Kaizero

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're s*** at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. You said he offered nothing.. then pointed out his contribution has resulted in 12 goals in 48. That he doesn't have many chances a match, and he provides assists to his team-mates. Stop it now, i'm bored. Amazing, I'd be tempted to say something about your intelligence, but I won't, so I'll bold it out for you, my point is THAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR A STRIKER STARTING AS MANY GAMES AS CARROLL FOR THE TEAM CURRENTLY LEADING THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND THAT IS WHY HE OFFERS US NOTHING THAT SAY AMEOBI COULDN'T. There, get it? I like it how you have managed to change your argument completely . I also like the fact you must edit your posts at least twice. I like the fact you can't actually argue your side of the argument, rather than point out things that has nothing to do with it. Seriously, man. What are you even doing on a debate forum if you don't want to debate something? Sadly, you can't really debate with people who say a striker offers nothing, and then say he is responsible for 25% of our goals. My point has always been that he offers us nothing compared to our other strikers, and that he'd barely be 4th choice for me. You can search all my previous posts regarding Carroll (in all threads) for evidence that it has been my opinion. And he's not responsible for 25% of our goals, since when is 7 out of 48 25%? Ameobi has 7 in 9 as well, by the way. You count the assists as well http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c75/Kaizero/dcscs.jpg I'm out. Let me know when we can have a debate where both sides discuss the same thing, though that will probably be never. ur an idiot. r u claymin u can pridikt da fyootah!?!?!? idiot! http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00384/mystic-meg-horoscop_384331a.jpg

Got here late - who is what here ? It's who has the best assist rate out of Ameobi and Carroll this season. Ameobi = 0.2222 and Carroll = 0.208 per appereance.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're s*** at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. You said he offered nothing.. then pointed out his contribution has resulted in 12 goals in 48. That he doesn't have many chances a match, and he provides assists to his team-mates. Stop it now, i'm bored. Amazing, I'd be tempted to say something about your intelligence, but I won't, so I'll bold it out for you, my point is THAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR A STRIKER STARTING AS MANY GAMES AS CARROLL FOR THE TEAM CURRENTLY LEADING THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND THAT IS WHY HE OFFERS US NOTHING THAT SAY AMEOBI COULDN'T. There, get it? I like it how you have managed to change your argument completely . I also like the fact you must edit your posts at least twice. I like the fact you can't actually argue your side of the argument, rather than point out things that has nothing to do with it. Seriously, man. What are you even doing on a debate forum if you don't want to debate something? Sadly, you can't really debate with people who say a striker offers nothing, and then say he is responsible for 25% of our goals. My point has always been that he offers us nothing compared to our other strikers, and that he'd barely be 4th choice for me. You can search all my previous posts regarding Carroll (in all threads) for evidence that it has been my opinion. And he's not responsible for 25% of our goals, since when is 7 out of 48 25%? Ameobi has 7 in 9 as well, by the way. You count the assists as well http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c75/Kaizero/dcscs.jpg I'm out. Let me know when we can have a debate where both sides discuss the same thing, though that will probably be never.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're s*** at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. You said he offered nothing.. then pointed out his contribution has resulted in 12 goals in 48. That he doesn't have many chances a match, and he provides assists to his team-mates. Stop it now, i'm bored. Amazing, I'd be tempted to say something about your intelligence, but I won't, so I'll bold it out for you, my point is THAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR A STRIKER STARTING AS MANY GAMES AS CARROLL FOR THE TEAM CURRENTLY LEADING THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND THAT IS WHY HE OFFERS US NOTHING THAT SAY AMEOBI COULDN'T. There, get it? I like it how you have managed to change your argument completely . I also like the fact you must edit your posts at least twice. I like the fact you can't actually argue your side of the argument, rather than point out things that has nothing to do with it. Seriously, man. What are you even doing on a debate forum if you don't want to debate something? Sadly, you can't really debate with people who say a striker offers nothing, and then say he is responsible for 25% of our goals. My point has always been that he offers us nothing compared to our other strikers, and that he'd barely be 4th choice for me. You can search all my previous posts regarding Carroll (in all threads) for evidence that it has been my opinion. And he's not responsible for 25% of our goals, since when is 7 out of 48 25%? Ameobi has 7 in 9 as well, by the way.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once It's also been pointed out that other strikers offer goals too, except a lot of the others offer more than that. Shola, Lovenkrands, even Ranger offer more than just goals. And before you say 'just goals!?' think about Nolan. Shola doesn't offer anything except goals, in fact Carroll offers more than him, Ameobi is a better goalscorer - that i would agree on. So then surely your point is moot if you're basing your argument to have Carroll in the team is based around goals? Carroll is easily the most one dimensional striker we have. Not at all, Shola is the most one dimensional striker we have. Carroll actually lays on goals for his team-mates. Ameobi has a better assist rate per appeareance than Carroll has, your point is moot. Mm that requires some proof, don't believe that at all 2/9= 0.22222 5/24 = 0.208

