Stockley is a good League One striker but if he’s not on it, it really doesn’t work and he doesn’t look great.
Aneke is a top League One striker but we have done this discussion to death.
Leaburn is only 18 and learning. He’s done very well but it’s not fair to pin any hopes on him.
No one in this division will get promoted with a strike force of just those 3.
A striker must be a priority because all it takes is Stockley to be out for any length of time and we will be very weak up front.
Without being disrespectful to anyone, it’s foolish to think otherwise.
I personally don’t disagree, but do not think this is the way it will go and think we ought to be very pleasantly surprised if if we do get another, rather than expectant at this stage, as my understanding is that this area is not being targeted for re-enforcement at this stage. Always a chance in the winter window depending on how the strikers and injuries fare I suspect?
Funny because when it comes to January every man & his dog says that you can't bring in players then because its difficult & you have to pay over the odds. Also told to wait until the summer when there are plenty of free agents & you have 4 months to prepare your squad for the new season.
If we are to expect goals from all over the pitch - I'd go for Luke McCormick from the Wombles. Did Garner coach him at Bristol Rovers? Would provide good depth from the bench - we were light at CM yesterday and we desperately needed a player of his ilk to come on in the 60th/65th.
Granted we have McG, but I think we need more cover, esp if both Gilbey and JFC are off. I wouldn't want to rely on Henry at his age, although he looked mustard yesterday , passing like Morgan from deep.
With Chuk’s injury problems, we’re into the season with just one senior striker and a raw 18 year old, which is asking for trouble.
The problem with the January window is that, first, it’s notoriously difficult to obtain value and, secondly, we may, by then have lost touch with the leading clubs.
The club are, very sensibly, playing their cards very close to their chest. If the budget won’t accommodate a permanent deal, maybe a loan striker will come in from the Premier League or Championship. That’s always a gamble but probably preferable to overplaying the likes of Leaburn and Kanu when they’re not ready.
Have to agree with you. I was told a little while ago Permanent and Loan incoming both strikers. We have the loan now waiting for the permanent striker. Of course I would have thought it would have been other way round but still have faith in person who told me personally.
Perhaps it’s a case they have enquired about strikers but the ones they think will be an improvement on Stockley, who is doing better than some will give him credit for, or Leaburn, who looks better than I think a lot of us expected, are out of reach. No point signing someone just for the sake of it.
Or perhaps they just want to play their cards very close to their chest for fear of losing a deal by it becoming public knowledge too early.
We’ll find out in a couple of weeks.
If Stockley or Leaburn get injured we are up creek.... we need another striker.
IF. It’s not definitely going to happen so the management team has to balance that risk against what it will cost to sign a striker that will be worth actually adding to the wage bill. And whatever the bed wetting doom mongers will say, Aneke will be available for selection at some point.
Ideally we would be able to sign a decent striker, but this isn’t like January 2019 when we were playing 2 up front and sold Grant to leave us with only Taylor and the injured Vetokele so had to sign Parker because he was all we could get. Right now we have two decent, fit options for one position.
If we just sign someone for the sake of it they might end being unused and unwanted and then, in January, maybe a better option comes on the market but we already spent our budget on the d-list option.
it’s made out like it’s a black and white decision but it’s not.
It will though won’t it.
Maybe, but if our new signing striker is no good, would it matter? For example, if we’d kept Josh Davison, would you be saying we don’t need a striker? And would you feel better about the prospect of starting him instead of, say, adapting so, perhaps, Payne plays as a false nine for a few matches?
Stockley may not be heading goals at the moment but 2 of our recent goals have come as a direct result of him heading at goal. Do you think Payne will be able to do that, get on the end of aerial crosses and hold the ball up that's not played to feet ?
I’m not arguing that we don’t need a striker. No one is. I’m just saying that if we’re going to sign one they have to be better than what we already have. Just because someone is officially a striker doesn’t mean they’ll automatically be the best option to replace Stockley, they have to be a good striker in order to do that. We’re not so desperate that we should sign any warm body that happens to be available. We saw last season with the two lads loaned from Chelsea and Spurs that signings for the sake of signings are just a waste of time, energy, and money.
Henry’s assessment makes sense to me. I think we were likely all in for Simpson but if Huddersfield want him it’ll be tough for us to compete, but they haven’t signed him yet so perhaps we’re still in the race. And that’s my point, Sandgaard will get a lot of criticism if a quality striker doesn’t come in and people are acting like we aren’t trying but we almost certainly have been and may miss out due to factors outside our control. That’s life, doesn’t necessarily mean anyone has been negligent or unambitious or cheap but that’ll the narrative.
