[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]He only offers something different if we play in a different way.
Is it time for a complete overhaul of our system? Not yet - but in time it may be.
I think you're missing the point - by that time Dicko will have been persuaded by Lennie that he has a genuine future at Rovers and that he should sign for them in January. And Parky has already said that he doesn't see Dicko featuring this season so there's hardly any incentive for him to come back to us is there?
It's not a complete overhaul and we don't need to be 4-4-2 every game in the same way as we don't need to be 4-5-1 all the time. At Leeds, for example, we probably do need to be 4-5-1 but at home against lowly opposition who have 10 behind the ball we need to stretch them and one up top (who doesn't have the pace to get in behind) isn't the solution.
All Dickson can do is play games, score goals and be part of a winning team.
That's what he's doing at Bristol Rovers. How anybody else can judge him on anything else is beyond me. He's not playing for us, he's playing for them.
He's scored 3 goals in 3 games and had one assist.
What more can he do? If he isn't going to get an opportunity with Charlton, I think it's a BIG mistake - however, sell him and let's move on.
However, at 2-0 down after 45 minutes last night - our game was crying out for an opportunist striker to be available to us and McLeod is not that player ...
Dicko does not fit in the current system and was told as much. I'm assuming here, but I reckon he was told - you are not going to play in this system at the moment but you need to get your head down and grab the opportunity when you get it. He preferred to go out on loan for first team football - got no problem with that at all.
On the flip side, McLeod seems to have had an attitude transformation and has really knuckled down to fight for his career at Charlton and good luck to him - we just need to translate it into goals.
We need to remember that Izzy has a decent goalscoring record at the lower levels as well.
[cite]Posted By: supaclive[/cite]However, at 2-0 down after 45 minutes last night - our game was crying out for an opportunist striker to be available to us and McLeod is not that player ...
And I remember Dicko coming on a few times last season and doing not a lot.
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]No I think you're missing the point. ;-)
Dicko does not fit in the current system and was told as much. I'm assuming here, but I reckon he was told - you are not going to play in this system at the moment but you need to get your head down and grab the opportunity when you get it. He preferred to go out on loan for first team football - got no problem with that at all.
On the flip side, McLeod seems to have had an attitude transformation and has really knuckled down to fight for his career at Charlton and good luck to him - we just need to translate it into goals.
We need to remember that Izzy has a decent goalscoring record at the lower levels as well.
Point taken but those goals were, I do believe, in League 2 whereas Dicko's 10 from 14 were all in this League.
[quote][cite]Posted By: supaclive[/cite]However, at 2-0 down after 45 minutes last night - our game was crying out for an opportunist striker to be available to us and McLeod is not that player ...[/quote]
And I remember Dicko coming on a few times last season and doing not a lot.[/quote]
Last season? In a rock bottom championship side that won hardly any games all year? Or should we compare the league we are in, the opposition we are playing and his stats in this division, as Addick mentions above?
Loaning a proven goal scorer (which Dickson is at this level) to your nearest rivals for promotion is madness no matter what spin Parky is trying to put on it. I thought the board were starting to do better, but sanctioning this one could really come back to haunt us. I thought loaning Sir Chris to the Hammers to help them win promotion was stupid enough, but this is right up there.
[cite]Posted By: queensland_addick[/cite]Loaning a proven goal scorer (which Dickson is at this level) to your nearest rivals for promotion is madness no matter what spin Parky is trying to put on it. I thought the board were starting to do better, but sanctioning this one could really come back to haunt us.
I thought loaning Sir Chris to the Hammers to help them win promotion was stupid enough, but this is right up there.
[cite]Posted By: queensland_addick[/cite]Loaning a proven goal scorer (which Dickson is at this level) to your nearest rivals for promotion is madness no matter what spin Parky is trying to put on it. I thought the board were starting to do better, but sanctioning this one could really come back to haunt us.
I thought loaning Sir Chris to the Hammers to help them win promotion was stupid enough, but this is right up there.
I can understand that you want to loan him to a team that do have the money to eventually buy him if they want BUT not when they are a promotion rival. Do the Board really believe that if they had loaned him to The Gills and he'd banged in goals for them that Bristol Rovers and others wouldn't be watching and then try to buy him in January. Now, I'm not a Dicko fan but this does smack as foolishness.
