Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Chuks Aneke - speculation re 2023/24 season (p60)
Comments
-
In a rational world no but we paid a fee for him so who knows 😂Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Yes that makes more sense now. But even so can you see any club rushing to offer a deal to a player who isn't fit, can't start games and has played 1150 minutes of league football in the last 2 years.talalsrightfoot said:
You have misunderstood. Im not saying he will get more than we pay him. What im saying is he could he stay here for rest of contract and get 100% what we owe him, ok ? Or we offer say 70% of his contract to offload and IF a team offer him say 40% of what he earns here on a 1 year contract he would have earned 10% more by cancelling his contract and signing a less paid contract elsewhere and we save 30%. Everyone is happy.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
There's not a hope in hell he's getting a better deal at any other club and given that i can honestly see him being not far off retiring, i highly doubt he's going to accept a pay off for less than we owe him. Unless something drastically changes in the next 2 years, this is probably his last decent contract.talalsrightfoot said:
Why not ? Gets the money off our wage budget if we are willing to take the hit, saves a place in squad. Worst case scenario offer him 50% or 75% to cancel his contract and he may be willing to gamble he can go elsewhere and make more money than he would of had he stayed here.Dazzler21 said:
And pay him anyway?WhenIwasLittleBoy said:We should just cut our loses with Chucks. On his day a top player is this league, and if could stay injury free he would certainly be in the championship minimum.
No doubt he is one of the top earners at the club, but given his injury record, I would call time and part our ways.
So given that we have a duty of care to him and we have to keep paying him anyway, all we can really do is plan ahead without him and if he returns at any point then it's a bonus.0 -
In this league are there limitations on squad size that we have to declare to EFL ?
That would have implications on whether we paid him off or not if we dont think he would get many games in0 -
If he was out until January, at the earliest for example, you don't have to name him in the squad.Kap10 said:In this league are there limitations on squad size that we have to declare to EFL ?
That would have implications on whether we paid him off or not if we dont think he would get many games in1 -
While I feel sorry for him as a player and a person, surely it's legitimate to question whether starting to look at other options is actually better for him.
Instead of just paying up and getting rid, maybe change so that he can be given more "non-playing" responsibilities like community or coaching work so there's less pressure to be specifically match fit.
It's a tricky one as I'm fairly sure he'd give up a lot of money if it meant he could actually play football again but it's getting worse not better.2 -
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.0 -
Is there an echo in here 😂thenewbie said:While I feel sorry for him as a player and a person, surely it's legitimate to question whether starting to look at other options is actually better for him.
Instead of just paying up and getting rid, maybe change so that he can be given more "non-playing" responsibilities like community or coaching work so there's less pressure to be specifically match fit.
It's a tricky one as I'm fairly sure he'd give up a lot of money if it meant he could actually play football again but it's getting worse not better.2 -
I genuinely must have just missed where you said that, sorry. But at least I'm not the only one thinking this!Manic_mania said:
Is there an echo in here 😂thenewbie said:While I feel sorry for him as a player and a person, surely it's legitimate to question whether starting to look at other options is actually better for him.
Instead of just paying up and getting rid, maybe change so that he can be given more "non-playing" responsibilities like community or coaching work so there's less pressure to be specifically match fit.
It's a tricky one as I'm fairly sure he'd give up a lot of money if it meant he could actually play football again but it's getting worse not better.2 -
They saw Ventokele’s name reasonably often on the team sheet but some still managed to use Vetokele.CharltonKerry said:
Because they never seen it spelt on a team sheet?JaShea99 said:How are people STILL getting his name wrong after this long? Jesus Christ.
