Keeper Competency

I saw this table and thought it was quite interesting. We don't obviously let the opposition have a lot of shots on goal, but Maarten doesn't exactly save a lot of those that we do let the opposition have. Is that down to weak ability, the fact that the shots that do get through are liable to be better chances, that from a smaller sample size every goal conceded is more significant? Interested to hear your thoughts... (Feel sorry for Bournemouth fans looking at it as well, seems arturs regressed a lot)

He hasn't really let in any which he should have saved (Willian free kick only possible one) so that gives you the answer.

Cech has played the same number of games and faced double the shots, but most of them were probably tame efforts from outside the box.

These kind of stats can be interpreted in so many ways. Plus something like the keeper making the defence calmer is hard to statistically quantify, as is good distribution, claiming crosses etc.

He looks like a bit of a steady Eddie to me . Never really makes a save that has you thinking " how did he get to that " but never really let's one in that should be saved . He saves ones he should save and lets in the ones that he shouldn't .

On the whole I'm pretty positive about him , comfortable with his feet , experienced and seems to give the back 4 confidence . Would be happy for him to sign permanent as him and FF is a pretty decent one & two

Would have beat Leicester with steady Eddie in nets

Not surprised. Steklenberg strength is his kicking. Look forward to having Fraser back though.

I really wouldn't read too much into those stats, especially if you look back at all the goals that we've conceded this season - you won't find much wrong with Stekelenburg's contributions.

Streets ahead of FF and our defence looks far more assured and comfortable with him between the posts.

Not surprised. Steklenberg strength is his kicking. Look forward to having Fraser back though.

Stekelenburg's strength is being an excellent goalkeeper. When you've got as good a keeper as we have, teams will think twice before trying to beat him with long shots, so the quality of chances he's facing could be more difficult to save to begin with - I'd also point out that they're only the shots on target, there's no indication of shots off target, which can be caused by players trying to pick out the corner against better keepers or being rushed into a decision by a rapid decision-making keeper in front of him. His presence is probably responsible for quite a few of those.

Need more data about location of shots etc to draw any firm conclusions.

Stekelenburg's strength is being an excellent goalkeeper. When you've got as good a keeper as we have, teams will think twice before trying to beat him with long shots - I'd also point out that they're only the shots on target, there's no indication of shots off target, which can be caused by players trying to pick out the corner against better keepers or being rushed into a decision by a rapid decision-making keeper in front of him. His presence is probably responsible for quite a few of those.

Don't agree that he's an excellent keeper. he's a decent keeper but weighing up the overall balance of his strengths and weaknesses area wise, I'd prefer Forster.

Don't agree that he's an excellent keeper. he's a decent keeper but weighing up the overall balance of his strengths and weaknesses area wise, I'd prefer Forster.

Forster is a worse keeper based on Saints appearances in the past year and a half. Flaps more, less accurate kicking, less confident on crosses, stays on his line too much and less quick decision-making on through balls. Stekelenburg is assure and confident and that comes across from the defence. Forster can work on all that though and may become better than Stekelenburg by his age. He has more physical presence, but needs to use it more, probably better reflexes as he's younger and longer kicking range but not as good with short passing or general distribution. Not much in it with shot-stopping though, but Stekelenburg has made far fewer mistakes than Forster in a similar time frame comparing the starts of the last two seasons.

If you judge purely on form and performance, and trust what you see rather than just rely on statistics, FF should have a battle on his hands to regain his spot when fit.

Yes it was famously poor last season with FF

He started well, but near the end he really went downhill. He was particularly poor in last half a dozen games or so. He even seemed to be shorter.

He started well, but near the end he really went downhill. He was particularly poor in last half a dozen games or so. He even seemed to be shorter.

Maybe the goals were bigger?

Looking at that table, the thing i'm massively impressed with is how few shots we allow on goal. Probably the lowest in the league for a 1st team keeper.

Don't agree that he's an excellent keeper.

he's a decent keeper but weighing up the overall balance of his strengths and weaknesses area wise, I'd prefer Forster.