[cite]Posted By: CHG[/cite]Dickson scored again, back to being the best player in the world of all time ever.
Absolutely - 10 in 14 starts in this Division is all the proof one needs but, there again, he "doesn't do enough for the Team" as evidenced by the fact that Rovers didn't win all three of those games. It was all his fault.
[cite]Posted By: CHG[/cite]Dickson scored again, back to being the best player in the world of all time ever.
Absolutely - 10 in 14 starts in this Division is all the proof one needs but, there again, he "doesn't do enough for the Team" as evidenced by the fact that Rovers didn't win all three of those games. It was all his fault.
I just can't believe he isn't playing for Real Madrid.
[cite]Posted By: CHG[/cite]Dickson scored again, back to being the best player in the world of all time ever.
Absolutely - 10 in 14 starts in this Division is all the proof one needs but, there again, he "doesn't do enough for the Team" as evidenced by the fact that Rovers didn't win all three of those games. It was all his fault.
I just can't believe he isn't playing for Real Madrid.
And that's 10 in his last 12 starts in this Division - he was an abject failure at Crewe when he didn't find the net in his two starts there.
Real Madrid? Possibly flying a bit high there but, if he was playing for Rovers from the start of the season, I probably would have had a punt on him being top goalscorer in this Division.
On that basis alone he should be good enough to make our bench but then Parky prefers to have a 17 year old permanently warming the seat who he clearly has no intention of using.
McLeod may be working hard but his record in this league is not that impressive (for MK Dons), and we need another option up front. I have noticed a build up in posts which talk of our lack of plan B, why Tuna is constantly on bench seems that he is just there to make up numbers. Even in the dark days of the Championship, Dickson came on a few times and looked bright (Ipswich away, Palace home). He is not everyones cup of tea but 10 in 14 is better than Beckford (the only blot on this is his Crewe form, yet it was the wrong move for him at wrong time). Shelvey is going to need a rest soon otherwise come April he will be burnt out so this is the perfect opportunity for us to bring someone like Dickson into the team especially as home. It appears that Dickson's championship performances caused a mix response yet he played his best games with Kandol alongside him so it is clear that he benefits from a striker who can hold the ball up well. Therefore I think we should recall him after the 28 days and seriously consider bringing him in, he is the type of player we may need when we are facing a 4-5-1 at the valley and are struggling to break the opposition down. Burton and Dickson could form a real good partnership.
Anyone watching McLeod during the strikers' shooting practice in the warm-up last night will not have much faith in the likelihood of him scoring regularly.
Four shots on his favoured right foot all woefully off-target. Was absolutely embarrassing for a professional footballer who plays as a striker.
Now, I know it was just the warm-up but it doesn't give you any confidence in his ability to then start hitting the target when under pressure during the actual game.
In comparion Shelvey and Burton hit the target every time (Shelvey struck his ones particularly sweetly) and Racon was also good apart from one wild effort high, wide and handsome.
my view is that not only is our 451 one dimensional and therefore predictable, we don't have the personnel to back it up striker wise, therefore not to have an effective 442 alternative is a big tactical error
[cite]Posted By: Mortimerician[/cite]I'd disagree there. Shelvey sure, but as was obvious from the start a 17 year old cannot and should not be expected to play every game pretty much through to the end. I think we've got a bit of duty of care to the lad, and if we keep going the way we're going he'll go the same way as a lot of potential: so those that demand we keep playing him need to consider if it's worth trashing his long term career for.
Burton's exceeded all expectations, but if plan B is Burton and McLeod, then there's a big flaw in it. Again, there's a massive reliance on a player, this time a vet who's had a few injury problems. Despite what poor quality pundits say, football management is about seasons not your last game. People that have got stuck into the belief that we'll be OK haven't factored that an unchanging formation will get sussed by better managers/teams, and that people will get injured.
I meant Shelvey and Burton are far better all round players than Dickson. Dickson is all about using his pace and strength, getting in behind defences, maybe with a few tricks along the way. Shelvey and Burton have much more to their all round game.
