Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Kaheim Dixon - on a season long loan to Crawley (p25)
Comments
-
I would say so.. But if Jones picks them is another matterHenry Irving said:Enslin scored a hat trick v QPR U21s and did well v Bromley.
At least as worthy of a first team spot as Dixon.0 -
DubaiCAFC said:
I would say so.. But if Jones picks them is another matterHenry Irving said:Enslin scored a hat trick v QPR U21s and did well v Bromley.
At least as worthy of a first team spot as Dixon.
Would have thought Tuesday night against Orient would be the ideal time to start both of them.
That means either off the bench for injury time or not involved in NJ land.0 -
This is sort of the problem though, Jones does actually have the facilities and players to at least attempt more expansive and ambitious football (maybe successfully, maybe not but he could TRY it.)Henry Irving said:Enslin scored a hat trick v QPR U21s and did well v Bromley.
At least as worthy of a first team spot as Dixon.
He remains absolutely welded to his insufferable miserable style out of pride alone.3 -
If there's a power struggle between Jones and Scott, and then Andy Scott's player (Dixon) comes in to rescue Jones' struggling team, Nathan will be aware of the resulting optics.
Hopefully he chooses to put results first.1 -
Jones on record as saying that he doesn’t feel Dixon is physically up to the rigours of league one football. This is the kid Nathan that is a current international who seems to do ok playing against men at international level. I’ll accept that he might well need to beef up but denying him ten minutes here and there is to me now starting to look spiteful and disingenuous. Disagree with Henry on this one. Dixon as a current international has a greater claim to a few minutes to show what he can do than Enslin who incidentally I also think should be considered for some game time. Mute point really as Jones is just too stubborn to think outside the box.11
-
.0
-
ShootersHillGuru said:Jones on record as saying that he doesn’t feel Dixon is physically up to the rigours of league one football. This is the kid Nathan that is a current international who seems to do ok playing against men at international level. I’ll accept that he might well need to beef up but denying him ten minutes here and there is to me now starting to look spiteful and disingenuous. Disagree with Henry on this one. Dixon as a current international has a greater claim to a few minutes to show what he can do than Enslin who incidentally I also think should be considered for some game time. Mute point really as Jones is just too stubborn to think outside the box.
Earlier this season you said expectations on Dixon should be managed as he was young and inexperienced or something to that effect.
Now you say his international pedigree shows he should be given a go in our first team and should be above Enslin who has been in the UK academy system for at least 7 years if not more and is evidence that N Jones is wrong and stubborn.
So let's look at Dixon's international pedigree...
- 11 appearances for Jamaica.
- Total 208 minutes (so a little over 2 full matches worth of minutes).
- Of that 128 minutes have been v teams ranked 75th in the world or worse (in fact almost 1/3 of his minutes were v a team ranked lower than Montserrat). Cabo Verde, Iraq and Burkina Fasu are all higher ranked than 75th. I would imagine our u21s would beat most, if not all of these teams and play tougher games in the London cup where they play against men.
- Dixon has played a total of 33 minutes of international football against teams ranked higher than Scotland (who are 45th).
That is not to criticise his international career, he is young and at the start of his journey. He may go on to great things and I hope he does. But simply repeating he is an international so should be in our squad is overly simplistic.
But then 2 weeks ago you kept saying that we should keep Jones irrespective of results and what happens, as the most important thing was stability.
10 -
AC, good initials. Have you seen him play? In his short cameo, would have had an assist for Leaburn had Miles been sharper. OK he is lightweight but just as likely to draw a foul as get barged off the ball. His closing down is scary for defenders who won't have experienced that level of pace.
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of his international opponents vs our U21s, but he has 2 in 11 as a winger, mainly off the bench at 19.
Fuck it, lets play Allan Campbell wide right, he has Prem experience.2 -
He is hardly a NJ sort of player, ie. Shite!3
-
Gisappointed said:AC, good initials. Have you seen him play? In his short cameo, would have had an assist for Leaburn had Miles been sharper. OK he is lightweight but just as likely to draw a foul as get barged off the ball. His closing down is scary for defenders who won't have experienced that level of pace.
