Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
++Charlie Kelman signs on a 4 year deal++
Comments
-
This is why 'win more games with X player in the team' is a positively useless stat.Crispywood said:
Stats also say we win more with Macca (6/19) in the team than Edwards (2/7) but ur not gonna sit here and tell me Macca is a better player than EdwardChris_from_Sidcup said:
And yet the stats show we're a better team and get better results when he starts.Crispywood said:
Games he was out injured was the same game we lost Bell and Burke and had a fixture swing that wasn’t down to Kelman. He looks like a clinical forward but if he’s not getting chances he’s not offering anything else clearly just wrong type of player for what we needChris_from_Sidcup said:In Kelman's last 12 league starts (going back to Millwall at home) we've lost only 2. In the games he didn't start or was out injured, 7 defeats in 12.
We've lost 2 games all season when Kelman starts. We've now lost 10 games when he hasn't.3 -
Not sure how Kelman must be feeling at the moment. Comes back from injuries, scores 3 goals in a fortnight, barely had a look in since.2-0 down at half time; desperately need goals, 3 changes made at half time and you’re not one of them…24
-
Hes looked poor in my opinion. If all fit I'd have him 4th choice and thats shocking seeing we've payed a decent amount for him.AFKABartram said:Not sure how Kelman must be feeling at the moment. Comes back from injuries, scores 3 goals in a fortnight, barely had a look in since.2-0 down at half time; desperately need goals, 3 changes made at half time and you’re not one of them…4 -
I am being totally serious here when I say Kelman, Apter and Olaofe should / would be key pieces in our attempt to bounce back in league one next season, if we found ourselves there. So dont want to write any of them off yet.3
-
Is he even 4th choice? I think he only gets to play if we ever get to the point where we have genuine wingers. Otherwise i would start with TC and Leaburn/dykes, bring on the other one of Leaburn/Dykes and Godden. Could consider having him play a bit deeper and drop Berry completely but he would have to tackle then0
-
So why are you bringing up league 1? We are in the Championship and should be staying there for a while 🤞DamoNorthStand said:I am being totally serious here when I say Kelman, Apter and Olaofe should / would be key pieces in our attempt to bounce back in league one next season, if we found ourselves there. So dont want to write any of them off yet.1 -
orpingtonRED said:
So why are you bringing up league 1? We are in the Championship and should be staying there for a while 🤞DamoNorthStand said:I am being totally serious here when I say Kelman, Apter and Olaofe should / would be key pieces in our attempt to bounce back in league one next season, if we found ourselves there. So dont want to write any of them off yet.
We are not down yet, or even close, but it is mad to not consider it is at least a possibility. If the worst happens, we should have a squad that can compete straight away. Hopefully it wont come to that.3 -
If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again1
-
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.
7 -
It’s not just about goals, we’re a defensive based side first so I don’t expect us to have 15-20 goal scorers. But with this style we need forwards who can handle the physical side of the game whether that’s attacking or defending set pieces, holding the ball up to Relieve pressure or hitting on the counter. Dykes Leaburn and TC may not offer good output but you can see the way they play suits what we need Kelman doesn’t.Addick Addict said:
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
The below tweet is far too simplistic to prove anything but it is interesting, I think he presses better than lots of us realiseCrispywood said:
It’s not just about goals, we’re a defensive based side first so I don’t expect us to have 15-20 goal scorers. But with this style we need forwards who can handle the physical side of the game whether that’s attacking or defending set pieces, holding the ball up to Relieve pressure or hitting on the counter. Dykes Leaburn and TC may not offer good output but you can see the way they play suits what we need Kelman doesn’t.Addick Addict said:
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.#cafc record when Charlie Kelman starts: 15 games - 7 wins - 6 draws - 2 losses#cafc record when Charlie Kelman doesn’t start: 13 games - 1 wins - 2 draws - 10 losses
— Daniel King (@dannyjk17) February 18, 2026
1.8 PPG when he starts vs 0.38 when he doesn’t @RichSCawley @LouisMend @secondtierpod6 -
Love you fenaddick but statistically when Gillesphey has played the majority of games he actually has a better win % than Ramsay, Jones and Edwards if you can believe it. For me it’s the most useless stat in the world.fenaddick said:
The below tweet is far too simplistic to prove anything but it is interesting, I think he presses better than lots of us realiseCrispywood said:
It’s not just about goals, we’re a defensive based side first so I don’t expect us to have 15-20 goal scorers. But with this style we need forwards who can handle the physical side of the game whether that’s attacking or defending set pieces, holding the ball up to Relieve pressure or hitting on the counter. Dykes Leaburn and TC may not offer good output but you can see the way they play suits what we need Kelman doesn’t.Addick Addict said:
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.#cafc record when Charlie Kelman starts: 15 games - 7 wins - 6 draws - 2 losses#cafc record when Charlie Kelman doesn’t start: 13 games - 1 wins - 2 draws - 10 losses
— Daniel King (@dannyjk17) February 18, 2026
