Danny Rogers

[BigAl]

LEEDS are among a host of English clubs eyeing a possible swoop for Falkirk goalie Danny Rogers.

 

The keeper is on loan from Aberdeen and has been in stunning form for the Bairns this season.

 

His brilliant last gasp save from Martyn Waghorn's penalty saw Peter Houston's side beat Rangers last month.

 

His displays — which have helped the club into second spot in the Championship — haven't gone unnoticed by clubs south of the border either.

 

The Elland Road aces are thought to be keen on the Republic of Ireland Under-21, whose Dons deal expires in the summer.

 

Championship rivals Reading, Bristol City and Preston are also understood to be interested.

 

The Dons have confirmed they won't recall Rogers, 21, after Liverpool allowed Danny Ward to see out the season at Pittodrie.

 

===========

 

I'm hope if we have any intention of trying to keep Rogers that the management team are all over this like a rash....

[Reidzer 1314]

If we have any intention of keeping him then we need to get him tied down ASAP.

[ayrshire_don74]

He has been in good form for a while curious why we havent tied him up but this could be skullduggery from his agent. Simple he is first choice next year get him signed

[Tyrant]

We'd be due compensation I think if we offered him a deal? Surely we'll offer him something?

[rocket_scientist]

Any football club with ambitions to succeed makes sure to recruit and retain talented footballers.

 

"Succeed" is relative of course. For St Mirren or Sunderland, playing in the top division is success, with the hope of a rare cup win.

 

Proof of competence as a club in the recruitment function is that transfer fees received exceed transfers spent.

 

This takes out the "level" of division that the club is operating in and proves that the scouts, coaches and managers know what they're doing, have an eye for a footballer and the ability to develop them so that they are attractive for a bigger club paying a big fee, which the club can re-invest in their "football side of the operation", the "product", or not, according to the business plan and their specific ambitions.

 

Any football operation worth its salt knows that a good team starts with a solid goalkeeper and defence.

 

This season is the first for well over a decade that AFC has had a competent goalkeeper, let alone a good one.

 

Whatever Milne's ambitions have been for our club for the last 20 years, I can't imagine that it has been successful. The results on the pitch and the solitary trophy won can't possibly have been considered a success, and the financial mismanagement resulting in a wrecked balance sheet the whole time proves failure off the pitch too, survival only having been achieved through an extraordinary intervention by an independent third party, Mr & Mrs Wm Donald.

 

If we want to reverse the performance trend of the last 20 years, we need to have a good goalkeeper. It's pretty amazing if you think about it that this simple truth has been ignored by the board of AFC and hopefully, will not continue to be neglected when it comes to the management of Rogers. What happens with him is a great barometer of what our club really wants to do and what it wants to be.

[RicoS321]

If we want to reverse the performance trend of the last 20 years, we need to have a good goalkeeper. It's pretty amazing if you think about it that this simple truth has been ignored by the board of AFC and hopefully, will not continue to be neglected when it comes to the management of Rogers. What happens with him is a great barometer of what our club really wants to do and what it wants to be.

 

It's hardly been ignored by the board. We had Leighton, Kjaer and paid a good fee for Preece (£300K was it?). That Calderwood brought in Langfield and, I assume, paid him well was a management decision - the board can't be expected to question the manager on the merits of signing a player that the manager had previously worked with and obviously rated. Langfield wouldn't have been on shite wages, so its down to poor management that he was never replaced with someone better on the same budget. That said, the state of our outfield playing staff meant I entirely agreed with McInnes's decision to give Langfield another contract when he did, as I simply didn't think we had the time and resource to source a good 'keeper whilst replacing several of the playing squad at the same time. The decision was made early on Langfield leaving, it had been known about for at least 6 months. It's telling/disappointing that at the end of the search, we could only come up with a loanee from the EPL (albeit a f'n good one) to take us forward. I'm not convinced Rogers is as good as this agent-leaked story suggests but nevertheless we're in the position that we know we need a new goalie in June and we've had a year to look for one. I'm hoping there's a huge amount of effort going into sourcing the next guy, with a keen eye on Rogers' progress at the same time. We need to get it right next season, and I'm certain the manager will know that. But it is the manager's job, not the board.

