Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Cole Stockton - Morecombe
Comments
-
What about Tom Lowery as the midfield in
4 -
I'd still go for Mullin up front.0
-
You can disagree but you're wrong. Playing a striker with no pace in a 3-5-2 alongside Stockley is a disaster waiting to happen. There is nowhere for the ball to go except out wide when it hits a one-paced frontline and a team with one singular outlet for creating chances will not succeed past the first couple of games when they're figured out. You've complained above that we only have two ways of playing and want to replace it with...one way of playing. What you actually want is a player in Stockley's role who is more technical, which we do have in Aneke when he's fit. Chuks is good with the ball at his feet and can drive with it as well as spread the ball aorund intelligently, he's the very rare attacker at this level who can win headers and hold the ball up, beat a man with pace and play clever passes, he just can't do it for any extended period. He and Stockley both need a runner alongside them to stretch play and allow players to come forward in support. There is nothing to be gained having a team where he sole pace on offer is from wing-backs and absolutely no-one else.SELR_addicks said:
Disagree.Garrymanilow said:SELR_addicks said:
We need someone to link the midfield with the attack.Garrymanilow said:
A Yann-type player alongside Stockley? Give me strength. Yann was an absolute monster at winning headers, to the point where teams had to put one player on him to mark him and another to block his run. Stockley's best asset is his ability to win headers. Not a scrap of pace between them and no ability to beat a man. They'd be winning knockdowns for no-one, praying our wing-backs have got forward so they could wait for the attackers to lumber into the box. If you think we're predictable now just wait until we're entirley reliant on punting the ball upfield and no-one is even running the channelsSELR_addicks said:Stockton isn't the answer.
We need a technical striker to link the midfield, wingers and Stockley.
Washington tries but isn't good enough to be that.
We need a Kermorgant-esque link player.
Stockley isn't technically good enough to do that.
Whether it's a decent #10 or a technical striker, we need someone to do it.
We can use the pace on the wing in CBT and 'insert LWB here' to unlock the opposition and open up the play a bit.
Yes, but that should be a midfielder, not one of the strikers. Up front we're playing with a player whose main attribute is his strength and aerial ability, and he needs a partner. If we make the link player a striker then we may have linked the midfield with the attack but there's nowhere for the play to go from there. The WBs can get forward where they can but ultimately they have too much defensive responsibility to be entirely relied on to support every single attack when it runs out of places to go with the strikers, and then we're asking the midfielders to constantly run beyond the two strikers to give an option, which is just leaving yourself totally exposed in the middle if the attack breaks down. If we're going to play with a strong but slow striker and a 10 then we'd need to play more like a 4-2-3-1 and demand less defensively of our wide men, who would have to play as advanced wingers. I was under the impression that Fraser was brought in to be the link player, but he hasn't shown us much yet. If we're going to play the way we are currently then alongside Dobson in the holding role we need a technical midfielder who can offer both solidity and the ability to keep the ball moving, and a creative player to, as you say, link midfield and attack. In front of them we need a player with pace and finishing capability to play off Stockley. Washington works hard but he's lacking in the consistent finishing department, and while he's quick he doesn't quite have the pace to carve out enough opportunities for himself to offset his finishing. On paper Fraser, JFC and Dobson with a bit of pace and power in front of them should be the way to get more out of this shape Jackson is insistent on, but this team hasn't reflected its potential on the pitch all season. Having actual wing backs as well would be a help. Kane Wilson would be perfect but he's done so well this season he's likely going to attract attention from teams higher up than us.
One attacker should be capable of having the ball at his feet and playing the wing backs into the game. Direct play up to Stockley is great, he can't pass though. We need the other striker to be able to bring the ball down and be someone Fraser + F-C can look to link play with.
Otherwise we're stuck like we have been this season, either lumping it to Stockley or lumping to to a channel for the 'quick one'. Neither of them are difficult to break down and stop.
