Stockley. Washington. Aneke. Defoe. That's a strikeforce that wins League One at a canter next season. When can I buy my season ticket, Thomas?
I get why some people don't want Defoe back. He was 16 at the time so I'm prepared to give him a bit of leeway. However, imagine how much Burstow might learn about being in the right place at the right time, timing a run etc etc from him in training. Whatever one thinks of Defoe I really can't think of anyone better equipped to help Burstow and our younger strikers than someone who has scored over 300 career goals and on the international stage too.
The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"
No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
Astounding how many people cant wrap their heads around this.
My favourite Charlton player since Lyle Taylor did the football equivalent of leaving for his mistress after knocking us up.
Concerns at the lack of foresight/ strategy in spending a substantial amount on a player that was under contract 6 months ago but perhaps lessons have been learned and it's a pragmatic move...we need a proven goalscorer who fits the chemistry of the club and we have that in Chuks Bergkamp.
If Aneke and Innis could maintain a consistent level of match fitness they would not be playing for Charlton Athletic in the 3rd division. They can't and therefore that's why they are here.
So long as Chuks is just one element of the rebuild that will see us challenge for promotion over the next 2 seasons and not the integral part then it will be a very good move for all parties.
Welcome back Chuks you have been missed (assuming this is confirmed)
If Aneke comes back we will definitely need another striker, which I think will be a loan. Yes it's not good business to pay £300000 for someone we had on our books last summer, add to that we've probably had to get close to the wage he was on at Brum but I think the management team believe that the players who are knocking on the door now will form our strike force in seasons to come so rather than over commiting and taking a gamble on someone who may not fit in they have gone for someone who can play and come off the bench and change the game, plus they know what he's about. Good or bad signing ? It's Thomas who is footing the loss and Chuks is a game changer, it's a thumbs up from me.
The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"
No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
Astounding how many people cant wrap their heads around this.
Absolutely. Of course it's a bit frustrating that we're now paying 300k for a player who was ours but that's gone now. If you don't think 300k is a good bit of business then fair enough, I actually understand that given his inability to start matches, but the fact he left for a team in the higher division a few months ago is now irrelevant.
Not many league 1 defenders are going to be happy coming up against him . If he is now a 90 minute player then fantastic . If he is only a 60 minutes player we have Mason Burstow who can get experience in the other 30 mins
If the 5 subs rule becomes permanent we will see more "45 minute" payers in the game as managers develop tactics around making three changes soon after half-time. Chucks cameos may become quite normal.
I am absolutely baffled by some of the responses here. A lot of people complained that we didn't replace Aneke. What I long felt was that, at this level, you cannot replace Aneke with just one striker because you won't get a striker who combines the technical, physical, and goal scoring abilities of Aneke to play at this level. We have now found the one player who can offer those things, and yes, he has fitness and injury issue which is why he's playing in League One, the league that we're in, and people are complaining.
Second, I'm also baffled by those saying, and who have been saying, that Thomas needs to show he's willing to spend money. We spent presumably decent fees on Stockley, Lavelle, Kirk, and (to a lesser extent) Clare in the summer. Add to that DJ and Schwartz, plus now Aneke, spending money, particularly on transfer fees, has not been the issue. How well those signings have worked out is definitely a mixed bag. But again, we're a League One club, transfer fees are not the norm in this division.
Given we have two very good at this level first choice strikers in Stockley and Washington, and given that Aneke can come in as a replacement for either of them, I don't see how this is anything but a good signing. Aneke has limitations in terms of fitness, we know this. But when he's on the pitch, he's one of the best players in the division, hands down. We don't necessarily need 20 goals from him, but if he can chip in with 10, and if we can keep Washington and have him and Stockley fit and firing next season, that's the kind of strike force that gets us out of this division.
If the 5 subs rule becomes permanent we will see more "45 minute" payers in the game as managers develop tactics around making three changes soon after half-time. Chucks cameos may become quite normal.
Still find it hard to believe an athlete in a sport where the game lasts 90 minutes is permanently unable to play 90 minutes.
I look at it this way if Chucks comes on after an hour every game next season and scores 15-20 goals that's 12-15 goals more than we would have scored otherwise.
If you think he could score 3 times as many in 3 times as much time do you honestly think he would be playing for us?
Bring on a sub that has a 50/50 chance of scoring is priceless, at any level.
