I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
That's why I said someone who could do a job for about ten games and a few subs like Parker. We would of had if the minister of shooting was actually any good
Wouldn’t be surprised if we go in for Mo Eisa now Chuks has left. Colby Bishop from Accies or Mikael Mandron from Crewe could be good options but Eisa would add some pace to the front line.
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Wouldn’t be surprised if we go in for Mo Eisa now Chuks has left. Colby Bishop from Accies or Mikael Mandron from Crewe could be good options but Eisa would add some pace to the front line.
I would be shocked if we go for Mo Eisa the transfer fee it would cost you can certainly get better.
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Josh Davison?
Wassim Aoucheria
I liked Wassim when I saw the U23's a couple of seasons ago. He also played and scored in the JPT against the O's last season .
Although his injury record is horrendous . Pre season is a great leveller and hopefully he can build fitness . I would still like another striker but I hope Wassim could be an interesting wild card option from the bench or in the Cups .
If he wants to go then fine, good luck to him, time to move on innit
Only if it's true.......
That’s worth remembering. Have a feeling though that Birmingham or another will announce Chuks next Thursday. I think he’s intent on departing. Whatever Nigel said to him obviously didn’t work.
Why "obviously"?
We don't know the state of play.
Maybe Chuks never had any intention of re-signing, maybe he wants to stay and is completing his medical as I type, maybe he's playing one club off against another to get himself the best deal, maybe he's at St Andrews holding a blue shirt.
We just don't know, it's not obvious.
People asking "can we panic now?" Sure, go ahead but won't make any difference.
Me, I want to see some signings and the sooner the better but since I can't control that not going to get uptight about it.
WIOTOS
99% of what we discuss here "won't make any difference" though...
If this transfer window were unfolding as is now under RD, everyone would be freaking out. The sole reason so many are staying hopeful is their personal liking of TS and that is all. But if you just analyze the hard facts of where we are with neither hope nor disdain, it’s not a pretty picture thus far. There is still time to fix but it’s not a good look.
Eisa would be an excellent addition at a sensible price. He had a bit of nothing season last year, but he wasn’t in the plans of the manager particularly. He has pace, is a local lad and knows where the goal is.
He isn’t one I would push the boat out for though.
If we brought in Eisa I'd either want another Striker or one of Washington / Schwartz would have to leave, as said, he's no Chuks Aneke so would leave us a bit light in the targetman role.
The first option is most unrealistic as no team needs five Strikers
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Josh Davison?
Davison looked slow, over weight and poor for FGR, so I don't fancy his chances at Charlton.
If this transfer window were unfolding as is now under RD, everyone would be freaking out. The sole reason so many are staying hopeful is their personal liking of TS and that is all. But if you just analyze the hard facts of where we are with neither hope nor disdain, it’s not a pretty picture thus far. There is still time to fix but it’s not a good look.
If we were freaking out under RD it would be based on previous windows. I don’t get “not a pretty picture at all. I have every confidence we’ll get the players we need. Would have been good to get them early but not doing so is not a problem of Sandgaards doing.
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Josh Davison?
Davison looked slow, over weight and poor for FGR, so I don't fancy his chances at Charlton.
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Josh Davison?
Davison looked slow, over weight and poor for FGR, so I don't fancy his chances at Charlton.
I’m not convinced by him either, though he might he have a good career by working his way back up like Pigott. I’ll be surprised if he makes an impact in our first team this season. I’d be very happy to be proved wrong of course.
I think that we need a sense of perspective. Given all that TS has done and how he has gone about it, we have no reason to think other than that we are in very good hands. On the basis of this, I think that he deserves our trust; seeing people acting like needy children on social media is just embarrassing. It's time for Charlton fans to show some class and some backbone.
We aren't going to get every player that we want, there are lots of other ambitious clubs in football. It's too early to start panicking.
As far as transfer activity goes, I'm reminded of the old saying: 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'.
Hold steady, Addicks.
Slight understatement there,...how about be nice if we could one or two.
Tbf Gomes is the first one that has gone elsewhere that we were actually interested in, 99 times out of 100 a player will sign for the team in the higher division. Same with Aneke.
Still confident our squad will be right up there come August.
PS the player that is close to signing is a good one.
Tbf Gomes is the first one that has gone elsewhere that we were actually interested in, 99 times out of 100 a player will sign for the team in the higher division. Same with Aneke.
Still confident our squad will be right up there come August.
PS the player that is close to signing is a good one.
We could sign Messi and some would moan he’s too short and we still need 10 more players!
Tbf Gomes is the first one that has gone elsewhere that we were actually interested in, 99 times out of 100 a player will sign for the team in the higher division. Same with Aneke.
Still confident our squad will be right up there come August.
