When is he due back, because in my opinion we need him fast. Bruce also needs him to sign a new contract. As a keeper my self, I know a bit about that department. While of course I'm nowhere near as good as Mignolet etc... I do understand the fundementals of being a top keeper. For me, Mignolet was to blame for both goals. The first goal his position was dreadful, he should of made himself big at the front post and not let it under his body (by the way the defence was dreadful as well)... The second goal he was not big enough. While it was cheaky finish, Mignolet should of saved that, or atleadt got a foot/hand to it. He is a very dodgy keeper, and his shot stopping ins't even great. He seems to parry infront of him quite alot. Play Westwood for now, then Flash when back!
Recon Flash will leave in jan, he will make some handy cash for himself that way. Well done Brucie, well done indeed.
Don't think he'll go if he's offered a new contract has been in the Scottish is saying he wants to fight for his place, before anyone says anything IMO he's a straight up guy.
never thought i would say it although i was a fan when we bought him. Then i think of Stoke away last year when he was shocking. I still think he is better than Mig and Migs gonna get battered on Sat
Sorry Bill but this is what pisses me off about the Bruce haters. By all means have a go at Bruce for tactics, team selection but why is Gordons injury his ofault. Is him being out his fault. Maybe you would have given Gordon a new contract without knowing how bad his injury is. So yes, well done Bruce for having a brain.
Syd I would still have offered him a contract, because he is THAT good when fit. Plus would also cover our backsides incase someone comes in January. Surely you common sense would be to give him a contract. Remember those matches he got his points.. i.e. Bolton match and Blackpool away. He saves you about 10 points a season.! he is THAT good.
offer a contract to a player who might have knackered knees? possible, but only if it it included a clause that said "if ya knees are buggered, we can get out of the contract on a free"
I still say that was the defences or even Bruces fault (could have even been Gordons i suppose), they let Fuller be infront of Gordon all game, when liverpool played them a couple of weeks later, they had a defender between the GK and the attacker on every throw in and set piece, and the GK had room to come out and claim the ball, Gordon didnt have any room as the attacker blocked him off every single time. Yes he did look like a rabbit in headlights, but if we done what Liverpool did, from the start, I think he would have handled the situation a lot better.
I am a Gordon fan and yes its a risk but Bruce had to protect the club, he said he will talk contract when he knows the extent of Gordons injury. I can hear it now if he had given him a contract then we found he is crocked, "What a clown Bruce is". And how do we know it was up to Bruce, does Quinn have a say in contracts, just think it very, very unfair to jump on Brucies back every time. Just my view and one I feel strongly about.
Personally, I think that Gordon was left out to dry by our centre-backs in that game. He got hardly any protection from them. Anyone defending sensibly against Stoke makes sure that they protect their keeper.
