Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
++Charlie Kelman signs on a 4 year deal++
Comments
-
There is no goal Godden can't score in people's head at the momentcafcsinger said:Carey scuffs the shot and it bounces into the ground, it’s hardly going at 100 mph. Kelman could have done better, and although granted it was a difficult chance, I think Godden scores that.17 -
So basically if you think he’s shit it was a chance anyone could score, if you don’t think he’s shit it was half a chance at best.3
-
I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.2
-
.0
-
100mph?Elthamaddick said:The Carey shot that hit Kelman at 100mph was in no way shape or form a 'chance'
straw clutching at it's best
Hilarious!1 -
He did try to deflect it, but it hit a soft part of his body, ie his thigh. A better or more experienced player may have tried to deflect it off his knee to get the required power.Crispywood said:I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.
Not having a go at Kelman BTW. As I have said on numerous occasions, him firing is our only hope of the play offs, although Godden might change that.1 -
This is how I see it. I think Godden probably gets his knee to it but that's partly a confidence and experience thing. It was a tough chance, he can't score every chance he gets.bolloxbolder said:
He did try to deflect it, but it hit a soft part of his body, ie his thigh. A better or more experienced player may have tried to deflect it off his knee to get the required power.Crispywood said:I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.
Not having a go at Kelman BTW. As I have said on numerous occasions, him firing is our only hope of the play offs, although Godden might change that.2 -
I think we can all agree on Saturday Kelman had his first clear cut chance and he put it away. Before he’s, at best, had half chances.4
-
ok - point taken re the speed, but let's not make it sound like it was a 'chance' cause it wasn't - the ball hit him FFS.Off_it said:
100mph?Elthamaddick said:The Carey shot that hit Kelman at 100mph was in no way shape or form a 'chance'
straw clutching at it's best
Hilarious!
Some are making Godden out on here to be the second coming of R9, yes we miss him, but everyone seems to get better when they don't play5 -
They showed the passage of play on the Sky Sports highlights - not the short version online but the longer version on TV. Was exactly how I remembered it - TC runs into the box, checks back, plays the ball back into the path of Carey who hits it first time but scuffed his shot into the ground and it loops up straight at Kelman who tries to control it but it bounces off him and into the keepers arms.bolloxbolder said:
He did try to deflect it, but it hit a soft part of his body, ie his thigh. A better or more experienced player may have tried to deflect it off his knee to get the required power.Crispywood said:I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.
Not having a go at Kelman BTW. As I have said on numerous occasions, him firing is our only hope of the play offs, although Godden might change that.
What I also saw on the TV, which I never saw at the time, was that Kelman has slipped in the build-up and has just got fully back to his feet as Carey hits the ball. So he has less time to react to the ball coming towards him than he would've had without that slip.
Who knows, without that slip he may have got a better touch on it. May have even scored. But strikers being strikers I reckon he himself will have seen it as an opportunity - albeit maybe not a fully fledged "chance" - even if some on here don't see it that way (which is fine, by the way) because, lets face it how many other touches immediately in front of goal has he had this season.
Anyway, he made up for it second half so all's well.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
4 -
Charlie Kelman has too many soft body parts!!!😂 bet that wasn’t covered in the scouting report!!!bolloxbolder said:
He did try to deflect it, but it hit a soft part of his body, ie his thigh. A better or more experienced player may have tried to deflect it off his knee to get the required power.Crispywood said:I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.
Not having a go at Kelman BTW. As I have said on numerous occasions, him firing is our only hope of the play offs, although Godden might change that.3 -
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
0 -
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.0 -
Godden would've scissor kicked it in the top corner3
-
I think kone only cost 500k more than Kelman. In fact selling Kelman is probably how qpr could afford kone.Addick Addict said:
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.0 -
And Stansfield cost three times as much, scoring half as many in open play.Diebythesword said:
I think kone only cost 500k more than Kelman. In fact selling Kelman is probably how qpr could afford kone.Addick Addict said:
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.
Goals in open play:
Kelman - 20
Godden - 15
May - 15
Kone - 14
Stansfield - 10
In fact, of the 92 clubs in the top four divisions, not one player scored more goals in open play last season than Kelman. So, without doubt, he can finish.2 -
How many chances did each of those players have? How many BIG chances? How many assists?Addick Addict said:
And Stansfield cost three times as much, scoring half as many in open play.Diebythesword said:
I think kone only cost 500k more than Kelman. In fact selling Kelman is probably how qpr could afford kone.Addick Addict said:
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.