Or maybe the other way round.2 -
Will the ‘truth’ ever become public re Chuks, seeing as we pay his wages, I just wish there was a bit more transparency, or is that never going to happen, in fact Bowyer, Adkins, Garner or DH have never disclosed a reason, but it must be widely known in footballing circles, which we seem to be going round and round in.1
-
Do "we" pay his wages? What truth are you after? What about Jackson he didn't disclose a reason either and he signed him? Bowyer signed him, twice. He must of had a medical to sign for us in the first place, Birmingham and us again.Mendonca In Asdas said:Will the ‘truth’ ever become public re Chuks, seeing as we pay his wages, I just wish there was a bit more transparency, or is that never going to happen, in fact Bowyer, Adkins, Garner or DH have never disclosed a reason, but it must be widely known in footballing circles, which we seem to be going round and round in.1 - Sponsored links:
-
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.4 -
The blame dies lay firmly at the clubs door. Chuks is totally without condemnation here. Poor chap is injured. That though doesn’t detract from the fact that he’s a paid employee who continually is unable to fulfil the role for which he is employed. In most jobs after rehabilitation and support that employee would have their contract terminated. Football is I accept different but eventually a decision, mutual or otherwise needs to be on the table.4
-
The fact we brought him in for 200k and on a 400k a year contract has to be one of the worst investments ever. I don't blame him for signing that deal and as above the club is to blame.14
-
When he is fit we need to put him on a full pre-season training programme and a session with the army, along with anyone else that is not match fit at the start of the season.
It would be worth it in the long run.0 -
The truth is that he is injury prone. It’s not a secret.Mendonca In Asdas said:Will the ‘truth’ ever become public re Chuks, seeing as we pay his wages, I just wish there was a bit more transparency, or is that never going to happen, in fact Bowyer, Adkins, Garner or DH have never disclosed a reason, but it must be widely known in footballing circles, which we seem to be going round and round in.
And whilst we are fans that support the club, the makeup of his contract and what he earns don’t automatically become our business.6 -
are you including his warm ups? He did not put effort into them at half time at the games i watched. Did you include the game when he got subbed off after being a substitute himself? That has to be slightly embarrassing for all involved.Gary Poole said:
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.
You can talk about the obligation the club has to him, but doesn't he have an obligation to the club and the people that pay to see him? If i was paid more than my peers to maintain a certain level of professionalism I think I would make some sort of effort to be in decent condition - we have seen in real time his attitude towards being ready to play - a couple of half hearted kick ups. His injuries have happened at work; but if i was at work and i wasn't taking safety precautions seriously and managed to hurt myself i'd get the sack at some stage
wish I had filmed what I saw at half time on a few occasions because it's indefensible. Watching people running and stretching all around him while he strolled around was the most infuriating thing i've seen in years2 -
Even if he was fit all of the time, 400k a year is stealing a living for who he is and what he does
8k a week to play league one football. His wages are an example of why football, us and so many other clubs are screwed
Even if the actual figure is slightly lower, 6 or 5k a week say, it’s ridiculous7 -
I haven’t witnessed this. But I really struggle to imagine that he would openly, as you imply, take the piss in front of not just his team mates but the Valley crowd. Not to mention the management. It also doesnt fit with his approach when on the field. He didnt hide, put himself about, and the last injury happened when he was chasing down hard a long ball that many strikers would have given up on.Manic_mania said:
are you including his warm ups? He did not put effort into them at half time at the games i watched. Did you include the game when he got subbed off after being a substitute himself? That has to be slightly embarrassing for all involved.Gary Poole said:
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.
You can talk about the obligation the club has to him, but doesn't he have an obligation to the club and the people that pay to see him? If i was paid more than my peers to maintain a certain level of professionalism I think I would make some sort of effort to be in decent condition - we have seen in real time his attitude towards being ready to play - a couple of half hearted kick ups. His injuries have happened at work; but if i was at work and i wasn't taking safety precautions seriously and managed to hurt myself i'd get the sack at some stage
wish I had filmed what I saw at half time on a few occasions because it's indefensible. Watching people running and stretching all around him while he strolled around was the most infuriating thing i've seen in years
The more common-sense view of it is that he was following medical orders with those warm-ups.
9 -
You’d think so wouldn’t you, but I do find it strange that the advice would be don’t bother to warm up and stretch properly. Go out there cold and strain a calf muscle !!PragueAddick said:
I haven’t witnessed this. But I really struggle to imagine that he would openly, as you imply, take the piss in front of not just his team mates but the Valley crowd. Not to mention the management. It also doesnt fit with his approach when on the field. He didnt hide, put himself about, and the last injury happened when he was chasing down hard a long ball that many strikers would have given up on.Manic_mania said:
are you including his warm ups? He did not put effort into them at half time at the games i watched. Did you include the game when he got subbed off after being a substitute himself? That has to be slightly embarrassing for all involved.Gary Poole said:
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.
