Sandgaard, sign a striker.

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

carly burn said:

To my mind there is only one Natural striker at the club. Daniel Kanu. Far too soon for him though.

If Sandgaard moves forward with the status quo it will be akin to having Mark Bright and Steve Jones as the main striking pair in 97/98.

And where would we be now if that was the case?

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

In no scenario would keeping Davison have been right 

I take it you would have welcomed us signing Tyreece Simpson even though Davison did slightly better in the same system as him last season under Garner?

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

In no scenario would keeping Davison have been right 

I take it you would have welcomed us signing Tyreece Simpson even though Davison did slightly better in the same system as him last season under Garner?

Got no idea about Tyreece Simpson but the conclusion from the Swindon fans i know is that if they had a better striker than Davison in the last few months of the season, they would probably have gone up - which reinforces what i saw of him whilst he was at Charlton and in the Swindon play off game i watched.  

Funny. The Swindon fans I know reckon they would have gone up if they had a better striker in the first few months of the season.

Simpson 9 goals in 25 games (239mins per goal)
Davison 9 goals in 21 games (199mins per goal)

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

In no scenario would keeping Davison have been right 

I take it you would have welcomed us signing Tyreece Simpson even though Davison did slightly better in the same system as him last season under Garner?

Got no idea about Tyreece Simpson but the conclusion from the Swindon fans i know is that if they had a better striker than Davison in the last few months of the season, they would probably have gone up - which reinforces what i saw of him whilst he was at Charlton and in the Swindon play off game i watched.  

Funny. The Swindon fans I know reckon they would have gone up if they had a better striker in the first few months of the season.

Simpson 9 goals in 25 games (239mins per goal)
Davison 9 goals in 21 games (199mins per goal)

no point quoting me simpson stats - as i've said, i know bugger all about him - i've seen enougyh of Davison to know that he is hard working and not a lot else 

So you'll only be happy if we sign a striker you've heard of that isn't Davison. Righto

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

In no scenario would keeping Davison have been right 

I take it you would have welcomed us signing Tyreece Simpson even though Davison did slightly better in the same system as him last season under Garner?

Got no idea about Tyreece Simpson but the conclusion from the Swindon fans i know is that if they had a better striker than Davison in the last few months of the season, they would probably have gone up - which reinforces what i saw of him whilst he was at Charlton and in the Swindon play off game i watched.  

Funny. The Swindon fans I know reckon they would have gone up if they had a better striker in the first few months of the season.

Simpson 9 goals in 25 games (239mins per goal)
Davison 9 goals in 21 games (199mins per goal)

no point quoting me simpson stats - as i've said, i know bugger all about him - i've seen enougyh of Davison to know that he is hard working and not a lot else 

So you'll only be happy if we sign a striker you've heard of that isn't Davison. Righto

You are trying to put words into my mouth for some bizzarre reason - i'm allowed not to rate Davison i believe - as to who we sign - well, i'm a construction consultant so whilst i like to think i can judge a player's ability having watched him play quite a few times, i'll be happy if we sign a striker that garner is happy with - after all, thats his job (and i currently have faith in him having watched the start of this season) and he and the support team will know a lot more about who is out there than i do - whether i know their names or not isn't massively important to me believe it or not.  

Just pointing out that I'm sure you would have been happy with us signing Simpson despite Davison performing better than him in this system last year. You are of course entitled not to rate him but I still think he'd be an ideal backup option for Stockley at this moment in time were he still here. Obviously I hope we sign better / anyone but if we don't it was silly to let Davison go, which you disagree with. All good

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

DOUCHER said:

Jac_52 said:

paulg1947 said:

Jac_52 said:

cafcpolo said:

Jac_52 said:

Callumcafc said:

Dazzler21 said:

Can we re-sign wash for 300k?

Not good enough for us apparently. Will probably go to Wimbledon with Jacko……

Oh wait what’s that, he’s scoring goals in the league above in a team that’s won 4-0 today..?

Washington would have done jack shit today for us.

No no no no no. Playing this system requires a striker who can beat the offside trap and get behind the defence. He might not be the most prolific of finishers but that's what Washington excelled at.

Washington suits a direct team that is fast in transition and doesn't care about possession. He would be utterly redundant in this system up top on his own and just cause us to cede possession. He scored 9 open play goals per season for us, really don't get why people are clamouring for him. Clamouring for another striker I get but not Washington.

He scored 1 goal today in a mauling, fine, but his overall game was poor. He completed 3 passes in his match today before he was subbed in fact, truly not what we need in a lone striker.

I am not sure if a lot of us, want Washington back (bit 'tongue in cheek ,surely) Its just that in the predicament we're in, selling him before a replacement was lined up, is sheer madness This is the main issure

Basically we should never have sold Davison

In no scenario would keeping Davison have been right 

I take it you would have welcomed us signing Tyreece Simpson even though Davison did slightly better in the same system as him last season under Garner?

Got no idea about Tyreece Simpson but the conclusion from the Swindon fans i know is that if they had a better striker than Davison in the last few months of the season, they would probably have gone up - which reinforces what i saw of him whilst he was at Charlton and in the Swindon play off game i watched.  

Funny. The Swindon fans I know reckon they would have gone up if they had a better striker in the first few months of the season.

Simpson 9 goals in 25 games (239mins per goal)
Davison 9 goals in 21 games (199mins per goal)

no point quoting me simpson stats - as i've said, i know bugger all about him - i've seen enougyh of Davison to know that he is hard working and not a lot else 

So you'll only be happy if we sign a striker you've heard of that isn't Davison. Righto

You are trying to put words into my mouth for some bizzarre reason - i'm allowed not to rate Davison i believe - as to who we sign - well, i'm a construction consultant so whilst i like to think i can judge a player's ability having watched him play quite a few times, i'll be happy if we sign a striker that garner is happy with - after all, thats his job (and i currently have faith in him having watched the start of this season) and he and the support team will know a lot more about who is out there than i do - whether i know their names or not isn't massively important to me believe it or not.  

Just pointing out that I'm sure you would have been happy with us signing Simpson despite Davison performing better than him in this system last year. You are of course entitled not to rate him but I still think he'd be an ideal backup option for Stockley at this moment in time were he still here. Obviously I hope we sign better / anyone but if we don't it was silly to let Davison go, which you disagree with. All good

I don't want a back up to Stockley - i want an improvement and a player more suited to the system - if we don't bring at least one in, we won't be going up. Davison is more suited to the system but isn't good enough. I'd sooner we tooka  gamble on a few others that might come off than keep ghold of somebody that we know isn't good enough. I'll be amazed if we don't sign a more suited striker and having offloaded the likes of Davison can only help in that respect. This is why keeping Davison would never have been right - its wasting his and our time and resources. And btw i'm sorry to piss on your data chips but stats don't always tell the full story and its quite feasible that Tyreece is much better than Davison - the fact he's gone to Huddersfield and Davison to Wimbledon kind of backs that up don't you think?       

Yeah but if we don't sign anyone it would have been right to keep him, but you said under no circumstances would it be. 

Also it's not my data chips you seem to think you're pissing on it's my fact chips.

But yeah I hope we sign better as well but christ knows who that would possibly be right now. If anything we'll probably end up with some loanee we've never heard of.

SELR_addicks said:

The mistake was letting Jackson sign Aneke in January. 

Waste of money better spent on someone that can be available all the time. 

IR94 said:

looks like free agent it is. Gary Hooper, nick blackman, jerome sinclair, Nathan Delfouneso, sam winnall, Marc McNulty most viable out of the bunch, grim