Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Chuks Aneke - speculation re 2023/24 season (p60)
Comments
-
Chunes said:
I was just making a slight joke, not being sarcastic.Addick Addict said:
Your maths is correct. Very well done. But do you know the difference between 17 goals a season and one goal a season?Chunes said:Not much difference between 40 and 38.
If my maths is correct, the difference is only 2.
Yes, there is a difference there. That was the first season he converted to a 9 (and only at the tail-end I believe? May be wrong there), so it's natural that he took some time adapting to it. If the expectation is that he should've straight away been smashing in goals in a new position... That's a bit much isn't it?
It was also at a higher level than we're playing now.
It's the fitness that is the issue - he also failed to do it under LB in the Championship this season and he was the one that converted him but, equally, he did only have one assist for us that year so if he wasn't a scorer and wasn't a creator, what did we sign him to do?
My biggest fear is that we don't sign two strikers in addition to Stockley, Washington and Aneke and that it is because of the purchase of Aneke, with his proven limited availability, that we leave ourselves light so far as options are concerned. Which is exactly what happened this season.0 -
That's definitely his big weakness. I remember LB said Chuks has very low natural fitness and that someone like Cullen could be out for months but within a few days of training he's match fit but Chuks has to be built up very slowly.
But as far as super subs go, there are none better. And if TS wants to spend 300k on a super sub, it's his money.
I agree we need to sign another striker at least. We can't have another repeat of this season because it will cost us, and it's highly likely Washington and Stockley will spend time out next year because they always do.1 -
Inniss is a good player but we need a settled defence with players building partnerships. If we keep him it needs to be as back up to allow the first choice defence to do that.addick1956 said:
Rubbish, CB’S can be on the bench. In fact an extra one is brought on to keep a lead or secure a draw at the closing stages. They can also head goals.Scoham said:
The difference is Aneke as a striker can still impact games by coming off the bench and scoring goals.addick1956 said:
He was out since Bolton away until two weeks or so ago which is a long period. You do not get promoted if a player misses that amount of time no matter how you dress it up. The same people who are in love with Aneke want Innis out. At the moment they are similar risks except Innis looks fitter and quicker.Athletico Charlton said:addick1956 said:
Usually the people on the bench can manage more than a 35 minute amble round the park. Also the need to be athletic. Not a poor imitation of Chicago Bears 'The Fridge' from 35 or so years ago .HandG said:
Exactly! Bowyer managed him perfectly, Jackson just needs to do the same next season. Better Chuks on the bench than an untried kid or loanee….Chunes said:Someone has to be on the bench. Might as well be a player who comes on and scores.
3 goals and an assist in 4.
He has 4 starts only since his return and only 2 complete games.
His first goal on return , left abandoned by Morecambe defenders for a free header. The assust at Cambridge was a complete fluke.
The goal at Cheltenham was fortuitous tap in.
The goal today was a decent header.
He needs to get fit. All this stuff of coming off the bench over a season require fitness he has yet to show.
Centre backs can't be used in the same way, because of that Inniss isn't a risk worth taking.
We'll get promoted if the squad is strong enough. Having attacking subs who can impact games is part of that strength we should be aiming for.
My issue is that Aneke has had a worse fitness record than Innis over the same sort of period.
Aneke featured in the majority of our league games last season. He got injured this season because we were starting him due to having limited options up front. He has a much better chance of staying fit if we mainly use him as a sub.0 -
When Chuks is fit, he gets on the pitch and impacts the game.
When Chris Gunter (your fave) is fit, he stays at home.
1 -
The shot was from 20 yards and it hit Washington 10 yards later, Washington was fairly central.addick1956 said:
The shot at Cambridge was going wide. The problem is the 8 games have been spread over half a season . A goal every 101 minutes skews the stats and ignores his ability to stay or even be fit.Sage said:In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in.
Since joining he has a goal ratio of 1 goal per 101 minutes.
He’s featured in 8 games, 4 of those have been starts. We’ve picked up 16 points in the 8 games.
I could go on but have already made the case time and time again.
