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

Addicks boss stunned by Gills striker offer

13»

Comments

  • [cite]Posted By: Scoham[/cite]Pretty sure Dickson (or McLeod) would have never picked out that pass for Wagstaff. Doubt they'd have played the backheel for Semedo either.

    Dickson might not have picked out that pass for Waggy or backheeled for Semedo, agreed.

    But he has different abilities and tricks of the trade.

    Where Burton hasn't the acceleration over that first yard, Dickson has.
    Instead of a pass to Waggy, he may have simply spun his marker and hared off 1-on-1 with the keeper, and scored himself.

    With Semedo, instead of backheeling (which actually Dicko might have done ...!) he may have just laid off back to Semedo, who then feeds a short pass between 2 square defenders, Dicko spins off his man and in space collects - and strokes the ball past the exposed keeper.

    Different abilities, horses for courses ...... or whatever.
  • edited September 2009
    [cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]I didn't mean to offend Mart, so I'm unreservedly sorry for being too forceful in my point

    Fair play fella, you didn't upset me too much ;0) For what it's worth i'd love Dicko to go on loan for a month or 3, show what he can do and come back to our thin squad later in the season when he could really play a part in our run in. I have much more of a problem with gillingham, their w@nker chairman and their fans, than i do with Dicko, and if he does leave to another club in League 1 i'm sure he could score goals which would hopefully be beneficial to our own promotion challenge. I just hope he doesn't go to the gills. LLL&BH
  • Dickson couldnt play in our system (not how PP wants the stiker to play) so he would have done a lot worse and he knows that hence his frustration , he knows he would get more of a look in in a 442 but we dont need to change how we play yet
  • [cite]Posted By: bibble[/cite]Golfie - Worse, Burton brings more to the side than Dicko. Burton is great in the 4-5-1, holds up play, brings other in. Yes Dicko might run at players but if our midfield has not had time to catch up with him and he loses the ball, the game gets stretched and comes straight back at us. Dicko will not play for us while we are playing 4-5-1. Not because he is a bad player but becasue he does not fit into 4-5-1.

    Yeah, Dickson won't be in the team in Burton's place. If Dickson plays, it'll be alongside Burton (or McKenzie?) as an out and out striker, with no one playing in Jonjo's position.
    [cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]Where Burton hasn't the acceleration over that first yard, Dickson has.
    Instead of a pass to Waggy, he may have simply spun his marker and hared off 1-on-1 with the keeper, and scored himself.

    With Semedo, instead of backheeling (which actually Dicko might have done ...!) he may have just laid off back to Semedo, who then feeds a short pass between 2 square defenders, Dicko spins off his man and in space collects - and strokes the ball past the exposed keeper.

    We'll never know. He might have tried to take the defender on, lost the ball, they counter attacked and scored ;-)
  • Dicko cant, and wont play in the system that were playing at the moment. He's not a lone front man, and would need to play alongside someone like Burton or McKenzie.Played in a 4 4 2 system he will score goals, but Parky is right to stick to his winning formula. I do wonder why though, Dicko has slipped so far down the list , considering the lack of success so far of Izzy, Fleets and co. Oh well, im sure he'll be farmed out again soon anyway, an unfortunate victim of our success at the mo.
  • I agree with what you say BR. I think Parky suggested that he missed out on pre-season games for various reasons so his fitness wasn't right up there.

    I would go with Burton the way the team is currently set up. The one thing we haven't yet faced is what do we do if we are chasing a game in the last ten or fifteen minutes and we need a spark. Maybe Dickson could be the one to be that although Parky may just go for injecting pace via Wagstaff.
  • But dickson doesn't appear to be an option for parky at the moment, he's not on the subs bench so I doubt he sees him as the man to change a game we're chasing.

    imo, i don't believe we can afford to give him a run in the team at the moment, especially in the lone striker role - with the importance of our league games this season being so high, I'd rather have a striker with the experience and knowhow of playing up front than risking inexperience in the hope that he might do well (which might never happen). His best bet is to take a loan option and see how he fairs - if he cuts it, we might have a very useful player returning to us.
  • Totally agree with that, a run in the team at the moment is not an option, but i also agree with Bing that if we are a goal down and struggling to score, he could be usefull coming off the bench for 15 or 20 minutes.
  • I'm not saying that Dicko is a bad egg but Parky does seem to be saying that he needs to show him in training that he is worth a place even on the bench. I can only judge on what I have seen and against Ipswich in the PSF he came on at the same time as Fleetwood and whereas Fleetwood went looking for the ball and tried to get involved Dickson walked around aimlessly and looked disinterested. When the ball did come his way his first instinct wasn't to hold the ball up or at least control it but to try an audacious flick. Needs to do the basics first imo and I'd be happy for him to be loaned to try and improve his game as he isn't going to get, and doesn't deserve yet, a chance with us.
  • [cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]
    Basically, yes though I'd not put it quite like that and I'm no Petrocelli. I really went on what Parky was quoted as saying in the article
    [cite]Posted By: Parky[/cite]
    “So we need to get him up to speed in terms of games and he had several other options where he could have gone out for28 daysbut he turned them all down.”
    I didn't mean to offend Mart, so I'm unreservedly sorry for being too forceful in my point, but what is said about our players sometimes - based on pure guesswork, genuinely saddens me. And a lot of what's been said to me on here (and on other threads too for some reason), does too.
    Genuinely saddened? You need to man up and grow a set, son. Unfortunately there are some people on the interweb that are nasty bullying pricks, who get pleasure from upsetting others because their lives are as empty as their heads (unless there's some cash incentive paid by the internet authority of great britain for causing upset. I notice every other thread you've contributed to has a snide jibe about you not reading things properly, when you clearly did. It is sad and it is pathetic, but to an extent you're to blame by being such a feeb. The weak will find the weak, I'm afraid. Just be grateful nobody has felt the need to go and lie to your former employer, pointlessly and without gain. Be angry rather than saddened, toe the party line, or give up coming on here
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited September 2009
    Mortimerican, it was you throwing around terms like 'ignorance' and 'idiots'.

    no one bullied mclovin or you they mearly suggested he took his own advice and read the article that clearly does mention a 3 month loan and that you were wrong when you confused a loan move with a contract of employment.

    For the sake of the board lets leave there or take it whispers.
  • I can't read or write and am a completely ignorant idiot.

    Hope this helps the debate.
  • [cite]Posted By: golfaddick[/cite]I like Dickso, he gives us something different up front.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!