You can talk about the obligation the club has to him, but doesn't he have an obligation to the club and the people that pay to see him? If i was paid more than my peers to maintain a certain level of professionalism I think I would make some sort of effort to be in decent condition - we have seen in real time his attitude towards being ready to play - a couple of half hearted kick ups. His injuries have happened at work; but if i was at work and i wasn't taking safety precautions seriously and managed to hurt myself i'd get the sack at some stage
wish I had filmed what I saw at half time on a few occasions because it's indefensible. Watching people running and stretching all around him while he strolled around was the most infuriating thing i've seen in years
The more common-sense view of it is that he was following medical orders with those warm-ups.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
He isnt on 400k a yearButtleJR said:The fact we brought him in for 200k and on a 400k a year contract has to be one of the worst investments ever. I don't blame him for signing that deal and as above the club is to blame.0 -
That's less than 8k a week, he won't be far off that.talalsrightfoot said:
He isnt on 400k a yearButtleJR said:The fact we brought him in for 200k and on a 400k a year contract has to be one of the worst investments ever. I don't blame him for signing that deal and as above the club is to blame.0 -
No common sense in trying to play full throttle at League One tempo without warming up properly, especially given his injury record.PragueAddick said:
I haven’t witnessed this. But I really struggle to imagine that he would openly, as you imply, take the piss in front of not just his team mates but the Valley crowd. Not to mention the management. It also doesnt fit with his approach when on the field. He didnt hide, put himself about, and the last injury happened when he was chasing down hard a long ball that many strikers would have given up on.Manic_mania said:
are you including his warm ups? He did not put effort into them at half time at the games i watched. Did you include the game when he got subbed off after being a substitute himself? That has to be slightly embarrassing for all involved.Gary Poole said:
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.
You can talk about the obligation the club has to him, but doesn't he have an obligation to the club and the people that pay to see him? If i was paid more than my peers to maintain a certain level of professionalism I think I would make some sort of effort to be in decent condition - we have seen in real time his attitude towards being ready to play - a couple of half hearted kick ups. His injuries have happened at work; but if i was at work and i wasn't taking safety precautions seriously and managed to hurt myself i'd get the sack at some stage
wish I had filmed what I saw at half time on a few occasions because it's indefensible. Watching people running and stretching all around him while he strolled around was the most infuriating thing i've seen in years
The more common-sense view of it is that he was following medical orders with those warm-ups.0 -
thenewbie said:While I feel sorry for him as a player and a person, surely it's legitimate to question whether starting to look at other options is actually better for him.
Instead of just paying up and getting rid, maybe change so that he can be given more "non-playing" responsibilities like community or coaching work so there's less pressure to be specifically match fit.
It's a tricky one as I'm fairly sure he'd give up a lot of money if it meant he could actually play football again but it's getting worse not better.
He would probably slip a disc putting the balls in the bag at the end of training.
1 -
cabbles said:Even if he was fit all of the time, 400k a year is stealing a living for who he is and what he does
8k a week to play league one football. His wages are an example of why football, us and so many other clubs are screwed
Even if the actual figure is slightly lower, 6 or 5k a week say, it’s ridiculous
He's not stealing a living, I think that term is a bit unfair. Have a look at who sanctioned the signing and point fingers in their direction, it had to be one of the worst signings in our history.
2 -
One guy on a forum says he didn't see Chuks warm up properly and now it's matter of "he isn't professional and doesn't take care of himself."
There are rocks softer than those quads.
Bowyer said it a couple of years ago, it has to do with his biological makeup. He's a huge dude and he's top heavy, and as a result it puts a lot of strain on his lower half. I remember what a doctor was once reported to have said about Jonathan Woodgate: he just doesn't have a body made for football.
