Snacks94 wrote:

I’ll be happy enough with Walton on a permanent contract.

Knows the club, the league and the area, good character and reliable. Still young and should continue to improve.

Could gamble and get better, but could also get so much worse.

 
Me too, steady pair of hands and proven at this level, exactly what we need after this seasons goalkeeper fiasco.

Slotbadger wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

Snacks94 wrote:

I’ll be happy enough with Walton on a permanent contract.

Knows the club, the league and the area, good character and reliable. Still young and should continue to improve.

Could gamble and get better, but could also get so much worse.

 
Me too, steady pair of hands and proven at this level, exactly what we need after this seasons goalkeeper fiasco.

 
Agree. Can’t gamble on GK. Seen what happens too many time recently when you do - relegation.

Also agree with all TEK’s points on the lad, but we have had 3 attempts at finding something better this season and all are worse.

 
Yeah he's not perfect, but if he was he'd not even be an option tbh. All I know is we kept a helluva lot more clean sheets with him in goal and he never punched anything into the net either.

JerryDungle wrote:

Tek wrote:

JerryDungle wrote:

Been told we’ve had talks with Jack Walton about signing permanently in the summer.

I heard Alan Temple in his podcast allude to the fact that he felt United might make a move for him.

Personally i think we could do better. 
 

 
We could, but as we’ve displayed on multiple different occasions in the last decade, we can also do a hell of a lot worse.

I’d be happy for us to go with someone we know to be solid and reliable, I never once felt nervous knowing Walton was in the sticks, and neither did the players, I can totally see the logic in it. His kicking isn’t good, but the perfect goalkeeper isn’t gonna end up at Dundee United I’m afraid. He had maybe 2 bad blunders in the two years he spent here (one unfortunately happening in a derby), the three we’ve used this season are having 2 every 5 games.

Taking aside pure goalkeeping ability, Jack’s also very vocal and I think you’d see a marked improvement in our defenders knowing that Walton’s behind them rather than some imbecile flapping about constantly, making them a bag of nerves.

 
2 every 5 games is quite generous tbh. I've not felt confident in a goalkeeper all season myself so God only knows how that feels for a defender? Our defence has been diabolical too though tbf and the goalies have also had to contend with watching each of them take turns to have a brainfart. All in all its not been great, getting Walton back would be a step in the right direction though.

Arabdownsouth wrote:

Aside from Walton,folk are raving about the Livi keeper. Ive only seen him against us tbh so have no real idea how good he is but for me he should have stopped Ferrys shot as it appeared to go right under him

 
Was gonna say the same, looked shit against us.

Jack Walton would be an excellent signing again.

Tek wrote:

Goodwin apparently saying he wants to keep Krtisztian Keresztes at Utd if we can afford him.

 
I’m personally not a massive Keresztes fan. He’s soft, has stupid lapses in concentration very often which usually cost us a goal, and he always just punts the ball aimlessly in the direction he’s facing.

In saying all that, there is still something there that can be fine-tuned, when he’s switched on, he can be very good, and is a big threat at the other end from set pieces. I know a lot of his data is very very good, as illustrated here: https://www.fotmob.com/players/1414649/krisztian-keresztes. There are some teams at a surprisingly high level that are watching him with interest for this reason, so I’m not exactly shocked that we’re trying to sign him permanently.

I understand it's just fantasy but it would be interesting to get some kind of AI reconstruction/replay of our season with the games all played with a flat back 4.
I reckon KK Iovu and Bert all come out of it better than as things have turned out.

A 433 would have seen them less exposed at the back, given us a midfield 3 which would match up the sides that have overpowered us there, and still given us a potent front 3. What would be missing from the reconstruction would be the extra power we get from Ferry in forward positions, but fullbacks are still allowed to attack from a flat back 4.

We'll never know. So a completely pointless late night post again 🤣

Tek wrote:

JerryDungle wrote:

 
I’m personally not a massive Keresztes fan. He’s soft, has stupid lapses in concentration very often which usually cost us a goal, and he always just punts the ball aimlessly in the direction he’s facing.

.

Some of those attributes have been true of him, but i think that last criticism is unfair and wrong JD.

I've seen KK zing the ball 70 yards horizontally across the pitch right on to a team mates foot almost. He's a very good passer of the ball imo. Ironically he hasn't done much of that recently, but has been better defensively and less prone to the aforementioned lapses of concentration.

I'm guessing Goodwin has told him to concentrate more on just defending. Which would be fair enough but there also has to be a fine balance imo, as you shouldn't try and coach that natural ability out of him.

I've love to see him in a meaningless game play CDM alongside maybe someone like Agyei, Sevelj or both.
 

 
Really? I find it maddening how often he hoofs the ball to the opposition or into the stand with no pressure on him. The stats back that up too, only 36% of his long passes find a man, and only 69% of all of his passes find a team mate. A lot of his stats are very good, but his passing definitely isn’t.

Do we not have fee's agreed for signing both as part of their loan deals?  If so, why is Goodwin saying 'if we can afford him' about Keresztes?  Surely he already knows the cost.

Also, re SuperMarios point above, would we be able to sign them to immediately sell them on for a profit?  If we sign them from their parent club, would the parent club not count as the first club and we would count as their second club, meaning they would be club tied until the next year or season (however it works)?

Macho Man wrote:

Do we not have fee's agreed for signing both as part of their loan deals?  If so, why is Goodwin saying 'if we can afford him' about Keresztes?  Surely he already knows the cost.

The fee was agreed, but his wages won't have been.

JerryDungle wrote:

Macho Man wrote:

Do we not have fee's agreed for signing both as part of their loan deals?  If so, why is Goodwin saying 'if we can afford him' about Keresztes?  Surely he already knows the cost.

Also, re SuperMarios point above, would we be able to sign them to immediately sell them on for a profit?  If we sign them from their parent club, would the parent club not count as the first club and we would count as their second club, meaning they would be club tied until the next year or season (however it works)?

 
Of course we’d be able to sell them in the summer, it’s going into a new season.

But we don't own him yet.  I imagine we can't buy him until the summer as the deal would have to be concluded during a transfer window.  So he would technically star the 'year/season' as a player of his parent club, if we buy him we would then be the second club he has been signed to.  My question is can he then sign and play for what would technically be a third club after us despite potentially not actually playing for the first two clubs during that year/season?

Other thing gets on my tits with KK: To many Tony Watt/Hollywoods.
Twat

Macho Man wrote:

JerryDungle wrote:

Macho Man wrote:

Do we not have fee's agreed for signing both as part of their loan deals?  If so, why is Goodwin saying 'if we can afford him' about Keresztes?  Surely he already knows the cost.

Also, re SuperMarios point above, would we be able to sign them to immediately sell them on for a profit?  If we sign them from their parent club, would the parent club not count as the first club and we would count as their second club, meaning they would be club tied until the next year or season (however it works)?

 
Of course we’d be able to sell them in the summer, it’s going into a new season.

But we don't own him yet.  I imagine we can't buy him until the summer as the deal would have to be concluded during a transfer window.  So he would technically star the 'year/season' as a player of his parent club, if we buy him we would then be the second club he has been signed to.  My question is can he then sign and play for what would technically be a third club after us despite potentially not actually playing for the first two clubs during that year/season?

 
We absolutely can buy him in the summer and sell him on. We could buy him and sell him in the same day if we wanted to. The rule is that a player can’t play a competitive game for more than two clubs in the same season.

do we need a new winger in the summer?  

https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/seven-released-and-winger-transfer-listed-doncaster-rovers-announce-retained-list-8139386