Goals in open play:
Kelman - 20
Godden - 15
May - 15
Kone - 14
Stansfield - 10
In fact, of the 92 clubs in the top four divisions, not one player scored more goals in open play last season than Kelman. So, without doubt, he can finish.
Edit: I dont want to know the answers, just making the point that there's more to it than X scored 5, Y scored 4 - so X is the better player.1 -
Sword65pf said:
Charlie Kelman has too many soft body parts!!!😂 bet that wasn’t covered in the scouting report!!!bolloxbolder said:
He did try to deflect it, but it hit a soft part of his body, ie his thigh. A better or more experienced player may have tried to deflect it off his knee to get the required power.Crispywood said:I don’t rate Kelman at all but a blasted shot at his thigh is in no way comparable to a tame shot at Godden’s foot.
Not having a go at Kelman BTW. As I have said on numerous occasions, him firing is our only hope of the play offs, although Godden might change that.
I have started to notice, he is a bit cuddly0 -
I'm not gonna disagree about Kelman's individual qualities. I liked him last season and I think he's a good player. But I don't think team stats can ever prove that.Addick Addict said:
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.
I can't imagine a top scouting department looking at a player's sprints per 90 minutes, key passes, possession won in the final 3rd, progressive passes, goal contributions, etc.. And then saying "Oh, hang on a minute. They lost more games when he was in the side. Let's move on."0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Kelman - 111 shots, xG of 18.6, 21 goalsOff_it said:
How many chances did each of those players have? How many BIG chances? How many assists?Addick Addict said:
And Stansfield cost three times as much, scoring half as many in open play.Diebythesword said:
I think kone only cost 500k more than Kelman. In fact selling Kelman is probably how qpr could afford kone.Addick Addict said:
Agreed but this isn't one game we're talking about. In fact, those 60 minute stats for the 10 games that Kelman has started reinforce what NJ is trying to achieve during that period. A striker's job isn't just to score goals. It's also to defend from the front and prevent the ball keep coming back and put the defence under pressure.Chunes said:
I know I'm always banging the drum of this pet peeve, but team stats don't really show individual performance. It's more correlation than causation. A striker can start every win without making much impact, just as they can play well in a loss.Addick Addict said:We can't say for definite that Godden would have taken the one that hit Kelman than we can that Godden would have taken the chance that Kelman converted.
What we do know is this.
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman has started:
Games - 10
Winning - 6
Drawing - 4
Losing - 0
Goals scored - 8
Goals conceded - 0
Points - 22/30
Position of each game at the 60 minute mark when Kelman hasn't started:
Games - 3
Winning - 0
Drawing - 1
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 1
Goals conceded - 2
Points - 1/9
If we just take the result purely based on the time when Kelman is on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 5
Drawing - 6
Losing - 2
Goals scored - 9
Goals conceded - 4
Points - 21/39
And when he isn't on the pitch:
Games - 13
Winning - 4
Drawing - 3
Losing - 6
Goals scored - 6
Goals conceded - 7
Points - 15/39
By any measure, results wise, we have been a better team when Kelman is on the pitch. Perhaps, though, when Godden is available he is the one to come on at the 60 minute mark to take advantage when the game does open up.
Whether Orient were more open in the way they played is another discussion to be had but no one can dispute that Kelman did better, so far as goals in open play are concerned, than any other player in our squad. In fact, he did better than any player in League 1 including the far more expensive Stansfield and Kone.
Goals in open play:
Kelman - 20
Godden - 15
May - 15
Kone - 14
Stansfield - 10
In fact, of the 92 clubs in the top four divisions, not one player scored more goals in open play last season than Kelman. So, without doubt, he can finish.
Edit: I dont want to know the answers, just making the point that there's more to it than X scored 5, Y scored 4 - so X is the better player.
Kone - 99 shots, xG of 16.6, 18 goals
Godden - 78 shots, xG of 15.2, 18 goals
Only based off of 1 season but this would suggest Godden is the best finisher but there isn’t much in it at all vs Kelman
Kelman is obviously a very good finisher, the doubts are all about the rest of his game which is why Godden and Kone are better players1 -
A lot of people are comparing Kelman to Godden with the inference that Godden would have taken the chances that Kelman has missed. The stats don't prove that (goals to chance ratio) and I can't see that the types of goals he scored are that much different either. What I would suggest is that we are creating less obvious chances for him as Orient did or we did for Godden in League 1.