[tlg1903]

It's been a while since we had a player in this position, the current regime has been pretty effective at giving out contracts so I'm not sure what to make of the fact it's happening with Rogers.  It could be as simple as DM for some reason or other just may not fancy him.  I saw that Liverpool just signed another young keeper so it may yet be possible to keep Ward for another season.  I'm not sure how I feel about that for the obvious what about our own youth reasons but he's been a real find this season and would be leaving big shoes to fill for Rogers should he be staying.  Ideally I would like ward another year with Rogers as his no2 but giving him a bit more game time than one would expect to integrate him.  E.G. Cup games against lower league opp and some of the diddier top flight sides.  It's likely pie in the sky thinking, if championship sides are offering more bucks Rogers will be gone you would think.

[rocket_scientist]

It's hardly been ignored by the board. We had Leighton, Kjaer and paid a good fee for Preece (£300K was it?).

 

This season is the first for well over a decade that AFC has had a competent goalkeeper, let alone a good one.

 

Read carefully. I said "if we wanted to reverse the performance trend of the last 20 years". Nobody's arguing that Kjaer and particularly Leighton wasn't fit for purpose.

 

 

We need to get it right next season, and I'm certain the manager will know that. But it is the manager's job, not the board.

 

The manager's appointments are all the responsibility of the board. Even a Director of Football appointing a manager is the board's responsibility, as they appointed the DoF.

 

I don't think there's any debate to be had about our performance as a club and as a business since Milne took charge. It is very dangerous to seek to mitigate the chairman's responsibility by pointing the finger at the manager. If the players aren't good enough, the manager is at fault. If the manager isn't getting results, it's the boardroom's fault. Our club has been so ineptly run for so long we didn't even understand the importance of a decent goalkeeper. One of my best mates has a ST at Smurren and being four or five years older than me, has been playing and watching for longer. He absolutely detests Langfield already, after half a season and yet some ignorant AFC webspeaksitechatters defended the incompetent fool and indeed, turn on any of us who have the audacity to say it like it is.

 

 

[BobbyBiscuit]

Falkirk fans were fairly unimpressed with Rogers in the first couple of months of the season. It really isn't the case that he's been performing to the level we saw against the huns, all season.

 

I haven't seen enough of the guy, but I'd still like us to go for Bain from Dundee.  Takes control of his box AND is a good shotstopper (a pre-requisite for a keeper at this level).

[Madbadteacher]

Isn't Bain another AFC "reject"?

[Edinburghdon]

Falkirk fans were fairly unimpressed with Rogers in the first couple of months of the season. It really isn't the case that he's been performing to the level we saw against the huns, all season.

 

I haven't seen enough of the guy, but I'd still like us to go for Bain from Dundee.  Takes control of his box AND is a good shotstopper (a pre-requisite for a keeper at this level).

 

The Falkirk fan at work is of the same opinion, I was impressed with what I saw of his performance against rangers but that's not enough to convince me he should be number 1 next season.

 

Bain would be a decent shout, seems to have improved significantly since he was let go by us.

 

I'm hoping for McInnes unearthing a keeper of the standard of ward on a permanent deal though, it'd be a big ask but it's the level we should be aiming for.

[RicoS321]

 

I don't think there's any debate to be had about our performance as a club and as a business since Milne took charge. It is very dangerous to seek to mitigate the chairman's responsibility by pointing the finger at the manager. If the players aren't good enough, the manager is at fault. If the manager isn't getting results, it's the boardroom's fault. Our club has been so ineptly run for so long we didn't even understand the importance of a decent goalkeeper. One of my best mates has a ST at Smurren and being four or five years older than me, has been playing and watching for longer. He absolutely detests Langfield already, after half a season and yet some ignorant AFC webspeaksitechatters defended the incompetent fool and indeed, turn on any of us who have the audacity to say it like it is.

