Chuks back on the sidelines
As day follows night, but gut wrenching for Chuks and us all the same.
Michael Appleton said today that following a scan, Chuks Aneke will be out “a couple of months at least.”
Too early to tell for sure but it means more times on the sidelines and in the treatment room for the 30-year old. Possibly he wasn’t ready to start, but one thing is for sure it was probably a matter of when and not if.
We will miss him, we always do. Chuks had shown the full force of his ability and commitment at this level in recent weeks, and I feel for him, we all should.
7 Comments
Post a comment
Who thought it was a good idea to start him? He’s always more effective coming on for the last 30 minutes & battering tiring defenders, plus we all know that’s the best chance of keeping him intact for the next game. Maybe need to question the advice that comes from the medical team/physios?
I make ‘Shetland’ right on that.
Sadly, Chuks needs to be released at this seasons end. He is constantly injured and probably needs to consider retiring.
I get no pleasure from saying so ………..
I agree with Shetland not just because I’m a Glaswegian Addick. Chuks – always looking for a goal – is seriously injury prone. Unavailable, more often than not; the time can’t be too far ahead to when his future as a footballer may need to be reconsidered.
Not holding my breath re Wanderers. At least Nat Lofhouse won’t be playing.
Glaswegian Addick
Before the match and hearing that he was playing I turned to my friend and said “fine, as long as he only plays 60 minutes”. Naturally he got injured in the 62nd minute…
One goal and one missed penalty doesn’t sound much but he does give us a strong target man to aim for and he takes a couple of defenders out of the game to mark him. But his selection costs us mobility across the frontline, he can’t play the pressing game either. On balance what he offers outweighs the negatives, especially as Tedic isn’t ripping up any trees.
See you n the new year Chuks…
Has anyone done an analysis of our points return when Chucks is available and when he is not? I bet its more important that which manager or formation we have in terms of points per game.
For the last two or three seasons we have been burdened with a striker that is prone to injury and out for months at a time, or when ‘fit’ can only manage a limited time on the pitch. Not only that, but we have given him a lengthy contract, and he is now out till January.. I struggle to think of any other club that would have let such repeat situations continue this far. Yes, when 100% fit, Chucks was a handful in this league, and originally a great signing, but how long do we rely on, and hold onto, a player who spends more time on the physio’s table than on the pitch. Don’t get me wrong, I like Chucks, but he is occupying a berth (and a salary) that a fully fit player could command. With a fully fit Chucks, playing in every game for 90 minutes throughout the season we would have a great chance of top six, but that is just a dream of course.
Not me Ollie, but it would be interesting to see. It’s not just goals but Chuks coming on as a 70 minute sub is quite a weapon…. Oh well.