Thanks for the link. Didnt expect them to be, knowing his stats for them. Strikers who havent scored goals are never much lamented. But there is no “always injured, made of crisps” talk, either.
He left because he got offered more money. If we'd have offered the extra £300k at the time, people would've been giving pelters for that too, no doubt. He also wanted to test himself at a higher level - fair play; I'd never begrudge anyone for that, especially with his contract up.
We didn't release him: his contract was up. An important distinction. We couldn't force him to stay and we couldn't command a fee.
And ultimately - viewing things in this way is horribly retrospective. It was a decision that had zero complaints at the time, because we could do nothing about it. That is business
We now are buying a striker, for £300k (or thereabouts), who scored 16 goals at this level last season. We know who he is, as do a lot of the squad.
What happened previously basically doesn't matter, from a financial standpoint. This is potentially good business if he's anything approaching the same player, though his wages will obviously be a bit higher.
I don't agree that he was on our books last summer and we let him go. He ran down his contract and so was a free agent, thus nobody's player. He tarted himself around to the highest bidder which wasn't us. The fact he's now under contract and available to buy is down to Brum wanting rid.
As others have suggested, he'll do a job but only for 30 minutes so if Stockley or Washington are out, who plays the other 60 mins from the start.
Chuks wants to be playing 30 minutes a week (not every game) and we need a proven striker, so that would be Chuks plus A. N. Other if he is signed.
Should be a free if business sense applies. This is not building for the future, more putting a lick of paint on a rotten door!
In the main - mixed but more glad than sad - and some of those in the latter bracket are unaware of his playing time limitations:
299k more than he’s worth
I'd say result, but we're so low on players unless we get someone else in it just weakens us.
Seems mad leaving us with Juke and Hogan for a month.
Certainly weakens us, however, I guess that with the return of Chong
shortly and the additional of walker, then is that why we are going to
let him go?
I don’t think we will miss him much, looks useless
I get what you're saying in that sense, but honestly, he looks so
lacking - if we are being offered money, we should just take it and out
him down as a poor signing.
Had a look on a Charlton forum to see what their view and after wading
through a bunch of comments about how crap Leko is, it appears they
quite like Chuks and think it would be a good deal.
I'd be amazed if we got a fee for him considering we signed him on a free and it's not worked out at all...
Another failed Gardner/Bowyer signing
Made a profit though
I don't think I have ever seen such a big bloke so poor at using his
natural advantage. He's too nice. He should be smashing the arse out of
these defenders, he should be impossible to shake off the ball (even
considering it takes him four touches to try and control it, fetch it,
try and control it again...etc) he should be just bullying people and he
doesn't. He's also a non-threat in the air for his size.
Best we cut our losses I reckon.
Thanks for the memories Chucks.
Not sure we can really blame Gardner for this one considering he was one of Bowyers players before he joined us.....
Cracking bit of business tbf
Weird thing with aneke though, when he comes on he almost always gets at
least 2 chances within 10 or 15 min when we haven't created a thing all
game. Sadly he misses most of them.
He has something though and has never been given a game to be fair.
Just me that dont think he's actually that bad then?
Hard to judge a player properly that only gets the last 10/15mins of a game.
I took it to be simply what we already know - LB has been told by our
glorious masters one out to get one in. Let's face it, if we are to
improve then Chuks (Gawd Bless him) never looked a player to do that at
all.
100% agree and gave his all when he did play. The Plymouth game on the
weekend he got booked for running the full length of the pitch to tackle
a player, you could see he really cared
Absolutely this. I know he's never going to top the goalscoring charts
but he does offer some threat. Letting him go now when we're down to the
bare bones is very poor in my opinion, unless, of course, we have a
better replacement lined up and he needs to go before we can bring new
striker in?
Started 1 game in the league all season according to Transfermarkt.
He hasn't been given a fair go in my opinion. People above saying he
misses too many chances etc but I'd argue Hogan has missed far worse
(e.g. Swansea at home).
He's the only striker we have with any sort of pace and now Deeney's out
for a month, getting rid is crazy unless we genuinely have someone else
lined up to replace him straight away.
We will probably have Leko back, don't see us spending a penny to be honest in this window,
There’s a reason he’s only getting ten mins
Honestly don’t think anyone would touch this basket case .