Ipswich, Peterborough and Pompey are all scoring goals and have far more depth up front than we have. Failure to strengthen up front will almost certainly consign us to yet another season of mid-table mediocrity.
Ipswich have scored one more goal than us although they’ve played the current 18th, 20th, 22nd and 24th team in the league.
They've also let in 3 fewer
Ipswich have a rock solid defence, they don't need to score lots of goals. We play open, attacking football so will concede more than them, we need to score more goals.
Yeah and they’ve also played 18th, 20th, 22nd and 24th in the league. We’ve not played anyone lower than 12th.
How well would both of us done if the teams we had played had been reversed. We just don’t know yet, and it’s difficult to really compare this early on in the season.
Does league position say much 5 games into the season?
Ipswich, Peterborough and Pompey are all scoring goals and have far more depth up front than we have. Failure to strengthen up front will almost certainly consign us to yet another season of mid-table mediocrity.
Ipswich have scored one more goal than us although they’ve played the current 18th, 20th, 22nd and 24th team in the league.
They've also let in 3 fewer
Ipswich have a rock solid defence, they don't need to score lots of goals. We play open, attacking football so will concede more than them, we need to score more goals.
Yeah and they’ve also played 18th, 20th, 22nd and 24th in the league. We’ve not played anyone lower than 12th.
How well would both of us done if the teams we had played had been reversed. We just don’t know yet, and it’s difficult to really compare this early on in the season.
Does league position say much 5 games into the season?
Not really - But there is a very strong argument that Derby | Sheff Wed | Plymouth will finish a lot higher in the League than Shrewsbury | Forest Green | Burton this coming season - The question is, will those three teams finish better than Accrington or Cambridge this coming season.
Once Ipswich have played someone expected to be fighting for promotion, we can then probably look into it a bit more, they might look good beating the teams they should brush aside, but struggle against those they need to beat... Basically the reverse of us at the present.
Perhaps it’s a case they have enquired about strikers but the ones they think will be an improvement on Stockley, who is doing better than some will give him credit for, or Leaburn, who looks better than I think a lot of us expected, are out of reach. No point signing someone just for the sake of it.
Or perhaps they just want to play their cards very close to their chest for fear of losing a deal by it becoming public knowledge too early.
We’ll find out in a couple of weeks.
If Stockley or Leaburn get injured we are up creek.... we need another striker.
IF. It’s not definitely going to happen so the management team has to balance that risk against what it will cost to sign a striker that will be worth actually adding to the wage bill. And whatever the bed wetting doom mongers will say, Aneke will be available for selection at some point.
Ideally we would be able to sign a decent striker, but this isn’t like January 2019 when we were playing 2 up front and sold Grant to leave us with only Taylor and the injured Vetokele so had to sign Parker because he was all we could get. Right now we have two decent, fit options for one position.
If we just sign someone for the sake of it they might end being unused and unwanted and then, in January, maybe a better option comes on the market but we already spent our budget on the d-list option.
it’s made out like it’s a black and white decision but it’s not.
It will though won’t it.
Maybe, but if our new signing striker is no good, would it matter? For example, if we’d kept Josh Davison, would you be saying we don’t need a striker? And would you feel better about the prospect of starting him instead of, say, adapting so, perhaps, Payne plays as a false nine for a few matches?
Stockley may not be heading goals at the moment but 2 of our recent goals have come as a direct result of him heading at goal. Do you think Payne will be able to do that, get on the end of aerial crosses and hold the ball up that's not played to feet ?
Ohh and forgot do you think Payne will be able to do the defensive headers out of our box at set plays.
Absolute madness if you're keeping a striker in the squad for his defensive ability
Perhaps it’s a case they have enquired about strikers but the ones they think will be an improvement on Stockley, who is doing better than some will give him credit for, or Leaburn, who looks better than I think a lot of us expected, are out of reach. No point signing someone just for the sake of it.
Or perhaps they just want to play their cards very close to their chest for fear of losing a deal by it becoming public knowledge too early.
We’ll find out in a couple of weeks.
If Stockley or Leaburn get injured we are up creek.... we need another striker.
IF. It’s not definitely going to happen so the management team has to balance that risk against what it will cost to sign a striker that will be worth actually adding to the wage bill. And whatever the bed wetting doom mongers will say, Aneke will be available for selection at some point.
Ideally we would be able to sign a decent striker, but this isn’t like January 2019 when we were playing 2 up front and sold Grant to leave us with only Taylor and the injured Vetokele so had to sign Parker because he was all we could get. Right now we have two decent, fit options for one position.
