[cite]Posted By: mart77[/cite]Gillingham are trying to sign Chris Dickson for £50k, according to the Mirror this morning.
Not a chance i reckon.
well if the board agrees to let him go It will show how f..cked we are. How can you release a player when :
1. he has played well in the championship
2. we paid 50k for him when he was a nobody > surely we cannot let him go for 50k
3. other strikers who couldn't score in a brothel cost alot more and not as hungry as he is.
Has he really played well in the championship? He has looked pony to me, over the top gesticulating and shouting and remonstrating with teammates does not do it for me. In my opinion it is trying to cover up for a lack of ability.
Certainly not at £50k, especially for a player who was last season their top scorer (and bear in mind he was on loan to them for no more than 2 months as well!). Pretty audacious given that they consider him as something of a superstar there.
If he is such a cult hero and an idol then they should be prepared to shell out £200,000- £300,000. Especially after they made probably at least £900k from their trip to Wembley last may.
And that's only if we're prepared to lose a striker with some promise.
[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]didnt look too interested 2nite
exactly right. Loooked completely disinterested, at least Fleets looked as if he wanted the ball. And Dicko, what is it with the attempted flicks and tricks all the time ? They hardly ever work, stick to the simple things like controlling the ball.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]And Dicko, what is it with the attempted flicks and tricks all the time ? They hardly ever work, stick to the simple things like controlling the ball.
Because he's not that good. Fairly physical (bit of pace, strength etc), got a bit of skill but not a lot else.
"I spoke to the chairman and I said we have to get it done one way or the other," Stimson told Kent Online.
"If we don't then there are a couple of other players I would be interested in bringing to the club, possibly on loan, so I'm just waiting to hear back from the chairman now.
"We have a target and if we don't get him I think we have to move on.
"There are one or two out there who I think can do a job, but we're keeping our fingers crossed that we can bring in the one we really want."
Comments
1. he has played well in the championship
2. we paid 50k for him when he was a nobody > surely we cannot let him go for 50k
3. other strikers who couldn't score in a brothel cost alot more and not as hungry as he is.
I reckon this info... is utterfeckingbollox
Not that we have anything better.
Gills say take it or leave it ...
Mr Babage says ... Ehhhh, ehhh
In which case we should say 'LEAVE IT!'
Certainly not at £50k, especially for a player who was last season their top scorer (and bear in mind he was on loan to them for no more than 2 months as well!). Pretty audacious given that they consider him as something of a superstar there.
If he is such a cult hero and an idol then they should be prepared to shell out £200,000- £300,000. Especially after they made probably at least £900k from their trip to Wembley last may.
And that's only if we're prepared to lose a striker with some promise.
exactly right. Loooked completely disinterested, at least Fleets looked as if he wanted the ball. And Dicko, what is it with the attempted flicks and tricks all the time ? They hardly ever work, stick to the simple things like controlling the ball.
And it's a "no" by the way.
What was the question again?
Because he's not that good. Fairly physical (bit of pace, strength etc), got a bit of skill but not a lot else.