Top player at this level.
we will never know if the shot was on target or not, we will never know. But from the camera angles I've seen, it looked like washingtons head sent it away from the keeper towards the corner of the goal, rather than a wide shot, back on target2 -
You moan about name calling, which covered end has provided clarification on but yet call someone else names?addick1956 said:
Thank you...that is exactly what I have said but could not be arsed to write down all the facts.Addick Addict said:Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Sage - I've never doubted Aneke's ability and the excitement of having a potential game changer on the bench but have certainly questioned his fitness record and ability to play minutes and preform consistently, season after season and the associated costs of having him in the squad simply because it is a gamble knowing which Aneke will turn up in any given season. And I'm struggling to see on what basis you have come to the conclusion that he's going to be "averaging 40 appearances" or, for that matter, the 12 starts or the 15-20 goals.
Aneke has never, in any single season in his 11 year career, achieved 40 League appearances. His actual average is 26 League appearances and his highest number of goals is 17 and that was in League 2. If you want to take out the early years in his career because of his age at that time and just count, say, the last six seasons (working backwards his appearances per season are 26-38-20-38-31-15) then that average rises to almost 28 but still nowhere near 40. In League 1 for us he's averaged 30 appearances at around about the 12 goal per season mark. He has also only made 18 starts in his last three seasons of football so an average of exactly six not 12 per season.
You also say that "In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in." That is no sample for a consistent trend. What influence on the result have Aneke's contributions actually made? The Cheltenham goal got us a point, the goal against Bolton was in defeat, the goal against Morecambe was in defeat, the assist against Cambridge was in a game we were winning anyway and his goal against Shrewsbury was also in a game that we were already in front in. So Aneke has been directly responsible for one point in half a season of football for us. If we apply the same criteria to the goals he scored in League 1 for us then he actually earned us nine points. And that was one of, if not his best, seasons in 11 years as a pro footballer.
We cannot go into next season with just Stockley, Washington, A N other and Aneke because he cannot start. Equally, if two of the others are out and Aneke does start, then we have no impact sub bar, perhaps, one of the 18 year olds that many of us are currently pinning their hopes on - and if Aneke doesn't start then the youngster will have to do so instead but, as we found with Burstow, that really isn't any guarantee to make the difference- Burstow hasn't scored in his last nine appearances. We also shouldn't underestimate the work of Stockley and Washington in softening those defenders that Aneke comes on to face.
Two seasons ago, when we were in the Championship, Aneke made 20 appearances and managed just 745 minutes on the pitch in total with one goal and one assist to his name. We did not recruit him to be an asset in League 1 - we bought him to do the business in the Championship! How much did that one goal and one assist cost us in terms of budget - perhaps as much as £500,000 - and a nil contribution to our survival.
Equally, our recruitment model, allegedly, is based on buying players good enough to play not just in League 1 but in the Championship too so, from the perspective, does it make any sense to take him on a second time? Aneke has consistently proven that he cannot hack it above League 1 level so we will have to try and offload a then soon to be 30 year old or continue to pay his wages for another two years. And being able to make any number of appearances will also be directly linked to how many minutes he actually manages next season. Be it as a result of lack of fitness or discipline - he has almost as many cards to his name as he does goals for us!
I will be ecstatic if he gets us 15-20 goals because that will mean that with Stockley, Washington and hopefully two other strikers doing the business we will be near to promotion. You say that some people "can't see the quality staring at them in the face". But others, equally, can't see that you can have all the quality in the world but if that quality is sitting on the bench or, even worse, in the stands then the "quality" becomes irrelevant. And that's what makes Aneke an expensive gamble. Which, if one tots up the wages on his first coming and £300k and salary this season is exactly what he has been. I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise.