..don't think too many people would argue against that, but the real question is ...who would be the keeper on the bench?.That was last season's problem.

Kelvin is out of contract in the summer ..and if Gazzaniga is expected to become our no.2 ........the idea of signing Stek. permanent is surely a no-brainer.

Quite a few Prem. sides have two international keepers on their books, and with the present state of Dutch football, Stek.is quite likley to get their goalie spot.

If you judge purely on form and performance, and trust what you see rather than just rely on statistics,

......FF should have a battle on his hands to regain his spot when fit.

.....and I don't disagree with that either. Some people seem to think that as soon as Forster is back " fit ".......that Stek.will be consigned to the bench.

......and players coming back from long-term injuries, don't suddenly pick up the same form they had before their injury....example Jay Rod. It takes time.

Forster (had / has) some fine qualities as a keeper, but I sometimes questioned his body size /weight.

Not every 6' 7" player has Peter Crouch's physique, but a keeper must be particularly agile and I always felt that FF ought be half-a stone lighter?......

Everyone makes mistakes, but overall I'm quite impressed with Stek's performances, and some of the goals we've conceded were hardly his fault alone.

..don't think too many people would argue against that, but the real question is ...who would be the keeper on the bench?.That was last season's problem.

 

Kelvin is out of contract in the summer ..and if Gazzaniga is expected to become our no.2 ........the idea of signing Stek. permanent is surely a no-brainer.

 

Quite a few Prem. sides have two international keepers on their books, and with the present state of Dutch football, Stek.is quite likley to get their goalie spot.

I'd argue it, obviously...though The9 has pretty much comprehensively summed up my views above so I won't regurgitate it.

If we're going on stats, Stekelenburg has the joint highest clean sheets total fwiw

I'd argue it, obviously...though The9 has pretty much comprehensively summed up my views above so I won't regurgitate it.

 

If we're going on stats, Stekelenburg has the joint highest clean sheets total fwiw

In fairness, clean sheets could be assigned more in credit of the whole defence, whereas shot-goal ratio is entirely on the keeper.

I think Stek has improved as the season has progressed. I wasn't a fan in the first few weeks, but I think (Willian apart) he has looked good over the recent period. One other aspect that these stats don't touch on, which is crucial in the modern game, is he is a very good footballer on the floor which you would expect from a Dutchman. Comfortable with both feet

I've watched the Willian free kick dozens of times, and still now each time I don't expect it to go in.

I think Stek has improved as the season has progressed. I wasn't a fan in the first few weeks, but I think (Willian apart) he has looked good over the recent period. One other aspect that these stats don't touch on, which is crucial in the modern game, is he is a very good footballer on the floor which you would expect from a Dutchman. Comfortable with both feet

Inspector Gadget would have not been able to reach the Willian goal; it was freakishly placed and unstoppable.

Yes it was famously poor last season with FF

Frazer made sever mistakes last year and is not that good a shot stopper....

He struggles with low shots in particular....

I wouldn't go on stats (there are shots from 6 yards out where the GK has no chance and shots from 20 yards out where the GK has more of a chance for example) rather than watching the guy perform.

My idea of a good GK is one that doesn't make silly mistakes and on that count he's a very good keeper, he saves what he's supposed to save, doesn't do anything silly and occasionally pulls off a great save.

I'm certainly happy with him and when Fraser recovers it's going to be a real battle for the vest.

2 very good GKs battling it out for top spot is good news for SFC.

In fairness, clean sheets could be assigned more in credit of the whole defence, whereas shot-goal ratio is entirely on the keeper.

Which is what I was saying last season to the Forster lovers, but apparently it had little to do with the defence. How things have changed, then,

Which is what I was saying last season to the Forster lovers, but apparently it had little to do with the defence. How things have changed, then,

You weren't saying that though, were you? You were saying that he is a L1 keeper at best and there are many more keepers in the lower leagues who are a lot better than him. Which is actually a load of tripe.

It's not just you, but people say crazy stuff like Forster is L1, Adkins isn't good enough, bla bla bla, Mane is non-league, and years on, months on...they still try to justify their moronic views. I don't get it, you were made to look incredibly silly with your views on Forster, so maybe it's time to gracefully back down.

