Ruddy is better than Forster.

[Buh 0]

And if Forster starts tonight it is a populist choice to appease neutrals. Ruddy is a far superior goalkeeper playing at a much higher level consistently.

[BroadstairsR 2,135]

Frankly. I don''t think there''s the thickness of a sheet of paper between the three of them, although until recently Hart has justifiably been the first choice.

I am not going to promote JH because he is NCFC as on a few occasions recently he has failed to be at his best also.

I wouldn''t mind seeing Forster given 45 minutes for the first time and a half each would appear the sensible option.

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Frankly. I don''t think there''s the thickness of a sheet of paper between the three of them, although until recently Hart has justifiably been the first choice. I am not going to promote JH because he is NCFC as on a few occasions recently he has failed to be at his best also. I wouldn''t mind seeing Forster given 45 minutes for the first time and a half each would appear the sensible option.[/quote]

With Hart  not even on the bench It''s a chance being handed to Ruddy /Forster to make a stand and claim the No1 shirt we all know that I think if Ruddy starts he will shine and rightfully stake a claim Forster has played well for Celtic BUT so did he for us in Lg1 and that''s where they differ

   

[*** 0]

[quote user="Buh"]And if Forster starts tonight it is a populist choice to appease neutrals. Ruddy is a far superior goalkeeper playing at a much higher level consistently.[/quote]

 

Err.............no he''s not imo.

[Buh 0]

Not playing at a higher level consistently?

Forster has played some big clubs a handful of times but he''s let in clangers against the might of Ross county etc

Ruddy is better, no question.

[Zak Van Burger 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="Buh"]And if Forster starts tonight it is a populist choice to appease neutrals. Ruddy is a far superior goalkeeper playing at a much higher level consistently.[/quote]

 

Err.............no he''s not imo.

[/quote]Oh yes he is....

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="Davros from Lowestoft"][quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="Buh"]And if Forster starts tonight it is a populist choice to appease neutrals. Ruddy is a far superior goalkeeper playing at a much higher level consistently.[/quote]

 

Err.............no he''s not imo.

[/quote]

Oh yes he is....
[/quote]

 

Oh no he in''t.

 

[| wolfswinkel | 0]

Terrific idea saying our keeper isn''t England worthy! Remember what defence he''s had to deal with, and playing in a pure defensive team!

[*** 0]

[quote user="wolfswinkel"]Terrific idea saying our keeper isn''t England worthy! Remember what defence he''s had to deal with, and playing in a pure defensive team![/quote]

 

I didn''t say that..........read the question again.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Go on then Wiz, justify it:Here''s a tie breaker for you:Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________Didn''t think so mate.Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.

[snake-eyes 13]

Sorry guys but it is a tough one to call!

Both deserve a chance and then we can judge!

Until then the p***ing contest is not needed!

Snake

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Forster is, like Hooper for us, an unknown quantity, we know he can hack it against everyone he''''s played so far, but none of the choices are ideal.

Hart is bang out of form

Ruddy has only had a half of international football and is, as much as we hate to admit it, playing for a lower premiership team and conceding a lot at the moment be it his fault or not, the goals are still going in

Forster is playing mainly at an even lower level and has even less experience than Ruddy.

I think both could do with a game, but if Hart is going to play the second game, then these two should have a half each.

[*** 0]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Go on then Wiz, justify it:

Here''s a tie breaker for you:

Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________

Didn''t think so mate.

Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.
[/quote]

 

Had it not been for Forster''s amazing stops for us in League 1, we''d still be stuck there.

[CiderkiddCanary 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Go on then Wiz, justify it:Here''s a tie breaker for you:Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________Didn''t think so mate.Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.[/quote]

 

Had it not been for Forster''s amazing stops for us in League 1, we''d still be stuck there.

[/quote]Of course. He was fantastic in League 1 in the 09/10 season. Therefore he should now play for England. [:D]

[Buh 0]

LEAGUE ONE

AWOOOOGAAA

AWOOOGA!!!!!

That''s the magic word!!!! Congratulations!!!!

Was wondering how long it would take, league one is so bad Ipswich will be playin in it soon, bare that in mind

[*** 0]

[quote user="CiderkiddCanary"][quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Go on then Wiz, justify it:

Here''s a tie breaker for you:

Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________

Didn''t think so mate.

Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.
[/quote]

 

Had it not been for Forster''s amazing stops for us in League 1, we''d still be stuck there.

[/quote]

Of course. He was fantastic in League 1 in the 09/10 season. Therefore he should now play for England. [:D]
[/quote]

 

Try reading the question again.

[Guest]

I would say they are both very good goalkeepers.

We were lucky to have Forster when we did, and Ruddy has matured into a dependable Premier League keeper.

Sure, the English Premier League provides a tougher regular test than the SPL. But remember Forster has also been playing against the likes Barcelona, Milan and Ajax in the Champions League where he''s not had to pick the ball out his net multiple times the way Ruddy has recently against Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea.

As for England, I can''t help think these sort of friendlies sets up goalkeepers to fail. Either one of Ruddy and Forster should already be in the England first eleven if their form is deemed good enough. Not because Hart has failed. It''s a negative way of promoting a player. If Ruddy drops a cross or Forster fluffs a save, they risk being written off as being no better than Hart based on one game.

[CiderkiddCanary 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="CiderkiddCanary"][quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Go on then Wiz, justify it:Here''s a tie breaker for you:Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________Didn''t think so mate.Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.[/quote]

 

Had it not been for Forster''s amazing stops for us in League 1, we''d still be stuck there.

[/quote]Of course. He was fantastic in League 1 in the 09/10 season. Therefore he should now play for England. [:D][/quote]

 

Try reading the question again.

[/quote]Sure. So Ruddy is better than Forster and/or you think has greater justification for being selected to play for England because he was really good for Norwich City in League 1 over three seasons ago. That''s how I read what you''ve said. So by that reckoning, every player that has ever been successful in League 1 (successful being determined as winning the league, I presume?) deserves an international call-up. [H]