Graeme smith to sign in the next few days

[Acker79]

a) I'm not suggesting people are wrong to disagree.

I'm probably just reading too much into it, then. Just when you wave the "I' a goalkeeper coach" flag, then present your opinion as solid, and tell others they don't know what they're talking about it comes across as if you're saying you're the only one qualified to judge.

Take it from someone who has trained keepers at a decent level, Henderson is a better keeper than Kuipers.

The reason Kuipers played 2nd fiddle to most other senior keepers we've had, is that surprise surpirse, he isn't actually that good. Brilliant shot stopper, but unfortuantely goalkeeping is about far more than just stopping shots.

The best Keepers don't make loads of saves each game. Sounds crazy, but those who have actually played the game, will know what that means.

Kuipers = Very good shot stopper
Very poor distribtuion
Very poor organisation
Poor at crosses
Poor attitude (when not number one)

In fact apart from his shot stopping, I see very little else he has as a keeper.

This is why every manager we have had, has tried to replace him.

This is why when he threw his toys out of the pram last time, no other league club, not one, was willing to sign him from us, despite him wanting to leave.

The bottom line is if Kuipers didn't have a contract for next season he'd be signing on down the dole office on Wednesday.

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.

 

[NF9]

In my opinion Michel Kuipers will always be an Albion legend but he shouldn't be put in the team just on sentimental value he needs to show he is still the best option to Slade, he is still a class keeper but under no circumstances should any player be in the team just because he is loved by the fans, I'm sure Slade knows this anyway.

FDM Will forever be a legend in the eyes of all Brighton fans but now might be the time to look at other options.

 

[Mr Burns]

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.

Far enough, so what do they do?

Play the number two? A teenager with no experience? Most of the number two's Kuipers have had, have melted into non league, some far below conference standard.

It was Kuipers or no one.

The managers could not sign anyone else, has they had a fit keeper in Kuipers in the side, and Knight was never going to sign an experienced keeper.

The only time it happened, was with Henderson. A good young keeper come good.

Now someone may back me up here, but I have it from a very realiable source who used to be in the thick of things ie coaching staff, Dick Knight went up to Wayne Henderson at training on the first day he had signed permantly for the club, and told him he didn't want to sign him, and that he disn't want him here, and that the only reason he was here was because of the manager.

This is why I defend Henderson. He was a cracking young keeper, who had the crowd on his back, had Kuipers on his back, as well as the chairman.

And people wonder why he played like a nervous wreak sometimes. I was sad when Henderson left, but at the same time I was delighted for him when he went. It's just a shame injury has held him back.

 

[Mr Burns]

I'm probably just reading too much into it, then. Just when you wave the "I' a goalkeeper coach" flag, then present your opinion as solid, and tell others they don't know what they're talking about it comes across as if you're saying you're the only one qualified to judge.

The comment talking bollocks was about the reason why allthe managers kept "offering him new deals" which I think has been covered now

 

[Ninja Elephant]

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.

Ignorant is completely out of order, if I'm honest. Nothing to do with ignorance, just because we disagree, doesn't mean I don't understand your opinions or the basis for them.

Clearly, I've been showing him too much respect to the man for getting clean sheets on a regular basis and keeping us in the games so incredibly often, and all that gets ignored. Every top save of his is forgotten straight away but the occaison he should have taken control and didn't, people like to rememeber them.

No, I disagree completely still, as I've said numerous times, they played him! They kept putting Kuipers on the team sheet, they knew about the clause, and they still played him. They can't argue with it!

I don't care that noone else wanted him, why would I? He's been a brilliant keeper for us, so what if others didn't want him. I wonder who else would have wanted to sign Zamora?

 

[gull-able]

'This is why I defend Henderson. He was a cracking young keeper'

Have you been on the sauce ??

Where is this cracking young keeper now, prestons no 3

And as someone who lives in ireland i can tell you the irish fans reckon he was the worst keeper to put on the green shirt in the history of thier national team.

 

[Brighton M]

NE, give it a rest please.

Kuipers - a great servant to the club, but a flawed keeper who has had his best days.

99% of people would agree with this, stop embarrassing yourself by trying to claim that he is the best keeper in the world and has a squeaky clean history.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Far enough, so what do they do?

Play the number two? A teenager with no experience? Most of the number two's Kuipers have had, have melted into non league, some far below conference standard.

It was Kuipers or no one.

The managers could not sign anyone else, has they had a fit keeper in Kuipers in the side, and Knight was never going to sign an experienced keeper.

The only time it happened, was with Henderson. A good young keeper come good.

