How would signing Carroll be any different than signing Charlie Austin? Most here seemed aboard that rumor.

You aren't actually providing evidence of anything.

 

Messi does hit a lot of goals, but he's also in another league compared to any other player barring Ronaldo. 

 

Not trolling. No-one has given Andy Carroll a second thought because they can't bear to have someone of his 'calibre' at the club. 

 

I'm not advocating a huge bid, nor making him first choice. He would be an excellent late impact striker and back up. He won't cost so much and he's vastly experienced in the PL. He's English, he's home grown. His injuries seem to be behind him. He's in good form.

 

Many would have argued against Costa being a part of this club because of his 'calibre' and reputation, yet he came here and tore the league up in his first season.

 

No-one is suggesting Carroll will set the world on fire, but he has the ability to do exceptionally well at Chelsea and I would welcome him here over Traore, Remy, Falcao and Pato any day of the week.

 

Can't seem to remember anyone being against Costa and he was top calibre player when we signed him. 

 

Carroll has been out 566 days through injury since the start of the 13/14 season so i would hardly say his troubles are behind him. If anything they've got worse as between 08/09 - 13/14 he 'only' missed 309 days.

 

He has a goal to game ratio of 0.28, its not exactly amazing.

 

I will give you that he does offer something different than what we currently have but do we really want to be a team that just pumps balls into the box and hope for the best. Look at our corners, we can't even beat the first man. He could probably win the header but will the ball ever get into the box for him to win? That's the issue that Liverpool had with him, he didn't receive the right service when he was playing. 

....scores again.

i have said this before, but i rate him, always gives defences a massive problem, holds the ball up well when needed, and scores

He's not battering ram of a player and is always going to cause defenders problems with his heading ability.

He's not really a lone striker but a second striker who you can lump balls into and hope for a knock down.

But his fitness record is atrocious.

He has these little purple patches every year and then picks up yet another lengthy injury.

i have said this before, but i rate him, always gives defences a massive problem, holds the ball up well when needed, and scores

Agreed. Much better than most people give him credit for. As I said before almost a clone of Mark Hately. If only Carroll could stay fit.

I just pray we don't sign Zlatan, but wouldn't be at all surprised if Roman does.

Agreed. Much better than most people give him credit for. As I said before almost a clone of Mark Hately. If only Carroll could stay fit.

I just pray we don't sign Zlatan, but wouldn't be at all surprised if Roman does.

Agreed just. With Spammers looking to sign a big name striker I would take Carroll. Especially given we don't really need him to be frontline and fit all the time.

Agreed. Much better than most people give him credit for. As I said before almost a clone of Mark Hately. If only Carroll could stay fit.

I just pray we don't sign Zlatan, but wouldn't be at all surprised if Roman does.

 

Doesn't want Zlatan who has just hit 38 goals in 29 starts this year yet wants Andy Carroll who has scored 30 goals in the last 9 years.. C'mon now. 

Zlatan would be immense whilst here, I can't remember seeing a player, players look so intimidated by, he is afforded so much room, he will wreak havoc who ever lands the beast...

would zlatans nose fit into the chelsea dressing room

would zlatans nose fit into the chelsea dressing room

Dunno, but his f**king ego wouldn't.

Is that a joke ?

I feel sick reading that someone would prefer Andy Carroll over Zlatan Ibrahimovic. Word salad going into overload here.

Before you ask, no, I'm not SplishSplosh in disguise. Just wondering, would anyone here take Carroll as a backup to Costa now? Personally, I reckon he's not bad but I don't think he would be what we need. The only reason I'm reviving this thread is because his form lately makes me wonder if people have changed their opinions after SplishSplosh suggested it last year.

I can't get past his injury record, to even start contemplating if he is good enough for us.

Fair call that.

i miss splishsplosh he was a funny troll, rip

I have always rated Carroll that header for England wow ! Just as spectacullar as dribbling past 5 players or scorpion kicking a goal .......

As many have said fitness means he is never a 1st team regular but if Roman wants to splash the cash on a bench warmer who comes on and gives the occasional team something to think about. I wouldn't complain 

I would complain, stupid signing don't want him, shouldn't even be discussing it.

He's a tough forward to play against and he opens up a way of playing most modern forwards don't allow. I do like him as a player.

That said, his injury record is atrocious and because of it he's so unreliable. 

Now, shall we revive SplishSplosh's Peter Crouch thread? Ha ha.

 

(Only joking, SS) 

Yes, lets buy Andy Carroll.

I'm going to be controversial here and say that if Carroll wasn't so injury prone he would have proven to be worth the £35mil that Liverpool paid for him.

I'm sure he will be injured again if we get anywhere close to sign him. He's not a bad player, I rate him above Bentake, whom we linked some how, very scary!

Top o the league having a laugh