Graeme smith to sign in the next few days

[Kinky Gerbil]

Why all the bickering?...

Everyone knows the best keeper of the last few years was David Yelldell...

Now get a f***ing grip.

f*** off, It was Andy Petterson

 

[Brighton M]

Ninja elephant is embarrassing himself with some of the shit written here.

McGhee rubbish? Yeah, that's right. Winning a play-off final and keeping us up was definitely all down to Kuipers and Virgo. It wasn't McGhee's idea to try him up front, and Kuipers obviously kept us up on his own despite missing half the season.

Typical NSC. Load of old cobblers.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Ninja elephant is embarrassing himself with some of the shit written here.

No its not as simple as that, and that comment proves you haven't got a f***ing clue what you are on about, and are indeed talking total bollocks.

He's kept getting new contrats due to a clause old Uncle Dick kept putting in contracts in the past. Play X amounts of games, and you'll get a new one. So the manager who were TRYING TO REPLACE HIM couldn't off load him, because a) no other team wanted him, and b) he was under contract.

Dean Wilkins even went as far as taking the number one shirt off him. He didn't want him here, but had no choice in the matter. We never had the budget to sign experienced keepers, all the time we had one, Knight wouldn't allow it, which is why all of Kuipers competetion were youngsters.

Hopefully this is going to change now, as we HAVE to sign a new keeper, and hopefully one that will spell the end of Kuipers time at the club, if for no other reason, then to stop people, who no idea what they are talking about, posting shit on here!

You tell me I'm talking bollocks, and then post that?

If you really think Dick Knight told Micky Adams, Steve Coppell, Mark McGhee and Dean Wilkins to give him a new contract, and you really think that ALL those managers did as they were told, then you have a very unrealistic outlook on how football works. You say Wilkins didn't want him, but he played in every minute of every game during the 07/08 season, Wilkins picked him for every single game. For a manager who didn't want him at the club, he didn't half contradict himself!

"Hopefully one that will spell the end of Kuipers time at the club". What a truly pathetic comment. He's been a legend at this club from start to present day, he was a very prominent reason in why we stayed up last season. Whether you want him in the team or not, you can't argue that he was crucial in us staying up, absolutely crucial. If you disagree, then you're not worth debating with.

Michel Kuipers has won 2 Championships with this club and he's played hundreds of games, so to say he's a good goalkeeper isn't talking shit.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

You tell me I'm talking bollocks, and then post that?

If you really think Dick Knight told Micky Adams, Steve Coppell, Mark McGhee and Dean Wilkins to give him a new contract, and you really think that ALL those managers did as they were told,

Kuipers had it in his contract that if he played x amount of games he would get a new one.

There really is little a manager can do if this is the case.

 

[Mr Burns]

You may have trained goalkeepers at a decent level, but it doesn't mean that because you rate Henderson more than Kuipers a) people are wrong to disagree, b) that people who disagree don't know what they're talking about.

a) I'm not suggesting people are wrong to disagree. I disagree with the fact that Kuipers is a good goalkeeper. In my defence many managers have tried to replace him, but haven't been able to for reasons above.
b) not always. But reading some to the pro-Kuipers crap I have on here (not this thread so much), I would suggest some people have no idea what they are talking about.

 

[Rookie]

love it, thread starts off as we are signing a new keeper (apparently anyway) and turns into a my keeper is better than your keeper. Is this going to go on forever, if we do sign someone and he plays I will trust Slade's judgment but if you are not going to can we atleast wait until we actually sign someone before slating them

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Kuipers had it in his contract that if he played x amount of games he would get a new one.

There really is little a manager can do if this is the case.

Why did the manager keep playing him then? If he REALLY didn't want Michel, he could easily have signed a keeper on loan or played Sullivan. There is no basis to suggest that the managers haven't wanted him. They didn't have to play Michel, that's the truth of it.

Mayo and Hart had the same clauses in their contracts, it's perfectly normal and it doesn't neccessarily mean the manager didn't want them just because they automatically qualified for a new deal.

I find the disrespect to Michel Kuipers an absolute joke in this thread, really offensive and obnoxious comments have been posted and usually I wouldn't care. But it's completely uncalled for and completely over the top.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Why did the manager keep playing him then? If he REALLY didn't want Michel, he could easily have signed a keeper on loan or played Sullivan. There is no basis to suggest that the managers haven't wanted him. They didn't have to play Michel, that's the truth of it.

Mayo and Hart had the same clauses in their contracts, it's perfectly normal and it doesn't neccessarily mean the manager didn't want them just because they automatically qualified for a new deal.

I find the disrespect to Michel Kuipers an absolute joke in this thread, really offensive and obnoxious comments have been posted and usually I wouldn't care. But it's completely uncalled for and completely over the top.

Where has anyone been offensive?

Maybe they played him because he didnt have any other choices? Bne May or Kuipers?

