Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Post-match Thread: Sheffield Wednesday vs Charlton Athletic | Saturday 13th August 2022
Comments
-
It is totally unfair as it is singling out Stockley.2
-
Problem is 14th best goal scorer is nowhere near good enough when we have no goals coming from anyone else on the pitch.Raith_C_Chattonell said:
Bearing in mind the rare talent of a goal scorer I don't get the stick that Stockley gets.cs1986 said:
I said 20 league goals something he has never achieved in his career at this level. Stockley will not score 20 this year.PragueAddick said:
Garner said it, in the post- match interview on Charlton TV. He used the phrase “under the weather”. I take that to mean a cold. They never say ‘ a cold’ in pro football circles, for reasons I discussed a page earlier. A couple of posters gave it an LOL without commenting further. I presume those two never played football even at Sunday League level and never swerved a visit to the Valley when they had colds.SoundAsa£ said:Seen a couple of posts ‘suggesting’ Stockley was ill.
I thought that was the case actually, as he appeared so listless from the start.
Anyone got the exact info on this?
It also seems a number of posters are suffering from mild attention deficit disorder. For their benefit I remind everyone that Jayden Stockley last season reached 20 goals in all comps despite being injured for several weeks as well as suspended for 3 games after being stitched up by the pub team at Accrington. You’re welcome.
Stockley has scored 105 goals in his career 346 matches which is a respectable goal per 3.3 games. For Charlton that figure improves to a goal every 2.7 games.
Compare that to Leaburn senior who used to frustrate the hell out of me. 66 goals in 474 games - 7.1 games per goal and for Charlton 53 goals in 344 games - 6.5 games per goal.
Stockley ended last season as 14th best goal scorer in league one which improved to 8th when it came to goals per minutes played. And that in a team that were all at sea for the greater part of the season.
I appreciate that others will talk of the nuances of tactics and playing formations, but sometimes you just need someone to bang it in the net ... or as Bill Shankly famously said.
"If you’re in the penalty area and aren’t quite sure what to do with the ball, stick it in the net and we’ll discuss your options afterwards!”
13 league goals is only a good return for a striker if/when there's multiple players scoring 5+ themselves.
Obviously that's not all his fault, but he was high up the list for chances missed from memory.
3 -
Wasn't even that negative on here yesterday tbf.Dazzler21 said:
No. Mocking the negative ninnies. Didn't say anything about our general travelling support.JohnnyH2 said:
And pretty much mocking our supporters. Great support up at Hillsborough yesterdayDazzler21 said:
Sorry Johnny but 🎣JohnnyH2 said:
We are far from shit. Been at all 4 games so far and we are making good progrrssDazzler21 said:
No we're shit and no unbiased opinion will change that.charlton_hero said:
I was just copying the usual negative ninnies2 -
I agree - give the poor guy a chance . He could be a dud though; we shall see .mart77 said:
Yeah I’ve thought this but tbh it’s largely from people who’re generally unhappy and we all know some Charlton fans need a whipping boy!covered_end_junior said:Can’t believe the amount of stick McGrandles has got, he’s played about 40 minutes of football for us yet some have made their mind up that he’s not good enough already 🤦🏼♂️.He’s a much better player than he’s shown so far, give the guy a chance.I think McGrandles is a cracking player and some fans will be eating humble pie soon enough.1 -
I loved Shanks, my all time favourite manager.😏Raith_C_Chattonell said:
Bearing in mind the rare talent of a goal scorer I don't get the stick that Stockley gets.cs1986 said:
I said 20 league goals something he has never achieved in his career at this level. Stockley will not score 20 this year.PragueAddick said:
Garner said it, in the post- match interview on Charlton TV. He used the phrase “under the weather”. I take that to mean a cold. They never say ‘ a cold’ in pro football circles, for reasons I discussed a page earlier. A couple of posters gave it an LOL without commenting further. I presume those two never played football even at Sunday League level and never swerved a visit to the Valley when they had colds.SoundAsa£ said:Seen a couple of posts ‘suggesting’ Stockley was ill.
I thought that was the case actually, as he appeared so listless from the start.
Anyone got the exact info on this?
It also seems a number of posters are suffering from mild attention deficit disorder. For their benefit I remind everyone that Jayden Stockley last season reached 20 goals in all comps despite being injured for several weeks as well as suspended for 3 games after being stitched up by the pub team at Accrington. You’re welcome.
Stockley has scored 105 goals in his career 346 matches which is a respectable goal per 3.3 games. For Charlton that figure improves to a goal every 2.7 games.