1.8 PPG when he starts vs 0.38 when he doesn’t @RichSCawley @LouisMend @secondtierpod
1 -
Oh I agree it's far too surface level but it is interesting. It certainly isn't that Kelman is our best striker but it might be that when he's in from the start we set up differently. Ultimately, it could be figured out by watching hours of footage but who has the time and can be arsed?Crispywood said:
Love you fenaddick but statistically when Gillesphey has played the majority of games he actually has a better win % than Ramsay, Jones and Edwards if you can believe it. For me it’s the most useless stat in the world.fenaddick said:
The below tweet is far too simplistic to prove anything but it is interesting, I think he presses better than lots of us realiseCrispywood said:
It’s not just about goals, we’re a defensive based side first so I don’t expect us to have 15-20 goal scorers. But with this style we need forwards who can handle the physical side of the game whether that’s attacking or defending set pieces, holding the ball up to Relieve pressure or hitting on the counter. Dykes Leaburn and TC may not offer good output but you can see the way they play suits what we need Kelman doesn’t.Addick Addict said:
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.#cafc record when Charlie Kelman starts: 15 games - 7 wins - 6 draws - 2 losses#cafc record when Charlie Kelman doesn’t start: 13 games - 1 wins - 2 draws - 10 losses
— Daniel King (@dannyjk17) February 18, 2026
1.8 PPG when he starts vs 0.38 when he doesn’t @RichSCawley @LouisMend @secondtierpod0 -
/Crispywood said:
The whole of the squad have only scored 31 goals between them in 32 matches. We might get away with that this year but there is no guarantee we will do so next season. In 27 of those games we have failed to score more than a single goal and in 18 of our last 20 matches that has been the case too.
It’s not just about goals, we’re a defensive based side first so I don’t expect us to have 15-20 goal scorers. But with this style we need forwards who can handle the physical side of the game whether that’s attacking or defending set pieces, holding the ball up to Relieve pressure or hitting on the counter. Dykes Leaburn and TC may not offer good output but you can see the way they play suits what we need Kelman doesn’t.Addick Addict said:
I'm not sure there is a striker who will regularly score with the system we play. This season (starts-sub appearances-goals):Crispywood said:If Kelman doesn’t score he doesn’t offer anything extra which is the issue despite being clinical in front of goal, Just the wrong striker for the system and style. If we stay up just have to accept we got it wrong with him sell and go again
Leaburn: 17-11-1
Kelman: 15-8-4
Olaofe: 6-16-1
Godden: 1-5-0
Campbell: 23-9-3
Dykes: 6-1-1
So, in total, that's:
Starts: 68
Sub appearances: 50
Goals: 10
So either that forward has to be the type that makes something out of nothing which, let's face it, we aren't going to be able to afford or we have to find a lot more goals from midfield. Again, that isn't going to be cheap.
There was also a lot of talk about how we should have bought Kone instead of Kelman but his record is, actually, no better and he's playing in a more attacking team - Kone has 6 goals in 2,288 minutes as opposed to Kelman's 4 goals in 1,336 minutes.
We struck lucky with Carey because without him we would be in the relegation zone. In fact, he has seven of the ten goals last night's starting XI, from 169 appearances, have between them this season. There is absolutely no guarantee he will do the same next season and If he fires blanks then who, in this system, is going to score? On all known evidence we are simply not going to get goals from Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Clarke, Chambers, Docherty, Coady, Leaburn and Dykes.
There has been occasions when Kelman has played with Leaburn or Dykes and we have looked more of a threat. But if we are going to dump him because the perception is that he won't score goals in this system, it still doesn't change the fact that we have to find goals from somewhere. Which means spending but where do they play when we have a back five, two water carriers, Carey and two target men up front?
2 -
All this talk of TC playing alongside Dykes/Leaburn....Bullshit.TC is a winger.Kelman is a STRIKER.we need goals and no way is TC getting us goals.He was awful when he came on last night.He kept drifting out wide leaving Dykes knocking on headers to absolute no one.
Kelman hasnt been great but we know what he can do as last season proved.Yes its a step up but give the boy a chance.TC has had loads of chances and hasnt been great but still gets picked ahead of Kelman.
If i was Charlie id be pissed off about TC getting on before him.Give him a chance and im sure he'll get goals.0 -
This, I don't think he has been given enough of a consistent starting position yet...AFKABartram said:Not sure how Kelman must be feeling at the moment. Comes back from injuries, scores 3 goals in a fortnight, barely had a look in since.2-0 down at half time; desperately need goals, 3 changes made at half time and you’re not one of them…5 -
we still managed to somehow recently win 2 games against leicester and stoke without Kelman on the pitch.
0 -
I want to see Kelman starting games and being replaced by Godden in the latter stages. He was brought into score goals and given a run in the side along side Dykes/Leaburn I think he will do, but he needs game time.
He was a part of our good start to the season without scoring, because he was working well in a pressing system alongside TC.
Plus we all noted how he looked a yard quicker when he returned, he also has a knack of finding the net as he did against Swansea and Oxford at important times.