 

[Icy Gull]

I have no problem with Kuipers but he is not close to being the World Class keeper a few on here would have us believe. He is a reasonable if limited lower Championship, good League One keeper imo. I hope he has some competition this year but if you think this is a binfest....wait until he gets replaced in goal when not injured.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I find the disrespect to Michel Kuipers an absolute joke in this thread, really offensive and obnoxious comments have been posted and usually I wouldn't care. But it's completely uncalled for and completely over the top.

Why? You called Whing a prat for stalling on a new deal, but Kuipers handed in a transfer request when he was dropped...

 

[Ninja Elephant]

love it, thread starts off as we are signing a new keeper (apparently anyway) and turns into a my keeper is better than your keeper. Is this going to go on forever, if we do sign someone and he plays I will trust Slade's judgment but if you are not going to can we atleast wait until we actually sign someone before slating them

Personally, I haven't been slating Graeme Smith, or Slade. I find the comments about Kuipers to be absolutely ridiculous and unreal, and the ignorance in general displayed by some in this thread is quite amazing in my opinion. People will call me arrogant, that's fine. The truth is, Kuipers is a legend at this club and why people don't like him is just beyond me, and it certainly doesn't seem to be based on anything to do with football.

 

[Mr Burns]

You tell me I'm talking bollocks, and then post that?

If you really think Dick Knight told Micky Adams, Steve Coppell, Mark McGhee and Dean Wilkins to give him a new contract, and you really think that ALL those managers did as they were told, then you have a very unrealistic outlook on how football works. You say Wilkins didn't want him, but he played in every minute of every game during the 07/08 season, Wilkins picked him for every single game. For a manager who didn't want him at the club, he didn't half contradict himself!


Michel Kuipers has won 2 Championships with this club and he's played hundreds of games, so to say he's a good goalkeeper isn't talking shit.

Second point first. I'm not saying you are talking shit if you think hes a good keeper. You are talking shit with this comment "There is a reason all these managers who other people have claimed were "trying to replace him" kept giving him new contracts, he's not here by accident. Managers have offered him a contract, and he's signed it. Simple as that."

Dick Knight had a thing about loyality clauses, ie play X amounts of games you get a new contract. As said before, if Kuipers is the only senior keeper, he will keep getting new deals.

Hopefully this will change now that Knight has gone, and Slade will be able to bring in his own man. Therefore Kuipers won't meet the required apperances to trigger a new deal, and if he's not gone by the end of the season (end of September would not surprise me if hes not number one), then he will not be offered a new deal.

If Slade is not allowed to bring in a experienced new number one (and he is allowed if he so wishes) then no doubt Kuipers will get a new deal, because he will have played the set number of games in his existing contract.

So to answer your comments Mark McGhee and Dean Wilkins did NOT give him a new contract, they HAD to do as they were told (Because it was in his contract), and that is how football works. (At least under Uncle Dick)

 

[Mr Burns]

Kuipers had it in his contract that if he played x amount of games he would get a new one.

There really is little a manager can do if this is the case.

NO NO NO KINKY.

DONT POST THE TRUTH ON HERE. SOME POSTERS CAN'T HANDLE IT:yahoo:

 

[Notters]

Why all the bickering?...

Everyone knows the best keeper of the last few years was David Yelldell...

Now get a f***ing grip.

You're forgeting Danny Gay! Have to say I'm firmly on Ninja's side of the fence here.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Personally, I haven't been slating Graeme Smith, or Slade. I find the comments about Kuipers to be absolutely ridiculous and unreal, and the ignorance in general displayed by some in this thread is quite amazing in my opinion. People will call me arrogant, that's fine. The truth is, Kuipers is a legend at this club and why people don't like him is just beyond me, and it certainly doesn't seem to be based on anything to do with football.

What a joke. Kuipers has not had much stick on this thread. In fact he cannot get any stick at all without someone defending him vehemently even if he is clearly to blame. It is not Kuipers that is my problem and I do think he has been a fantastic player for us. However, as this thread shows, the Kuipers can do no wrong people do annoy me. Look at the crap posted by you about Henderson and see what ignorance really is.

Going back to your earlier comments, I would not have booed Hawkins (although you can think what you like) and it was Kuipers fault solely and not Virgo's for the Luton goal. Kuipers had no reason to come out and Virgo would have dealt with it otherwise. If that was Henderson it would now be firmly listed as one of his glaring mistakes by you and others.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Second point first. I'm not saying you are talking shit if you think hes a good keeper. You are talking shit with this comment "There is a reason all these managers who other people have claimed were "trying to replace him" kept giving him new contracts, he's not here by accident. Managers have offered him a contract, and he's signed it. Simple as that."

Dick Knight had a thing about loyality clauses, ie play X amounts of games you get a new contract. As said before, if Kuipers is the only senior keeper, he will keep getting new deals.

Hopefully this will change now that Knight has gone, and Slade will be able to bring in his own man. Therefore Kuipers won't meet the required apperances to trigger a new deal, and if he's not gone by the end of the season (end of September would not surprise me if hes not number one), then he will not be offered a new deal.