Compare that to Leaburn senior who used to frustrate the hell out of me. 66 goals in 474 games - 7.1 games per goal and for Charlton 53 goals in 344 games - 6.5 games per goal.
Stockley ended last season as 14th best goal scorer in league one which improved to 8th when it came to goals per minutes played. And that in a team that were all at sea for the greater part of the season.
I appreciate that others will talk of the nuances of tactics and playing formations, but sometimes you just need someone to bang it in the net ... or as Bill Shankly famously said.
"If you’re in the penalty area and aren’t quite sure what to do with the ball, stick it in the net and we’ll discuss your options afterwards!”1 -
A striker should be judged on the goals he scores rather than those he misses. Stockley's record is more than respectable and he contributes defensively too.2
-
MuttleyCAFC said:A striker should be judged on the goals he scores rather than those he misses. Stockley's record is more than respectable and he contributes defensively too.I'd be interested to see his record broken down by goals/game playing as a lone striker or as one of 2 up front. I think part of the concern is based on the impression that the respectability of his record is rooted in a formation we no longer play, and that there's a dearth of goals from our other attacking/midfield options so it becomes even more critical that he's on top form.4
-
Possibly but he is still our best option. Maybe he shouldn't be but he is so we should probably look how to get the most from him and certainly he doesn't deserve any criticism. Personally I like him and he is one of the better strikers at this level.0
-
But he did. What's the point of expected goals then ? A player in that position was expected to score 27% of the time. But Bakinson scored. In that position last week Stockley missed. What was his EG last week with that chance ? 27% ???. The problem with EG is that they dont take account who is in that position. If it was Shearer I'd say it was 100%. Stockley probably 30%.Callumcafc said:
Not quite. What if he headed it over the bar? Or straight at the goalkeeper? Hence 73% chance of a header from that range not resulting in a goal.seth plum said:
So in the third minute Fraser had a 10% chance of scoring a goal?Callumcafc said:
Player - minute - probability of a goal (e.g. 0.1 = 10%)seth plum said:
Are these map co-ordinates?Callumcafc said:xG…
Sheff Wed 0.89 - 0.72 Charlton
Fraser 3’ 0.10
Clare 5’ 0.02
Morgan 24’ 0.03
Fraser 30’ 0.08
Sessegnon 31’ 0.03
Blackett-Taylor 40’ 0.22
Windass 42’ 0.14
Blackett-Taylor 47’ 0.02
Blackett-Taylor 49’ 0.07
Bannan 50’ 0.06
Kirk 52’ 0.11
Windass 52’ 0.03
Morgan 57’ 0.03
Payne 64’ 0.01
Bakinson 81’ 0.27 (GOAL)
Sow 87’ 0.11
Windass 90+1’ 0.02
Windass 90+1’ 0.08
And Bakinson in the 81st minute had a 0.27 chance of scoring a goal. Shouldn't that be 100% seeing as how he scored?
27% is not zero. He controlled the header well and gave Wollacott no chance. Not every player would’ve been as composed in that situation.1 -
EGs is a tool. It can't be totally accurate but helps inform alongside other data but it shouldn't be treated as gospel.1
-
Sponsored links:
-
A player is only as good as their last game.MuttleyCAFC said:A striker should be judged on the goals he scores rather than those he misses. Stockley's record is more than respectable and he contributes defensively too.0 -
Just seen the extended highlights. We'll get found out soon by coaches who will suss that Kirk and Stockley either cannot or do not like pressing, so target them and overlap to outnumber us from there onwards in attack.0
-
Kirk might not be here by the end of the window, and if he is I wouldn't assume he'll be a regular starter with JRS now here. Hopefully we bring a striker and Stockley's place won't be guaranteed either.mendonca said:Just seen the extended highlights. We'll get found out soon by coaches who will suss that Kirk and Stockley either cannot or do not like pressing, so target them and overlap to outnumber us from there onwards in attack.1 -
I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.4 -
Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.6 -
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
6 -
xG is highly flawed and really shouldn’t be treated as a statistic.3
-
Washington leads to the same mistakes that Stockley does.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
Chances are created for them, they miss. That's the issue.
If Stockley finished the headers and chances he's been gifted this season there would be no debate about whether he 'fits'. Washington would be the same. Running around the frontline means nothing because he can't finish consistently.5 -
That's not an accurate comparison though, as Stockley has played a lot of his football in the lower leagues. Of his 105 league goals, 57 were in L2 and 12 in non league.Raith_C_Chattonell said:
Bearing in mind the rare talent of a goal scorer I don't get the stick that Stockley gets.cs1986 said:
I said 20 league goals something he has never achieved in his career at this level. Stockley will not score 20 this year.PragueAddick said:
Garner said it, in the post- match interview on Charlton TV. He used the phrase “under the weather”. I take that to mean a cold. They never say ‘ a cold’ in pro football circles, for reasons I discussed a page earlier. A couple of posters gave it an LOL without commenting further. I presume those two never played football even at Sunday League level and never swerved a visit to the Valley when they had colds.SoundAsa£ said:Seen a couple of posts ‘suggesting’ Stockley was ill.