Now someone may back me up here, but I have it from a very realiable source who used to be in the thick of things ie coaching staff, Dick Knight went up to Wayne Henderson at training on the first day he had signed permantly for the club, and told him he didn't want to sign him, and that he disn't want him here, and that the only reason he was here was because of the manager.

This is why I defend Henderson. He was a cracking young keeper, who had the crowd on his back, had Kuipers on his back, as well as the chairman.

And people wonder why he played like a nervous wreak sometimes. I was sad when Henderson left, but at the same time I was delighted for him when he went. It's just a shame injury has held him back.

There's a loan system, they could have signed a keeper on loan. They didn't, those are the facts.

I think to suggest that Dick Knight told Henderson he didn't want him is just offensive and unbelievable! It's such a character slur! I agree he was never confident when he played for us, maybe things would have worked out differently for him if the fans believed in him. But, there's a reason we didn't.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

NE, give it a rest please.

Kuipers - a great servant to the club, but a flawed keeper who has had his best days.

99% of people would agree with this, stop embarrassing yourself by trying to claim that he is the best keeper in the world and has a squeaky clean history.

Embarrasing myself? I haven't suggested he's the best keeper in the world, even suggesting I have been smacks of ignorance and immaturity. He's a very good league 1 goalkeeper, we're a league 1 club. Let's not kid ourselves, we can't expect "world class" goalkeepers, we have to expect someone good enough for our current status, and good enough to progress if we do too.

 

[chez]

You sound like a teacher-'Take it from me....

Personally I'd sooner take it from Ninja Elephant (so to speak). Mr Burns clearly wouldn't know Homer Simpson from a goalkeeper, and he tries to coach them, presumably to be like Calamity Wayne!!

Clueless is all I can say.

 

[Mr Burns]

Ignorant is completely out of order, if I'm honest. Nothing to do with ignorance, just because we disagree, doesn't mean I don't understand your opinions or the basis for them.


No, I disagree completely still, as I've said numerous times, they played him! They kept putting Kuipers on the team sheet, they knew about the clause, and they still played him. They can't argue with it!

I don't care that noone else wanted him, why would I? He's been a brilliant keeper for us, so what if others didn't want him. I wonder who else would have wanted to sign Zamora?

Err. Right.

Firstly other people did want to sign Zamora. He left us!! Sure at the time he signed for us, they maybe didn't, but when they knew what he could do, he left.

When others saw when Kuipers could do, no one wanted him, so you are starting to clutch at straws with that comparison.

Ignorant is not out of order. You were completely ignorant to the reason why he kept getting new contracts. To say previous managers had all given him new deals is ignorant. You've admitted to didn't know that.

And finally as I said before. Kuipers is adequete keeper in league two or Conference, but he not at our level.

So what does a manager do? Play him, or pick a young keeper for the whole season, who would struggle to get in a decent county league side??

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Ignorant is completely out of order, if I'm honest. Nothing to do with ignorance, just because we disagree, doesn't mean I don't understand your opinions or the basis for them.

Clearly, I've been showing him too much respect to the man for getting clean sheets on a regular basis and keeping us in the games so incredibly often, and all that gets ignored. Every top save of his is forgotten straight away but the occaison he should have taken control and didn't, people like to rememeber them.

No, I disagree completely still, as I've said numerous times, they played him! They kept putting Kuipers on the team sheet, they knew about the clause, and they still played him. They can't argue with it!

I don't care that noone else wanted him, why would I? He's been a brilliant keeper for us, so what if others didn't want him. I wonder who else would have wanted to sign Zamora?

You have just described the exact oppostie to reality. Henderson's talent was ignored and all mistakes jumped on. Every save he made should have been made while all goals conceded were magically his fault. You only have to look at this thread to see people actually still believe that.

To be honest, at the time I was pleased we had great competition for places (as despite what you might think I do rate Kuipers but am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the Kuipers clan) and was gutted to see Henderson go. I still think the way he was treated at Bournemouth was disgusting and if you did boo him off then I have no respect at all for you. If not, fair enough maybe you weren't one of the ones getting on his back but many were.

 

[Mr Burns]

'This is why I defend Henderson. He was a cracking young keeper'

Have you been on the sauce ??

Where is this cracking young keeper now, prestons no 3

And as someone who lives in ireland i can tell you the irish fans reckon he was the worst keeper to put on the green shirt in the history of thier national team.

But as I said, he had injury after injury. He had so much potenital for a young keeper, that wasn't fulfilled, and with what he went through here, its no wonder his confidence was shot to pieces.

