Roy Carroll

E

EastParkTiger

Member
Jan 28, 2011
30
0
6
NULL
Roy Carroll is a free agent and looking for a club.

Anyone think he could do a job for City? (again)

I don't fancy the idea of having 2 keepers on loan and hope we at least sign one.
 
Carrolls done nothing for a long time. I don't have a problem with two loan keepers as long as they are season long, my only concern would be using up two loan spots
 
EastParkTiger said:
Roy Carroll is a free agent and looking for a club.

Anyone think he could do a job for City? (again)

I don't fancy the idea of having 2 keepers on loan and hope we at least sign one.
Click to expand...

Nah, to old and last time he in England he was poor for me.

I have never found out why it matters whether they are on loan or permanant what difference does it make? Guzan and Mannone where still as good for us and that was nothing to do because they where on loan or permanant.
 
Carroll is a good keeper at Championship level and will also have something to prove, that he can still cut it at his age. Why not give him a trial Mr Pearson?
 
City1904 said:
Nah, to old and last time he in England he was poor for me.

I have never found out why it matters whether they are on loan or permanant what difference does it make? Guzan and Mannone where still as good for us and that was nothing to do because they where on loan or permanant.
Click to expand...

The difference is that season long loans is they may not be here next season thus a new keeper has to blend into the squad and it takes time. If you have a permanent keeper they will be here of years and thus know the squad better.
 
originallambrettaman said:
I think we'll try and bring our second keeper in on a permanent and I suspect we'll bring in someone who's a bit younger and has no baggage.
Click to expand...

Well, I would say Gulasci falls under that bracket.

I still think Matt Duke would have made a decent number two, but things need to move on I suppose
 
H-D city till I die said:
Well, I would say Gulasci falls under that bracket.

I still think Matt Duke would have made a decent number two, but things need to move on I suppose
Click to expand...

That's because Gulasci is the first keeper, it's the second one I think we'll look for on a permanent, as I do expect two keepers to come in.

NP obviously didn't think Duke was good enough, when we see the two he gets, we'll know if he was right or not.
 
EastParkTiger said:
Roy Carroll is a free agent and looking for a club.
Anyone think he could do a job for City? (again)
I don't fancy the idea of having 2 keepers on loan and hope we at least sign one.
Click to expand...

God no.

JosephSeddon said:
Carroll is a good keeper at Championship level and will also have something to prove, that he can still cut it at his age. Why not give him a trial Mr Pearson?
Click to expand...

Because he's not very good and there are better free agents out there.

suchy said:
The difference is that season long loans is they may not be here next season thus a new keeper has to blend into the squad and it takes time. If you have a permanent keeper they will be here of years and thus know the squad better.
Click to expand...

The squads constantly changing. Players are coming and going all the time so all players are in the same boat. We've pretty much changed our entire squad twice in the past 3 years. Dawson and Barmby being the only two exceptions and they've still had to blend with the players coming in as much as the new players will have to blend.

originallambrettaman said:
That's because Gulasci is the first keeper, it's the second one I think we'll look for on a permanent, as I do expect two keepers to come in.

NP obviously didn't think Duke was good enough, when we see the two he gets, we'll know if he was right or not.
Click to expand...

Pearson obviously got it right. Duke really wasn't very good and I trust Pearsons judgement to bring in better quality replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back