Not saying we should play either every game, we shouldn't, but it's clear from watching the 3 of them why Dickson isn't ahead of Shelvey and Burton.
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]He only offers something different if we play in a different way.
Is it time for a complete overhaul of our system? Not yet - but in time it may be.
I think you're missing the point - by that time Dicko will have been persuaded by Lennie that he has a genuine future at Rovers and that he should sign for them in January. And Parky has already said that he doesn't see Dicko featuring this season so there's hardly any incentive for him to come back to us is there?
It's not a complete overhaul and we don't need to be 4-4-2 every game in the same way as we don't need to be 4-5-1 all the time. At Leeds, for example, we probably do need to be 4-5-1 but at home against lowly opposition who have 10 behind the ball we need to stretch them and one up top (who doesn't have the pace to get in behind) isn't the solution.
Blimey I thought Dickson was a Charlton player. I didn't realise he could just sign for Rovers in January without our consent :-)
NB I would expect us to recall him in 2 weeks time. Let's be honest Rovers are now too close for comfort to leave him there.
The truth of the matter isn't really how well he does for another club but how well he does for us.
Speaking for myself, he's never done much in an Addicks shirt to convince me that he's any great shakes.
All clubs have legions of players who've left them having failed to set the place on fire, only to go on and do well elsewhere....it's a funny old game.
Just one very classic example, right off the top of my head.......how must Luton Town have felt after they let Killer go.....and on the cheap as well?
Heard an interesting rumour. There's no recall clause, despite what was said at the time. Kind of makes sense: Parky said that Dickson hadn't wanted to go on those terms, at the time. Then, when the 28 days was up we were increasingly thin on the ground up front if we had the right to call back a player who has scored a few goals for a team that's close to us in the league, we choose to go scratching around for a reserve player from an doomed looking Championship side. It's not of much consequence, I suppose, but illustrates to anyone who is still debating - he's not going to be playing for us again.
Don't think there's any great need for a consiracy theory to explain why Dickson wasn't recalled:
a) the cover was needed for Burton - Dickson wouldn't really offer that because he's a different kind of player,
b) it seems pretty clear Parky and Dickson don't get on, therefore recalling him may well be a bit of a last resort
suspect the recall clause was put in there to cover us in the case of the last resort, doubt there were ever an real plans to get him back. Either way, don't think there's any reason to suspect underhand tactics on this one.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Lennie said there was a recall clause.
Henry, did Lennie say anything else about Dicko?
Not a lot.
Said he was pleasantly surprised that CAFC let him come to them, mentioned that they has money after selling Lambert, he was vaguely aware that Gills wanted him but he also said that "we (Rovers) have lots of good footballers but we needed something different" which I thought was a slightly back handed compliment.
He wouldn't say if they would buy him or for how much (understandably)
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Lennie said there was a recall clause.
Henry, did Lennie say anything else about Dicko?
Not a lot.
Said he was pleasantly surprised that CAFC let him come to them, mentioned that they has money after selling Lambert, he was vaguely aware that Gills wanted him but he also said that "we (Rovers) have lots of good footballers but we needed something different" which I thought was a slightly back handed compliment.
He wouldn't say if they would buy him or for how much (understandably)
Comments
I think you're missing the point - by that time Dicko will have been persuaded by Lennie that he has a genuine future at Rovers and that he should sign for them in January. And Parky has already said that he doesn't see Dicko featuring this season so there's hardly any incentive for him to come back to us is there?
It's not a complete overhaul and we don't need to be 4-4-2 every game in the same way as we don't need to be 4-5-1 all the time. At Leeds, for example, we probably do need to be 4-5-1 but at home against lowly opposition who have 10 behind the ball we need to stretch them and one up top (who doesn't have the pace to get in behind) isn't the solution.
That's what he's doing at Bristol Rovers. How anybody else can judge him on anything else is beyond me. He's not playing for us, he's playing for them.
He's scored 3 goals in 3 games and had one assist.
What more can he do? If he isn't going to get an opportunity with Charlton, I think it's a BIG mistake - however, sell him and let's move on.