4 -
So a technical striker can't have a turn of pace?Garrymanilow said:
You can disagree but you're wrong. Playing a striker with no pace in a 3-5-2 alongside Stockley is a disaster waiting to happen. There is nowhere for the ball to go except out wide when it hits a one-paced frontline and a team with one singular outlet for creating chances will not succeed past the first couple of games when they're figured out. You've complained above that we only have two ways of playing and want to replace it with...one way of playing. What you actually want is a player in Stockley's role who is more technical, which we do have in Aneke when he's fit. Chuks is good with the ball at his feet and can drive with it as well as spread the ball aorund intelligently, he's the very rare attacker at this level who can win headers and hold the ball up, beat a man with pace and play clever passes, he just can't do it for any extended period. He and Stockley both need a runner alongside them to stretch play and allow players to come forward in support. There is nothing to be gained having a team where he sole pace on offer is from wing-backs and absolutely no-one else.SELR_addicks said:
Disagree.Garrymanilow said:SELR_addicks said:
We need someone to link the midfield with the attack.Garrymanilow said:
A Yann-type player alongside Stockley? Give me strength. Yann was an absolute monster at winning headers, to the point where teams had to put one player on him to mark him and another to block his run. Stockley's best asset is his ability to win headers. Not a scrap of pace between them and no ability to beat a man. They'd be winning knockdowns for no-one, praying our wing-backs have got forward so they could wait for the attackers to lumber into the box. If you think we're predictable now just wait until we're entirley reliant on punting the ball upfield and no-one is even running the channelsSELR_addicks said:Stockton isn't the answer.
We need a technical striker to link the midfield, wingers and Stockley.
Washington tries but isn't good enough to be that.
We need a Kermorgant-esque link player.
Stockley isn't technically good enough to do that.
Whether it's a decent #10 or a technical striker, we need someone to do it.
We can use the pace on the wing in CBT and 'insert LWB here' to unlock the opposition and open up the play a bit.
Yes, but that should be a midfielder, not one of the strikers. Up front we're playing with a player whose main attribute is his strength and aerial ability, and he needs a partner. If we make the link player a striker then we may have linked the midfield with the attack but there's nowhere for the play to go from there. The WBs can get forward where they can but ultimately they have too much defensive responsibility to be entirely relied on to support every single attack when it runs out of places to go with the strikers, and then we're asking the midfielders to constantly run beyond the two strikers to give an option, which is just leaving yourself totally exposed in the middle if the attack breaks down. If we're going to play with a strong but slow striker and a 10 then we'd need to play more like a 4-2-3-1 and demand less defensively of our wide men, who would have to play as advanced wingers. I was under the impression that Fraser was brought in to be the link player, but he hasn't shown us much yet. If we're going to play the way we are currently then alongside Dobson in the holding role we need a technical midfielder who can offer both solidity and the ability to keep the ball moving, and a creative player to, as you say, link midfield and attack. In front of them we need a player with pace and finishing capability to play off Stockley. Washington works hard but he's lacking in the consistent finishing department, and while he's quick he doesn't quite have the pace to carve out enough opportunities for himself to offset his finishing. On paper Fraser, JFC and Dobson with a bit of pace and power in front of them should be the way to get more out of this shape Jackson is insistent on, but this team hasn't reflected its potential on the pitch all season. Having actual wing backs as well would be a help. Kane Wilson would be perfect but he's done so well this season he's likely going to attract attention from teams higher up than us.
One attacker should be capable of having the ball at his feet and playing the wing backs into the game. Direct play up to Stockley is great, he can't pass though. We need the other striker to be able to bring the ball down and be someone Fraser + F-C can look to link play with.
Otherwise we're stuck like we have been this season, either lumping it to Stockley or lumping to to a channel for the 'quick one'. Neither of them are difficult to break down and stop.
Our problem going forward is our link play between our midfield and attack. You're wanting to do nothing other than play the same midfield and attack that have caused us issues this season.
If dropping Stockley is the answer, I'd prefer that to fix our team than again playing with the same 'lump it to Stockley' approach we've had for 8 months this season.0 -
We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.2 -
One able to pass is enough.Scoham said:We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.
I really don't understand how difficult it is to grasp that it improves Fraser + Forster-Caskey to have a striker able to pass the ball and interact with them. Bringing them into play in attacking areas between the lines of defense.
At the moment we have Stockley that is a lump and glorified finisher. And Washington who runs into channels but doesn't really have the quality to be relied upon.
0 -
We have one already who can do all those pretty well but he’s always injured. I do agree though that we need someone like Washington who can run in behind with some pace but hopefully better finishing.Scoham said:We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.If we don’t have pace/running in behind then teams can just push up and play a high line against us, and then our midfield has no space. Happened a few times this season when Washington has been absent teams have just played with a high line, we had no threat in behind and then our midfield have no space to do anything and we’ve created nothing. Plymouth away is the one that springs to mind but it’s happened most games Washington hasn’t been there1 -
I agree it would improve us but we have Stockley and Aneke under contract so I’m not convinced we’ll go for Stockton or a link player. It’s more likely we’ll offer Washington a contract and bring in another pacey striker. A pacey striker can’t do two roles, being both the link player and a threat running in behind.SELR_addicks said:
One able to pass is enough.Scoham said:We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.
