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

Chuks Aneke - speculation re 2023/24 season (p60)

145791069

Comments

  • Options
    Would rather pay the 500k for Stockton
  • Options
    I'd be happy with this but we can't assume he will bag a goal a (half) game like last time.

    He had a good relationship with Millar. Once again another player fans thought was rubbish but appreciate him now as the alternatives aren't great!
  • Options
    Loved watching him play but concerned with his fitness. Yeah he scores but a professional footballer not being able to last 90 minutes? Why are we signing another sick note?
    He was either top or close to being top goal scorer in L1 last season, based on minutes played. 
  • Options
    Make you wonder what Gallen and Co. have been doing if Chuks and Defoe are the answer....no L2 strikers worth taking a punt on or other championship strikers not getting minutes ? 
  • Options
    edited January 2022
    Good player at this level, but we've gone about this on the most Charlton way possible.

    Katrien Miere levels of business nous to wait half the season to replace a striker you desperately need, by signing the same striker back. If the budget was there, then wtf have we been doing with Davison as back up?
  • Options
    Belv said:
    £300k for a player that left for nothing only 5 months ago.

    What a fantastic piece of business.
    Beggars can’t be choosers as they say. Who would you rather starts up front tomorrow- Chuks or Davison?

    But can he start? And on a regular basis? He's started 13 and come on as sub 62 times in the116 League games that were played when he was with us and at Birmingham
  • Options
    If the 5 subs rule becomes permanent we will see more "45 minute" payers in the game as managers develop tactics around making three changes soon after half-time. Chucks cameos may become quite normal.
    Still find it hard to believe an athlete in a sport where the game lasts 90 minutes is permanently unable to play 90 minutes. 
    Yeah but like, I feel this way about Jason Pearce and his inability to dribble a football, it's pretty key to the game. He's just good at other stuff.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Good to get Chuk’s back….£300 k for a proven goal scorer in L1 seems a bargain considering Kirk cost £500 K.  A frontline of Washington,Stockley, Aneke and Barstow is not too shabby
  • Options
    SDAddick said:
    If the 5 subs rule becomes permanent we will see more "45 minute" payers in the game as managers develop tactics around making three changes soon after half-time. Chucks cameos may become quite normal.
    Still find it hard to believe an athlete in a sport where the game lasts 90 minutes is permanently unable to play 90 minutes. 
    Yeah but like, I feel this way about Jason Pearce and his inability to dribble a football, it's pretty key to the game. He's just good at other stuff.
    so chucks being good at sitting on the bench is equally as important as Pearce's qualities (other than dribbling)  on the pitch?
  • Options
    If he comes in a rekickstarts our season and gives us a foundation for our striking options next season then £300k will look like a great investment.
  • Options
    Swisdom said:
    The return of Chuks makes me think there is more to Stockley's hip injury than first we thought
    :-( hope you are wrong mate, Stockley is huge for us
    I'm led to believe that deal has been going on some time, certainly before Stockley got injured so its not a "panic buy" due to bad news on Stockley.  
  • Options
    Swisdom said:
    The return of Chuks makes me think there is more to Stockley's hip injury than first we thought
    :-( hope you are wrong mate, Stockley is huge for us
    I'm led to believe that deal has been going on some time, certainly before Stockley got injured so its not a "panic buy" due to bad news on Stockley.  
    Inside Golfie knowledge!
  • Options
    I'm happy with this, I don't care if he's only on for 10 minutes a game, there's been enough games this season where we needed someone prepared to have a go at the goal and I know that Chuks is someone who will do that. Would we have lost to Crewe if we'd brought Chuks on for the last 20 minutes? 
  • Options
    edited January 2022
    Belv said:
    £300k for a player that left for nothing only 5 months ago.

    What a fantastic piece of business.
    Beggars can’t be choosers as they say. Who would you rather starts up front tomorrow- Chuks or Davison?

    But can he start? And on a regular basis? He's started 13 and come on as sub 62 times in the116 League games that were played when he was with us and at Birmingham
    And had one of the best minutes played v goals ratio in the country, not just the league

    he was also our top scorer last season. 