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're s*** at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. You said he offered nothing.. then pointed out his contribution has resulted in 12 goals in 48. That he doesn't have many chances a match, and he provides assists to his team-mates. Stop it now, i'm bored. Amazing, I'd be tempted to say something about your intelligence, but I won't, so I'll bold it out for you, my point is THAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR A STRIKER STARTING AS MANY GAMES AS CARROLL FOR THE TEAM CURRENTLY LEADING THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND THAT IS WHY HE OFFERS US NOTHING THAT SAY AMEOBI COULDN'T. There, get it? I like it how you have managed to change your argument completely . I also like the fact you must edit your posts at least twice. I like the fact you can't actually argue your side of the argument, rather than point out things that has nothing to do with it. Seriously, man. What are you even doing on a debate forum if you don't want to debate something?

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once It's also been pointed out that other strikers offer goals too, except a lot of the others offer more than that. Shola, Lovenkrands, even Ranger offer more than just goals. And before you say 'just goals!?' think about Nolan. Shola doesn't offer anything except goals, in fact Carroll offers more than him, Ameobi is a better goalscorer - that i would agree on. So then surely your point is moot if you're basing your argument to have Carroll in the team is based around goals? Carroll is easily the most one dimensional striker we have. Not at all, Shola is the most one dimensional striker we have. Carroll actually lays on goals for his team-mates. Ameobi has a better assist rate per appeareance than Carroll has, your point is moot.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're s*** at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. You said he offered nothing.. then pointed out his contribution has resulted in 12 goals in 48. That he doesn't have many chances a match, and he provides assists to his team-mates. Stop it now, i'm bored. Amazing, I'd be tempted to say something about your intelligence, but I won't, so I'll bold it out for you, my point is THAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR A STRIKER STARTING AS MANY GAMES AS CARROLL FOR THE TEAM CURRENTLY LEADING THE CHAMPIONSHIP AND THAT IS WHY IT IS MY OPINION HE OFFERS US NOTHING THAT SAY AMEOBI COULDN'T. There, get it?

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above. Where you contradicted yourself more than once If there are contradictions, they're there because I'm not a native speaker of English and have probably constructed sentences wrong. Your dissection is pretty bad as well, mind. As you've bolded statistical facts regarding him this season were I say it doesn't sound to bad, before I go into describing why it still is bad. Then you've bolded that I say we're shit at getting balls through to him, which we are, which in turn I mentioned to describe how our midfield is not good and that we need a striker that can do more with the delievery they do get. Then you've highlighted where I've said he basically offers us nothing, which he doesn't, as we could easily play Ameobi instead and have a better striker on the pitch. Even Ranger, as I've mentioned before, has better hold up play. That said, I'll give you that Ranger has yet to develop the finishing skills needed to score the goals we need, so he's not a better choice as long as Carroll keeps getting lucky. Once Carroll starts to dry out, though, he'd be a better choice as he can keep the ball up and get it around to others better than Carroll can. If you can't give more than a few badly pointed out examples (there are better ones in there if you tried to turn my words around to make your point) and a few smileys saying "unbelievable". Your argument is pretty shit, and I'd appreciate it if you could actually make an attempt and explain why you think Andy Carroll is better than the rest of our strikers, besides that he has scored "5 in 6".

