Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
RETAINED LIST | Club trigger one-year extension on Forster-Caskey, Innis, Davison, Harness
Comments
-
Pretty much my thoughts also.wmcf123 said:
He had that one absolute stinker, but otherwise he played ok last season. To me, he looks like he's carrying too much muscle and had lost some mobility, but I think he will have a career in league one. He impresses me more than Smith or Pigott did in their early careers and they have both done well, relative to their ability.BR7_addick said:
Then he’d be a young striker who just scored 1 in 2 for the season in a promoted side. That’s something we should be looking at.paulfox said:If Swindon get promoted, I’d be surprised if Davison isn’t with them on a permanent next season, with a little cash in our coffers.Many of our fan base has written him off already, seems trigger happy to me.
He’s good at pressing which is quite suited to the modern game, I honestly think there’s room for him, you know full well if we release him he’d turn up in our league at some point and score loads of goals.0 -
How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.0 -
I thought the Squad Cap remained at 20 going forward now.Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.0 -
Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.Looking as things stand,
At least 3 full backs.
1 centre back
1 winger
1 striker
And this is without knowing the formation, so numbers I’d say at least 6. Preferably 8.First TeamGoalkeepers
Craig MacGillivray 2023
Ashley Maynard-Brewer 2023
Nathan Harness 2023
Right sided defendersLeft sided defendersCentre BacksDeji Elerewe 2024
Sam Lavelle 2024
Ryan Innis 2023Central Midfielders
George Dobson 2023
Sean Clare 2023Scott Fraser 2025
Alex Gilbey 2023
Albie Morgan 2023
Jake Forster-Caskey 2023
Wingers
Corey Blackett-Taylor 2023
Diallang Jaiyesimi 2024
Charlie Kirk 2025Strikers
Chuks Aneke 2025
Jayden Stockley 2024
Josh Davison 20230 -
There are mixed opinions about Davison.
I don’t see him as a premiership signing ever, but beyond natural frustration when he misses a chance I think he is alright.
From seeing him since he joined us late in life you can see genuine improvement at Charlton. This is credit to the club.
He is a willing outlet, prepared to take the batterings a front man often gets, easily as much a trier as the estimable Washington, can finish as well as miss, and in a way I think greater nous and experience might make him better still.
If Davison does go, it would be with my best wishes, but I am not unhappy he is retained.
Who knows if he had been here when Stockley and Washington were out we might have got some more points, and Jacko might still be in situ. Looking back it would’ve been better with Davison than Burstow during that injury ravaged spell.
2 -
It was 22 last season, was ment to be 20 going forward. Won't be confirmed until the EFL AGM in June!ForeverAddickted said:
I thought the Squad Cap remained at 20 going forward now.Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.
What ever it is we don't have much wiggle room as it stands, do we?1 -
If that proves to be the case, he will lose twice what he should have spent over the next 12 months and that much again in the reduced value of his investment in the club.golfaddick said:Can't wait for the meltdown on here come July 30th when we've signed diddly squat & relying on youth & loanees.....AGAIN.
Really can't see Sandgaard spending the money needed to replace 12 or so players......especially when he said we would only be signing 2 or 3 key ones.0 -
Genuinely one of the funniest things I have read on here.ValleyOfTears said:And keeping Pearce would have been prudent. He is super fit for his age and still quick and in quite a few games last season he was arguably man of the match.
Strange choice that one..Inniss and Pearce could get into any team in this division and even a good few Championship sides.3 -
If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.4
-
Why would that be? The only real debate here is on 2 players where some believe we let the wrong one go. Its universally agreed that the others let go are the right decisions. Agree that who we bring in needs the incoming managers agreement but not really on those released.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Including Kirk, Davison and Purrington we'd have 15 players. I was under the impression it was going to be 21 for season 22/23 and then 20 from 23/24 onwards but could be wrong.Cafc43v3r said:
It was 22 last season, was ment to be 20 going forward. Won't be confirmed until the EFL AGM in June!ForeverAddickted said:
I thought the Squad Cap remained at 20 going forward now.Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.
