Third Choice Goalkeeper

I cant say I know much about the Slovakian Goalkeeper we have brought in on loan right at the end of the transfer window there, Lubos Kamenar, so Im not having a go at the guy, but the fact he hasn't been listed in our Champions League squad you have to question if he will play any part this season or win a deal with us at the end of the loan.

I think Celtic could have pulled a signing out the hat that wouldv excited us & that couldv been the return of big Arrur Boruc, the Holy Goalie, hes a free agent after being released from Fiorentina & by * he would push Fraser Forster for that no.1 jersey, ok ashame on Zaluska, but a 1 year deal for Artur until he found a club or stay a little longer at Celtic, to me bringing in Kamenar is a waste really & ashame on the guy himself if he doesnt feature atall, ok he is brought in to make competition for Forster & Zaluska but surely young Robbie Thompson or the other young goalkeepers couldv done that.

For me Boruc wouldv been superb cover for us & maybe sent Zaluska out on loan to get some matches under his belt, think Celtic have missed out on 1 there to be honest & I cant believe Boruc hasnt been snapped up yet from anyone..

​

 

Yes I agree. I was Boruc fan - still the best goalkeeper i have seen play for Celtic. If he was available then i think it would have been a popular move with the majority of fans. Big personality.

 

Shame he signed for Dnipro which is a shame.

 

Loved Artur as much as the next guy, but have heard some very positive reviews of our new keeper. Could be one for the future if we sell Fraser.

 

Stupid idea.

 

Boruc was a hero during his time at Celtic but to bring him back when we already have Forster and a good back up in Zaluska would be pointless imo.

 

Not sure if I get the point of this thread. Is it to talk the Slovak as our 3rd choice 'keeper, or mere speculation on Boruc being a no.2 or 3 goalie for us?

Neither really warrant much discus ion. I'm not sure why Lennon signed Kamenar, but he said he was back-up to Forster - not Zaluska. So, as far as we know, the Pole is down to 3rd place, and the Slovak is in fact our no.2, currently.

And really, if we were going to resign Boruc, it would've been to fill the no.1 position.

 

I've honestly no clue why we brought this guy in? I've never seen him play & so I can't judge if he's a decent or not, but we have Zaluska who is a good back up keeper to have. This wee loan could be another Pawel Brozek, just brought in and barely used.

 

We only had two senior keepers. Every good team has three.

 

So the difference between a good and a bad team is a 3rd choice keeper?

 

For me 2 is enough. If Forster gets injured, use Zaluska and put Thomson on the bench. I can't remember the last time we used 3 different keepers in the one season? thats just what I would do though.

 

Nope

 

How did you get that from the statement, "every good team has three senior keepers."

 

The Slovak was a waste of money since Zaluaska is a more than capable back-up. But Boruc would have been a even bigger waste of money as he would have been on 3 times the Slovaks wages and played just as much.

 

By you saying EVERY GOOD team has 3 keepers.

So if a team does not have 3 senior keepers what does that make them?

Can you define what a good team is?

 

I didn't say that every good team was good just because they have three keepers. If you look at every good team, however, you will see that they all have three senior keepers.

 

That's untrue.

 

Well a large majority do. Who doesn't?

 

Just off the top of my head, Man Utd for a start.

 

I think I'm right in saying that if your keepers who are listed in the champs league squad get injured you can bring in an emergency one. Only position you can do it for, so you'd have to be an idiot to waste a third squad place on a keeper.