade. But Hart was error-prone since 2013, was at fault for England getting knocked out in the group stages in 2014 and 2016, and generally got an easy ride from the media because he was still pulling off top performances in a handful of higher profile Champions League games. It basically took someone with Guardiola's credibility to erode the media's perception of his status as one of the top keepers around, even though he'd been inconsistent for a number of years before that point.
No it's not a coincidence. It's because they hired the best manager in the world, rather than decent but unexceptional ones like Pellegrini and Mancini.
He wasn't a liability at City for most of his career, he was one of the best keepers in the league. He had a dramatic drop off and turned in to an absolute joke, but that doesn't mean that we have to rewrite history and pretend he was always a poor keeper. He had the odd off game and had his weaknesses like every keeper who isn't a great, but he was a good goalie.
Being passionate and singing your national anthem loudly (as people were demanding?) sums up how over-hyped he was? How do you know that allowed him to lose concentration?
That's enough of De Gea, this is Pickford thread.
Pickford would be delighted if he was Joe Hart 'mk 2'. He's yet to show the kind of form Hart did from 2009-2012, and even after his dip Hart was still better than Pickford is now. It's only since he left City that Hart drastically declined, beginning at Torino.
His Torino move came after Euro 16 right? He was absolutely awful in that tournament, pretty hard to remember him making a save.
Yeah true, his decline started that summer. He was dreadful at the Euros.
Euro 2016 was an actual disgrace. Every goal we conceded I remember thinking he could have done better.
But yeah, he was genuinely a very good keeper for City for a good while, that amazing game vs Dortmund stands out. People forget that because he had one of the sharpest drop offs I've ever seen for a player who really wasn't that old.
it's called one fact after another... also known as evidence.you go ahead and think he was great but i judge great as Peter S, Gordon Banks and Peter Shilton
He looks like a character from a Stanley Kubrick film who talks to his gun.
You gave zero evidence of anything. City being better after Joe Hart is not proof that Joe Hart was shit, it's proof that Guardiola is arguably the best manager of this generation and City bringing him in has made them more consistent.
I literally said 'he wasn't a great', so I don't know why you're telling me what you judge a great on. He was a good keeper, one of the better ones in the league in his prime, and Pickford would do well to reach that level as long as he doesn't experience the sharp drop off.
Everyone knows Joe Hart fell off a cliff, but that doesn't mean we have to act like he was never decent.
Indeed. Too many people can only calculate in binary these days.
His decline seemed to begin in earnest at the same time he started getting ridiculously pumped up in the tunnel at the 2014 World Cup. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the same happens to Pickford.
Well I would.
One of the main reasons why Hart looked good was that there were no other good English keepers at that time.
Pickford is the English number one keeper against a number of other pretty good keepers.
I am surprised with the level of detractors as I think he is top class.
Hart looked good because he was a deserved starting keeper for one of the best sides in the league where he won league titles. City fans on here have repeatedly said he was very good for them during that period, and who would know better?
What other good keepers is Pickford up against? Butland, Henderson, Pope, Heaton etc? It's a very average list of goalkeepers. Pickford is decent but Hart was better at his peak, though time is still on Pickford's side.
Really good keeper but he flaps too much imo, I like keepers to give an air of calm.
He may become more composed with experience idk.
Imagine the chaos with Pickford, Young, Jones & Smalling in the same lineup
city conceded fewere goals afer he left.. but of course that's not really evidence. Pep ran out and stopped the ball
Seeing our transfer strategy, he is surely on top of the list for De Gea replacement.
much prefer Buckland - better (in my mind) and cheaper. and less of a prat
What are you even trying to argue? That a manager can't improve a defensive record? He invested about a bazillion in new defenders, built a system around heavy ball possession in which the opposition barely get shots on goal (seriously, watch city play and see how rarely teams test Ederson) but yeah, Man City concede fewer goals purely because Joe Hart left.
Not that it would even be relevant if that was the case, because I've clearly stated 2-3 times that Joe Hart at the tail end of his City career turned in to a poor keeper. That doesn't mean that in his prime he was also poor.
I beg your pardon. I hope you are trying to be ironic...
Yep, I remember the first game of the season way back when and you absolutely battered us but it stayed 0-0 due to Hart, yeah he dropped the odd clanger but was a fine keeper for 5-6 years between 2009 - 2014.
I also think lots of goalkeepers are now peaking earlier, not sure why but it just appears that way to me now.
He's in the best team for the Nations League .
ahh yes the Nations League - UEFA's answer to the Milk Cup!
I miss the Milk Cup....
Actually he was ranked as the number one player in the whole thing with the ‘Fedex Performance Zone’ on the UEFA site.
Seems biased towards keeper though with 4 in the top 10.
No idea why anyone rates him.
He is shit. Has been for a while. Those that get their football news through British media (instead of watching games) rate him. Which is quite a large portion of the country. With twitter access unfortunately.
Separate names with a comma.