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of his international opponents vs our U21s, but he has 2 in 11 as a winger, mainly off the bench at 19.
Fuck it, lets play Allan Campbell wide right, he has Prem experience.
My comment is not whether he is good enough, it is that using the "he's an international, so Jones is wrong and rubbish" argument is mighty simplistic. I saw his 10 minute cameo for the first team. He was quick and did a skill. It's not enough to cast any judgement of him.
Those 2 international goals. V Dominica, ranked 183 (12 places below the part time postmen of Andorra) and V Trinidad and Tobago, ranked 102,.who are just one place behind the football powerhouse of Palestine.
Again, no criticism of Dixon, he may be incredible and maybe Jones is wrong but those that have posted who watch the youth have not been demanding his inclusion that I have seen and have said he is very raw.2 - Sponsored links:
-
Don’t think Scott can take much of the credit for Kaheim. Fairly certain he was brought to our attention by the Jamaican FA owing to our relationships in the area and the fact we had done a good job for them with Karoy.Chunes said:If there's a power struggle between Jones and Scott, and then Andy Scott's player (Dixon) comes in to rescue Jones' struggling team, Nathan will be aware of the resulting optics.
Hopefully he chooses to put results first.4 -
I think the point regarding Dixon has moved on. Certainly manage him with game time but freezing him out completely despite stellar performances for the under 21’s is now looking like spite. How long has he been at the club ? He’s a young man but he’s come here from Jamaica not Mars. If he’s settled enough to get game time and star for our u-21’s then I don’t think it outrageous to give him a bench place and a few minutes here and there. As for Nathan Jones. I’ve changed my mind based on what I’m seeing and on the results. We can’t keep changing managers and just a few weeks ago I was all for keeping hold of him but I think it’s now clear to me certainly that he’s not the answer. He’s stubborn and his tactics are shite. Once you reach that conclusion what’s the point of retaining him. I still think he’ll lead us into next season btw.Athletico Charlton said:ShootersHillGuru said:Jones on record as saying that he doesn’t feel Dixon is physically up to the rigours of league one football. This is the kid Nathan that is a current international who seems to do ok playing against men at international level. I’ll accept that he might well need to beef up but denying him ten minutes here and there is to me now starting to look spiteful and disingenuous. Disagree with Henry on this one. Dixon as a current international has a greater claim to a few minutes to show what he can do than Enslin who incidentally I also think should be considered for some game time. Mute point really as Jones is just too stubborn to think outside the box.
Earlier this season you said expectations on Dixon should be managed as he was young and inexperienced or something to that effect.
Now you say his international pedigree shows he should be given a go in our first team and should be above Enslin who has been in the UK academy system for at least 7 years if not more and is evidence that N Jones is wrong and stubborn.
So let's look at Dixon's international pedigree...
- 11 appearances for Jamaica.
- Total 208 minutes (so a little over 2 full matches worth of minutes).
- Of that 128 minutes have been v teams ranked 75th in the world or worse (in fact almost 1/3 of his minutes were v a team ranked lower than Montserrat). Cabo Verde, Iraq and Burkina Fasu are all higher ranked than 75th. I would imagine our u21s would beat most, if not all of these teams and play tougher games in the London cup where they play against men.
- Dixon has played a total of 33 minutes of international football against teams ranked higher than Scotland (who are 45th).
That is not to criticise his international career, he is young and at the start of his journey. He may go on to great things and I hope he does. But simply repeating he is an international so should be in our squad is overly simplistic.