I thought that was the case actually, as he appeared so listless from the start.
Anyone got the exact info on this?
It also seems a number of posters are suffering from mild attention deficit disorder. For their benefit I remind everyone that Jayden Stockley last season reached 20 goals in all comps despite being injured for several weeks as well as suspended for 3 games after being stitched up by the pub team at Accrington. You’re welcome.
Stockley has scored 105 goals in his career 346 matches which is a respectable goal per 3.3 games. For Charlton that figure improves to a goal every 2.7 games.
Compare that to Leaburn senior who used to frustrate the hell out of me. 66 goals in 474 games - 7.1 games per goal and for Charlton 53 goals in 344 games - 6.5 games per goal.
Stockley ended last season as 14th best goal scorer in league one which improved to 8th when it came to goals per minutes played. And that in a team that were all at sea for the greater part of the season.
I appreciate that others will talk of the nuances of tactics and playing formations, but sometimes you just need someone to bang it in the net ... or as Bill Shankly famously said.
"If you’re in the penalty area and aren’t quite sure what to do with the ball, stick it in the net and we’ll discuss your options afterwards!”
Carlo played in either the 2nd tier or the top tier against far better defenders.4 -
Spot on.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
Leaburn is a great prospect. But he is no where near ready to start games on a consistent basis or even come on as sub in games like yesterday where he was up against good, strong defenders .Leuth said:Yeah, Stockley wasn't great from what I saw, but Leaburn basically achieved nothing at all, which is fine, he was up against good defenders as a lone striker and he's very young, he'll have games like that
1 -
Sponsored links:
-
We’ve been told by many that the likes of CBT, Fraser, Payne, McGrandles, Kirk, DJ, Morgan etc will chip in enough goals to make up for the lack of a second striker but there has been no evidence of this so far.MuttleyCAFC said:
I get your point. I wasn't bothered that Stockley missed two headers against Derby because I know over the course of the season he will put enough away. Getting the chances is the most important thing. I was bothered that CBT messed up his chance yesterday, even though he scored against Derby because over the course of the season I think he will miss too many.Raith_C_Chattonell said:
Bearing in mind the rare talent of a goal scorer I don't get the stick that Stockley gets.cs1986 said:
I said 20 league goals something he has never achieved in his career at this level. Stockley will not score 20 this year.PragueAddick said:
Garner said it, in the post- match interview on Charlton TV. He used the phrase “under the weather”. I take that to mean a cold. They never say ‘ a cold’ in pro football circles, for reasons I discussed a page earlier. A couple of posters gave it an LOL without commenting further. I presume those two never played football even at Sunday League level and never swerved a visit to the Valley when they had colds.SoundAsa£ said:Seen a couple of posts ‘suggesting’ Stockley was ill.
I thought that was the case actually, as he appeared so listless from the start.
Anyone got the exact info on this?
It also seems a number of posters are suffering from mild attention deficit disorder. For their benefit I remind everyone that Jayden Stockley last season reached 20 goals in all comps despite being injured for several weeks as well as suspended for 3 games after being stitched up by the pub team at Accrington. You’re welcome.
Stockley has scored 105 goals in his career 346 matches which is a respectable goal per 3.3 games. For Charlton that figure improves to a goal every 2.7 games.
Compare that to Leaburn senior who used to frustrate the hell out of me. 66 goals in 474 games - 7.1 games per goal and for Charlton 53 goals in 344 games - 6.5 games per goal.
Stockley ended last season as 14th best goal scorer in league one which improved to 8th when it came to goals per minutes played. And that in a team that were all at sea for the greater part of the season.
I appreciate that others will talk of the nuances of tactics and playing formations, but sometimes you just need someone to bang it in the net ... or as Bill Shankly famously said.
"If you’re in the penalty area and aren’t quite sure what to do with the ball, stick it in the net and we’ll discuss your options afterwards!”