When some strange person said we had got was responsible for 16 points on 8 ga.es he had played that was intended to infer he made a major contribution. He didn't really as you explained. I just couldn't be bothered again. Covered End called me an arsehole because of my views on Aneke as a game changer. I expect if there is justice I will be able to say to you ," welcome to the club"
that poster did not say that aneke was responsible for 16 points in 8 games, he said we have picked up 16 points in the 8 games that aneke has played. Two completely different sentences!!!2 -
Mumpsimus - a person who cannot/will not change their opinion on something, even when presented with hard evidence that proves them wrong.Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Many thanks to Susie Dent for that one this morning 😉6 -
1) if you notice I didn’t state 40 league appearances, not that it matters anyway because last season he made 41 appearances in all competitions, 38 in the league. He scored 16 in all competitions, 15 in the league. He was not in the squad in the league on just 7 occasions. This season has been less, he’ll make 31 appearances in all competitions because he picked up an injury after being thrown in to start 4 games in a row, playing the vast majority of minutes because we had no one else. He can do it, he prefers to be a sub but also knows his own body. Saying he will average 40 appearances a season is not plucked from thin air. Without the lengthy injury, he would have again made 40 this season. He’s also scored 4 in 8 appearances, he got 15 last season. He had a goal ratio of 1 goal every 101 minutes last season. Guess what, he’s got a goal ratio of 101 minutes for us since January this season. It is not wild to say he will get another 15 goals next season. He also made 11 league starts last season, so 12 is not some arbitrary figure. He’s made 8 appearances for us since January, 4 of them starts. Additionally, he’s only had 3 injuries in the last 6 seasons that has kept him out for any length of time.Addick Addict said:Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Sage - I've never doubted Aneke's ability and the excitement of having a potential game changer on the bench but have certainly questioned his fitness record and ability to play minutes and preform consistently, season after season and the associated costs of having him in the squad simply because it is a gamble knowing which Aneke will turn up in any given season. And I'm struggling to see on what basis you have come to the conclusion that he's going to be "averaging 40 appearances" or, for that matter, the 12 starts or the 15-20 goals.
Aneke has never, in any single season in his 11 year career, achieved 40 League appearances. His actual average is 26 League appearances and his highest number of goals is 17 and that was in League 2. If you want to take out the early years in his career because of his age at that time and just count, say, the last six seasons (working backwards his appearances per season are 26-38-20-38-31-15) then that average rises to almost 28 but still nowhere near 40. In League 1 for us he's averaged 30 appearances at around about the 12 goal per season mark. He has also only made 18 starts in his last three seasons of football so an average of exactly six not 12 per season.
You also say that "In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in." That is no sample for a consistent trend. What influence on the result have Aneke's contributions actually made? The Cheltenham goal got us a point, the goal against Bolton was in defeat, the goal against Morecambe was in defeat, the assist against Cambridge was in a game we were winning anyway and his goal against Shrewsbury was also in a game that we were already in front in. So Aneke has been directly responsible for one point in half a season of football for us. If we apply the same criteria to the goals he scored in League 1 for us then he actually earned us nine points. And that was one of, if not his best, seasons in 11 years as a pro footballer.
We cannot go into next season with just Stockley, Washington, A N other and Aneke because he cannot start. Equally, if two of the others are out and Aneke does start, then we have no impact sub bar, perhaps, one of the 18 year olds that many of us are currently pinning their hopes on - and if Aneke doesn't start then the youngster will have to do so instead but, as we found with Burstow, that really isn't any guarantee to make the difference- Burstow hasn't scored in his last nine appearances. We also shouldn't underestimate the work of Stockley and Washington in softening those defenders that Aneke comes on to face.
Two seasons ago, when we were in the Championship, Aneke made 20 appearances and managed just 745 minutes on the pitch in total with one goal and one assist to his name. We did not recruit him to be an asset in League 1 - we bought him to do the business in the Championship! How much did that one goal and one assist cost us in terms of budget - perhaps as much as £500,000 - and a nil contribution to our survival.
Equally, our recruitment model, allegedly, is based on buying players good enough to play not just in League 1 but in the Championship too so, from the perspective, does it make any sense to take him on a second time? Aneke has consistently proven that he cannot hack it above League 1 level so we will have to try and offload a then soon to be 30 year old or continue to pay his wages for another two years. And being able to make any number of appearances will also be directly linked to how many minutes he actually manages next season. Be it as a result of lack of fitness or discipline - he has almost as many cards to his name as he does goals for us!
