From what I can remember ll our strikers used to score regularly in the reserves, JJ, Barlett, Svensson, Lisbie, Euell etc.
I think most of them would score a fair few goals, even Varney.
Difference is if they were there, they would be getting fit. Dickson's there to try and break into the first team. Not that it's an excuse for them not scoring.
I think he deserves a chance more for what he did at Gillingham, shown he can score goals in League One. In the reserves he's going and doing what he should do.
I thought Burton was bought as a back up for Gray, not to play up front with him. Not the two quickest strikers in the league, so with Toddy on the bench we have no pace in attack. With Dicko up front with one of them, we might have a decent partnership.As many have said , he's earned his chance. Pardew's comment to me that 16 minutes is plenty of time to show what he can do was rubbish, like his managerial performances for us.
Didn't the much maligned Carl Leaburn score shedloads of goals in a season for the reserves at the start of his career? (There's something in my mind that says 60, but that sounds utterly ridiculous)
in that game where he scored 4 against pompey the only player we hadin the team was JFH who had any league experience, yes the pompey team was proberly made up of second stringers and their yoof team but so was ours.
I have mentioned this on the Jimmy Bullard thread but it probably sits more comfortably here.
Bullard started his career for Ron Billings' Club Corinthians before being signed by Gravesend. It was there that West Ham saw him and paid £30,000 but, despite being there over two years, he never started a single game. As, possibly, with Dickson, his next club was Peterborough.
After just 62 appearances for The Posh he signed for Wigan for £275,000 before eventually moving to Fulham for £2.5 million.
The similarity is not just about the fact that both players were signed from non league for a similar amout and were/will be released without a start but also in so far as the Management at both West Ham and CAFC saw/have seen obvious deficiencies in their game. What, clearly they didn't recognise with Bullard is what else he "brings to the table" and whereas this may not be quite so quantifiable in his case, it is in Dickson's - that is the ability to score goals.
Or the fact that Bullard and Dickson weren't ready for the level their sides are at present. Do you give a player a 62 game run in the side before seeing if they've improved enough to actually be able to play at that level?
You could hold onto a player indefinately to see if they'll improve and pay their wages, or you cut your losses allow the player to drop down a level for every Micheal Turner there is a Stacey Long...
"What, clearly they didn't recognise with Bullard is what else he "brings to the table" and whereas this may not be quite so quantifiable in his case, it is in Dickson's - that is the ability to score goals."
I don't think anyone is saying give him 62 games. However we paid £2,000,000 for a player (Varney) on the basis of goals scored in a lower Division (the same Dickson scored 11 in 11 starts last season) and gave him almost 50 games to prove he can score one in four in the Championship. On that basis alone, there does seem to be a question mark as to how you justify not giving the lad one single start.
Its been said but if either Pardew or Parky thought that Dickson was gonna fire the goals to save their jobs then he would have played. They didn`t think he was good enough. End of. I just know that once he leaves we will all go on and on about how he might have been our Wright for months and months.
Good point but there must be a reason. It makes no sense otherwise does it ? For what its worth I would have liked to see him given a shot but I`m just a fan. Pards and Parky et al see him every day. Remember that the board have accepted the request so they must also consider him not worth persevereing with !
Parky's saying on the OS, that if Dicko comes off the bench and scores a couple, it will only help himfind another club.What??? I would have thought how few goals we score that it would have heped us,let alone re think about selling him. I was hoping Parky wasn't going to be like Pardew.
Shame Dickson looks like going because, but for the fact that our strikers have been so prolific this season (9 goals in open play from 24 matches), he might have been given a chance by now.
Comments
;o)
I think most of them would score a fair few goals, even Varney.
Difference is if they were there, they would be getting fit. Dickson's there to try and break into the first team. Not that it's an excuse for them not scoring.
If that was the case, Varney should have been subbed after just 20 minutes for his last 10 matches for us.
Did Pardew really say Dickson had a chance to show what he can do?
;o)
LOL!!!
Bullard started his career for Ron Billings' Club Corinthians before being signed by Gravesend. It was there that West Ham saw him and paid £30,000 but, despite being there over two years, he never started a single game. As, possibly, with Dickson, his next club was Peterborough.
After just 62 appearances for The Posh he signed for Wigan for £275,000 before eventually moving to Fulham for £2.5 million.
The similarity is not just about the fact that both players were signed from non league for a similar amout and were/will be released without a start but also in so far as the Management at both West Ham and CAFC saw/have seen obvious deficiencies in their game. What, clearly they didn't recognise with Bullard is what else he "brings to the table" and whereas this may not be quite so quantifiable in his case, it is in Dickson's - that is the ability to score goals.
You could hold onto a player indefinately to see if they'll improve and pay their wages, or you cut your losses allow the player to drop down a level for every Micheal Turner there is a Stacey Long...
"What, clearly they didn't recognise with Bullard is what else he "brings to the table" and whereas this may not be quite so quantifiable in his case, it is in Dickson's - that is the ability to score goals."
I don't think anyone is saying give him 62 games. However we paid £2,000,000 for a player (Varney) on the basis of goals scored in a lower Division (the same Dickson scored 11 in 11 starts last season) and gave him almost 50 games to prove he can score one in four in the Championship. On that basis alone, there does seem to be a question mark as to how you justify not giving the lad one single start.
Only if his name's Luke Varney