    He bullied defenders and created chances out of nothing.

    he kept the ball which meant we weren't defending!!

    i don't see how this is a bad signing. Next year we are allowed 5 subs again? What a player to bring on and run at and bully tired defences!

    Charlton fans......we desperately need a proven league 1 goal scorer but not that proven league 1 goal scorer!!!!   
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    I don't see anyone acting like we released him, I see quite a few comments wondering why we didn't try and tie him down long before Brum came sniffing. 

    Like how it points out in this article back in Feb, his importance and effectiveness, and, how Bowyer wanted to tie him down then.

    https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/chuks-aneke-has-unique-abilities-its-vital-that-charlton-athletic-secure-former-arsenal-and-mk-striker-on-a-new-contract/

    Like how we seem to be dragging our heels over Washington and Purringtons contracts this Jan, despite Jacko apparently wanting guarantees they'll get sorted while his own contract talks were on going.

    Baffling how people don't understand this really 🤷🏻‍♂️
  • Options
    Belv said:
    £300k for a player that left for nothing only 5 months ago.

    What a fantastic piece of business.
    I've been out this morning and just seen this and nothing else.

    I suspect I'm going to get whoosed here but are we really paying £300k for someone who left on a free transfer 7 months ago?


    Jeez, he didn't leave on a free transfer.
    He was out of contract.
  • Options
    I don't see anyone acting like we released him, I see quite a few comments wondering why we didn't try and tie him down long before Brum came sniffing. 

    Like how it points out in this article back in Feb, his importance and effectiveness, and, how Bowyer wanted to tie him down then.

    https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/chuks-aneke-has-unique-abilities-its-vital-that-charlton-athletic-secure-former-arsenal-and-mk-striker-on-a-new-contract/

    Like how we seem to be dragging our heels over Washington and Purringtons contracts this Jan, despite Jacko apparently wanting guarantees they'll get sorted while his own contract talks were on going.

    Baffling how people don't understand this really 🤷🏻‍♂️
    Even more baffling that we keep doing it tbh. 
  • Options
    Considering we don't know the full extent/time frame of Stockleys hip injury this is a good move!
  • Options
    so we were not willing to push the boat out to keep him in the summer but willing to spend 300k fee now to get him back plus probably increase his wages. Bizarre. Why not have just offered him more in the summer to stay and at least we would have had him the last six months or so and who knows we may have been in for a shot at promotion with some vital goals scored. Shot our selves in the foot. And Birmingham must be laughing their heads off.

    Plus I'm not convinced because if he can only play 30/45 minutes as his previous time with us, and his time at Brum, would suggest then we still havn't got a Stockley replacement. However, welcome back Chuks and better option than Defoe.
    I'd be grateful if you'd let us all know what we offered Chuks and what Brum offered Chuks no doubt including a signing on fee, then we can judge as well as you  :)
  • Options
    They must think we were born yesterday. We don't take on any old player and just hope for the best you know - 

      

    ......would you consider £575k for both?
  • Options

    As others have suggested, he'll do a job but only for 30 minutes so if Stockley or Washington are out, who plays the other 60 mins from the start?


    Davison for the first 20 mins....Burstow for the next 50 mins.....Chuks for the final 20 mins (plus stoppage time....). Job done.
  • Options
    Belv said:
    £300k for a player that left for nothing only 5 months ago.

    What a fantastic piece of business.
    I've been out this morning and just seen this and nothing else.

    I suspect I'm going to get whoosed here but are we really paying £300k for someone who left on a free transfer 7 months ago?


    Jeez, he didn't leave on a free transfer.
    He was out of contract.
    Fair enough. I just used the wrong term as I know his contract was up and he was free to go elsewhere.

    But I'm never going to agree with you that it is good business to let someone walk out the door and 7 months later, buy him back for £300k (if that is the true figure).

  • Options
    Happy - even if he only plays 50% of the time he’ll still be a big threat. 
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!