I will be ecstatic if he gets us 15-20 goals because that will mean that with Stockley, Washington and hopefully two other strikers doing the business we will be near to promotion. You say that some people "can't see the quality staring at them in the face". But others, equally, can't see that you can have all the quality in the world but if that quality is sitting on the bench or, even worse, in the stands then the "quality" becomes irrelevant. And that's what makes Aneke an expensive gamble. Which, if one tots up the wages on his first coming and £300k and salary this season is exactly what he has been. I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise.
2) suggesting that the fact of what he has done in the last 71 minutes he’s been on the pitch as not a good indicator or trend is simply untrue. His ratio, goal contribution, presence, and general influence of what he brings to the team and how he scares the opposition shows it is not a fluke. It is what he does. At 28, he is now in his prime. He will be heading into next season knowing his role, knowing his job, and excelling in it. And that will be facilitated by the club because they know what they’re taking on, what he brings, what his role will be. It is also a very weak argument to say the goals he has scored has not directly won us points. What he brings to the team in terms of results is far more than if he is the one who puts the ball in the back of the net. Last season he didn’t feature in the squad in 7 games, we won only one of them. This season, he missed 12 games and we won 4 of them, we’ve won 5 in the 8 he has featured in. That’s a fact. As I said, this isn’t a fluke, that’s across two seasons. 5 wins in 19 games he was unavailable for, 23 wins in 47 he has been available for. Do you see where I’m going with this? I genuinely believe he will continue to be just as influential next season and people won’t need to worry, he isn’t going to be our starting striker, or second starting striker, but he’ll play regularly and he’ll score around 15 goals, the majority of them from the bench. No other team will have that in this league.
But I think I’ve said enough and have provided evidence for every point I have made so I’ll call it a day rather than going on and on about each and every point. We all have opinions and that’s what makes football interesting to debate and the whole point of Charlton Life.
4 -
Public forum, people will feel free to chip in on those things that they agree/disagree with.addick1956 said:
Why are you sticking your oar in ? It is nothing to do with you and yes disgusting name calling is out if order.Todds_right_hook said:
You moan about name calling, which covered end has provided clarification on but yet call someone else names?addick1956 said:
Thank you...that is exactly what I have said but could not be arsed to write down all the facts.Addick Addict said:Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Sage - I've never doubted Aneke's ability and the excitement of having a potential game changer on the bench but have certainly questioned his fitness record and ability to play minutes and preform consistently, season after season and the associated costs of having him in the squad simply because it is a gamble knowing which Aneke will turn up in any given season. And I'm struggling to see on what basis you have come to the conclusion that he's going to be "averaging 40 appearances" or, for that matter, the 12 starts or the 15-20 goals.
Aneke has never, in any single season in his 11 year career, achieved 40 League appearances. His actual average is 26 League appearances and his highest number of goals is 17 and that was in League 2. If you want to take out the early years in his career because of his age at that time and just count, say, the last six seasons (working backwards his appearances per season are 26-38-20-38-31-15) then that average rises to almost 28 but still nowhere near 40. In League 1 for us he's averaged 30 appearances at around about the 12 goal per season mark. He has also only made 18 starts in his last three seasons of football so an average of exactly six not 12 per season.
You also say that "In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in." That is no sample for a consistent trend. What influence on the result have Aneke's contributions actually made? The Cheltenham goal got us a point, the goal against Bolton was in defeat, the goal against Morecambe was in defeat, the assist against Cambridge was in a game we were winning anyway and his goal against Shrewsbury was also in a game that we were already in front in. So Aneke has been directly responsible for one point in half a season of football for us. If we apply the same criteria to the goals he scored in League 1 for us then he actually earned us nine points. And that was one of, if not his best, seasons in 11 years as a pro footballer.
We cannot go into next season with just Stockley, Washington, A N other and Aneke because he cannot start. Equally, if two of the others are out and Aneke does start, then we have no impact sub bar, perhaps, one of the 18 year olds that many of us are currently pinning their hopes on - and if Aneke doesn't start then the youngster will have to do so instead but, as we found with Burstow, that really isn't any guarantee to make the difference- Burstow hasn't scored in his last nine appearances. We also shouldn't underestimate the work of Stockley and Washington in softening those defenders that Aneke comes on to face.
