Jump to content

Swansea City 1 - 1 Newcastle United - 13/02/10 - post match reaction from pg 25


Nate

Recommended Posts

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

But we cant think about Nolan anymore when saying just goals. If he was still scoring now, hed be getting less criticism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

But we cant think about Nolan anymore when saying just goals. If he was still scoring now, hed be getting less criticism.

 

I thought he was shit when he was getting goals mind. If he's going to be in the side we must play long ball football 100%.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For god's sake guys. Lovenkrands offered f*** all in that much. Shola is forever injured. Jury's out on Best. We have a 21 year old striker who is scoring goals consistently. He may be lacking things from his game but he's still learning.

 

Enough of the f***ing knee-jerking!

 

He has to play alongside someone who can hold the ball up, because despite his size the ball never sticks with him. Best has to start upfront.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Heneage

Anyone else surprised by Fitz Hall's play?

 

One of those guys that has just been passed on from one average team to another, but looks a lot better than I thought he would. Very surprising.

 

 

He's a rare breed, he knows his limitations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont understand the arguments against Carroll.

 

He's scoring goals. He is proving himself to be an effective striker recently. If he isnt doing well with us playing long ball to him all game, the solution is to not play long ball to him all game.

 

You dont drop your most in form striker because you want him to create everything at the same time and he isnt doing it satisfactorily

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

 

But we cant think about Nolan anymore when saying just goals. If he was still scoring now, hed be getting less criticism.

 

I thought he was s*** when he was getting goals mind. If he's going to be in the side we must play long ball football 100%.

 

 

 

Not true. Play it down the wings. Especially when enrique and jonas are back. Get balls into the box from wide positions. It's easily where he is best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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 :lol:.  I also like the fact you must edit your posts at least twice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Carrolls link up play was on display for everyone to see today after all. How wonderfully he dove-tailed with Lovenkrands to lead the Swansea defenders a merry dance.  :iamatwat:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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 :lol:.  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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Sorry, what are you basing that on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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.

 

Carrolls link up play was on display for everyone to see today after all. How wonderfully he dove-tailed with Lovenkrands to lead the Swansea defenders a merry dance.  :iamatwat:

 

I've seen little of Best but so far he look slike the best at holding the ball up and linking play amongst all our strikers.

 

Caroll falls over too much and gets involved in silly scraps, Shola is always fouling defenders, Loven looks to get in behind and doesn't drop deep. Ranger is the other who holds up play and links well, but he is seemingly being brought along slowly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaah waaah waaaaaah Carrol is the worst player we have!  :facepalm:

 

 

Yeeeeah yeeeeah yeeeeeah Carrol we love you!  :iamatwat:

 

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.

 

:lol:

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.

 

:lol:

Our target man should be getting a goal every game :lol:  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.

 

:lol: 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.

 

:lol: 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.  :aww:

 

Actually, i dissected your massive post - just up above.  Where you contradicted yourself more than once :lol:

 

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 :lol:.  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 a few posts later say he is responsible for 25% of our goals. 

 

I point out the colossus contradiction, and suddenly that's not what you meant - (although you repeatedly that very claim many times prior).

 

I don't care anymore, I'm bored, if you want the last word..  then fine... go ahead.. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...