 

I disagree entirely. I think it is solely the responsibility of the manager to prioritise the position(s) required - see my McInnes example above. I actually think that Langfield was about right for the quality of outfield player we had at the time (under Calderwood, McGhee and Brown). That is a criticism of the quality of outfield player we had rather than a compliment for Langfield.

 

There was a point when Calderwood should have tried to replace him, when we were performing well. It coincided with Langfield's best spell, but the deficiencies were obvious and we should have looked to spend a decent wage on a better 'keeper.

 

McGhee went into Europe with no central defenders, which was far more of a priority than changing goalie. He then proceeded to employ Ifil and other f'n awful players whilst dicking about trying to replace Langfield with pish like Brown and Gonzalez; arguably he'd have been better spent prioritising a centre half or a full back.

 

Brown's entire spell seemed to be about us not finishing bottom. He didn't seem to have much of a forward plan.

 

McInnes, as I mentioned earlier, held off on the goalie position whilst he sorted out the rest of the side - recognising that good ones don't come along that often in the SPL. If Milne had insisted that McInnes prioritise a goalie, then I think that would have set us back considerably, whilst completely over-stepping the mark as chairman.

 

I agree that Milne has made some spectacularly bad appointments, but that doesn't mean that he should see it as a cue to get involved in team strategy. Once making his shite appointments, he has to put faith in them as a manager - he clearly thought he was doing the right thing.

 

Anyway, I'm not convinced Rogers is the ready made replacement for Ward, but I would like to see him given his chance because I like the idea of us taking through a youth goalie! I'm going to assume that - given the impact Ward has made - McInnes knows that it's a huge position to fill in the summer and he's allocating an appropriately large chunk of our budget for it.

 

To add: I dinna really rate Bain either. Only seems to look good against us - based on SPL highlights only!

[rocket_scientist]

I don't really think you and I can agree about anything as we can't get past a very simple point.

 

Which is this.

 

Ultimate responsibility for everything that happens at any organisation rests with the man in charge.

 

I'm not advocating a chairman gets involved in team selections or tells the manager what he should or should not be doing. That's just stupid. But as evidence of how badly we have been managed for a very long time, we've not had a decent goalkeeper before this season for well over a decade and it's ONLY because we got Ward in on loan that we've been able to compete.

 

THIS IS SIMPLE AND COMMON KNOWLEDGE IN FOOTBALL.

 

You can not win anything without a solid goalkeeper AND defence. A shite goalkeeper and you're fucked. That one position will fuck you, having an incompetent fool between the sticks.

 

If we all know this, why don't and why didn't the many professional football men at AFC know this too?

[Madbadteacher]

Mr Rocket, much as I have grown, genuinely, to value your voicing of your opinions, I will disagree with this quote, probably taken out of context, but let's see where we go with this

Ultimate responsibility for everything that happens at any organisation rests with the man in charge.

 

If so, any school I've taught at in Scotland and abroad, and any organisation I've worked for, would have sacked the "boss" many, many times, and not laid blame at us "foot soldiers"

 

Back on track.....Milne is a fuck-up, but a fuck-up that may well have saved AFC from oblivion? I have no real insider info to back this up, but maybe better a club still alive "owned" by a fuckwit, than a dead club? Genuinely not looking for a fight here, just observations from my, maybe childlike, POV.

[ayrshire_don74]

disagree if a school or organisation fails then the ceo/headteacher gets it , quite simple

[RicoS321]

I don't really think you and I can agree about anything as we can't get past a very simple point.

 

Which is this.

 

Ultimate responsibility for everything that happens at any organisation rests with the man in charge.

 

I'm not advocating a chairman gets involved in team selections or tells the manager what he should or should not be doing. That's just stupid. But as evidence of how badly we have been managed for a very long time, we've not had a decent goalkeeper before this season for well over a decade and it's ONLY because we got Ward in on loan that we've been able to compete.

 

THIS IS SIMPLE AND COMMON KNOWLEDGE IN FOOTBALL.

