Anthony Stokes

We were poor as a team in an attacking sense, to blame an out-of-position Stokes for that is myopic. Several attacking players struggled this season that have proved they can cut it at that level in previous seasons (I'm especially thinking of Sammy here). Stokes is definitely not one of my favourites, so I'm not playing any scapegoat "card"; I'm simply stating that he (and Ambrose) get more than their fair share of any criticism. I don't have Stokes beer goggles, as I say, he's actually yet to win me over. I give him the benefit of the doubt for 3 reasons:

1) I used to feel similarly about Broony and Commons and both went on to prove me wrong.
2) It is obvious to me that our attacking problems in Europe this year were a team issue, not a Stokes issue.
3) Stokes has yet to have a fair chance to show what he can do. His performances in the CL may not have been what I'd hope for from a Celtic player but they were nothing like as poor as you say, they were perfectly acceptable for a Celtic player played out of position against superior opposition and finally none of our attacking players actually did any better than him (and I repeat: that includes players that were played in their preferred positions and had previously proved they could cut it at CL level).

Hence scapegoating.

 

If Stokes was as good as people on here make out he would be on the team sheet regardless of what formation we were playing. As I said in my initial post he can't hold the ball up, or win a header, or be a threat in behind, or take his chances in the big games.

I actually like Stokes as I think he gives his all as a player and I'll always remember the day he took control of the game against Kilmarnock when we were 3-0 down. However, no matter how much posters on here adore him, he is unfortunately never taking us to the next level in European football. He simply isn't cut out for that level of football.

 

Unfortunately on this forum at times if you have a ridiculous post count such as 30,000 you get away with this sort of *, patronising, sarcastic response.

Why can't you debate your point against mine instead of using smileys or arrows to convey your argument for you?

 

I think Stokes is at the best stage of his career to date! Been really impressed by the player this season. OK, he's not against the best of opposition but at the same time, he's looked like the star of the side!

Looking forward, I think we all know he doesn't have the pace to make it at the top level but he may find his way around that through clever positioning and skill.

I said he was worth the 1 million we paid for him and no more. I'm still hoping he proves me wrong and now I believe that may be possible.

 

I think stokes is a top spfl player but nothing more than that. I think while he hasnt scored as much as expected this year his link up play has improved. But he is still a mile behind european standard. Ok for the league but nothing more in my opinion.

 

It's all well and good saying that Stokes wasn't playing in his natural position, but with the way we set up or team, and more than likely will for the foreseeable future in Europe, Stokes will never really play in his best position in my opinion. It's fairly obvious that he is at his best when he has a partner up top, but we simply cannot play with two strikers at the top level of European football. So where does he fit in? I wouldn't want him shoehorned into the team in an attacking midfield role, I would hope that we are still looking to bring someone in for that, because right now, we don't have anyone good enough for that position in the Champions League in my opinion.

 

He won't be a starter because he doesn't fit but he will be a very good option from the bench or as cover in attacking midfield or as a withdrawn striker. He is a good option to have if we need to open up and go for it.

Out of all our forward thinking players in the Champions League I think Stokes was the best of them. Sammy was atrocious, Commons forgot how to kick a ball, Boerrigter hardly got any gametime, Forrest was the next best but was injured half the time...

* Kayal was the best going forward after that.

 

I don't have a problem with him being an impact player, I just don't want to see him starting as our lone striker, or being played as our attacking midfielder. I think the fact that he was our best attacking player in Europe only highlights how poor we actually were in an attacking sense.

 

I have to agree with this.

 

I agree mate because he was nowhere near his best in Europe due to the position he was playing in, however, I feel he is the most highly criticised.

 

Samaras got it pretty bad like. I'm not just nit-picking, the overboard criticism of Stokes wasn't widely prevalent, the majority recognised that he was still a good option domestically.

Plus, for every comment saying he was "pure pish", you saw one saying he was "better than Hooper".

 

That's not my view of it, the criticism from the very start of the season was over the top, from the first league game where he got labled greedy when he scored his 2nd to win us the match.

I don't think any of us has ever labled him better than Hooper.

 

Because when you're on the phone and doing a *, being blunt and straight to the point seems fine enough.

And, erm, don't talk so much * in future about mods letting high posters off......okeydoke sweetheart

 

Very close to having his highest scoring season in the league. Hope he does it he has been great in recent games.

 

And it seems that despite spending half your life on here that you still aren't articulate enough to debate a simple point.

 

Another hat-trick and assist yesterday then, bhoys just not a fitba player eh?

 

19 goals and 3 games still to play,not bad at all..

 

Be interesting to see what he will end up with, currently has 11 goals in his last 11 games. 8 goals in his last 6 games, with 4 assists.

He's playing * incredible the now.

 

Bump up his value just in time for the transfer window, excellent.

 

Ha ha good one.