Useless Grant Must be Dropped

[Rapid]

I am SICK of Lee Grant costing us goals. How long is it going to go on before Legzins get's a chance?

He's done it all season. He's incompetent. He doesn't command his box. About every 1 in 3 we concede is down to him. it's ridiculous. We can't keep tolerating a goalkeeper that's costing us goals. occasionally he makes a good save, like when morison went through but that's his job. he's in the team to make saves. at the very least he needs to cut these stupid errors out.

drop him now and give Legz a chance.

I think he has improved massively in the last few months[/quote]

and yet in the last few months he's cost us goals against Barnsley, Chelsea, Leicester, burnley and now milwall. that's just off the top of my head, I can't remember a lot of the games in between those.

I can't remember ever seeing a keeper in goal for us that's cost us so many goals in a season and getting away

[Boliclaret]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

Grant had a brilliant season for Burnley last year thanks largely to Shacks becoming settled after a back injury. Grant is a liability, he could pull off some good reflex saves but he always struggled to do the basics.

[HOODIE]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.


Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.

[su4eranio]

We sold Shackell cos he thought he was bigger than the management team, got too opinionated, and threw his dolls out his pram. One thing Nigel never tolerated. Next day, he was on his way out the door. Think the same thing happened to him at Wolves, so he has history.

Good solid player no doubt. And better than Keogh. But this Derby dressing room has been built on unity, and every bad penny is moved on - further shown by Chris MacGuire!

As for the opening comments on Grant. Very harsh. He has been very good over the last 20 games. Keepers are harshly judged on their mistakes. For me, a striker missing a chance in the 6 yards box is equally as bad, but when we have our faves, we tend to overlook those ones!!!

3 factors on the goal yesterday - poor freekick. Grant didnt deal with it. Keogh (I think) let Morisson evade him and gave him free header.

[Gift_of_the_Gabb]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.

Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.[/quote]

I remember Glick saying on RD that Keogh cost more than the amount we got for Shackell. I don't think it was by much, but I remember being surprised.

[Rapid]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.


Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.[/quote]

that wasn't the real reason we sold him mate. I can't say anymore as I don't want to end up in court!

[SuperDerbySuperRams]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.


Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.[/quote]

that wasn't the real reason we sold him mate. I can't say anymore as I don't want to end up in court![/quote]

This. Much more to it than out with the old and in with the new

[triz]

so to speak

[DCFC95]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.


Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.[/quote]

that wasn't the real reason we sold him mate. I can't say anymore as I don't want to end up in court![/quote].

If it's the Steve Davies thing then that's just hearsay, me mate spoke to him when he was tipsy and him and Davies were quite good mates.

Apparently him and Clough just didn't get on.

He was gutted (at the time) that it was Burnley he ended up at as well!

This is all second hand obviously so, it might no

[Rapid]

The big question shouldn't be why did you sign Grant, but Why did you sell Shackell?

We had to sell Shackell because we could replace him with the cheaper and younger Keogh ( but not as good ) and spend the balance on strengthening one or two other areas of the team.


Nobody really wanted to lose Shackell. It was a case of needs must, simply the conditions Cloughie was operating under whilst at the club.[/quote]

that wasn't the real reason we sold him mate. I can't say anymore as I don't want to end up in court![/quote].

If it's the Steve Davies thing then that's just hearsay, me mate spoke to him when he was tipsy and him and Davies were quite good mates.

Apparently him and Clough just didn't get on.

He was gutted (at the time) that it was Burnley he ended up at as well!

This