If we just sign someone for the sake of it they might end being unused and unwanted and then, in January, maybe a better option comes on the market but we already spent our budget on the d-list option.
it’s made out like it’s a black and white decision but it’s not.
It will though won’t it.
Maybe, but if our new signing striker is no good, would it matter? For example, if we’d kept Josh Davison, would you be saying we don’t need a striker? And would you feel better about the prospect of starting him instead of, say, adapting so, perhaps, Payne plays as a false nine for a few matches?
Stockley may not be heading goals at the moment but 2 of our recent goals have come as a direct result of him heading at goal. Do you think Payne will be able to do that, get on the end of aerial crosses and hold the ball up that's not played to feet ?
Ohh and forgot do you think Payne will be able to do the defensive headers out of our box at set plays.
Absolute madness if you're keeping a striker in the squad for his defensive ability
Agreed. I heard somebody sitting near me yesterday saying that Stockley as a defender is invaluable. All good if he scores a penalty every 4 games……
For 4-3-3 to work well, your central forward in the 3 isn't isolated. Why is this concept difficult for people to understand ? I prefer twin strikers especially in the mediocre League 1 but I understand what Garner is trying to achieve but the jury will be out for sometime to see if we have enough goals when teams stifle us and double mark our X factor players like Rak Sakyi and CBT.
Against Plymouth we attacked in numbers as the Evatt and Garner system is based on support in attack and defence which is why 16 players over 90+ minutes and athletes are required as well as skill in possession and tracking back out of Possession. The passing and movement was good and Stockley was never isolated and his link up play was excellent. Against Cambridge the team didn't link as well over the duration and a draw was a fair result as we didn't do enough with our 66% possession.
We need another forward for the squad which is difficult as we can't give a guarantee they will play every week and from part time up to Premier, they are gold dust if they are goal scorers and should command a higher wage. They also need to fit our pattern of play. Goal scorers are needed in any system unless you park two buses and play for 0-0 which isn't "Garnerball".
Daniel Kanu is 18 in November and by that time a lad with his eye for goal should be in the 1st team squad in League 1. Stockley is playing well but just not taking chances at the moment but he is leading the line well and carry out Ben Garner remit of coming short to link the play.
We need a couple more players with a forward being one of them. The Pope is Catholic and we need another forward as Chuks seems to have even more injury problems that when he left for Birmingham.
Hopefully Steve Gallen will pull a rabbit out the hat because the top 6 will be difficult as I just can't see as gaining enough wins.
I think it was established some pages back that "we need a striker who scores goals".
Pacey forwards, tricky-dicky step-over merchants, false nines, injury-prone tens, lumbering journey men who once notched up 15 in a season, talented midgets from PL academies, and hard working donkeys need not apply.
That’s depressing. Three players I wanted us to sign. Well, one of them anyway. Wilks in particular. Cheers AC. :-(
BUt: @Lewis Coaches saves the day! ‘ Well I have been told otherwise. Another striker is incoming. Have faith in this person that he is telling the truth. It will be before this transfer period is up.’
My feeling has always been that they’re still working on a striker, and we’ll have one post Wycombe. 🤞
If one of the three to arrive before deadline day is a striker, then if we don't take maximum points from all our games after that, people won't be able to claim it's because Sandgaard didn't sign a striker 👍
I really like stockley. He is an old school centre forward with limitations. He's Strong,aggressive and intelligent. Trouble is he's not very mobile and I think it's quite clear to see with garnerball we are screaming out for an attacking mobile forward!
Fuck of Sheffield Wednesday you don’t need any more good players.
All these top promotion chasing top league one clubs in for Stockton I see.
All the top promotion teams are stocked up with striking options.
Those teams probably realise if they secure him their chances of survival increase significantly just as it would increase our chances of promotion significantly
Perhaps it’s a case they have enquired about strikers but the ones they think will be an improvement on Stockley, who is doing better than some will give him credit for, or Leaburn, who looks better than I think a lot of us expected, are out of reach. No point signing someone just for the sake of it.
Or perhaps they just want to play their cards very close to their chest for fear of losing a deal by it becoming public knowledge too early.
We’ll find out in a couple of weeks.
If Stockley or Leaburn get injured we are up creek.... we need another striker.
IF. It’s not definitely going to happen so the management team has to balance that risk against what it will cost to sign a striker that will be worth actually adding to the wage bill. And whatever the bed wetting doom mongers will say, Aneke will be available for selection at some point.