I wouldn't drop CBT btw. He is a key player for us but we need look elsewhere for anything above 4-5 goals.4 -
I wondered why on Saturday with Stockley ill we didn’t just play with a false number 9, say Payne, which would have surely suited our passing game. Better than playing someone who wasn’t up to it.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.6 -
I watched the extended highlights and Stockley looked well off the pace, regularly out of position.LargeAddick said:
I wondered why on Saturday with Stockley ill we didn’t just play with a false number 9, say Payne, which would have surely suited our passing game. Better than playing someone who wasn’t up to it.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
I think you are spot on, if we are playing a possession game then why not play a false 9 and encourage the wide players to run in behind?
I just don't see the value of playing a bloke that is clearly unwell.0 -
Strikers miss chances - that's part of football.SELR_addicks said:
Washington leads to the same mistakes that Stockley does.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
Chances are created for them, they miss. That's the issue.
If Stockley finished the headers and chances he's been gifted this season there would be no debate about whether he 'fits'. Washington would be the same. Running around the frontline means nothing because he can't finish consistently.
People will remember that even BWP - who was a goal machine for us - regularly missed chances in that promotion season.
The more important thing is that we have players in place for when the ball is played in and Stockley is not mobile enough to do that for us in a 4-5-1 formation.
I am sure Garner will claim we are 4-3-3 but that's bullshit, two of our front three are not strikers, they are wingers with poor scoring records.
As others have said, if you are going to play 4-3-3 then those wide players NEED to score goals or you are in trouble.
Kirk has 29 goals in 200 league games - about one goal every ten games - and CBT has 6 in 85 which is one goal every 14 games!
Football is about scoring goals, it's no surprise that in our two promotion seasons from League One we have had TWO goal scoring strikers in BWP/Yann and Taylor/Grant and in our 97/98 promotion season we had Mendonca/Bright/Jones.
I am VERY skeptical about coaches that play 4-3-3 but play wingers instead of out and out attacking goal scorers.
Look at Liverpool, they had Salah and Mane - two genuine goal scorers playing those wide roles, they didn't have wingers that were infrequent scorers.
You can make the same argument for Spurs, their front three Kane, Son and Kulusevski are ALL goal scorers.5 -
So there’s a pattern developing here ..Callumcafc said:There’s a reason Sheff Wed fans booed their team off the pitch at half time.
this booing lark seems to work5 -
I think we should do this anywayLargeAddick said:
I wondered why on Saturday with Stockley ill we didn’t just play with a false number 9, say Payne, which would have surely suited our passing game. Better than playing someone who wasn’t up to it.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.1 -
Garner had McKirdy scoring from out wide in a 4-3-3 at Swindon and it’s why we’ve loaned JRS.Ormiston_Addick said:
Strikers miss chances - that's part of football.SELR_addicks said:
Washington leads to the same mistakes that Stockley does.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
Chances are created for them, they miss. That's the issue.
If Stockley finished the headers and chances he's been gifted this season there would be no debate about whether he 'fits'. Washington would be the same. Running around the frontline means nothing because he can't finish consistently.
People will remember that even BWP - who was a goal machine for us - regularly missed chances in that promotion season.
The more important thing is that we have players in place for when the ball is played in and Stockley is not mobile enough to do that for us in a 4-5-1 formation.
I am sure Garner will claim we are 4-3-3 but that's bullshit, two of our front three are not strikers, they are wingers with poor scoring records.
As others have said, if you are going to play 4-3-3 then those wide players NEED to score goals or you are in trouble.
Kirk has 29 goals in 200 league games - about one goal every ten games - and CBT has 6 in 85 which is one goal every 14 games!
Football is about scoring goals, it's no surprise that in our two promotion seasons from League One we have had TWO goal scoring strikers in BWP/Yann and Taylor/Grant and in our 97/98 promotion season we had Mendonca/Bright/Jones.
I am VERY skeptical about coaches that play 4-3-3 but play wingers instead of out and out attacking goal scorers.
Look at Liverpool, they had Salah and Mane - two genuine goal scorers playing those wide roles, they didn't have wingers that were infrequent scorers.
You can make the same argument for Spurs, their front three Kane, Son and Kulusevski are ALL goal scorers.
Proven L1 goal scorers don’t really exist as anyone scoring consistently will get their chance at a higher level. As much as we need a good striker we also need to find players we can develop into goal scorers like other clubs do. Keep passing the ball well and we’ll create chances, the midfielders and wide players need to regularly get into the box. Garner got a few goals from Williams last season, a player who didn’t really get into the box and when he did rarely liked to shot.
CBT for example I’m expecting to improve on his two league goals last season given he spent most of that at wing back and we’re playing a much better style of football. He’s already scored one and had three chances Saturday where he should have scored at least one of them. As long as he stays fit this will be his first season as a regular starter and with JRS coming in to play on the right he’ll move back to the left where he’ll be able to cut inside to shoot on his stronger right foot.5 -
Jacko tried to solve the issue by playing two strikers. It is a balancing act but you could have a striker playing wide like we have done with Leaburn from the bench. It would require more from the right full back or indeed the left one if you play a striker on the left of the three.