PS the player that is close to signing is a good one.
If this transfer window were unfolding as is now under RD, everyone would be freaking out. The sole reason so many are staying hopeful is their personal liking of TS and that is all. But if you just analyze the hard facts of where we are with neither hope nor disdain, it’s not a pretty picture thus far. There is still time to fix but it’s not a good look.
If we were freaking out under RD it would be based on previous windows. I don’t get “not a pretty picture at all. I have every confidence we’ll get the players we need. Would have been good to get them early but not doing so is not a problem of Sandgaards doing.
Well, I hear ya, but when I look at this graphic I do not consider it a "pretty picture." At least "now" which was my point. I am not commenting on "confidence" in getting across the line, as that is just hoping. Yes, it could change and hopefully will, but when I look at where we are right now, it's hard to look at this graphic NOW and see it as anything other than decidedly "not pretty." If others think otherwise, good for them. But I do not.Fortunately the season does not start next week.
Sadly I think some will try to see the bright side whatever. I am waiting for the bright side to come as I believe we were promised it. I accept it can come and am waiting for that, but we haven't had anything to cheer about so far.
We have lost a player that makes a difference at this level so if we have a bit of good replacing to do just to be where we were last season!
I'm waiting for the evidence to buy a season ticket as I am fed up of the mediocrity and false promises we always get. I am still expecting positive action so not in panic mode but Chuks was a big marker for me and it is an understatement I am disappointed he is leaving. Cue people being ok about it because of his lack of minutes last season. To be honest, I have no interest in these views as I believe they lack football knowledge. We have to be better than last season and it isn't easy to replace what Chuks gives us, but we shall see. I will worry after the Euros if there is something to worry about!
I mentioned further up that I’m disappointed we couldn’t retain Aneke, 15 goals will be very difficult to replace. But being of the opinion that him leaving isn’t a big deal doesn’t mean that person “lacks football knowledge” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). There is a legitimate argument that retaining Aneke actually costs you two salaries from the budget - one for Chuks and one for the guy that needs to play the 75% of minutes that he can’t.
That's a false argument though. If you have 4 strikers in the squad you are very rarely going to start more than 2 of them. Unless one doubles up as a winger or something else. You are always, where possible, going to have a striker on the bench.
With out looking up the stats I would guess out of the 46 league games, lets call 50 including senior cups, that 100 starts if you play 2 up front. We won't play 2 in every game so let's say it's 80 starts. In a normal season, baring a serious injury, you expect someone like Stockley to be able to start 40 games out of the 50. Someone like Washington would probably be able to play all the games you want 2 up front.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to have another striker, that doesn't have to be top notch, just do a job for about 10 games and a few off the bench, like Parker did. Unfortunately Schwartz and Smyth weren't deemed capable of doing that.
Last season Chuks ability, or lack of, to play 90 minutes wasn't the problem. The fact at times, he was by far, our best striker was.
Stockley is suspended. Washington is injured and you have a senior player who you can’t start and know finish the game because he’s only useful off the bench due to whatever reason. I agree with se9 on this one.
But I specifically said you have a 4th striker for exactly that reason. Else Stockley is suspended and Washington is injured and your starting with Schwartz up front on his own and no sub on the bench if you only have 3, who ever they are.
We won't have 3 strikers that play more minutes next season than Chuks did last season.
Having a fourth striker of any quality is quite a rarity in league one clubs.
The problem being we don't have a fourth striker AT ALL presently. Stockley and Washington are proven at this level, Schwartz not so much. Beyond that it's hoping a youth product really steps up.
Again I'm sure that business IS being done but we can't judge how well that signing replaces Aneke until it gets made.
Josh Davison?
Davison looked slow, over weight and poor for FGR, so I don't fancy his chances at Charlton.
Will spend his career in non-league, no where near good enough for L1.
Comments
Definitely need better.
First choice, no yet
Although his injury record is horrendous . Pre season is a great leveller and hopefully he can build fitness . I would still like another striker but I hope Wassim could be an interesting wild card option from the bench or in the Cups .
The first option is most unrealistic as no team needs five Strikers
Oops sorry it's 66 days.
Still confident our squad will be right up there come August.
PS the player that is close to signing is a good one.
Well, I hear ya, but when I look at this graphic I do not consider it a "pretty picture." At least "now" which was my point. I am not commenting on "confidence" in getting across the line, as that is just hoping. Yes, it could change and hopefully will, but when I look at where we are right now, it's hard to look at this graphic NOW and see it as anything other than decidedly "not pretty." If others think otherwise, good for them. But I do not.Fortunately the season does not start next week.
We have lost a player that makes a difference at this level so if we have a bit of good replacing to do just to be where we were last season!