Two seasons ago, when we were in the Championship, Aneke made 20 appearances and managed just 745 minutes on the pitch in total with one goal and one assist to his name. We did not recruit him to be an asset in League 1 - we bought him to do the business in the Championship! How much did that one goal and one assist cost us in terms of budget - perhaps as much as £500,000 - and a nil contribution to our survival.
Equally, our recruitment model, allegedly, is based on buying players good enough to play not just in League 1 but in the Championship too so, from the perspective, does it make any sense to take him on a second time? Aneke has consistently proven that he cannot hack it above League 1 level so we will have to try and offload a then soon to be 30 year old or continue to pay his wages for another two years. And being able to make any number of appearances will also be directly linked to how many minutes he actually manages next season. Be it as a result of lack of fitness or discipline - he has almost as many cards to his name as he does goals for us!
I will be ecstatic if he gets us 15-20 goals because that will mean that with Stockley, Washington and hopefully two other strikers doing the business we will be near to promotion. You say that some people "can't see the quality staring at them in the face". But others, equally, can't see that you can have all the quality in the world but if that quality is sitting on the bench or, even worse, in the stands then the "quality" becomes irrelevant. And that's what makes Aneke an expensive gamble. Which, if one tots up the wages on his first coming and £300k and salary this season is exactly what he has been. I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise.
When some strange person said we had got was responsible for 16 points on 8 ga.es he had played that was intended to infer he made a major contribution. He didn't really as you explained. I just couldn't be bothered again. Covered End called me an arsehole because of my views on Aneke as a game changer. I expect if there is justice I will be able to say to you ," welcome to the club"
that poster did not say that aneke was responsible for 16 points in 8 games, he said we have picked up 16 points in the 8 games that aneke has played. Two completely different sentences!!!
While we are at it I forgot to delete the
words ,'was responsible for'.
I already thanked Addick Addict for agreeing with me so why the need for you to interject? If you had read and understood that you would have maybe realised that.3 -
I bet he’s never made a spo ge without an egg. Idiot0
- Sponsored links:
-
Just noticed that he called me strange and still took what I said wrong 😂0
-
He’ll do a job. Stockley will also do a job, and then Washington is good cover. However, we need one more better than all of them
1 -
Thank you for thanking me for agreeing with you but I wasn't quite doing that as I had previously said that Aneke will be an asset if he can stay fit. I expressed that opinion and queried his signature in January for that reason (and the length of contract) and where Sage and I differ is in our interpretation of his fitness and his limited ability to contribute because of that.addick1956 said:
Why are you sticking your oar in ? It is nothing to do with you and yes disgusting name calling is out if order.Todds_right_hook said:
You moan about name calling, which covered end has provided clarification on but yet call someone else names?addick1956 said:
Thank you...that is exactly what I have said but could not be arsed to write down all the facts.Addick Addict said:Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Sage - I've never doubted Aneke's ability and the excitement of having a potential game changer on the bench but have certainly questioned his fitness record and ability to play minutes and preform consistently, season after season and the associated costs of having him in the squad simply because it is a gamble knowing which Aneke will turn up in any given season. And I'm struggling to see on what basis you have come to the conclusion that he's going to be "averaging 40 appearances" or, for that matter, the 12 starts or the 15-20 goals.
Aneke has never, in any single season in his 11 year career, achieved 40 League appearances. His actual average is 26 League appearances and his highest number of goals is 17 and that was in League 2. If you want to take out the early years in his career because of his age at that time and just count, say, the last six seasons (working backwards his appearances per season are 26-38-20-38-31-15) then that average rises to almost 28 but still nowhere near 40. In League 1 for us he's averaged 30 appearances at around about the 12 goal per season mark. He has also only made 18 starts in his last three seasons of football so an average of exactly six not 12 per season.