I think Ormiston has nailed the issue though, for the 4-3-3 to work there needs to be enough goals from the wide men or if that fails, the midfield/accross the team. The records of the players to date suggest that isn't the case and the only player who has proven he can get the required number is the one everybody is criticising at the moment.
If we play Payne as a false 9, where are the goals going to come within the team? Not sure if the glaring problem is solved. Surely the easiest way is to bring the 20 or so goals we are short of in one chunk but not at the expense of Stockley because we can't afford to lose his goals.1 -
For me it’s a mentality issue, Garner needs to get CBT and Kirk thinking like wide attackers, NOT wingers.Scoham said:
Garner had McKirdy scoring from out wide in a 4-3-3 at Swindon and it’s why we’ve loaned JRS.Ormiston_Addick said:
Strikers miss chances - that's part of football.SELR_addicks said:
Washington leads to the same mistakes that Stockley does.Ormiston_Addick said:
If we are playing a possession based game - that’s Garner’s philosophy - then you don’t need a target man like Stockley because you are not hitting long balls in the first place.Jac_52 said:Ormiston_Addick said:I feel very sorry for Stockley, this system doesn’t suit him at all.
You know who would suit this system? Conor Washington.
We need a mobile runner up top, someone who can get in behind and be in the box to score goals.
Stockley is an old fashioned target man, he needs wide players that get the ball in early and a striker alongside him to do the running that he can’t do.
He really really wouldn't. He barely suited a system that suited him last year and playing him up top on his own would be a disaster as would playing him wide as he cannot dribble. I'd honestly rather Davison back than washington, which is to say we really need to stop deifying Connor Washington and his legendary 9 open play goals per season.
Our current game is based on pressing as a unit high up the pitch - this was something that Washington excelled at doing and something Stockley is not suited to.
Washington would be far, far better as our central attacker than anyone else that we are likely to bring in and the fact that he is now playing in a division HIGHER than us shows it.
The bloke has 70 goals in 210 starting league games - and scored 22 goals in 56 starting league games for us despite often playing wide.
It makes no sense to let him leave and not replace him.
Chances are created for them, they miss. That's the issue.
If Stockley finished the headers and chances he's been gifted this season there would be no debate about whether he 'fits'. Washington would be the same. Running around the frontline means nothing because he can't finish consistently.
People will remember that even BWP - who was a goal machine for us - regularly missed chances in that promotion season.
The more important thing is that we have players in place for when the ball is played in and Stockley is not mobile enough to do that for us in a 4-5-1 formation.
I am sure Garner will claim we are 4-3-3 but that's bullshit, two of our front three are not strikers, they are wingers with poor scoring records.
As others have said, if you are going to play 4-3-3 then those wide players NEED to score goals or you are in trouble.
Kirk has 29 goals in 200 league games - about one goal every ten games - and CBT has 6 in 85 which is one goal every 14 games!
Football is about scoring goals, it's no surprise that in our two promotion seasons from League One we have had TWO goal scoring strikers in BWP/Yann and Taylor/Grant and in our 97/98 promotion season we had Mendonca/Bright/Jones.
I am VERY skeptical about coaches that play 4-3-3 but play wingers instead of out and out attacking goal scorers.
Look at Liverpool, they had Salah and Mane - two genuine goal scorers playing those wide roles, they didn't have wingers that were infrequent scorers.
You can make the same argument for Spurs, their front three Kane, Son and Kulusevski are ALL goal scorers.
Proven L1 goal scorers don’t really exist as anyone scoring consistently will get their chance at a higher level. As much as we need a good striker we also need to find players we can develop into goal scorers like other clubs do. Keep passing the ball well and we’ll create chances, the midfielders and wide players need to regularly get into the box. Garner got a few goals from Williams last season, a player who didn’t really get into the box and when he did rarely liked to shot.
CBT for example I’m expecting to improve on his two league goals last season given he spent most of that at wing back and we’re playing a much better style of football. He’s already scored one and had three chances Saturday where he should have scored at least one of them. As long as he stays fit this will be his first season as a regular starter and with JRS coming in to play on the right he’ll move back to the left where he’ll be able to cut inside to shoot on his stronger right foot.
Their job is to get BETWEEN the central defender and full back, it’s NOT to get outside the full back - Mane and Salah are fantastic at doing this for Liverpool and Henry was a master at this for Arsenal.1
