Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Chuks

1131416181958

Comments

  • I think, like 99% of us do, that chucks makes a huge difference to our team - its true, he does and part of that is because he is a level or 2 above but the other part of it is that we have no one else that can perform the vital role that he does - when Leaburn is fit, he has a go at it but for a  big fella is poor in the air, and nowhere near as strong. Kanu is having a good go atm and is doing his bit to fill the void but its not really his game and the same can be said of Ladapo, although he doesn't really appear to be busting a gut. Chucks impact will not seem so great once we sign similar in the summer - at least 1. Dare i say it, but even if we still had Stockley, we would have been nowhere near the trouble we've been in.           
  • Chuks out for the season with Wickham signed? 
  • I love Chuks, he’s a tank, but he has more breakdowns than the RAC.
  • Chuks out for the season with Wickham signed? 
    That's my assumption. Is he ever going to be fully fit? It's a pity but I don't think he can cope with full time football anymore. 
  • Is Chuks out for the season now ?
  • Absolutely no room for sentiment re Chuks ..as popular as he might be we should work something out to terminate his contact and move on .
  • He is a great technical play, but lazy.  Sorry you can't disagree with me without the snide comment, but their you go.
    Lazy is probably not a word I'd use for him. 

    You can call his warm ups lazy, I would assume the club would have taken it up with him were they concerned that was the issue Doc

  • lolwray said:
    Absolutely no room for sentiment re Chuks ..as popular as he might be we should work something out to terminate his contact and move on .
    Not much point unless a termination heavily favours the club, and if he’s on a decent wedge which he likely is then terminating his deal won’t come cheap and would likely have to come out of the summer budget. Therefore unless he was to accept a token amount nothing will change.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Sure was. A billion miles away from being one of our worst bits of transfer business ever though. We signed Traore and Faye in the same day for £4m and then sold Traore six months later at a £1m loss. £2.5m on Bougherra. £3.7m on Diawara. £2m on Luke Varney. £1.1m on McLeod and £1.5m on Andy Gray. We spent actual money on Reza and replaced Yann with Polish Pete. Real legal currency changed hands so we could have Christophe Lepoint (2.5 year deal, gone in 6 months), Zakarya Bergdich (4 year deal, paid to leave after 1), Nicky Ajose, Charlie Kirk and Ronnie Schwartz. We signed Cory Gibbs and he didn't play a single minute in two years. Chuks can't be called good business but at least he's actually good when he plays and we like him! There's about 6 teams worth of absolutely unforgivable signings to get through before we're even allowed to think Chuks' name in this conversation
    Woah, I’m not having Bougherra and Diawara in there. 
  • Woah, I’m not having Bougherra and Diawara in there. 
    And yet you must. Two absolutely atrocious pieces of business. Diawara was a good player in his career but he wasn't suitable for our team. Maybe if he joined a more stable team he might have settled better but in the end we spent £3.7m, which I think is our 4th highest transfer fee ever, on a centre back who struggled terribly and helped take us down to the Championship. We then sold him a year later for a £1.1m loss. Bougherra cost £2.5m in the January we were desperately trying to stay in the league and started two PL games, with 3 sub appearances. He's our 10th highest transfer (because we all know we didn't actually spend £2.5m on Jeffers). The positive for Bougherra is we sold him to Rangers at cost but not before he helped us finish 12th in the Championship. Thanks Madjid! £2.5m is what we spent on Darren Bent. It's what we spent on Danny Murphy (boo). Think about what Curbs could have done with £6.2m! He could do a whole season's transfers for that and have enough left over to still threaten to sign Julian Gray. Not the worst players we've ever had but unforgivably bad business.
  • se9addick said:
    I’m not sure we can “work something out”. No other team will sign him, certainly not on the money that he’s on with us so there’s no chance of him agreeing to walk away with anything less than his contract paid up. In those circumstances we might as well keep him even if we can only get a handful of matches. 
    Yep, I imagine he has an appropriate insurance and pension scheme in place as well.
  • #missingthepoint :)
  • edited March 2024
    Chucks is at an age when players start thinking about their post career prospects. I wonder if we can help him with the transition into coaching, support him get his badges, and use his experience to work with our forwards particularly kanu, Leaburn and Casey during his down time.
  • Nobody doubts Chuks attitude, he's just not up to the job. I can't imagine many of us that would be happy to work alongside a colleague that is off sick 30+ weeks a year. I knew a woman that did that for over 20 years and has finally had her contract ended after 18 months off.

    There can be many differing health reasons, and I don't judge on the at, it is more about how a service, department, team or group can function, when somebody is so unreliable. 

    Who wants to own a car the breaks down every few weeks? We'd all get rid, no matter how fond.

    If the reality is that he'd need paying to the end of his contract, then keep all day long.
     Chuks isn't Kirk. He tries and most importantly makes a difference as soon as he comes in, only in Chuks outings the difference is positive. Kirk we all know.

     
  • Maybe a sensible approach might have been a pay by match approach. Although on that basis Chuks would be turning up in a three wheel Reliant Robin instead of a top of the range jam jar. As his body ages he sure ain’t going to recover quicker so well done to the mastermind who decided a 3 year contract was a good idea with his track record. Unbelievable. 
    Did I read at the time he signed ...... that Chuks was originally offered a 2 and a half year contract on a higher wage - but instead it was negotiated by his agent to have the total worth of that contract rolled up and paid over 3 and a half years?
  • I posted on another thread that I think we must try and get Chuks into next preseason still fit. A properly structured full preseason could give us some player next season. The poor bloke is always playing catchup with his colleagues and I’m sure is desperate to show what he’s got to offer. If he’s still feeling that niggle then leave him out until he’s properly ready. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • I posted on another thread that I think we must try and get Chuks into next preseason still fit. A properly structured full preseason could give us some player next season. The poor bloke is always playing catchup with his colleagues and I’m sure is desperate to show what he’s got to offer. If he’s still feeling that niggle then leave him out until he’s properly ready. 
    I think you posted the same this time last season
  • I wouldn't be surprised to see him retire after his contract ends with us. 
  • Chunes said:
    I wouldn't be surprised to see him retire after his contract ends with us. 
    Wonder if any other clubs will want to offer him a contact anyway. 

    I assume some will, but it will be on reduced wages. 
  • The issue I think is the club not being more transparent about his various injuries. 

    When they are medium to long term just tell us. 
  • The issue I think is the club not being more transparent about his various injuries. 

    When they are medium to long term just tell us. 
    This is down to NJ and I can understand it - why tell opponents so much about who’s available and when?


  • Scoham said:
    This is down to NJ and I can understand it - why tell opponents so much about who’s available and when?


    Don't really think the most recent quote addresses my wider point. We've consistently been 'under' informed as regards Chuks versus other players - it feels.
  • Don't really think the most recent quote addresses my wider point. We've consistently been 'under' informed as regards Chuks versus other players - it feels.
    Yeah agree the club have said less about him, but given what NJ has said that’s not going to change.
  • Get in.
    He can't he's not on the bench according to the match thread  ;)
  • FFS, ha ha. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!