Yes, believe it or not by the end of October, a total of 27 players have worn the Charlton shirt this season. One hopes Randolph will become the 28th this week.
What is the record? Remember getting to the high 30s in the last two seasons but lost count after that. Did we ever break the 40 barrier?
Even in those record-breaking seasons, though, I wonder if we hit the giddy heights of 27 by the end of October?
Don't suppose we will break the record this season. But there's Randolph, Holden, Sinclair and Jack Clark who might yet swell the numbers and certain to be at least four or five more here-today-gone-tomorrow loanees, so we might yet make the mid-30s!
0
Comments
I prefer the settled squad approach, not the rotation.... unless it is cup games. I have also noted the youngsters have 'shrunk' from the first team, at least playing.
I agree he has a limited pack to deal from, more quantity than quality, but that is this league, and injuries are part of the game, and we are only in October,
Having been brave and settled on a 451 approach we seem to be trying to play 442, my prefered formation, but not with this squad, unless you are 2-0 down!.
Come on Parky pick your team, and play them......
Strip out Andy Gray, Mambo, Tuna etc and other the league cup/JPT appearences and how many are there?
Another four have made cup appearances: Small and Satvrinou as starters and Fleetwood and Mambo as subs.
That's 27. Randolph will make 28 this week and possibly Holden 29.
And there is , of course, Chris Dickson who will almost certainly not become number 30.
The point was that we are not as short of bodies as is sometimes suggested. The difficulty, of course, is finding the right 11 bodies !
My personal view is that we have got greater strength in depth than we sometimes imagine. Basey, Spring and Wagstaff have all impressed me this season, for example, and if required to play a bigger role, I don't think they would let anyone down.
That's why he wasn't used and a loanee had to play
Randolph is hopeless, even Parkinson knows that!
Only your jaundiced eye would interpret it as a "tired rant''. Please keep up and read more closely !
But as you mention it, no I don't want any more here-today-and-gone-tomorrow loanees if we can possibly help it. I'd rather see the likes of Randolph, Basey, Wagstaff and Spring in the side, because I think they are all good players and will give their all.
Spring, Wagstaff, Basey, Solly, Mambo, McLeod, Tuna etc haven't let us down, but they're not good enough to be playing regularly in the league for a team that wants promotion.
Dickson, Gray, Small and Fleetwood have all played but aren't even here any more.
Take away all those players and you're left with a starting 11 and not much else.
I can never agree we have a big enough squad, we really don't.
Was very surprised that we have used so many players so far particularly as the starting 11 has not really changed that much over the course of the season. I think why the number is so high is due to having 7 subs gives so much more opportunity for more players to get time on the pitch, as well as all the changes made in the two cup games. Would be interested to know whet that figure is for league games in terms of starts.
16 i think.
Elliot, Ikeme.
Richardson, Omozuzi, Youga, Sodje, Liera, Dailly
Bailey, Sam, Racon, Semedo, Spring
Shelvey, Burton, McLeod.
And if we do win promotion, they will not be good enough for that league!..... Thought that Wagstaff looked good enough for me, as well as Shelvey who was the key player from this time last season,and is younger than Tuna!
Not expecting the lads to start and play each game , but a run out in the JPT is not going to make you an instant ready made player in this league, and two of those players scored, albeit 'young'.
The saying goes you win nothing by playing 'kids',..... you also do not win anything by not scoring as well!
23 have made League appearances, 16 starters and 7 appearing as subs: Bailey, Basey,Burton, Dailly, Elliot, Gray, Ikeme, Llera, McKenzie, McLeod, Mooney, Omozusi, Racon, Richardson, Sam, Semedo, Shelvey, Sodje, Solly, Spring,Tuna, Wagstaff, Youga
Have to disagree slightly with Scoham when he says:
''Spring, Wagstaff, Basey, Solly, Mambo, McLeod, Tuna etc haven't let us down, but they're not good enough to be playing regularly in the league for a team that wants promotion.''
I'd say Spring, Basey and McLeod are good enough already for top of division three football. The others may be in time, if given the opportunities. Would we have been any better with Randolph and Basey in our back five yesterday? Perhaps not, but one doubts the result could have been any worse.
Spring and Basey can both 'do a job', but won't add anything extra. We saw when Spring was starting he was playing quite well, but we were also missing Semedo. Neither will do much wrong, but they won't add much extra to the team.
McLeod I just don't see it. His pace and movement creates chances, but he can't finish them most of the team, he's got a poor touch, he gives away possession easily at times, he's not particularly strong or good in the air. So many poor areas of his game. If anything he'd be better with less pressure at a team in the bottom half against teams pushing up giving him space to get in behind defences. When teams have 11 men behind the ball McLeod isn't the player who's going to break them down. When we're winning and counter attacking, then yes he's useful, throw him on and use his pace to take advantage of the space when opponents get forward.
Have to ask if clubs like Leeds, Norwich and Southampton would want McLeod, Spring or Basey in their teams. They'd be back up at the very most wouldn't they? Here they're a bit more than that, they're going to have to play 10-20 league games from the start, maybe more depending on injuries and suspensions.
Basey also performed pretty well at a higher level than we are now in and I think he does add something extra. Despite his alleged lack of pace, I really like the way he gets forward when playing at full back. It was only Barnet, I know, but he was my MOM in that game.
On second thoughts, I suppose we should be careful saying ''only Barnet''. Not so long ago we would have been saying ''it's only Carlisle'' and ''it's only Colchester'' !!!
This is a ludicrous arguement when he kept virtually the same 11 for the first ten odd matches. He had to make changes in JPT and rest some players, and others are still ploughing on in league matches with niggles. He's gone out to play a settled side, and one could argue giving Mcleod a chance is part of that; as giving him a chance and him scoring is not quite fair on the 'settled side' maxim of playing those who perform.
Tuna took his goal against Barnet well, had some good moments in the game, but several poor touches and mistakes as well.
We don't know they're not good enough until they have a run no, but there's a reason they haven't been given a run and that's because Parky doesn't think they're ready yet. And from watching them I can see why, they've not done badly but that doesn't mean they're good League One players yet.