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. That's funny, your funny. You're. If you don't want to have an actual debate about something to defend your opinion, I'll resort to childlike petty replies as well. Oh, right, I forget. You can't defend your opinion. How stupid of me.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're s*** at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 56 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in. Unbelieveable. What? The actual statistics of Andy Carroll this season? I know. Cheers for conceding the argument by not continuing the debate

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer. Well it's not 'offering nothing' than is it, when he is scoring and assisting. How about you put some logic into your next argument. Andy Carroll has 7 in 24 apps and 5 assists. We have 48 goals, which means he's been involved in 12 of them, which in itself doesn't sound bad. Though, when you look at all the chances he's had to set people up and to put more away, it starts to get more shocking. You can't waste that many chances, if we'd not have Nolan around fluking one in here and there earlier in the season, those errors would be much more apparent and could single-handedly be a reason for us being around mid-table rather than at the top of the table. He has 65 shots (headers included), whearas 20 have been on goal. We're shit at getting the balls to him though, but you'd imagine a player like the one you're describing would be able to produce more than statistically 2.7 shots a match, wouldn't you? I mean, after all, he has "5 in 6". But wait, 5 in 6? What happened before those 6? Oh, yeah, he did almost nothing. I can't find his completed pass percentage, but I'm fairly certain that when and if I do find it, it will be less than 30%. He's not a good striker, we're not a good team. It's not a good match when we need ability up front to make up for the shitness of the rest of the team, especially in midfield. If he can only get 65 shots fired in the Championship, what would he do in the Premiership? He's not good, the numbers speak for themselves. What he does on the pitch speaks for itself. I'm not blinded by one lucky scoring run. Basically, he offers us pretty much nothing. I'm fairly certain even Ameobi would be banging some of the headers Carroll has missed straight in.

You shouldnt expect Carroll to single handedly make up for our poor style of football. No matter how much is directed at him. If anything it puts more pressure on him to create something from nothing, with little support from others as has been said. He's scoring goals recently and showing that he'll deliver if given decent crosses. The one thing id have a go at him for is that he's pretty lazy off the ball. You can't deny the fact people tend to be more forgiving of him than others just because he's local, though.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh. You should look at how many assists Carroll has, it might just surprise you. I don't need to look, as I'm well aware. He's still not good enough to be first choice striker for us, I'd be concerned if he was our 4th choice striker, even. He'll never make it at the top level, and while he'll be good enough until we (hopefully) get promoted, we need rid of him in the summer and bring in someone that's actually a footballer.

2 weeks maybe. Coventry.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that. Our target man should be getting a goal every game Your funny. Where was Carroll prior to his scoring run? If we had a target man that could actually steer his headers towards other players, and use his feet as well, we'd easily be a much better side. I'm not saying a target man needs to score, but Carroll offers nothing besides being lucky a few times in recent games. Ranger for instance, whilst still being very raw, shows sign of being a decent target man in that he can hold up the ball and actually aim headers. It's a shame he can't put them away. Carroll is just a young Tore Andre Flo tbh.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. So? If our target man was any decent it'd be more than that with our long ball tactics tbh. If your being serious that is even funnier! Of course I'm serious, anyone not wearing "He's a local lad, he's teh best since Shearahhhh lolz!!!11!1one!!1" glasses sees that.

Now, see, that "header" was just the ball hitting Carroll in the face.

Carroll is still fucking shit, it's only statistics that with all the headers he fucks up one or two will sometimes be good. So every header should be perfect? We're in the championship. I'd say more than 1 in 10 should be decent, even in the Championship, yeah.

Carroll is still f***ing s***, it's only statistics that with all the headers he f***s up one or two will sometimes be good. That's 5 goals in 6. At least I'm not silly and love Michael Owen.

Worst part about Nolan is that when he actually runs instead of jog he's not that slow. He never does though.

Carroll is still fucking shit, it's only statistics that with all the headers he fucks up one or two will sometimes be good.

Blatantly gonna win it 2-1 now, we're the Liverpool of the Championship with how jammy we are.

I've always, always, hated Carroll. I was slagging him off when he scored twice as well.

I hate Carroll so much it's unhealthy.