What ever it is we don't have much wiggle room as it stands, do we?1 -
Because this suggests the decisions are being made by TS and his team for non-footballing reasons, or suggests he will interfere with footballing decisions next season. A new manager will have his own ideas about what sort of players and how we play, so why make these decisions without the new manager deciding who he thinks he needs for his style of play. A new manager may well want to get rid of them all (I probably would - apart from Washington), but surely they should have waited and let the new guy have some input?AllHailTheHen said:
Why would that be? The only real debate here is on 2 players where some believe we let the wrong one go. Its universally agreed that the others let go are the right decisions. Agree that who we bring in needs the incoming managers agreement but not really on those released.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.1 -
Just for fair balance I know Fleetwood are trying to sign someone I know and they don’t have a manager in place at the moment. We aren’t the only team doing this.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.
0 -
I agree that clubs do this, but it still seems odd to me signing players who a new manager may not like. Surely that's a waste of money that would be better used recruiting players that a new manager wants and who fit with his style of play?SouthWest_Addicks said:
Just for fair balance I know Fleetwood are trying to sign someone I know and they don’t have a manager in place at the moment. We aren’t the only team doing this.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.0 -
So it's 5 or 6 as it stands.cafcfan1990 said:
Including Kirk, Davison and Purrington we'd have 15 players. I was under the impression it was going to be 21 for season 22/23 and then 20 from 23/24 onwards but could be wrong.Cafc43v3r said:
It was 22 last season, was ment to be 20 going forward. Won't be confirmed until the EFL AGM in June!ForeverAddickted said:
I thought the Squad Cap remained at 20 going forward now.Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.
What ever it is we don't have much wiggle room as it stands, do we?
We need 5 or 6, at least, to have a decent team, let alone squad.2 -
Unless the plan is to establish a style of play and then sign players and hire a manager that suits it. That's what Southampton do, they make sure that the manager that comes in wants to work in a style that is consistent with the club's playing philosophy, so although they may find their signings aren't as good as they hoped they're never the wrong fit in terms of shape and strategy. If we're focusing on a high pressing team, maybe in a certain formation, then we get in a high pressing manager and a load of very fit, quick, pressing footballers then unless the manager doesn't like a player's haircut there's unlikely to be a huge number of complaints.thetomahawkkid said:
I agree that clubs do this, but it still seems odd to me signing players who a new manager may not like. Surely that's a waste of money that would be better used recruiting players that a new manager wants and who fit with his style of play?SouthWest_Addicks said:
Just for fair balance I know Fleetwood are trying to sign someone I know and they don’t have a manager in place at the moment. We aren’t the only team doing this.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.
0 -
Definitely. 5/6 can sort out the defence and strikeforce, but would then leave the midfield short.Cafc43v3r said:
So it's 5 or 6 as it stands.cafcfan1990 said:
Including Kirk, Davison and Purrington we'd have 15 players. I was under the impression it was going to be 21 for season 22/23 and then 20 from 23/24 onwards but could be wrong.Cafc43v3r said:
It was 22 last season, was ment to be 20 going forward. Won't be confirmed until the EFL AGM in June!ForeverAddickted said:
I thought the Squad Cap remained at 20 going forward now.Cafc43v3r said:How many do we need?
I think Davison out and Fraser in kept us at the squad cap limit. Am I right in thinking that that is reduced by 1 for next season?
4 players from last years squad didn't count and ignore the keepers.
6 released, 3 loans add Morgan back in and take the 1 off, that's 7 spaces. Isn't it? That doesn't include Kirk.
So unless anyone else leaves, the squad cap is abolished, or we sign under age players we can only bring in 6.
We seriously need to get all of them perfect, not a lot of margin for error.
What ever it is we don't have much wiggle room as it stands, do we?
We need 5 or 6, at least, to have a decent team, let alone squad.
I have to admit, I'm expecting at least two to depart (probably Kirk and Davison). We'll probably need 1/2 U21 loans too.1 -
He probably wouldn't want to stay to be 3d or 4th choice though.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Which is exactly what he would've been.golfaddick said:
Wont get you promoted & are stats for your 3rd or even 4th choice striker.felix_31 said:
Yes he didCharltonstu said:Surprised about Washington, but did not score enough goals for a striker
2 seasons here, 11 league goals in each
36 (11)
35 (11)
Equates to roughly 1 in 3. I'd have at least offered him a one-year deal, ideally two. Why not?
Remember we will now be able to make 5 subs, so if we assume that Stockley and a new striker would be expected to start, then i don't think many league one sides would have better than Aneke and Washington coming off the bench after 55-60 minutes.