I really don't understand how difficult it is to grasp that it improves Fraser + Forster-Caskey to have a striker able to pass the ball and interact with them. Bringing them into play in attacking areas between the lines of defense.
At the moment we have Stockley that is a lump and glorified finisher. And Washington who runs into channels but doesn't really have the quality to be relied upon.1 -
Well he should be on Friday!cafc999 said:Cannot see him coming south0 -
Which of Stockley and Aneke would you move on from to make space for this player?SELR_addicks said:
One able to pass is enough.Scoham said:We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.
I really don't understand how difficult it is to grasp that it improves Fraser + Forster-Caskey to have a striker able to pass the ball and interact with them. Bringing them into play in attacking areas between the lines of defense.
At the moment we have Stockley that is a lump and glorified finisher. And Washington who runs into channels but doesn't really have the quality to be relied upon.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Out of the two of them? If we did genuinely get a player with that quality I would move Stockley on. Would get a decent sum from another League One club. He's 28 and at his peak value, and is fairly limited to our overall play if we want to play a flat midfield 2 (with Dobson behind).Callumcafc said:
Which of Stockley and Aneke would you move on from to make space for this player?SELR_addicks said:
One able to pass is enough.Scoham said:We’ll do incredibly well to sign a striker who can effectively drop deep to link the play, has the strength to battle CBs and has pace.
Yann had the first two but not the third and was good enough to be a key player when Bournemouth won the Championship.
I really don't understand how difficult it is to grasp that it improves Fraser + Forster-Caskey to have a striker able to pass the ball and interact with them. Bringing them into play in attacking areas between the lines of defense.
At the moment we have Stockley that is a lump and glorified finisher. And Washington who runs into channels but doesn't really have the quality to be relied upon.0 -
Money.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Why would he leave Peterborough to come to us?Covered End said:
Clarke-Harris would definitely be a very good signing and he's possible as he does seem to move clubs a fair bit.ValleyOfTears said:Pay Peterborough whatever it costs to land Clark,-Harris. Confident if he was our only signing in the summer we would all be certain of promotion
Has 2 years left on his contract and Peterborough are not a club who sell strikers cheaply either.0 -
Sorry but Clarke-Harris is never coming here.
Firstly, Peterborough won’t sell to another League One club.
Secondly, no League One club will pay the fee or wages for him.
Thirdly, he’s scored 11 in the Championship this season and 31 in League One last season. He’s scored 42 in his last 81 league games.
He won’t be a Charlton player next season.
Also, genuinely believe that Stockton is not the answer. We will sign better, I expect us to sign better.3 -
Fingers crossed. If we are aiming for higher quality signings, I hope we have the appropriate package ready to snap them up, and avoid missing out on too many targets like last off-season.Sage said:Sorry but Clarke-Harris is never coming here.
Firstly, Peterborough won’t sell to another League One club.
Secondly, no League One club will pay the fee or wages for him.
Thirdly, he’s scored 11 in the Championship this season and 31 in League One last season. He’s scored 42 in his last 81 league games.
He won’t be a Charlton player next season.
Also, genuinely believe that Stockton is not the answer. We will sign better, I expect us to sign better.
0 -
What better players could we sign than Stockton?Sage said:Sorry but Clarke-Harris is never coming here.
Firstly, Peterborough won’t sell to another League One club.
Secondly, no League One club will pay the fee or wages for him.
Thirdly, he’s scored 11 in the Championship this season and 31 in League One last season. He’s scored 42 in his last 81 league games.
He won’t be a Charlton player next season.
Also, genuinely believe that Stockton is not the answer. We will sign better, I expect us to sign better.
I dearly hope you're right, but I would be very pleasantly surprised if we did.
I'm not doubting you by the way.1 -
Not saying we are interested in any of these, but in terms of actual ability and in terms of not being a one season wonder, which I think Stockton will prove to be, but Joe Pigott, Stephen Humphrys, and even Alfie May are all better than Stockton, in my honest opinion.Covered End said:
What better players could we sign than Stockton?Sage said:Sorry but Clarke-Harris is never coming here.