 

[Marshy]

im happy if this true, good age, good experience and on a free, cant go wrong.
sounds like a decent keeper to me, kuipers best days are behind him and fitness wise cant be relied on.

 

[Mr Burns]

There's a loan system, they could have signed a keeper on loan. They didn't, those are the facts.

I think to suggest that Dick Knight told Henderson he didn't want him is just offensive and unbelievable! It's such a character slur! I agree he was never confident when he played for us, maybe things would have worked out differently for him if the fans believed in him. But, there's a reason we didn't.

Well, if you ever bump into any old coaching staff around town, ask them!

I'm sure they'll be delighted to tell you some of the things that went on.

 

[Mr Burns]

There's a loan system, they could have signed a keeper on loan. They didn't, those are the facts.

You aint gonna give this up are ya.

DICK KNIGHT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE SIGNING OF A NUMBER ONE KEEPER. HIS VIEW WAS WE HAD ONE, AND THE MONEY WAS BETTER SPENT ELSEWHERE.

You do not sign experience keepers on loan for nothing. Clubs pay to loan experiecne players, unless they are being sent out to get games under their belts.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Err. Right.

Firstly other people did want to sign Zamora. He left us!! Sure at the teasm he signed for us, they maybe didn't, but when they knew what he could do, he left.

When others saw when Kuipers could do, no one wanted him, so you are starting to clutch at straws with that comparison.

Ignorant is not out of order. You were completely ignorant to the reason why he kept getting new contracts. To say previous managers had all given him new deals is ignorant. You've admitted to didn't know that.

And finally as I said before. Kuipers is adequete keeper in league two or Conference, but he not at our level.

So what does a manager do? Play him, or pick a young keeper for the whole season, who would struggle to get in a decent county league side??

Erm, obviously they wanted him after he'd banged in the goals for us. I didn't say that, I said who wanted to sign him when we did? Just because noone else wanted him, doesn't mean he wasn't a good player. As history will support.

No, if he had the loyalty clause then fine... I personally think he deserves a loyalty clause! If any player plays 30odd games in a season, then I agree they deserve to be offered a new contract. Besides, all those managers did then give him a contract, that's the truth because he's still here!

Kuipers played all 46 games in the league 2 seasons ago and we finished 7th, that was no accident. Our defence was solid, absolutely rock solid. We went to Forest and Leeds days after each other and didn't conceed to either. Kuipers not good enough for this league, no?
For the last time, I say that there is a loan system. They could have signed a loan goalkeeper, if they REALLY didn't want him they didn't have to play him. They could have tried other people at the club, Sullivan for example. But they decided to play Kuipers, whatever the reason, they played him and he got new contracts. These are the facts, agree or not.

Also, Dick Knight didn't pick the team and I'm sure he didn't tell the managers they weren't "allowed" to sign another goalkeeper! It's amazing to suggest such things.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Great thread.
Kuipers will still get the vote of most fans on here because he is an excelent goalkeeper for League One. Can't understand why stopping shots seems to be a crime for some supporters. And his kicking was exemplary last season after Paul Crichton sorted him out. So why hark back to before? Thank goodness we didn't have another pig headed manager insisting on not playing him when we needed someone to stop shots to keep us up. But for Kuipers, we would have gone down again like when Calamity Wayne took us down from the Championship.(although fairplay to Hart, Owusu & the rest who also did the biz). To all goalkeeping coaches & Chez-shotstopping wins matches,not big kicking!

 

[Mr Burns]

Erm, obviously they wanted him after he'd banged in the goals for us. I didn't say that, I said who wanted to sign him when we did? Just because noone else wanted him, doesn't mean he wasn't a good player. As history will support.

No, if he had the loyalty clause then fine... I personally think he deserves a loyalty clause! If any player plays 30odd games in a season, then I agree they deserve to be offered a new contract. Besides, all those managers did then give him a contract, that's the truth because he's still here!

For the last time, I say that there is a loan system. They could have signed a loan goalkeeper, if they REALLY didn't want him they didn't have to play him. .

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Great thread.
Kuipers will still get the vote of most fans on here because he is an excelent goalkeeper for League One. Can't understand why stopping shots seems to be a crime for some supporters. And his kicking was exemplary last season after Paul Crichton sorted him out. So why hark back to before? Thank goodness we didn't have another pig headed manager insisting on not playing him when we needed someone to stop shots to keep us up. But for Kuipers, we would have gone down again like when Calamity Wayne took us down from the Championship.(although fairplay to Hart, Owusu & the rest who also did the biz). To all goalkeeping coaches & Chez-shotstopping wins matches,not big kicking!

This is essentially what I've been trying to say, just not quite as clearly!