It's one i think we might regret, but we can't say for sure until we see who we bring in.0 -
TBF there are plenty of wildly OTT comments on the Washington thread, this thread, and on twitter.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Uproar is probably stretching the truth a bit as from i can't tell there is only a debate over 2 players.AndyG said:I'm still confused by all this uproar. Literally everyone wanted a Summer clear out now we have one hysteria breaks out 😳😳
Inniss we've kept and a lot think we shouldn't. Washington we got rid and a lot think we should've kept him as backup.0 -
We are just a weird club. You couldn't make it up at times, unless it is.....
- Innis's red card was a sign of a player that's just been told he's not here next season many said.
- Washington ends up being the guy spreading a bad vibe around the place. But when he plays, is one of few who gives 100% to the cause.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
In an ideal world we'll try and find some decent U21 players that have been doing well in League Two, or have finished in the very few places below us in League One this season - Need to look at players who in the future can be sold on for a lot more than what we sign them for.
Its a shame that we're so prepared to give up on Kirk (Be shocked if he's here when the window closes) for that reason.
I mean Blackpool are clearly showing their hand, that clubs higher than League One are impressed with Kirk's potential - Why dont we get Charlie back for pre-season, look at his videos for Crewe, find out what worked (the overlapping Full-Back perhaps), and then try bloody harder with him, rather than give up six months down the line every time.
Then again the Squad cap equally doesnt help, as clubs cant afford to have passengers anymore.0 -
Washington was the best (only?) player in our squad who was capable of playing a high press!Garrymanilow said:
Unless the plan is to establish a style of play and then sign players and hire a manager that suits it. That's what Southampton do, they make sure that the manager that comes in wants to work in a style that is consistent with the club's playing philosophy, so although they may find their signings aren't as good as they hoped they're never the wrong fit in terms of shape and strategy. If we're focusing on a high pressing team, maybe in a certain formation, then we get in a high pressing manager and a load of very fit, quick, pressing footballers then unless the manager doesn't like a player's haircut there's unlikely to be a huge number of complaints.thetomahawkkid said:
I agree that clubs do this, but it still seems odd to me signing players who a new manager may not like. Surely that's a waste of money that would be better used recruiting players that a new manager wants and who fit with his style of play?SouthWest_Addicks said:
Just for fair balance I know Fleetwood are trying to sign someone I know and they don’t have a manager in place at the moment. We aren’t the only team doing this.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.0 -
I'm not devastated to see Washington go, but neither do I have any faith in the recruitment team that we will sign anyone any better. Much like my thoughts on Jacko going.Croydon said:
TBF there are plenty of wildly OTT comments on the Washington thread, this thread, and on twitter.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Uproar is probably stretching the truth a bit as from i can't tell there is only a debate over 2 players.AndyG said:I'm still confused by all this uproar. Literally everyone wanted a Summer clear out now we have one hysteria breaks out 😳😳
Inniss we've kept and a lot think we shouldn't. Washington we got rid and a lot think we should've kept him as backup.2 -
To be fair... Washington could have played like Messi at times, and I was a big fan of his.
But if he was a big reason behind unrest in the dressing room then he had to go - We need chemistry amongst a squad.
I've heard of one Manager (Might have been Wagner @ Huddersfield) who went into a club, and told the players to write down the names of those who they thought were disruptive in the dressing room - Was all kept confidential so the players didnt feel uncomfortable, but the handful that were listed, quietly got moved on to other clubs.
Feel we need to do similar.2 -
If we put down what we have now, our 11 in a 433 looks like:
MacG (AMB)
Clare, Inniss (Elewere), Lavelle, Purrington (assuming he stays- he's unlikely to have better offers)
Fraser (Gilbey), Dobson, Forster Caskey (Morgan)
DJ, Stockley (Aneke/Davison), CBT (Kirk).
We need 2 central defenders, given Inniss' injury record, Elewere's lack of experience, 2 full backs that can attack, another central midfielder and I would say at least two more forward/wide options.
I don't think we can play this system with Stockley up front either; I would rather we modified the 352 or played a diamond.
0 -
I think Sandgaard might well be a fan of the 352 but could be wrong. I don't think we can play 433/4231, in fact with Stockley I think we have to play 2 up top. It leaves the 352 or the diamond. Neither of which will suit Kirk.ForeverAddickted said:In an ideal world we'll try and find some decent U21 players that have been doing well in League Two, or have finished in the very few places below us in League One this season - Need to look at players who in the future can be sold on for a lot more than what we sign them for.