You also say that "In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in." That is no sample for a consistent trend. What influence on the result have Aneke's contributions actually made? The Cheltenham goal got us a point, the goal against Bolton was in defeat, the goal against Morecambe was in defeat, the assist against Cambridge was in a game we were winning anyway and his goal against Shrewsbury was also in a game that we were already in front in. So Aneke has been directly responsible for one point in half a season of football for us. If we apply the same criteria to the goals he scored in League 1 for us then he actually earned us nine points. And that was one of, if not his best, seasons in 11 years as a pro footballer.
We cannot go into next season with just Stockley, Washington, A N other and Aneke because he cannot start. Equally, if two of the others are out and Aneke does start, then we have no impact sub bar, perhaps, one of the 18 year olds that many of us are currently pinning their hopes on - and if Aneke doesn't start then the youngster will have to do so instead but, as we found with Burstow, that really isn't any guarantee to make the difference- Burstow hasn't scored in his last nine appearances. We also shouldn't underestimate the work of Stockley and Washington in softening those defenders that Aneke comes on to face.
Two seasons ago, when we were in the Championship, Aneke made 20 appearances and managed just 745 minutes on the pitch in total with one goal and one assist to his name. We did not recruit him to be an asset in League 1 - we bought him to do the business in the Championship! How much did that one goal and one assist cost us in terms of budget - perhaps as much as £500,000 - and a nil contribution to our survival.
Equally, our recruitment model, allegedly, is based on buying players good enough to play not just in League 1 but in the Championship too so, from the perspective, does it make any sense to take him on a second time? Aneke has consistently proven that he cannot hack it above League 1 level so we will have to try and offload a then soon to be 30 year old or continue to pay his wages for another two years. And being able to make any number of appearances will also be directly linked to how many minutes he actually manages next season. Be it as a result of lack of fitness or discipline - he has almost as many cards to his name as he does goals for us!
I will be ecstatic if he gets us 15-20 goals because that will mean that with Stockley, Washington and hopefully two other strikers doing the business we will be near to promotion. You say that some people "can't see the quality staring at them in the face". But others, equally, can't see that you can have all the quality in the world but if that quality is sitting on the bench or, even worse, in the stands then the "quality" becomes irrelevant. And that's what makes Aneke an expensive gamble. Which, if one tots up the wages on his first coming and £300k and salary this season is exactly what he has been. I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise.
When some strange person said we had got was responsible for 16 points on 8 ga.es he had played that was intended to infer he made a major contribution. He didn't really as you explained. I just couldn't be bothered again. Covered End called me an arsehole because of my views on Aneke as a game changer. I expect if there is justice I will be able to say to you ," welcome to the club"
that poster did not say that aneke was responsible for 16 points in 8 games, he said we have picked up 16 points in the 8 games that aneke has played. Two completely different sentences!!!
While we are at it I forgot to delete the
words ,'was responsible for'.
I already thanked Addick Addict for agreeing with me so why the need for you to interject? If you had read and understood that you would have maybe realised that.
Sage, for example, says things like Aneke missed part of this season "because he picked up an injury after being thrown in to start 4 games in a row" (though the "knock" can happen whether you play one minute or 90 minutes) and he highlights the fact that he played 41 times last season but fails to talk about his overall career average of 26 appearances (not starts) or that he only played 572 of Championship football that season - the equivalent of less than seven full games during which time he contributed one goal and one assist. Sage uses last season as proof of what he will do next, but discounts this season's injury and refuses to even acknowledge that really poor first season with us. As I said before, we signed him for the Championship on Championship wages not for League 1.
What has also since come to light is that his signature was dependant on an "add on" that LB insisted on. Another expense. I would guesstimate that his Charlton contribution of 20 total goals and four assists has cost the Club well in excess of £1.5m to date. I also fear that we will be light up front if we do not sign two forwards in addition to Washington and Stockley which, again, is an extra outlay that will compromise our signings in other areas.