Please take a look and tell me what you think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5nFOAW151A 0 -
Godden would have more goals but not because he’d have finished better than Kelman, with Godden on the pitch we would create more chances for him. His all round game is better, he’d win more duels, hold the ball up and link play better. We’d therefore be on the attack more and would create more chances. It’s why Leaburn gets more chances than Kelman doesAddick Addict said:A lot of people are comparing Kelman to Godden with the inference that Godden would have taken the chances that Kelman has missed. The stats don't prove that (goals to chance ratio) and I can't see that the types of goals he scored are that much different either. What I would suggest is that we are creating less obvious chances for him as Orient did or we did for Godden in League 1.
Please take a look and tell me what you thinkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5nFOAW151A 0 -
I said it before, but on quite a few of those goals they get the ball to him early from out wide. TC tries to beat his marker or hesitates and then tries to beat his marker, by which time momentum’s gone.Addick Addict said:A lot of people are comparing Kelman to Godden with the inference that Godden would have taken the chances that Kelman has missed. The stats don't prove that (goals to chance ratio) and I can't see that the types of goals he scored are that much different either. What I would suggest is that we are creating less obvious chances for him as Orient did or we did for Godden in League 1.
Please take a look and tell me what you thinkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5nFOAW151A 1 -
The guys shots on target to total shots ratio this season is ridiculous. 75%In the league last season he scored 42% of his shots on target. He also missed 21 big chances, not knocking him but with further improvement it suggests he could score more than 23.He’s a finisher but his overall game is pretty average.Play him in to situations where he can get a shot off regularly and I have no doubt he’ll score loads. Ask him to rely on his overall game most of the time and we’re playing him to and judging him by his weaknesses.3
-
Watch Godden in the couple of seconds leading up to both of the goals. He makes them easier for himself because he’s constantly anticipating that the ball might come to him and getting his body in position for it.Athletico Charlton said:Callumcafc said:
Yep, not a single one...Off_it said:
Absolutely. No striker would ever score from that. Not one.sam3110 said:
What the hell are you on about? A wayward shot from Carey drilled into his thigh isn't a chance! Even prime Henry wouldn't be able to do anything different in that situation.Off_it said:
But the sort of "right place, right time" opportunity that people have been saying he's never had.southamptonaddick said:
No you're not dreaming.Off_it said:
Apart from in the first half yesterday, when it bounced off him about 7 yards out and into their keepers arms.carly burn said:Glad he scored.
The ball never seems to drop anywhere near him when it's in and around the box. That said he doesn't seem to bust a gut to make things happen.
There was a passage of play in the first half over on the right hand side where he did well to hold up and distribute the ball to Bree. It was quite obvious that the ball would be swung in the box at some
point but he just ambled his way towards the goal.
Sure enough 10-15 seconds later the ball is swung into the box. Kelman nowhere to be seen.
I would have thought for a player that is yet to score he would have been bombing his way to that penalty area.
I wondered at the time if that was his one big chance, but he never took it. So am glad he scored later, but I seem to be the only one who remembered that earlier opportunity. Maybe I was dreaming?
I would hardly say it was a chance. It was quite a fierce shot that hit him on the thigh.
Not really a lot he could have done.
A stiker on form finishes that sort of chance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBBZ5djvQ_8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy8fvsuaEU8
Your posts are typically sensible. This one isn't.
A scuffed TC shot dribbling tamely at Goddens feet 3 yards out is in no way comparable to Kelmans "chance" this weekend.
That’s why they look easier when they reach Godden and harder when they go to Kelman.3 -
Read on Facebook that Kelman injured his hamstring in training today and is out of tomorrow’s game. Anyone heard similar ?0
-
Well we’re find out tomorrow0
-
Just read similar, also said both Center Backs are fucked for a while which leads me to believe he’s chatting shit. 5 players in the span of 3 days seems crazy even for uscafc4life said:Read on Facebook that Kelman injured his hamstring in training today and is out of tomorrow’s game. Anyone heard similar ?3 -
Rossman92 said:
Just read similar, also said both Center Backs are fucked for a while which leads me to believe he’s chatting shit. 5 players in the span of 3 days seems crazy even for uscafc4life said:Read on Facebook that Kelman injured his hamstring in training today and is out of tomorrow’s game. Anyone heard similar ?
In general, when I read reports on any kind of news, unless there are quotations involved I just ignore.
1