If Slade is not allowed to bring in a experienced new number one (and he is allowed if he so wishes) then no doubt Kuipers will get a new deal, because he will have played the set number of games in his existing contract.

So to answer your comments Mark McGhee and Dean Wilkins did NOT give him a new contract, they HAD to do as they were told (Because it was in his contract), and that is how football works. (At least under Uncle Dick)

Oh ok, fair enough. I misunderstood, I still disagree though.

The point is that managers kept playing him, so he kept reaching the X amount of games. They played him! They can't complain at having to offer him a new deal, because they did go ahead and play the man! They didn't have to. You don't think "Uncle Dick" was picking the team do you? A manager could have signed someone else if they really disliked Kuipers that much, which clearly they didn't.

Michel played every game in 07/08 and we had a good defensive record and finished 7th, to me, that speaks volumes for how good he is. Noone has called him world class (Icy Gull going unneccessarily over the top there), he's just a bloody good goalkeeper at league 1 level. I think some people need reminding we're not in the Premier League, you can't expect Premier League standard at this level. We have a very good league 1 goalkeeper in Michel Kuipers.

Barrel of Fun mentioned about him handing in a transfer request, I'm not going to lie to anyone, I didn't know he'd done that. I don't even know when that happened, but I can guess... Happily, it was years and years ago now and it's no longer relevant because he did his talking on the pitch and suprise suprise, he's still our #1.

 

[Mr Burns]

People will call me arrogant, that's fine. The truth is, Kuipers is a legend at this club and why people don't like him is just beyond me, and it certainly doesn't seem to be based on anything to do with football.

I wouldn't say your arrogant. Ignorant, yes, but not arrogant.

The reason some people don't like Kuipers, because some people know what he's like when things are not going his way. He looked good under Adams part one, but it soon become obvious he wasn't the keeper many thought he was. Problem is, people see outstanding saves, and think he's a great keeper. They miss the goals from times he stay glued to his line, or the mix ups with defenders, or the pressure his pathetic kicking puts the team under.

The facts speak for themseleves though. Hopefully you now accept why Kuipers kept getting new deals. Not because the manager wanted him, they were almost stuck with him.

Do you not wonder why no other club wanted to sign him when he was not in the team and out on loan. I may be wrong on this one, but I don't think we were even asking for a fee for him at the time, and still no one took him.

 

[Acker79]

Much like my fact that he took over a team coppell left top of the division, and over saw them dropping through the play offs, and got us relegated bottom of the pile from the championship after selling our best players. These are also facts, are they not?

Yes, they are selective, but so are your facts.

So are yours. Bob Booker took over the manager's role for a few weeks until Mcghee moved in. The team dropped under his time in chage.

Did you read my post at all?

My point was that the facts that El Pres was citing were selective, and that I can select facts to make McGhee look bad, which is what I did. Coppell Left us top of the division. After Booker's final game in that stint we were in second place, still automatic. Under Mcghee we slipped down through the play offs and out the other side before moving back up.

I missed the bit about Booker out, but I didn't lie and what I said was still factual.

I presented facts. I admitted they were selective. Just like El Pres's were.

 

[chez]

Michel obviously makes Chez feel inadequate.

Inadequate in some ways maybe, but certainly not on the football pitch!!

 

[Ninja Elephant]

What a joke. Kuipers has not had much stick on this thread. In fact he cannot get any stick at all without someone defending him vehemently even if he is clearly to blame. It is not Kuipers that is my problem and I do think he has been a fantastic player for us. However, as this thread shows, the Kuipers can do no wrong people do annoy me. Look at the crap posted by you about Henderson and see what ignorance really is.

Going back to your earlier comments, I would not have booed Hawkins (although you can think what you like) and it was Kuipers fault solely and not Virgo's for the Luton goal. Kuipers had no reason to come out and Virgo would have dealt with it otherwise. If that was Henderson it would now be firmly listed as one of his glaring mistakes by you and others.

I will always vehemently defend Michel Kuipers when there's rubbish being spoken about him, I've never suggested he can do no wrong. In actual fact, I have mentioned mistakes Michel has made. He's a league 1 goalkeeper, obviously. We shouldn't be attempting to judge him by Premier League standards, keep a sense of perspective. Henderson made more major gaffes in his short time, than Michel has made in 10 years.

If you say that, I won't call you a liar. But you would atleast understand why he would get booed, same with Henderson being booed at Bournemouth. Kuipers was NOT solely to blame at Luton, he obviously screamed at Virgo who ignored him. He shouldn't have come out, I agree. But he did, and he was taking control of the situation, but it was taken away from him by a teammate, it was 50/50 for the blame in my opinion.
Of course it would have gone against Henderson, he'd f***ed up SO much even before the classic at Bournemouth, he'd earnt a reputation as a calamity and therefore was judged as such. That's just how life works. Michel has earnt my respect, and the respect of many others.