It's not just me though that has talked about Aneke's playing history. Louis Mendez's article quoted above mentions that "the 28-year-old has been dogged by injury problems at times in his career. Other than the 2013/14 campaign with Crewe, the forward has never made more than 26 league starts during a single season" and Aneke says “Every player is different. That’s my personal battle that I’ve had throughout my whole career. That’s something that I’ve always got to stay on top of. My personal battle. Some players are fit as a fiddle and can play every minute. I’m not one of those players unfortunately. I can do what I can do. I did it today, so I’m delighted.”
Aneke will be 29 before next season starts and Sage says that "he is now in his prime". If he were a 10 year old race horse with only 20 races to his name then one might suggest that the lack of mile on the clock make him as asset. But if that horse has underlying fitness issues then the number of career races to date become somewhat irrelevant.
Like Sage I am tired of expressing my opinion on Aneke. The proof of his value next season will be in May 2023 (not each and every time he comes on and scores) and I sincerely hope that he fulfils his potential. I will be the first to express my delight at that time.
4 -
Because you play the victim about name calling then name call in the same sentence. Very strange!!!addick1956 said:
Why are you sticking your oar in ? It is nothing to do with you and yes disgusting name calling is out if order.Todds_right_hook said:
You moan about name calling, which covered end has provided clarification on but yet call someone else names?addick1956 said:
Thank you...that is exactly what I have said but could not be arsed to write down all the facts.Addick Addict said:Sage said:Sometimes, no matter what people will never change their opinion and see the quality staring at them in the face. And that’s okay, we’re all allowed opinions.
However, for the life of me I cannot understand what a problem might be towards Aneke? He’s proved time and time and time again his ability and impact off the bench. In pretty much every game he plays he influences it by either scoring, assisting, or his presence causes havoc for the opponents. If you know what you’re getting, and this is it, you’d have to be mental to turn it down. We’d all love for him to start more games, but I’d prefer to have him doing the business every time he is out on the pitch and if that means averaging 40 appearances and only 12 of them are starts but he scores 15-20 goals, so be it. That’s invaluable.
Sage - I've never doubted Aneke's ability and the excitement of having a potential game changer on the bench but have certainly questioned his fitness record and ability to play minutes and preform consistently, season after season and the associated costs of having him in the squad simply because it is a gamble knowing which Aneke will turn up in any given season. And I'm struggling to see on what basis you have come to the conclusion that he's going to be "averaging 40 appearances" or, for that matter, the 12 starts or the 15-20 goals.
Aneke has never, in any single season in his 11 year career, achieved 40 League appearances. His actual average is 26 League appearances and his highest number of goals is 17 and that was in League 2. If you want to take out the early years in his career because of his age at that time and just count, say, the last six seasons (working backwards his appearances per season are 26-38-20-38-31-15) then that average rises to almost 28 but still nowhere near 40. In League 1 for us he's averaged 30 appearances at around about the 12 goal per season mark. He has also only made 18 starts in his last three seasons of football so an average of exactly six not 12 per season.
You also say that "In the last 71 minutes he has been on the pitch, he’s scored 3 and had the shot that came off Washington’s head to go in." That is no sample for a consistent trend. What influence on the result have Aneke's contributions actually made? The Cheltenham goal got us a point, the goal against Bolton was in defeat, the goal against Morecambe was in defeat, the assist against Cambridge was in a game we were winning anyway and his goal against Shrewsbury was also in a game that we were already in front in. So Aneke has been directly responsible for one point in half a season of football for us. If we apply the same criteria to the goals he scored in League 1 for us then he actually earned us nine points. And that was one of, if not his best, seasons in 11 years as a pro footballer.
We cannot go into next season with just Stockley, Washington, A N other and Aneke because he cannot start. Equally, if two of the others are out and Aneke does start, then we have no impact sub bar, perhaps, one of the 18 year olds that many of us are currently pinning their hopes on - and if Aneke doesn't start then the youngster will have to do so instead but, as we found with Burstow, that really isn't any guarantee to make the difference- Burstow hasn't scored in his last nine appearances. We also shouldn't underestimate the work of Stockley and Washington in softening those defenders that Aneke comes on to face.