But then 2 weeks ago you kept saying that we should keep Jones irrespective of results and what happens, as the most important thing was stability.2 -
ShootersHillGuru said:
I think the point regarding Dixon has moved on. Certainly manage him with game time but freezing him out completely despite stellar performances for the under 21’s is now looking like spite. How long has he been at the club ? He’s a young man but he’s come here from Jamaica not Mars. If he’s settled enough to get game time and star for our u-21’s then I don’t think it outrageous to give him a bench place and a few minutes here and there. As for Nathan Jones. I’ve changed my mind based on what I’m seeing and on the results. We can’t keep changing managers and just a few weeks ago I was all for keeping hold of him but I think it’s now clear to me certainly that he’s not the answer. He’s stubborn and his tactics are shite. Once you reach that conclusion what’s the point of retaining him. I still think he’ll lead us into next season btw.Athletico Charlton said:ShootersHillGuru said:Jones on record as saying that he doesn’t feel Dixon is physically up to the rigours of league one football. This is the kid Nathan that is a current international who seems to do ok playing against men at international level. I’ll accept that he might well need to beef up but denying him ten minutes here and there is to me now starting to look spiteful and disingenuous. Disagree with Henry on this one. Dixon as a current international has a greater claim to a few minutes to show what he can do than Enslin who incidentally I also think should be considered for some game time. Mute point really as Jones is just too stubborn to think outside the box.
Earlier this season you said expectations on Dixon should be managed as he was young and inexperienced or something to that effect.
Now you say his international pedigree shows he should be given a go in our first team and should be above Enslin who has been in the UK academy system for at least 7 years if not more and is evidence that N Jones is wrong and stubborn.
So let's look at Dixon's international pedigree...
- 11 appearances for Jamaica.
- Total 208 minutes (so a little over 2 full matches worth of minutes).
- Of that 128 minutes have been v teams ranked 75th in the world or worse (in fact almost 1/3 of his minutes were v a team ranked lower than Montserrat). Cabo Verde, Iraq and Burkina Fasu are all higher ranked than 75th. I would imagine our u21s would beat most, if not all of these teams and play tougher games in the London cup where they play against men.
- Dixon has played a total of 33 minutes of international football against teams ranked higher than Scotland (who are 45th).
That is not to criticise his international career, he is young and at the start of his journey. He may go on to great things and I hope he does. But simply repeating he is an international so should be in our squad is overly simplistic.
But then 2 weeks ago you kept saying that we should keep Jones irrespective of results and what happens, as the most important thing was stability.
The debate has moved on in 3-4 months due to some goals at U21 level?
If we are talking stellar U21 performances now (and have flip flopped away from the International ones everything seemed to be based around just a few hours ago), then what about Casey and M'Bick? Appreciate both injured right now but Casey must have 90+ goals in the last 2 seasons yet has played less first team minutes than Dixon.
Not seen anywhere near as many people talking about him being in the first team more.
Fact is, Casey and M'Bick almost certainly are not ready and maybe Dixon too. I very much doubt NJ is being spiteful towards him. He may not value flair enough, that's another matter.3 -
He's not the Messiah, he's just a very naughty lovely boy!
3 -
Mbick has impressed for the 1st team both times he has played. He is pacy and strong. Casey hasnt the physicality to make an impression at this time.
Dixon's pace should afford him more game time.
Lets assess our midfielders;-
Coventry, Taylor, Docherty, Berry, A Campbell, REG and other non-scorers.0 -
REG as in the defender REG?Gisappointed said:Mbick has impressed for the 1st team both times he has played. He is pacy and strong. Casey hasnt the physicality to make an impression at this time.
Dixon's pace should afford him more game time.
Lets assess our midfielders;-
Coventry, Taylor, Docherty, Berry, A Campbell, REG and other non-scorers.4 -
Hope Dixon gets at least a 3 minute run out on Tuesday night.0
-
AMB's goal scoring is also poorTodds_right_hook said:
REG as in the defender REG?Gisappointed said:Mbick has impressed for the 1st team both times he has played. He is pacy and strong. Casey hasnt the physicality to make an impression at this time.
Dixon's pace should afford him more game time.
Lets assess our midfielders;-
Coventry, Taylor, Docherty, Berry, A Campbell, REG and other non-scorers.
