Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Chuks Aneke - speculation re 2023/24 season (p60)
Comments
-
Given there's only 7 weeks left of the season, i think we can safely rule him out until next season.Tunwellsaddick said:This has been reported today within JJ`s weekly press conference - "But Jackson added that Chuks Aneke is “still a number of weeks” from a first-team return."
Does anyone know the extent of the injury(ies) keeping Chucks out?
This is such depressing news bearing in mind we desparately need him back to strengthen our depleted attack.1 -
And then when he plays 90 minutes in the first game of next season, we can rule him out of the rest of that season as well.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Given there's only 7 weeks left of the season, i think we can safely rule him out until next season.Tunwellsaddick said:This has been reported today within JJ`s weekly press conference - "But Jackson added that Chuks Aneke is “still a number of weeks” from a first-team return."
Does anyone know the extent of the injury(ies) keeping Chucks out?
This is such depressing news bearing in mind we desparately need him back to strengthen our depleted attack.
Still we'll keep sending the pay cheques to him for the next 3 years. Madness.0 -
Shocking signing and three and a half years!!
Laughable3 -
If only it was mentioned he might be a risk due to fitness/injury issues. Who could have foreseen it?1
-
Seriously, we can present whatever stats we like, resigning Aneke on a 3.5 year deal in full knowledge of his frailties was an act of utter folly. Regardless of how desperate we were and how good he can be for those precious few minutes he appears, whoever sanctioned this deal should be escorted from the building, marched up Floyd Road and put on the first train to Bonkersville. A pay as you play deal would have been fair enough, but a three and a half year contract! Bonkers. Give Innes a five year deal next.4
-
I`m still no wiser what his ongoing injuries are that keep him out for such long periods.
Perhaps someone out there has some knowledge of them? It would be good to know so we can get an idea of his future availability and not always live in hope.
If he is going to struggle to even come on as a "super sub" for 30 minutes on a regular basis, then the next 3 years are going to be a big disappointment.1 -
One of the stupidest transfers yet. Wrong on so many levels. Cannot rely on someone like him to get us out this league.4
-
Spotted by MS black box as a player who had done well then moved to another club and dropped off the radar and been forgotten. Couldn't believe our luck that no one else was competing for him!1
-
Tunwellsaddick said:I`m still no wiser what his ongoing injuries are that keep him out for such long periods.
Perhaps someone out there has some knowledge of them? It would be good to know so we can get an idea of his future availability and not always live in hope.
If he is going to struggle to even come on as a "super sub" for 30 minutes on a regular basis, then the next 3 years are going to be a big disappointment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yjgf-HQKRcE 1 -
That's the thing, isn't it? Nobody has got the slightest clue what is wrong with him and why it makes him unable to play for more than 30 minutes on a good day. (The good days getting less and less frequent).Tunwellsaddick said:I`m still no wiser what his ongoing injuries are that keep him out for such long periods.
Perhaps someone out there has some knowledge of them? It would be good to know so we can get an idea of his future availability and not always live in hope.
If he is going to struggle to even come on as a "super sub" for 30 minutes on a regular basis, then the next 3 years are going to be a big disappointment.
That of course is not strictly true as presumably those in the club do know. So if they thought whatever the problem is could be managed, they have got that seriously wrong.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Given there's only 7 weeks left of the season, i think we can safely rule him out until next season.Tunwellsaddick said:This has been reported today within JJ`s weekly press conference - "But Jackson added that Chuks Aneke is “still a number of weeks” from a first-team return."
Does anyone know the extent of the injury(ies) keeping Chucks out?
This is such depressing news bearing in mind we desparately need him back to strengthen our depleted attack.
Get him fit for 22 sub appearance's next season.2 -
That's what Aneke says as well.eaststandmike said:Shocking signing and three and a half years!!
Laughable0 -
I agree. I tend to be one who defers to “the professionals” in the absence of good information to the contrary, so I was in favour of his signing, despite the oddity of paying a fee. I assumed the long contract was a sign they had properly assessed his fitness issues and deemed them to be a thing of the past. This situation has seriously shaken my confidence in the set-up. But who exactly was party to the decision? I can’t believe it was TS overruling everybody to waste a load of his own money, when he knew as well as the rest of us the problems Aneke had with injuries in his first spell. Someone must have persuaded him it was all fixed. But what is “it”, and who has the best visibility over it in medical terms? I guess we won’t find out unless someone blabs. Meanwhile we are back to endlessly wondering how much better we would be if we could get Aneke fit.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
That's the thing, isn't it? Nobody has got the slightest clue what is wrong with him and why it makes him unable to play for more than 30 minutes on a good day. (The good days getting less and less frequent).Tunwellsaddick said:I`m still no wiser what his ongoing injuries are that keep him out for such long periods.
Perhaps someone out there has some knowledge of them? It would be good to know so we can get an idea of his future availability and not always live in hope.
If he is going to struggle to even come on as a "super sub" for 30 minutes on a regular basis, then the next 3 years are going to be a big disappointment.
That of course is not strictly true as presumably those in the club do know. So if they thought whatever the problem is could be managed, they have got that seriously wrong.2 -
I agree. I also dont think £300k was "wasted" on him, considering we got £2m for Bonne & £1.6m for Burstow.......and spent £500k on Kirk.Addick Addict said:I do think that we have been influenced by what Aneke is capable of doing rather than, historically, he has done and because of one or two good seasons at this level (primarily as a super sub for us). This is his full goal scoring record/appearances, season by season, as a pro:
1/13 (L1)
6/30 (L1)
14/40 (L1)
2/30 (Belgium)
2/11 (Belgium)
4/15 (L2)
9/31 (L1)
17/38 (L2)
1/20 (Championship)
15/38 (L1)
4/23 (Championship/L1)
That's 75 league goals in 11 seasons as a pro from 289 appearances. In the Belgium's Pro League it was 4 goals in 41 appearances and in the Championship it has been 3 in 38 so, from 7 goals in total from 79 appearances at a level higher than League 1, it is safe to say that he might well have not been a roaring success in that division next season even if we had been promoted at the end of this one.
