It looks like Gordon could get his chance in the last 7 games. I don't know which games, and don't expect him to play on Saturday. But looks like he will play sometime before the end of the season. ************************************************ MARTIN OâNeill is ready to hand Craig Gordon the chance to prove he is worthy of a new contract at Sunderland. Scotland keeper Gordon has not made a first-team appearance for Sunderland since February 2011 after spending 11 months on the sidelines with a knee problem and then finding his way back into the fold blocked by Simon Mignolet and Keiren Westwood. The 29-year-old was included six times on the bench while Westwood recovered from a wrist injury, before the Ireland international resumed his place as back-up to Mignolet at Manchester City last weekend. But, with Sunderland out of the FA Cup and free from relegation worries, OâNeill is considering pitching Gordon into the starting XI during the final seven games of the campaign. Gordonâs five-year deal expires in the summer and the Black Cats boss wants to see the £9million former Hearts man on the pitch before considering offering him a new contract. OâNeill told the Echo: âIâve got what I consider three really fine goalkeepers at the football club. âOne is recovering from a long-term injury, in Craig, and genuinely, before the end of the season, I would like to see what he can do. âThe goalkeeping position is one which does cause you a problem. Itâs not as if I can switch him from right-back to left-back. âCraig is nearly about there in terms of full fitness, but the only way you can check is by putting him into the team. âItâs a situation Iâll monitor before the end of the season, particularly with Craigâs contract coming up. âBut if heâs fully fit, then really he should be in a strong bargaining position anyway. He needs to play though.â Summer signing Westwood held the goalkeeping spot on OâNeillâs arrival, but was forced out of the side through illness at the turn of the year. Mignolet has grasped his opportunity after recovering from severe facial injuries, with the Belgian international enjoying an impressive run of form despite conceding three times at Manchester City last weekend. âKeiren Westwood lost his position through illness so he could consider himself unlucky,â added OâNeill. âMignolet has done very, very well and Iâve been very pleased with him. âI donât think he could do anything about the two late goals at Manchester City. Heâs beating himself up because apparently he was getting a bit of criticism in Belgium and he was very disappointed. âSeamus McDonagh (goalkeeping coach) was full of praise for him obviously in the game and Simon said he was pleased because he had taken some stick.â ********************************************* I would be over the moon, as IMO he is the best keeper.
I think he may well get the last 7 games to show he is fit and ready to be offered a new contract. If we offer him a new contract, which matches or improves his current one and he refuses it, doesn't it still mean we can receive a fee? Only if we don't offer a contract do we lose out completely on any fees? Am I right in thinking this?
Never thought of that one, but under normal terms of employment, if your contract is completed you can leave, even if you have been offered ao follow on contract, having fullfilled your obligation.
I still see him as number 1 until he proves he is not, dont think he will be in Tomorrow but maybe Monday, who knows.
Not for me lads if Mig is injured then fine get him in if not then he is on the bench. Some on here want Mig out because he doesn't command his area or his distribution is ****e that's fine but, he is a goal keeper and his job is to keep the ball out the back of the net something he has done okay so far.
I think to be fair, all of us think Mig has done well talc but we have a big decision to make on a player that we invested £9m in and will be paying something like £40k per week to. He needs game time and we need to see if he has fully recovered before a contract is discussed. We are safe now form any relegation and therefore can afford to utilise the likes of Gordon, Campbell and Meyler to assess where they are in their comeback trails from serious injury. Our team will not be weakened by playing Gordon and we will, or more importantly, MON will be able, to assess a keeper he has probably never seen play. I'd be happy to see Gordon play the last 7 games personally.
To be fair Cest I think we've left it too late to tempt Gordon back into the fold after ignoring him and his sad lack of contract because he was injured. We should have sorted that out if only for a one year extension until he was sorted, again another nail in the ever widening coffin of SB. In my opinion if we drop Mig to give games to Gordon then there has to be a reason for it and, being sort of safe is not a good enough reason for me. What sort of message does that send to Mig if we do that?
Catch 22... We need Gordon to be given a chance again, as he is a superb g/k.. But Mig will feel hard done by, as he's done little wrong..... But it's a squad game....and we've 3 good g/k's.
To be honest, if its explained correctly and Mon is just the man for that job, then Mig will like all other players have to accept it. BTW, we are not sort of safe, we are safe. As for the contract stuff, I think the club were right not to throw another $40k per week away if the lad was never going to play again? I think we would all have been scathing if we had offered a contract to him and he just took the money and didn't play? If he plays 7 games and proves his fitness, then a contract and a career could still be made for a keeper who promised much when he came to us but has thus far delivered little
Well I'll agree to disagree with you on this one mate, Gordon is a good keeper I've no doubt about that. Dropping Mig for whatever reason MON gives him would be a mistake. Are we mathematically safe mate not sure we were? The contract was a big big mistake for me throwing 9mil down the pan for the sake of one year is ludicrous, not sure who sanctioned that but they fooked up.
Fair enough kidda. BTW, I asked earlier, on another thread, if we were to offer him a contract which matched his current one or bettered it, would we not then still receive a fee for him? Thats my understanding. He can only go on a free if we dont offer a contract in time.