However, at 2-0 down after 45 minutes last night - our game was crying out for an opportunist striker to be available to us and McLeod is not that player ...
Dicko does not fit in the current system and was told as much. I'm assuming here, but I reckon he was told - you are not going to play in this system at the moment but you need to get your head down and grab the opportunity when you get it. He preferred to go out on loan for first team football - got no problem with that at all.
On the flip side, McLeod seems to have had an attitude transformation and has really knuckled down to fight for his career at Charlton and good luck to him - we just need to translate it into goals.
We need to remember that Izzy has a decent goalscoring record at the lower levels as well.
And I remember Dicko coming on a few times last season and doing not a lot.
Point taken but those goals were, I do believe, in League 2 whereas Dicko's 10 from 14 were all in this League.
And I remember Dicko coming on a few times last season and doing not a lot.[/quote]
Last season? In a rock bottom championship side that won hardly any games all year? Or should we compare the league we are in, the opposition we are playing and his stats in this division, as Addick mentions above?
:-)
I thought loaning Sir Chris to the Hammers to help them win promotion was stupid enough, but this is right up there.
can't argue with that
I can understand that you want to loan him to a team that do have the money to eventually buy him if they want BUT not when they are a promotion rival. Do the Board really believe that if they had loaned him to The Gills and he'd banged in goals for them that Bristol Rovers and others wouldn't be watching and then try to buy him in January. Now, I'm not a Dicko fan but this does smack as foolishness.
Yup, just think what he could do in front of our midfield, would score a hat-trick every game ;-)
Absolutely - 10 in 14 starts in this Division is all the proof one needs but, there again, he "doesn't do enough for the Team" as evidenced by the fact that Rovers didn't win all three of those games. It was all his fault.
I just can't believe he isn't playing for Real Madrid.
And that's 10 in his last 12 starts in this Division - he was an abject failure at Crewe when he didn't find the net in his two starts there.
Real Madrid? Possibly flying a bit high there but, if he was playing for Rovers from the start of the season, I probably would have had a punt on him being top goalscorer in this Division.
On that basis alone he should be good enough to make our bench but then Parky prefers to have a 17 year old permanently warming the seat who he clearly has no intention of using.
Four shots on his favoured right foot all woefully off-target. Was absolutely embarrassing for a professional footballer who plays as a striker.
Now, I know it was just the warm-up but it doesn't give you any confidence in his ability to then start hitting the target when under pressure during the actual game.
In comparion Shelvey and Burton hit the target every time (Shelvey struck his ones particularly sweetly) and Racon was also good apart from one wild effort high, wide and handsome.
rovers had loads of fans at soton looked 3k+
Not saying we should play either every game, we shouldn't, but it's clear from watching the 3 of them why Dickson isn't ahead of Shelvey and Burton.
Blimey I thought Dickson was a Charlton player. I didn't realise he could just sign for Rovers in January without our consent :-)
NB I would expect us to recall him in 2 weeks time. Let's be honest Rovers are now too close for comfort to leave him there.
Not according to the TV, but could not be clear whether they got it wrong or it was another player
Speaking for myself, he's never done much in an Addicks shirt to convince me that he's any great shakes.
All clubs have legions of players who've left them having failed to set the place on fire, only to go on and do well elsewhere....it's a funny old game.
Just one very classic example, right off the top of my head.......how must Luton Town have felt after they let Killer go.....and on the cheap as well?
a) the cover was needed for Burton - Dickson wouldn't really offer that because he's a different kind of player,
b) it seems pretty clear Parky and Dickson don't get on, therefore recalling him may well be a bit of a last resort
suspect the recall clause was put in there to cover us in the case of the last resort, doubt there were ever an real plans to get him back. Either way, don't think there's any reason to suspect underhand tactics on this one.
Henry, did Lennie say anything else about Dicko?
Not a lot.
Said he was pleasantly surprised that CAFC let him come to them, mentioned that they has money after selling Lambert, he was vaguely aware that Gills wanted him but he also said that "we (Rovers) have lots of good footballers but we needed something different" which I thought was a slightly back handed compliment.
He wouldn't say if they would buy him or for how much (understandably)
Thanks Henry.