Its a shame that we're so prepared to give up on Kirk (Be shocked if he's here when the window closes) for that reason.
I mean Blackpool are clearly showing their hand, that clubs higher than League One are impressed with Kirk's potential - Why dont we get Charlie back for pre-season, look at his videos for Crewe, find out what worked (the overlapping Full-Back perhaps), and then try bloody harder with him, rather than give up six months down the line every time.
Then again the Squad cap equally doesnt help, as clubs cant afford to have passengers anymore.2 -
Diamond means we can't play any of our 3 wingers though. It's basically a question of whether Stockley is good enough to build pretty much a whole new team around.wmcf123 said:If we put down what we have now, our 11 in a 433 looks like:
MacG (AMB)
Clare, Inniss (Elewere), Lavelle, Purrington (assuming he stays- he's unlikely to have better offers)
Fraser (Gilbey), Dobson, Forster Caskey (Morgan)
DJ, Stockley (Aneke/Davison), CBT (Kirk).
We need 2 central defenders, given Inniss' injury record, Elewere's lack of experience, 2 full backs that can attack, another central midfielder and I would say at least two more forward/wide options.
I don't think we can play this system with Stockley up front either; I would rather we modified the 352 or played a diamond.0 -
I don’t think this looks too sad either:wmcf123 said:If we put down what we have now, our 11 in a 433 looks like:
MacG (AMB)
Clare, Inniss (Elewere), Lavelle, Purrington (assuming he stays- he's unlikely to have better offers)
Fraser (Gilbey), Dobson, Forster Caskey (Morgan)
DJ, Stockley (Aneke/Davison), CBT (Kirk).
We need 2 central defenders, given Inniss' injury record, Elewere's lack of experience, 2 full backs that can attack, another central midfielder and I would say at least two more forward/wide options.
I don't think we can play this system with Stockley up front either; I would rather we modified the 352 or played a diamond.
MacG
New, Innis, Lavelle, New
Dobson, JFC
Fraser
CBT, Stockley, Kirk
The full backs are vital, I genuinely mean that they could be the difference between another mid table finish and a promotion push.Also would like to see a new centre half and winger if that’s the formation we play.2 -
But not the only one in the world capable of doing it. Could be that he was offered and wanted too much money, could be he didn't want to stay, could be that we're trying to get in better. What follows in place of him is the key now.thetomahawkkid said:
Washington was the best (only?) player in our squad who was capable of playing a high press!Garrymanilow said:
Unless the plan is to establish a style of play and then sign players and hire a manager that suits it. That's what Southampton do, they make sure that the manager that comes in wants to work in a style that is consistent with the club's playing philosophy, so although they may find their signings aren't as good as they hoped they're never the wrong fit in terms of shape and strategy. If we're focusing on a high pressing team, maybe in a certain formation, then we get in a high pressing manager and a load of very fit, quick, pressing footballers then unless the manager doesn't like a player's haircut there's unlikely to be a huge number of complaints.thetomahawkkid said:
I agree that clubs do this, but it still seems odd to me signing players who a new manager may not like. Surely that's a waste of money that would be better used recruiting players that a new manager wants and who fit with his style of play?SouthWest_Addicks said:
Just for fair balance I know Fleetwood are trying to sign someone I know and they don’t have a manager in place at the moment. We aren’t the only team doing this.thetomahawkkid said:If these decisions have been taken without any input from the new manager (whoever that may be), we are in BIG trouble for next year.
1 -
wmcf123 said:If we put down what we have now, our 11 in a 433 looks like:
MacG (AMB)
Clare, Inniss (Elewere), Lavelle, Purrington (assuming he stays- he's unlikely to have better offers)
Fraser (Gilbey), Dobson, Forster Caskey (Morgan)
DJ, Stockley (Aneke/Davison), CBT (Kirk).
We need 2 central defenders, given Inniss' injury record, Elewere's lack of experience, 2 full backs that can attack, another central midfielder and I would say at least two more forward/wide options.
I don't think we can play this system with Stockley up front either; I would rather we modified the 352 or played a diamond.
Would need a lot of work recruitment wise for the diamond I'd say.
2 full backs as we, well, have none.
2/3 CBs because Inniss is mainly a community ambassador2 forwards
1 proper no. 10
Then have 2/3 wingers sitting on the bench scratching their bollocks most of the time.
But I guess that would apply to 352 as well TBF.1