Comments
I get why some people don't want Defoe back. He was 16 at the time so I'm prepared to give him a bit of leeway. However, imagine how much Burstow might learn about being in the right place at the right time, timing a run etc etc from him in training. Whatever one thinks of Defoe I really can't think of anyone better equipped to help Burstow and our younger strikers than someone who has scored over 300 career goals and on the international stage too.
That is all
Concerns at the lack of foresight/ strategy in spending a substantial amount on a player that was under contract 6 months ago but perhaps lessons have been learned and it's a pragmatic move...we need a proven goalscorer who fits the chemistry of the club and we have that in Chuks Bergkamp.
If Aneke and Innis could maintain a consistent level of match fitness they would not be playing for Charlton Athletic in the 3rd division. They can't and therefore that's why they are here.
So long as Chuks is just one element of the rebuild that will see us challenge for promotion over the next 2 seasons and not the integral part then it will be a very good move for all parties.
Welcome back Chuks you have been missed (assuming this is confirmed)
Can't understand their stupid accent.
2 , Result I’d say
Brummies don't seem bothered either way honestly.
I am absolutely baffled by some of the responses here. A lot of people complained that we didn't replace Aneke. What I long felt was that, at this level, you cannot replace Aneke with just one striker because you won't get a striker who combines the technical, physical, and goal scoring abilities of Aneke to play at this level. We have now found the one player who can offer those things, and yes, he has fitness and injury issue which is why he's playing in League One, the league that we're in, and people are complaining.
Second, I'm also baffled by those saying, and who have been saying, that Thomas needs to show he's willing to spend money. We spent presumably decent fees on Stockley, Lavelle, Kirk, and (to a lesser extent) Clare in the summer. Add to that DJ and Schwartz, plus now Aneke, spending money, particularly on transfer fees, has not been the issue. How well those signings have worked out is definitely a mixed bag. But again, we're a League One club, transfer fees are not the norm in this division.
Given we have two very good at this level first choice strikers in Stockley and Washington, and given that Aneke can come in as a replacement for either of them, I don't see how this is anything but a good signing. Aneke has limitations in terms of fitness, we know this. But when he's on the pitch, he's one of the best players in the division, hands down. We don't necessarily need 20 goals from him, but if he can chip in with 10, and if we can keep Washington and have him and Stockley fit and firing next season, that's the kind of strike force that gets us out of this division.
If you think he could score 3 times as many in 3 times as much time do you honestly think he would be playing for us?
Bring on a sub that has a 50/50 chance of scoring is priceless, at any level.
He left because he got offered more money. If we'd have offered the extra £300k at the time, people would've been giving pelters for that too, no doubt. He also wanted to test himself at a higher level - fair play; I'd never begrudge anyone for that, especially with his contract up.
We didn't release him: his contract was up. An important distinction. We couldn't force him to stay and we couldn't command a fee.
And ultimately - viewing things in this way is horribly retrospective. It was a decision that had zero complaints at the time, because we could do nothing about it. That is business
We now are buying a striker, for £300k (or thereabouts), who scored 16 goals at this level last season. We know who he is, as do a lot of the squad.
What happened previously basically doesn't matter, from a financial standpoint. This is potentially good business if he's anything approaching the same player, though his wages will obviously be a bit higher.
Welcome back Chuks!
As others have suggested, he'll do a job but only for 30 minutes so if Stockley or Washington are out, who plays the other 60 mins from the start.
Chuks wants to be playing 30 minutes a week (not every game) and we need a proven striker, so that would be Chuks plus A. N. Other if he is signed.
Should be a free if business sense applies. This is not building for the future, more putting a lick of paint on a rotten door!
Not sure we can really blame Gardner for this one considering he was one of Bowyers players before he joined us.....
Weird thing with aneke though, when he comes on he almost always gets at least 2 chances within 10 or 15 min when we haven't created a thing all game. Sadly he misses most of them. He has something though and has never been given a game to be fair.
Just me that dont think he's actually that bad then? Hard to judge a player properly that only gets the last 10/15mins of a game.
100% agree and gave his all when he did play. The Plymouth game on the weekend he got booked for running the full length of the pitch to tackle a player, you could see he really cared
Absolutely this. I know he's never going to top the goalscoring charts but he does offer some threat. Letting him go now when we're down to the bare bones is very poor in my opinion, unless, of course, we have a better replacement lined up and he needs to go before we can bring new striker in?