Firstly, Peterborough won’t sell to another League One club.
Secondly, no League One club will pay the fee or wages for him.
Thirdly, he’s scored 11 in the Championship this season and 31 in League One last season. He’s scored 42 in his last 81 league games.
He won’t be a Charlton player next season.
Also, genuinely believe that Stockton is not the answer. We will sign better, I expect us to sign better.
I dearly hope you're right, but I would be very pleasantly surprised if we did.
I'm not doubting you by the way.
I genuinely think we will be signing a name more higher profile than Stockton.2 -
Of course a technical striker can have a turn of pace. The point is that if there's one playing with Stockley then he will need to be playing beyond him rather than dropping deep as a 10. I don't want us to play the same way, but I'm talking realistically based on what we've got; Fraser signed less than 4 months ago, he'll be there next season, as will Stockley. I don't want us to play this way at all, I'd love the whole shape to be scrapped, but I'm responding to your original point that we need to play a link-up striker 'to link the midfield, wingers and Stockley'. You've now arrived at 'drop Stockley' as the solution to a support striker linking up with Stockley so we've sort of got there in the end.SELR_addicks said:
So a technical striker can't have a turn of pace?Garrymanilow said:
You can disagree but you're wrong. Playing a striker with no pace in a 3-5-2 alongside Stockley is a disaster waiting to happen. There is nowhere for the ball to go except out wide when it hits a one-paced frontline and a team with one singular outlet for creating chances will not succeed past the first couple of games when they're figured out. You've complained above that we only have two ways of playing and want to replace it with...one way of playing. What you actually want is a player in Stockley's role who is more technical, which we do have in Aneke when he's fit. Chuks is good with the ball at his feet and can drive with it as well as spread the ball aorund intelligently, he's the very rare attacker at this level who can win headers and hold the ball up, beat a man with pace and play clever passes, he just can't do it for any extended period. He and Stockley both need a runner alongside them to stretch play and allow players to come forward in support. There is nothing to be gained having a team where he sole pace on offer is from wing-backs and absolutely no-one else.SELR_addicks said:
Disagree.Garrymanilow said:SELR_addicks said:
We need someone to link the midfield with the attack.Garrymanilow said:
A Yann-type player alongside Stockley? Give me strength. Yann was an absolute monster at winning headers, to the point where teams had to put one player on him to mark him and another to block his run. Stockley's best asset is his ability to win headers. Not a scrap of pace between them and no ability to beat a man. They'd be winning knockdowns for no-one, praying our wing-backs have got forward so they could wait for the attackers to lumber into the box. If you think we're predictable now just wait until we're entirley reliant on punting the ball upfield and no-one is even running the channelsSELR_addicks said:Stockton isn't the answer.
We need a technical striker to link the midfield, wingers and Stockley.
Washington tries but isn't good enough to be that.
We need a Kermorgant-esque link player.
Stockley isn't technically good enough to do that.
Whether it's a decent #10 or a technical striker, we need someone to do it.
We can use the pace on the wing in CBT and 'insert LWB here' to unlock the opposition and open up the play a bit.
Yes, but that should be a midfielder, not one of the strikers. Up front we're playing with a player whose main attribute is his strength and aerial ability, and he needs a partner. If we make the link player a striker then we may have linked the midfield with the attack but there's nowhere for the play to go from there. The WBs can get forward where they can but ultimately they have too much defensive responsibility to be entirely relied on to support every single attack when it runs out of places to go with the strikers, and then we're asking the midfielders to constantly run beyond the two strikers to give an option, which is just leaving yourself totally exposed in the middle if the attack breaks down. If we're going to play with a strong but slow striker and a 10 then we'd need to play more like a 4-2-3-1 and demand less defensively of our wide men, who would have to play as advanced wingers. I was under the impression that Fraser was brought in to be the link player, but he hasn't shown us much yet. If we're going to play the way we are currently then alongside Dobson in the holding role we need a technical midfielder who can offer both solidity and the ability to keep the ball moving, and a creative player to, as you say, link midfield and attack. In front of them we need a player with pace and finishing capability to play off Stockley. Washington works hard but he's lacking in the consistent finishing department, and while he's quick he doesn't quite have the pace to carve out enough opportunities for himself to offset his finishing. On paper Fraser, JFC and Dobson with a bit of pace and power in front of them should be the way to get more out of this shape Jackson is insistent on, but this team hasn't reflected its potential on the pitch all season. Having actual wing backs as well would be a help. Kane Wilson would be perfect but he's done so well this season he's likely going to attract attention from teams higher up than us.
