Charlie Kirk (p68 - released by Barrow)

Garrymanilow said:

Chunes said:

wmcf123 said:

I just don't see where he gets in.  We do not have the players to play in a 433 and that's the only system in which he can play.  

What formation do we have the players for?

At the moment, something without full backs

Or center backs and one up top. 

2-7-1?

SoundAsa£ said:

addick1956 said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

The bloke didn't play one full game in his natural position and we are all writing him off. He went on loan to club in the division above and they are keen to sign him permanently - tells you quite a bit.

Hopefully under a new manager in a different formation we can see some of the CK from his Crewe spell.

 His natural position seems 'Wide of the mark' rather than wide left though.  

He settled so well he couldn't wait to leave...Why the hell he left the North and caused Charlton  to wate 500k only he can tell. It isn’t  going to work now no matter how much we wish otherwise. 

100% correct. 👍

Can you really blame him though?  He has no loyalty to us, signing that contract means his, very recently, widowed mum will never have to go without.

I would do exactly the same.

addick1956 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

SoundAsa£ said:

addick1956 said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

The bloke didn't play one full game in his natural position and we are all writing him off. He went on loan to club in the division above and they are keen to sign him permanently - tells you quite a bit.

Hopefully under a new manager in a different formation we can see some of the CK from his Crewe spell.

 His natural position seems 'Wide of the mark' rather than wide left though.  

He settled so well he couldn't wait to leave...Why the hell he left the North and caused Charlton  to wate 500k only he can tell. It isn’t  going to work now no matter how much we wish otherwise. 

100% correct. 👍

Can you really blame him though?  He has no loyalty to us, signing that contract means his, very recently, widowed mum will never have to go without.

I would do exactly the same.

Yes I do blame him...what is it with people who naturally align to con artists and then reason that this is acceptable. 

Jesus fucking christ.

I fear the option to buy that was put in place for Kirk as part of the loan agreement with Blackpool means the Seasiders hold all the aces here and leaves a lot of the debate as to whether Kirk can be any good for us immaterial.

For example, if they are able to just hold out to see if Josh Bowler is sold before deciding, it could be a long summer. Kirk may even return to us for pre÷season and then depart again. 

Admittedly I write this without a full understanding of the option to buy agreement. i.e. is it time limited and if so,  crucially, for how long? 

Cafc43v3r said:

Garrymanilow said:

Chunes said:

wmcf123 said:

I just don't see where he gets in.  We do not have the players to play in a 433 and that's the only system in which he can play.  

What formation do we have the players for?

At the moment, something without full backs

Or center backs and one up top. 

2-7-1?

Garrymanilow said:

Cafc43v3r said:

Garrymanilow said:

Chunes said:

wmcf123 said:

I just don't see where he gets in.  We do not have the players to play in a 433 and that's the only system in which he can play.  

What formation do we have the players for?

At the moment, something without full backs

Or center backs and one up top. 

2-7-1?

Mac

Inniss - Lavelle

DJ -  Clare - Dobson - JFC - Fraser - CBT

Aneke

Stockley

What's sad about that is with a slightly different shape that's an 11 that Jackson might seriously have set out

With the same results. If we are serious on a top two finish then only two or three of those players are good enough.

I think we could put out a reasonable 1-4-1

addick1956 said:

redlanered said:

Kirk was completely underwhelming, of that there is little doubt.

The upside is that for a new manager, Kirk is potentially an easy/quick win.  If Kirk starts to deliver, the new manager gets to demonstrate ability, making a difference.  If Kirk continues to flounder, the new manager won't be faulted.  If I'm the new gaffer I'd be tempted to give Kirk another try

Not if C B-T is available  for the same position. 

Well, Kirk can  still step in after CB-T has done his hammy.

Oggy Red said:

addick1956 said:

redlanered said:

Kirk was completely underwhelming, of that there is little doubt.

The upside is that for a new manager, Kirk is potentially an easy/quick win.  If Kirk starts to deliver, the new manager gets to demonstrate ability, making a difference.  If Kirk continues to flounder, the new manager won't be faulted.  If I'm the new gaffer I'd be tempted to give Kirk another try

Not if C B-T is available  for the same position. 

Well, Kirk can  still step in after CB-T has done his hammy.

And that's the problem, isn't it.  Two totally different players that happen to play in the same position.  You can't swap them in and out and not change anything else. 

paulie8290 said:

SouthWest_Addicks said:

Got a feeling this will be one of those deals which will be completed on the final day of the window, after Blackpool finally sell someone to raise the money.

If Jackson was still here I would agree

But New manager, new formation, new Ideas

I for one would love to see Kirk given Pre Season.

If we can get the player Crewe had then that could be a key part to promotion, someone whipping balls in to Stockley 

Not sure Kirk's biggest strength is his crossing. It's not bad by any means but we wouldn't get the most of him by forcing him out wide, taking on full backs and wing backs.

We need to get the ball to his feet in and around the penalty areas and half spaces. He can use his intelligence to slide passes along the deck and have defenders facing their own goal line.

It's why I think giving him a free role in behind the strikers wouldn't be the worst idea, if he can put on some muscle over the summer.




All that said, I still expect him to be off before the season starts whether that's to Blackpool or elsewhere up north.