Bowyer couldn't wait to get rid of Aneke and started him for just one of his 18 appearances at Birmingham and as I've said numerous times previously I really could not understand why he signed him for them in the first place. Bowyer was the very person who kept telling us he couldn't start games for us but must have thought that he would still been an impact sub and he was on a "free".
It's not as if we weren't aware of Aneke's issues either though he did, actually, go straight into the starting line up when he came back to us - for the first time in ages. But now he's out again and we are straddled with not being able to rely on not just one of our main two strikers but, probably, one of the highest paid players in the Club who is on a three and a half year contract.
It really does smack a bit like a £300,000 (plus wages) gamble in January to get us into the Play Offs that has, unfortunately, somewhat backfired. Every player has his ceiling and I believe League 1 is his but the hope has to be that he returns next season all guns blazing and that he produces a season similar to his last one with us at this level. It is that issue with having to manage his game time and ensuring that he stays fit that will be the one that will need to be addressed - once again. But those issues also mean that we have to carry that one extra striker. Just in case and of course those injuries impact even further when, as we have now, another one or two are out at the same time.
I hope for his as much as ours that Aneke finds a way of staying available for selection because, if he does, he will, almost certainly, be an asset and not a financial liability. But he remains very much a relatively expensive gamble.
As you say, he has shown that he really is just an impact player & going forward we need to realise this & play to his strengths, not lay him from the start and expect 90 mins from him.
In the summer we still need to sign a 20 goal striker. Stockley & Washington (with Aneke as back up) wont be enough for promotion. Mark my words.1 -
To me this shows the weakness of our scouting and recruitment team....If Aneke is the answer I give up....and they paid a fee and gave him 3 1/2 years!!!0
-
Desperation?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I said when we resigned him for £300k it was bad business (don't believe me - look at my earlier comments on this thread!). And lets just say one or two people disagreed.
It now looks very bad business, particularly given his 3.5 year contract.
It would be interesting to know if this current injury was caused by him playing 90 minutes in a couple of games when he first come back. And if it was suspected his body wouldn't be able to cope, why on earth did we do it?
Maybe they thought Stockley would be out for the season, we still don’t know if this is going to be a recurring injury either, or whether he’s ‘fixed’?0 -
Let's see if he fires us to promotion next season before we judge.12
-
I said the 1st time we had him he was one of the most overhyped/ over rated footballers we’ve ever had. With that in mind added to his injury record makes the resigning of him even if it was a 1 year, and yet we give him a three and a half deal is absolutely pathetic business. We never seem to learn no matter who makes the decisions.0
-
- Sponsored links:
-
Aneke is a very good squad player. Should we have paid £300K for him and given him 3.5 years, no - but I for one am glad he is back.
As Golfie says above though we need Stockley, him and 2 other senior strikers (assuming Washington will be one but he is out of contract).
Add in Kanu/Leaburn/Reilly/Gavin as young gun back ups and we would be excellent if the one or two new senior ones are of quality.3 -
Strange how everyone was gutted he left and now disappointed he has returned.
Just general frustration again, IMO.8 -
With us playing two strikers and Aneke’s fitness issues we need five senior strikers next season.7
-
Doesnt matter how good a player is if he is injured most of the time. Unfortunately with Chucks it is a given that if you get half a season out of him you are doing well, and that is based on mostly impact sub appearances not starting and playing 90 mins. Everybody knows this so for this reason it was a ridiculous signing imo2
-
Gutted he wasn't replaced and disappointed we bought him back thinking he would play 90 minutes for 3 years injury free.Chunes said:Strange how everyone was gutted he left and now disappointed he has returned.
Just general frustration again, IMO.1 -
He made 40 appearances in 20/21. He's hardly Ryan Inniss.3
-
His 20/21 season is worth £300,000 easilyAndyG said:Doesnt matter how good a player is if he is injured most of the time. Unfortunately with Chucks it is a given that if you get half a season out of him you are doing well, and that is based on mostly impact sub appearances not starting and playing 90 mins. Everybody knows this so for this reason it was a ridiculous signing imo0 -
Fractured eyelash.addick1956 said:What is wrong with him now ? He is always unfit for a significant period of time. Also he seems less like scoring now when he does play.
Can be very long term that.1 -
His minutes per game?Chunes said:He made 40 appearances in 20/21. He's hardly Ryan Inniss.1 -
paulsturgess said:
His 20/21 season is worth £300,000 easilyAndyG said:Doesnt matter how good a player is if he is injured most of the time. Unfortunately with Chucks it is a given that if you get half a season out of him you are doing well, and that is based on mostly impact sub appearances not starting and playing 90 mins. Everybody knows this so for this reason it was a ridiculous signing imo
Agreed!paulsturgess said:
His 20/21 season is worth £300,000 easilyAndyG said:Doesnt matter how good a player is if he is injured most of the time. Unfortunately with Chucks it is a given that if you get half a season out of him you are doing well, and that is based on mostly impact sub appearances not starting and playing 90 mins. Everybody knows this so for this reason it was a ridiculous signing imo
At this level Chucks will probably be worth 5 points a season even if he makes just 20 "30 minute appearances". That could be the difference between making the play-offs and not making the play-offs. Worth it just for the extra gate receipts.
Happy to pay £300,000 for squad players who settle into the team but most don't have the same impact even if they play every game.1
This discussion has been closed.