One attacker should be capable of having the ball at his feet and playing the wing backs into the game. Direct play up to Stockley is great, he can't pass though. We need the other striker to be able to bring the ball down and be someone Fraser + F-C can look to link play with.
Otherwise we're stuck like we have been this season, either lumping it to Stockley or lumping to to a channel for the 'quick one'. Neither of them are difficult to break down and stop.
Our problem going forward is our link play between our midfield and attack. You're wanting to do nothing other than play the same midfield and attack that have caused us issues this season.
If dropping Stockley is the answer, I'd prefer that to fix our team than again playing with the same 'lump it to Stockley' approach we've had for 8 months this season.
0 -
No idea who the players are, and it's a big ask on a league 1 budget so probably at least one will have to be a loan signing, but, imo, assuming Washington, Stockley and Chuks are all here next season, we need two strikers - one to compete/cover for Washington and one to compete/cover for Stockley. I believe Chuks should be used as a sub for every match he is fit either coming on for some fresh legs to see a game out, or to score a goal to get us back in the game or beat a stubborn defence. I just don't think we can rely on him to start games with any kind of frequency and therefore if Stockley were to get injured Chuks can't be seen as a reliable backup to him. He can be a potent weapon next season but not one we can use willy-nilly.We don't even have any cover for Washington in terms of a pacy striker who can play of the shoulder and run the channels.2
-
The idea we could be in the running for one of League One's players of the year and we still have people saying 'We can do better' shows how difficult managing expectations is for the club right now. Isn't he exactly the kind of profile people are saying we should sign? Knows the league, not likely to command a huge fee, will see playing for us as an upgrade (No offence to Morecambe) and a decent age.
I haven't seen enough of Stockton to have a detailed opinion either way but his stats this year and the kind of goals he's been banging in suggest he will surely be on the radar of championship/top end League one clubs. I don't think it will be a case of whether we are interested, it will be a case of whether the player is interested in coming to us given he will have 10+ options on the table.
3 -
Sponsored links:
-
As people have already suggested, I think it is unlikely Stockton comes too far south. The boy has been banging them in for a couple of seasons now, so confidence is high and, if I were them, I'd be tempted to cash in now. It's going to be a bit of a gamble for whoever gets him to see if he can still do it elsewhere. To do it in that team says a lot.
We'll all get a good look at him on Friday. If Pompey and Preston (!) are looking at him, he might be out of our price bracket anyway. Would I want him? I'm not sure if he's the right fit for us because of how he'd fit with Stockley. I still think another pacey striker that can finish would work better, but honestly, goals are goals and I wouldn't be upset if we did get him.0 -
I didn’t expect Soare to outshine Lee this season.mendonca said:I certainly didn't expect May to outshine Elliot Lee this season.0 -
wishful thinking signing him, he won't want to come here. Will get a much better offer elsewhere0
-
Could be the next Charlie Austin, or Pawel Abbott, hope he has an off day today!0
-
That's enough Cole, you've proved you're decent6
-
He will not rest until he's signed for Millwallkillerandflash said:That's enough Cole, you've proved you're decent0 -
Looks like he has the potential to be another Lyle Taylor. Taylor flew a bit more under the radar than Stockton has though. Seem we only really had to fight Sunderland for Taylor. Every club with promotion ambitions in League 1 will be after Stockton, and a few Championship clubs will be looking at him too. Can’t see why he would choose us in those circumstances.
1 -
Thought for a period in the first half he looked quick, powerful, dynamic, and kept getting into decent positions, which made himself a couple of chances and eventually a well taken goal.
2nd half I thought he looked awful, and didn’t really contribute anything.1 -
It works for him when he's supported, otherwise he's an isolated Striker with nothing he can do on his ownFishCostaFortune said:Thought for a period in the first half he looked quick, powerful, dynamic, and kept getting into decent positions, which made himself a couple of chances and eventually a well taken goal.
2nd half I thought he looked awful, and didn’t really contribute anything.1 -
That was because Morecambe set up to keep what they had and he was more isolated. He is the sort of player we need and he could absolutely play with Stockley, Aneke or Washington. And he does not look to be injury prone.2
