Ranking our Squad - 1: Dubravka

[midds]

He's a D but he's only going one way from here and it's not up

[Mike]

CE smushed together. He was damn good at one point, and has been when called upon this year. But he's also in his mid thirties.

[TheBrownBottle]

D on a good day, E on a bad day.

 

Anyone giving any member of our team an A other than Isak has B&W specs on, mind.

2 hours ago, Shearergol said:

Nothing wrong with E, mind

 

[Heron]

He's a C for me. He isn't gonna tear it up anywhere but he's reliable enough like.

[Shearergol]

36 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

D on a good day, E on a bad day.

 

Anyone giving any member of our team an A other than Isak has B&W specs on, mind.

Nothing wrong with E, mind

 

I reckon Tonali gets in most teams tbh 

[Joe1984]

2 hours ago, astraguy said:

pathetic  thread , Players view this forum and we're just entering the nitty gittty end of the season then we get this shit

 

 

 

Which players view this forum?

 

I voted C. Solid enough player Dubz.

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Joe1984

[TheBrownBottle]

24 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

I reckon Tonali gets in most teams tbh 

All opinion, but not for me at the moment 

[La Parka]

He's a c. Would be fine at any other club looking to survive all the way up to brink of Europe imo.

[Shak]

Stunned that there are so many saying C, a team full of players of his level would be absolutely fucked in the PL.

 

Went for E, was stuck between that and D but ultimately I feel like I can make four fairly distinct tiers above Dubravka so went for the harsher option. Pleased for him that he's had a nice run recently but he's just such a poor shot stopper that I'll never feel comfortable with him starting games for us even as a backup.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Used to be a C, dropped to an E, has very recently performed as a D. Not sure that can last particularly long at 36. 

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Actually tbf in his past few games where he's done well and not really put a foot wrong, if he was a new signing and 27 you'd say he was a C. To be fair to his recent performances. But the wider context exists and it has to be taken in to account.

[CaliMag]

Minority opinion here...

For decades, our supporters has been absolutely spoiled with the high caliber level of keepers we have had. By spoiled, I mean that I have consistently heard and read how poor our keepers are when they have consistently been well above average in the league. Given and Harper were amazing but if you only got your information from online forums you'd think they were both poor. Krul was also great. Darlow in his day was also good. I have always felt that our keepers have had unfair scrutiny and it seems to be more pronounced within our fanbase when compared to other sets of supporters. 

There are three keepers in the league right now that I would say are clearly better than Dubs (and I don't think Pope is one of them). Another three or four, like Pope, that would improve some things but take us back in others. The rest (a clear majority) are a step big backward. 

Could we do better? Sure, if we think its a priority to spend a big slice of our transfer budget (and we are taking a risk as they would likely be outside of our league right now), but to say Dubs is a D is just wrong.

[TheBrownBottle]

22 minutes ago, CaliMag said:

Minority opinion here...

For decades, our supporters has been absolutely spoiled with the high caliber level of keepers we have had. By spoiled, I mean that I have consistently heard and read how poor our keepers are when they have consistently been well above average in the league. Given and Harper were amazing but if you only got your information from online forums you'd think they were both poor. Krul was also great. Darlow in his day was also good. I have always felt that our keepers have had unfair scrutiny and it seems to be more pronounced within our fanbase when compared to other sets of supporters. 

There are three keepers in the league right now that I would say are clearly better than Dubs (and I don't think Pope is one of them). Another three or four, like Pope, that would improve some things but take us back in others. The rest (a clear majority) are a step big backward. 

Could we do better? Sure, if we think its a priority to spend a big slice of our transfer budget (and we are taking a risk as they would likely be outside of our league right now), but to say Dubs is a D is just wrong.

Not for me.  GK has always been a troubled position for NUFC.  If Keegan had spent 4m on Nigel Martyn instead of Warren Barton, NUFC wins at least one league title under him - and Martyn wasn't a world class keeper by any stretch, just a good one.

 

Given was a good shot stopper, but his distribution and positioning on crosses (and ability against them) was mediocre to poor.  Harper was as bog standard a GK as you're likely to see.  Darlow was a million miles away from being good.  Krul looked like he could be, but ultimately he hasn't proved to be.   Dubravka was an ok PL keeper, and is not that these days - Pope is patently a better keeper, but he's on the wane too.  Neither are close to good enough for next season.  Given would be most people's best NUFC GK, but that doesn't mean he was a great keeper.

 

If at some point we'd actually signed a genuine high calibre keeper, we wouldn't be hoping that next month we end a 70 year trophy drought.  I'm sure we will sign one soon - and when we do, the difference will be very, very noticable.