You can complain about Chuks "stealing a living" or whatever, but he didn't sign himself to a contract. And if he was scoring 40 goals per season, the club wouldn't have to raise his wages. There are risks in signing players on both sides. The risks for Chuks, who'd spent the previous what, three season with us, should have been well known to the club. On his day, he's one of the best forwards in League One. He doesn't play much. Someone at the club felt him not playing was worth the risk of him potentially being one of the best forwards in the league. They lost that bet. Take it up with them.15 -
I believe it was the Brighton game where he came on for less than 5 mins before going down like he was shot & had to go off.PragueAddick said:
I haven’t witnessed this. But I really struggle to imagine that he would openly, as you imply, take the piss in front of not just his team mates but the Valley crowd. Not to mention the management. It also doesnt fit with his approach when on the field. He didnt hide, put himself about, and the last injury happened when he was chasing down hard a long ball that many strikers would have given up on.Manic_mania said:
are you including his warm ups? He did not put effort into them at half time at the games i watched. Did you include the game when he got subbed off after being a substitute himself? That has to be slightly embarrassing for all involved.Gary Poole said:
That’s an interesting point and I’m guessing by saying he is a drain on our resources you are talking about the treatment and rehab work he gets from the club?ShootersHillGuru said:
That’s not strictly true. There are very real costs with having an employee and especially if that employee is unable to carry out the duties of that role. Yes being a paid employee and professional sportsman are different to the normal job market but Chuks is a drain on resources.MuttleyCAFC said:The fact is, nobody is going to take him off our hands so we might as well try to sort out his issues even if it is unlikely we will. There are no other options.
Would this not be something he is fully entitled to and part of his employment with the club? When he was signed on that three year contract they would have had the opportunity to conduct a medical and also have some significant history of his medical problems. If the latest injuries are due from previous problems the club should have known the risk and if they are new problems then Aneke could not have known about them beforehand any more that the club could.
As far as I am aware all his injuries have happened at work, unlike for instance Darren Bent who injured himself at home making a sandwich. I can’t recall a game where Aneke didn’t put the effort in when on the pitch (until getting injured) and I don’t think that can be said about all the strikers who have played for us in the last few years.
And when people say he is taking up a squad place, he doesn’t have to, if he is not likely to be fit between now and January we don’t need to include him in the numbers. It’s clearly a frustrating situation for all concerned, but in my view the blame lies at the clubs door. They could have not signed him and Birmingham would have been paying his wages.
You can talk about the obligation the club has to him, but doesn't he have an obligation to the club and the people that pay to see him? If i was paid more than my peers to maintain a certain level of professionalism I think I would make some sort of effort to be in decent condition - we have seen in real time his attitude towards being ready to play - a couple of half hearted kick ups. His injuries have happened at work; but if i was at work and i wasn't taking safety precautions seriously and managed to hurt myself i'd get the sack at some stage
wish I had filmed what I saw at half time on a few occasions because it's indefensible. Watching people running and stretching all around him while he strolled around was the most infuriating thing i've seen in years
The more common-sense view of it is that he was following medical orders with those warm-ups.
I distinctly remember seeing him "warm up" at half time with the other subs. Sitting in the East they did their warm up in front of us & I remember remarking to my son that I hope Chuks does a proper one before he comes on because he was putting little effort into the one a HT. He was barely stretching & it was so half hearted. I know it was cold that night & he probably wanted to be elsewhere but I can only comment on what I saw. No idea if all of his other "warm ups" were this lethargic but it was no surprise to me when he pulled up after less than 5 mins on the pitch.
I think it is more physiological than physical now with him & he probably needs to step away from the game for a while.
On his day he was invaluable. Sadly that is not him any longer.3 -
If his headline weekly wage is £8000 a week it is unlikely that he will be picking that amount up while he is injured. Player wages are made up of a basic, appearance fee, win bonuses, and others such as goals scored, league position. Yes it's a hefty wack but could be half the figure bandied about.1
-
that's alright then....phew, he's only picking up £4k a week for sitting on his arseKap10 said:If his headline weekly wage is £8000 a week it is unlikely that he will be picking that amount up while he is injured. Player wages are made up of a basic, appearance fee, win bonuses, and others such as goals scored, league position. Yes it's a hefty wack but could be half the figure bandied about.
1 -
And thats the 64000 dollar question that we still don't know the answer to.ElfsborgAddick said:cabbles said:Even if he was fit all of the time, 400k a year is stealing a living for who he is and what he does
8k a week to play league one football. His wages are an example of why football, us and so many other clubs are screwed
Even if the actual figure is slightly lower, 6 or 5k a week say, it’s ridiculous
He's not stealing a living, I think that term is a bit unfair. Have a look at who sanctioned the signing and point fingers in their direction, it had to be one of the worst signings in our history.
Who exactly sanctioned the signing?2
This discussion has been closed.