0 -
That would be the REG that has played wingback the last few games and was CDM earlier in the season.Todds_right_hook said:
REG as in the defender REG?Gisappointed said:Mbick has impressed for the 1st team both times he has played. He is pacy and strong. Casey hasnt the physicality to make an impression at this time.
Dixon's pace should afford him more game time.
Lets assess our midfielders;-
Coventry, Taylor, Docherty, Berry, A Campbell, REG and other non-scorers.1 -
He hasn't played in midfield this season, he played there twice for us last season and that's itGisappointed said:
That would be the REG that has played wingback the last few games and was CDM earlier in the season.Todds_right_hook said:
REG as in the defender REG?Gisappointed said:Mbick has impressed for the 1st team both times he has played. He is pacy and strong. Casey hasnt the physicality to make an impression at this time.
Dixon's pace should afford him more game time.
Lets assess our midfielders;-
Coventry, Taylor, Docherty, Berry, A Campbell, REG and other non-scorers.3 - Sponsored links:
-
So wing-back isn't midfield in your book? Admittedly in KJ sides it is 5-3-2 rather than 3-5-2, but that's just because he gets nosebleeds over hwl.5
-
No, a wingback (particularly in this team) is still part of the defence, hence the word "back". Ramsay, Small, Edwards, Watson etc. are in no way midfielders which is why Ramsay, Edwards & REG have all played (or been tried) as CB's tooGisappointed said:So wing-back isn't midfield in your book? Admittedly in KJ sides it is 5-3-2 rather than 3-5-2, but that's just because he gets nosebleeds over hwl.2 -
So TC playing RWB yesterday was a defender? As was Small? Wing also suggests 'forward'.0
-
No wing suggests side, the wings of a plane or bird aren't at the front. TC had a bad game at WB yesterday because he isn't a defender, a similar problem to CBT had. Small is a more attacking WB but is still defensively solid and would be more comfortable at LB than LWGisappointed said:So TC playing RWB yesterday was a defender? As was Small? Wing also suggests 'forward'.3 -
But enough of the semantics, our midfielders (or defenders) don't score goals, so why not give game time to a mercurial talent who can?1
-
DFTT1
-
A bit ironic Henry, given many of your posts are digging out genuine contributors.2
-
A social media troll is someone who posts or comments online with the intent to upset others:
- PurposeTrolls want to start arguments and stir up trouble. They may post controversial things to get a reaction, or to derail conversations.
BehaviorTrolls may:- Post under a fake name or anonymously
Say things they don't believeDiscredit, humiliate, or punish othersEncourage others to join in the attackSpread false informationUse hate speechImpactTrolls feed on the negative reactions of their targets. They can make people feel concerned and afraid.ExamplesTrolling can manifest in various forms, including:- Hurtful comments
Personal attacksCyberbullyingTrolling can take place on social media platforms, online forums, blogging sites, and newspapers comments.In the UK, trolling can be prosecuted under the Malicious Communication Act 1988 and the Communications Act 2003.If you're being trolled, you can: Resist the urge to respond, Collect evidence, Report and block the troll in-app, and Talk about it with someone you trust.0 -
Ha ha, a wing back is called a wing back because he plays on the wing and at the right or left back.Gisappointed said:So wing-back isn't midfield in your book? Admittedly in KJ sides it is 5-3-2 rather than 3-5-2, but that's just because he gets nosebleeds over hwl.
Midfield, is short for playing in the middle of the field.
It's not rocket science.0 -
Regardless, our wing backs should be chipping in with 25-30 goals a season.Covered End said:
Ha ha, a wing back is called a wing back because he plays on the wing and at the right or left back.Gisappointed said:So wing-back isn't midfield in your book? Admittedly in KJ sides it is 5-3-2 rather than 3-5-2, but that's just because he gets nosebleeds over hwl.
Midfield, is short for playing in the middle of the field.
It's not rocket science.11