Two seasons ago, when we were in the Championship, Aneke made 20 appearances and managed just 745 minutes on the pitch in total with one goal and one assist to his name. We did not recruit him to be an asset in League 1 - we bought him to do the business in the Championship! How much did that one goal and one assist cost us in terms of budget - perhaps as much as £500,000 - and a nil contribution to our survival.
Equally, our recruitment model, allegedly, is based on buying players good enough to play not just in League 1 but in the Championship too so, from the perspective, does it make any sense to take him on a second time? Aneke has consistently proven that he cannot hack it above League 1 level so we will have to try and offload a then soon to be 30 year old or continue to pay his wages for another two years. And being able to make any number of appearances will also be directly linked to how many minutes he actually manages next season. Be it as a result of lack of fitness or discipline - he has almost as many cards to his name as he does goals for us!
I will be ecstatic if he gets us 15-20 goals because that will mean that with Stockley, Washington and hopefully two other strikers doing the business we will be near to promotion. You say that some people "can't see the quality staring at them in the face". But others, equally, can't see that you can have all the quality in the world but if that quality is sitting on the bench or, even worse, in the stands then the "quality" becomes irrelevant. And that's what makes Aneke an expensive gamble. Which, if one tots up the wages on his first coming and £300k and salary this season is exactly what he has been. I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise.
When some strange person said we had got was responsible for 16 points on 8 ga.es he had played that was intended to infer he made a major contribution. He didn't really as you explained. I just couldn't be bothered again. Covered End called me an arsehole because of my views on Aneke as a game changer. I expect if there is justice I will be able to say to you ," welcome to the club"
that poster did not say that aneke was responsible for 16 points in 8 games, he said we have picked up 16 points in the 8 games that aneke has played. Two completely different sentences!!!
While we are at it I forgot to delete the
words ,'was responsible for'.
I already thanked Addick Addict for agreeing with me so why the need for you to interject? If you had read and understood that you would have maybe realised that.1 -
I pledge that if Aneke is our Leading Goal Scorer next season, OR completes the season uninjured, I will give £100 to the Upbeats.8
-
well we have a guy & his team in place and after last year gotta he better - just make us look like a team - because adkin & jacko failed0
-
Well, we have a guy and his team in place. After last year they have to be better. They need to make us look a team, something in which Adkins and Jacko failed.JaShea99 said:
And in English?jdsd42 said:well we have a guy & his team in place and after last year gotta he better - just make us look like a team - because adkin & jacko failed1 -
Chucks needs to be used how Bowyer used him, wrap him up in cotton wool and unleash him off the bench in tight games , simple but very effective1
-
Don’t shoot the messenger, but I’ve heard from a source that Chuks dislocated his shoulder putting that Castore T-shirt on for the shoot, and will now be out until Xmas. Hope it’s not true3
- Sponsored links:
-
Yeah heard similar, apparently he put his head in, one arm in and said that’s me I cant do a full T shirt put on, think they photoshopped for the pics.😂cafc4life said:Don’t shoot the messenger, but I’ve heard from a source that Chuks dislocated his shoulder putting that Castore T-shirt on for the shoot, and will now be out until Xmas. Hope it’s not true3 -
Withdrawn as a precaution but should be fine.
5 -
Scoham said:Withdrawn as a precaution but should be fine.
Good. Tbh I think it's a madness to let him play 60 minutes+, especially in pre-season.1 -
I accept people think he is good, but the madness was re signing him, especially on anything other than a very short term or pay as you play deal.Jac_52 said:Scoham said:Withdrawn as a precaution but should be fine.
Good. Tbh I think it's a madness to let him play 60 minutes+, especially in pre-season.3 -
The madness is having a player where playing him for more than 60 minutes is considered reckless. Such a restriction when trying to manager a squad over a 46 game season20
-
Yes agreed.killerandflash said:The madness is having a player where playing him for more than 60 minutes is considered reckless. Such a restriction when trying to manager a squad over a 46 game season0 -
Will pick up at least a couple of injuries this season that will see him miss a few weeks at least.
Always been that way and won’t change now. Just need adequate back up when that happens.
0 -
We should be expecting a min of 60 mins in pre season against Welling United!1
This discussion has been closed.