The goalkeeper is an intregral part of the team and defence and in a sound defence the shots he has to save should be very difficult to save.

Sunderland's goalkeeper yesterday would have amazing stats but they still lost, so apart from the fact that he prevented a thrashing it makes no difference.

A lot that a goalkeeper does can only really be measured by the team and the management; organising the defence, distribution and giving players confidence to pass back and many more. Their positioning can also prevent a lot of shots, if the striker doesn't think he can score he is more likely to pass.

I remember reading a very good striker once said of playing Saints many years ago: " you get through their defence and then you see Shilton in front of you and you still realise you've got a lot to do", I paraphrase as it was many years ago, (the unexpurgated version probably contained many expletives).

A good goalkeeper also has a subliminal effect on opposing strikers.

Raw statistics aren't a particularly good guide. A good goalkeeper can just be a good shot-stopper, but a very good or great goalie is a great deal more.

You weren't saying that though, were you? You were saying that he is a L1 keeper at best and there are many more keepers in the lower leagues who are a lot better than him. Which is actually a load of tripe.

 

It's not just you, but people say crazy stuff like Forster is L1, Adkins isn't good enough, bla bla bla, Mane is non-league, and years on, months on...they still try to justify their moronic views. I don't get it, you were made to look incredibly silly with your views on Forster, so maybe it's time to gracefully back down.

Errr, I did say those things AND I did mention that the defence also had to take a huge amount of credit, not just Forster. Check the posts.

I'm not going to gracefully back down either... Why? Because I genuinely don't think he's very good.

Errr, I did say those things AND I did mention that the defence also had to take a huge amount of credit, not just Forster. Check the posts.

 

I'm not going to gracefully back down either... Why? Because I genuinely don't think he's very good.

You genuinely think Forster is no better than League One standard? That is obviously nonsense.

For what it's worth I also think Stekelenburg is a better keeper at the moment, but the potential in Forster is huge

You genuinely think Forster is no better than League One standard? That is obviously nonsense.

 

For what it's worth I also think Stekelenburg is a better keeper at the moment, but the potential in Forster is huge

I reckon it's like watching a League One keeper sometimes, yes. Potential? He's 27, I don't think he'll get much better if I'm honest as he's now entering his prime but still struggles with a lot of the basics; whereas Stekelenburg is far, far more polished and could do everything that Forster can't do and do it well.

For me, there's better Championship keepers than Forster; Marshall, Heaton, McGregor, Smithies, Martin etc...

I did wonder how long it was going to take Crabby to yet again start reeling off names of random lower division keepers who he just happens to be an expert on and all just happen to be better than "League One standard" England International Frazer Forster.

The answer us not that long. Funny he isn't getting all wet over Boruc any more. Pity.

I did wonder how long it was going to take Crabby to yet again start reeling off names of random lower division keepers who he just happens to be an expert on and all just happen to be better than "League One standard" England International Frazer Forster.

 

The answer us not that long. Funny he isn't getting all wet over Boruc any more. Pity.

And there he is.

I like a dominant keeper and Fraser is certainly dominant but as others have said I think he can sometimes be a bit slow down to some shots by the nature of his frame. I was dubious about steklenburg when he signed because of his record at Fulham but I genuinely hope he remains as I think he is very slightly the better option now. He will be Hollands number 1 again soon no doubt and I give him the edge on Fraser shot stopping, claiming crosses and distribution.

We are lucky to have two goal keepers of such standard.

We really should have bought Butland when we had the chance

We really should have bought Butland when we had the chance

as I recall...there was talk that we bid £6 million for him..in 2012. The (then) Birmingham manager said he was worth £15 million ...

as a result we looked elsewhere ...and bought Gazzaniga instead .

Forster is ok but I prefer Stekelenburg. I don't think there is a single aspect of the game that Forster is better at, apart from being a little bigger.

