Andy Mitchell contract terminated "by mutual consent"

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Because ... ahem ... 3 of those goalies you list play in our youth team's games and are what, 16 to 17 years old? Gallagher is to be Bell's deputy and successor in years to come, but before Ally views him as a straight replacement he wanted him to have more competitive games? No matter whether he played blinders before Bell became available. Simonsen will be gone in the summer and that leaves us with two senior goalkeepers and half a handful of youngsters playing youth football. 25 or more of those 55 you mention are youngsters too, playing youth footie at u18s or u20s level. Breeding talent is the always the cry. How shall we do that if we only employ a senior squad? I actually wonder what sort of wages the youngsters take up each week.

Gallagher is less than 3 years younger than Bell. He is hardly going to be his long term replacement. I'd be surprised if he has any future at the club.

 

Also, we have 3 keepers in our first team squad.

[UCF2008 0]

25 or more of those 55 you mention are youngsters too, playing youth footie at u18s or u20s level.

 

It's 29 pro youths to be precise and that's not counting the 4 under 20's in our 26 man first team squad.

[Super Cooper 0]

4 first team keepers. Simonsen, Bell, Gallacher, Smith. All 20 or above years of age.

[der Berliner 4,035]

4 first team keepers. Simonsen, Bell, Gallacher, Smith. All 20 or above years of age.

 

Yes, had we not signed Simonsen, Gallagher would have been Bell's deputy and had not seen a single game once the transfer ban went. Had we not signed Simonsen, after it was agreed to let Gallgher go on loan (so he would get games), we might have well ended up with a goalie like Smith or Kelly who would have not had played 15 minutes for the first team amongst each other and in front of crowds of more than 250? Thrown in at Ibrox in front of 40k, or on a nice cold Cup night out in Falkirk? Or maybe you suggest that we send these youngsters (who take up what, 500 pounds a week?) packing too and play whom exactly in goals in the youth leagues? Or should we shut down that sector too for the time being. Sorry for sounding a touch sarcastical here.

 

The club right now has three recognized first team goalkeepers.

[Super Cooper 0]

Yes, had we not signed Simonsen, Gallagher would have been Bell's deputy and had not seen a single game once the transfer ban went. Had we not signed Simonsen, after it was agreed to let Gallgher go on loan (so he would get games), we might have well ended up with a goalie like Smith or Kelly who would have not had played 15 minutes for the first team amongst each other and in front of crowds of more than 250? Thrown in at Ibrox in front of 40k, or on a nice cold Cup night out in Falkirk? Or maybe you suggest that we send these youngsters (who take up what, 500 pounds a week?) packing too and play whom exactly in goals in the youth leagues? Or should we shut down that sector too for the time being. Sorry for sounding a touch sarcastical here.

 

The club right now has three recognized first team goalkeepers.

 

Absolutely no worries, that's your game.

 

We have absolutely no need for 4 goalkeepers over the age of 20 as part of the first team squad. There was no need to sign Bell and certainly no need to sign Simonsen either. Gallacher should have been given a chance, of at least one full season. Spending £8k a week for a keeper in the lower leagues and a grand or two on a substitute goalkeeper to sit and do nothing, we deserve all that comes our way. Every transfer window Ally is like a kid in a sweet shop, will take everything and anything, even the stuff that's bad for you not giving any consequences a second thought.

[der Berliner 4,035]

So essentially you are saying we would have been fine with Gallagher and Smith or Kelly as his understudy?

[Super Cooper 0]

So essentially you are saying we would have been fine with Gallagher and Smith or Kelly as his understudy?

 

Through the part time lower leagues of one of Europes backwaters, of course we would have been.

 

Do you really believe we should be spending at least £10k per week on the goalkeeping position at this level?

[RANGERRAB 4,014]

Through the part time lower leagues of one of Europes backwaters, of course we would have been.

 

Do you really believe we should be spending at least £10k per week on the goalkeeping position at this level?

 

I'd agree with you but probably for different reasons. I'm none too convinced about Cammy Bell.He doesn't seem too clever coming off his line. I think that's why McCoist signed Simonsen

[BrahimHemdani 1]

So essentially you are saying we would have been fine with Gallagher and Smith or Kelly as his understudy?

 

That would have been my choice; see no reason why Gallagher could not have become another McGregor.

[Super Cooper 0]

I'd agree with you but probably for different reasons. I'm none too convinced about Cammy Bell.He doesn't seem too clever coming off his line. I think that's why McCoist signed Simonsen

 

As a club we can't afford mistakes like that though mate. Imagine the uproar if McCoist benched Bell for 34 year old substitute Simonsen. There would be chaos inside and outside the club. I think it is obscene the wages we are throwing at keepers at this level. From Alexander which we couldn't do much about to Bell and Simonsen. It's simply not necessary.