 

You can not win anything without a solid goalkeeper AND defence. A shite goalkeeper and you're fucked. That one position will fuck you, having an incompetent fool between the sticks.

 

If we all know this, why don't and why didn't the many professional football men at AFC know this too?

 

But Langfield wasn't a shite goalkeeper in comparison to his teammates. He was a significantly better goalkeeper than Ifil or Diamond were centre halves. A significantly better goalie than Mackie was a striker, Clark a midfielder, Young a wherever the fuck young played, Duff a midfielder, Vujadinovic a defender, Hughes a midfielder, Zdrilic a striker etc etc. I would also argue that it's simple and common knowledge in football that a 15-20 goal a season striker is required to win things, and a box to box midfielder that can score a healthy number of goals in a season too.

 

I agree that our club has been mismanaged by Milne, completely. I just think you're overstating the goalkeeping element of it. I can genuinely only think of a couple of occasions where I thought we were being held back by our 'keeper (i.e. Langfield) rather than our batch of substandard outfielders. I don't believe I could look back at a Calderwood, McGhee or Brown team and say: "if it wasn't for that goalie, we'd be winning trophies". Our entire squads were simply incoherent.

 

Which I suppose backs you up in a way! One of the problems I have always had with AFC is our lack of overall strategy and continuity planning. We are in a far better position than we were a few years back, but most of the improvement appears to be down to McInnes. I don't believe we have it quite right on the pitch yet, but the strategy appears to be there. We seem to have better sports science, better contract negotiation and possibly better youth team development and scouting (remains to be proven). However all those elements seem to be down to McInnes, so if he leaves then there's a chance that those will not be maintained. I think that those elements should transcend the manager and should be in place, bar a few minor changes, when a manager arrives. The manager should be assessed at interview on his ability to gel with the current "service providers" at the club and only his tactical ideas and motivational skills above that. Milne's biggest failure for me is that he hasn't put a structure in place at AFC that allows us to move seamlessly for manager to manager without massive disruption. I am not convinced that's borne out in our goalkeeper anymore than it is our other positions on the park. In honesty, I think over the last ten years - tragically - our 'keeper has probably faired better than defence, midfield and striker positions. It'd be an interesting exercise to throw up our starting elevens for the last ten years and pick out the seasons where 'keeper was worse than the players in front of him. It would probably be quite depressing!

[rocket_scientist]

MBT,

 

It's cool to disagree. It's cool to have a different view. I'm somewhat surprised that we disagree on something so basic and simple however, something that I consider so absolute that I can't even imagine it being contentious and worthy of discussion.

 

The "pyramid" model of corporate governance is well enshrined, applying equally to the public sector of course. In fact, I can't even imagine an alternative.

[rocket_scientist]

But Langfield wasn't a shite goalkeeper in comparison to his teammates.....

 

Let me stop you right there. As I said, I don't think it's possible that we could agree. Based on that first statement alone - let alone the rest of the rant - it's not possible for you and I to even understand each other. I'm not running away here. I genuinely don't want to waste any more time.

[RicoS321]

Let me stop you right there. As I said, I don't think it's possible that we could agree. Based on that first statement alone - let alone the rest of the rant - it's not possible for you and I to even understand each other. I'm not running away here. I genuinely don't want to waste any more time.

 

Why, what else will you be doing?

 

I'm not trying to get us to agree, I was just interested to hear your point of view on what I said.

[ally s]

 

I saw Rogers play in the flesh for the first time at the beginning of last season and I have to say I wasn't impressed in the slightest.  I saw him again toward the end of the season and there was definite improvements made to his all round game.  I've seen quite a lot of Rogers this season, he didn't start the season too well (August/September), his distribution was iffy, and he struggled with crosses. Generally he didn't seem to instill much confidence in his defence.  However, over the past couple of months there has been a marked improvement. 

 

I don't think he's ready to be our No. 1 but if he's willing to sign up for another few years, and continues to progress as he has done over the past 12 months, then he'd be worth another contract.