I reckon it's like watching a League One keeper sometimes, yes. Potential? He's 27, I don't think he'll get much better if I'm honest as he's now entering his prime but still struggles with a lot of the basics; whereas Stekelenburg is far, far more polished and could do everything that Forster can't do and do it well.

 

For me, there's better Championship keepers than Forster; Marshall, Heaton, McGregor, Smithies, Martin etc...

Blimey. I didn't actually realise he was that young. He has huge potential then. Keepers rarely reach their potential before 28/29 so he's still got a lot of time to improve really. I appreciate this is a wind-up as none of the keepers you name are even close to Forster which is why no-one has been tempted to take them out of the championship. Quite rightly he was England's number 2 and was a vital part of the tightest defence in the Premier League. It's nice to have such a capable number two though so nothing to complain about in relation to that position in the team. Stek's career problem - particularly in his stay at Fulham - has been poor concentration - just suddenly in the middle of games losing it (and the ball) and conceding needless goals. He has dropped a couple out of the blue for us but with no great consequences so far - another plus for our coaching team.

I like a dominant keeper and Fraser is certainly dominant but as others have said I think he can sometimes be a bit slow down to some shots by the nature of his frame. I was dubious about steklenburg when he signed because of his record at Fulham but I genuinely hope he remains as I think he is very slightly the better option now. He will be Hollands number 1 again soon no doubt and I give him the edge on Fraser shot stopping, claiming crosses and distribution.

We are lucky to have two goal keepers of such standard.

Odd, I think 'being dominant' is probably Forster's biggest weakness. He's a man mountain but, relative to his size and stature, he is very poor in the air. All goalkeepers are 'good shot-stoppers'. I used to love the way Lehmann would come and claim the ball towards the edge of his box. Yes, it would cost Arsenal a goal or so a season from the odd howler, but it took so much pressure off the defence. Wish Forster would command his box more. I think Stekelenburg is slightly ahead of where Forster was last season but not a huge amount in it. Forster should end up being a much better keeper than him though.

Forster is ok but I prefer Stekelenburg. I don't think there is a single aspect of the game that Forster is better at, apart from being a little bigger.

Kicking range, reflexes and width are the three I'd give to Forster, but Stekelenburg has a lot of experience and shows it regularly. One big save needed against Bournemouth, one save made. One big save needed against Sunderland, one save made.

Odd, I think 'being dominant' is probably Forster's biggest weakness. He's a man mountain but, relative to his size and stature, he is very poor in the air. All goalkeepers are 'good shot-stoppers'. I used to love the way Lehmann would come and claim the ball towards the edge of his box. Yes, it would cost Arsenal a goal or so a season from the odd howler, but it took so much pressure off the defence. Wish Forster would command his box more. I think Stekelenburg is slightly ahead of where Forster was last season but not a huge amount in it. Forster should end up being a much better keeper than him though.

I think Forster is very good in the air, partially because his size (not just height) makes claiming difficult balls look easy for him - the problem is that he's a lump and it takes him longer to move himself to a position where he can do that - and that sometimes means he doesn't come out at all. The only real criticisms I had of Forster were his goalline-hugging and an occasional tendency to ball-juggle. Both of them are very good keepers.

If we can sign Stek permanently, move Gazza on for a decent up n coming keeper and give Kelvin a job doing something else I would be a happy bunny.

If we can sign Stek permanently, move Gazza on for a decent up n coming keeper and give Kelvin a job doing something else I would be a happy bunny.

I'd settle for just having Stekelenburg and Forster as 1 and 2 (in no specific order) and to hell with the rest of it. Whether that's viable is likely to depend on Stekelenburg's appraisal of his position after this season - he's just got back in the Dutch squad, he's playing well, does he want to go somewhere he'll play all the time for certain or is he prepared to sign permanently and risk being second choice to Forster? We'll probably know the chances of signing him permanently as soon as Forster is fit enough to play for the first team - and I'm guessing we'll have a month or so of him playing Dev Squad games first.

If we can sign Stek permanently, move Gazza on for a decent up n coming keeper and give Kelvin a job doing something else I would be a happy bunny.

think that's about the right mark......