Ideally we would be able to sign a decent striker, but this isn’t like January 2019 when we were playing 2 up front and sold Grant to leave us with only Taylor and the injured Vetokele so had to sign Parker because he was all we could get. Right now we have two decent, fit options for one position.
If we just sign someone for the sake of it they might end being unused and unwanted and then, in January, maybe a better option comes on the market but we already spent our budget on the d-list option.
it’s made out like it’s a black and white decision but it’s not.
It will though won’t it.
Maybe, but if our new signing striker is no good, would it matter? For example, if we’d kept Josh Davison, would you be saying we don’t need a striker? And would you feel better about the prospect of starting him instead of, say, adapting so, perhaps, Payne plays as a false nine for a few matches?
Stockley may not be heading goals at the moment but 2 of our recent goals have come as a direct result of him heading at goal. Do you think Payne will be able to do that, get on the end of aerial crosses and hold the ball up that's not played to feet ?
Ohh and forgot do you think Payne will be able to do the defensive headers out of our box at set plays.
Absolute madness if you're keeping a striker in the squad for his defensive ability
That was not the point. I did not say a striker should be in the team for his defensive ability. It was suggested that Payne could play as a striker (false 9). To that I made the point Payne could not fulfil the role and in addition wouldn't be able help out at set plays in defending.
Gilbey is nowhere near as bad as many on here believe but he doesn’t fit Garnerball/is too expensive, so it looks like we’ll all move on. Personally think Lincoln fans will like him.
I’d hold off about being smug about swapping Gilbey for McGrandles. I’m not a big fan of Gilbey, but we’ve hardly seen McGrandles yet, thanks to injury, and he’s been both good and bad in the limited time he has been on the pitch. Jury is very much still out on him
Comments
Round & round it goes.....
in all seriousness we will sign a forward.
Granted we have McG, but I think we need more cover, esp if both Gilbey and JFC are off. I wouldn't want to rely on Henry at his age, although he looked mustard yesterday , passing like Morgan from deep.
I was told a little while ago Permanent and Loan incoming both strikers.
We have the loan now waiting for the permanent striker.
Of course I would have thought it would have been other way round but still have faith in person who told me personally.
Henry’s assessment makes sense to me. I think we were likely all in for Simpson but if Huddersfield want him it’ll be tough for us to compete, but they haven’t signed him yet so perhaps we’re still in the race. And that’s my point, Sandgaard will get a lot of criticism if a quality striker doesn’t come in and people are acting like we aren’t trying but we almost certainly have been and may miss out due to factors outside our control. That’s life, doesn’t necessarily mean anyone has been negligent or unambitious or cheap but that’ll the narrative.
Once Ipswich have played someone expected to be fighting for promotion, we can then probably look into it a bit more, they might look good beating the teams they should brush aside, but struggle against those they need to beat... Basically the reverse of us at the present.
Against Plymouth we attacked in numbers as the Evatt and Garner system is based on support in attack and defence which is why 16 players over 90+ minutes and athletes are required as well as skill in possession and tracking back out of Possession. The passing and movement was good and Stockley was never isolated and his link up play was excellent. Against Cambridge the team didn't link as well over the duration and a draw was a fair result as we didn't do enough with our 66% possession.
We need another forward for the squad which is difficult as we can't give a guarantee they will play every week and from part time up to Premier, they are gold dust if they are goal scorers and should command a higher wage. They also need to fit our pattern of play. Goal scorers are needed in any system unless you park two buses and play for 0-0 which isn't "Garnerball".
Daniel Kanu is 18 in November and by that time a lad with his eye for goal should be in the 1st team squad in League 1. Stockley is playing well but just not taking chances at the moment but he is leading the line well and carry out Ben Garner remit of coming short to link the play.
We need a couple more players with a forward being one of them. The Pope is Catholic and we need another forward as Chuks seems to have even more injury problems that when he left for Birmingham.
Hopefully Steve Gallen will pull a rabbit out the hat because the top 6 will be difficult as I just can't see as gaining enough wins.
Pacey forwards, tricky-dicky step-over merchants, false nines, injury-prone tens, lumbering journey men who once notched up 15 in a season, talented midgets from PL academies, and hard working donkeys need not apply.
:-(
BUt:
@Lewis Coaches saves the day! ‘ Well I have been told otherwise.
Another striker is incoming.
Have faith in this person that he is telling the truth.
It will be before this transfer period is up.’
https://therealefl.co.uk/2022/08/21/charlton-exit-set-to-be-confirmed-on-monday/
Strikers for Charlton... Station!