The big lump combo is not going to work, it’s to easy to read and defend against. I see the sense for the last 5 mins of a game sending Hail Mary passes and hoping for the best, but it’s not a tactic employed by any other side at this level and above for a good reason.4 -
There’s been far too much chopping and changing upfront, some forced and some not. I’d go with Dykes and Kelman for a sustained period now.10
-
TC was playing on the wing on Tuesday, we changed formation. Dykes was up front on his owngreenwichred68 said:All this talk of TC playing alongside Dykes/Leaburn....Bullshit.TC is a winger.Kelman is a STRIKER.we need goals and no way is TC getting us goals.He was awful when he came on last night.He kept drifting out wide leaving Dykes knocking on headers to absolute no one.
Kelman hasnt been great but we know what he can do as last season proved.Yes its a step up but give the boy a chance.TC has had loads of chances and hasnt been great but still gets picked ahead of Kelman.
If i was Charlie id be pissed off about TC getting on before him.Give him a chance and im sure he'll get goals.
4 -
Sponsored links:
-
Kelman and Leaburn was looking like a good developing partnership. Dykes has maybe overtaken Leaburn as the target man starter, but I’d like to see Dykes and Kelman start more games. Southampton away is tough so I’d maybe go with TC for that one to be more defensive and then Kelman for West Brom1
-
We were playing against 10 men for more than 80 minutes against Leicester. We scrambled a 1-0 win against Stoke.oohaahmortimer said:we still managed to somehow recently win 2 games against leicester and stoke without Kelman on the pitch.
Against Sheffield United we played the final 10 minutes of the first half against 10 men and they had another player sent off in the final minute. We then took Kelman off, scored against 9 men immediately after half-time but couldn't find the net again for the remaining 45 minutes when they were two men short.
That says it all about our lack of invention and creativity. Playing the system we have is based wholly around us not conceding. Once we do let a goal in, the system doesn't work because we aren't good at chasing the game and invariably end up leaving holes doing so.
As I say, we have failed to score more than one goal in 18 of the last 20 matches. The two times we did so were against 10 man Leicester and against Blackburn - when Kelman scored both.
Clean sheets is how we got promotion and how we will survive. It is "parking the bus" and reliant on set pieces. If we want to progress as a Club that has to change as it will only take us so far.1 -
It felt like he'd turned a corner at that point. It doesn't go into his stats but he also created the equaliser against Coventry in that period. He failed to influence the game against Sheff Utd, Dykes came on and created a goal within a minute and that seemed to be the end for Charlie's impact from Jones' perspective. He didn't really take his chance against QPR but I'd like to see him start alongside Dykes with a bit more regularity to build a partnership.AFKABartram said:Not sure how Kelman must be feeling at the moment. Comes back from injuries, scores 3 goals in a fortnight, barely had a look in since.2-0 down at half time; desperately need goals, 3 changes made at half time and you’re not one of them…3 -
Yes Leaburn got their man sent off at Leicester with his strength and tenacity .Addick Addict said:
We were playing against 10 men for more than 80 minutes against Leicester. We scrambled a 1-0 win against Stoke.oohaahmortimer said:we still managed to somehow recently win 2 games against leicester and stoke without Kelman on the pitch.
Against Sheffield United we played the final 10 minutes of the first half against 10 men and they had another player sent off in the final minute. We then took Kelman off, scored against 9 men immediately after half-time but couldn't find the net again for the remaining 45 minutes when they were two men short.
That says it all about our lack of invention and creativity. Playing the system we have is based wholly around us not conceding. Once we do let a goal in, the system doesn't work because we aren't good at chasing the game and invariably end up leaving holes doing so.
As I say, we have failed to score more than one goal in 18 of the last 20 matches. The two times we did so were against 10 man Leicester and against Blackburn - when Kelman scored both.
Clean sheets is how we got promotion and how we will survive. It is "parking the bus" and reliant on set pieces. If we want to progress as a Club that has to change as it will only take us so far.
Leaburn and Dykes offer a lot more than Kelman has in recent times .
A fit Leaburn is much more an asset than the Kelman who has appeared for us ,
Leaburn adds to us defensively as well as offensively.
I agree the way we play is utter shit , there is no genuine class or skill from the midfield so we are reliant on some magic to appear and I fancy Leaburn and Dykes to provide it more than the cowardly lion
0 -
In the Championship this season:oohaahmortimer said:
Yes Leaburn got their man sent off at Leicester with his strength and tenacity .Addick Addict said:
We were playing against 10 men for more than 80 minutes against Leicester. We scrambled a 1-0 win against Stoke.oohaahmortimer said:we still managed to somehow recently win 2 games against leicester and stoke without Kelman on the pitch.
Against Sheffield United we played the final 10 minutes of the first half against 10 men and they had another player sent off in the final minute. We then took Kelman off, scored against 9 men immediately after half-time but couldn't find the net again for the remaining 45 minutes when they were two men short.
That says it all about our lack of invention and creativity. Playing the system we have is based wholly around us not conceding. Once we do let a goal in, the system doesn't work because we aren't good at chasing the game and invariably end up leaving holes doing so.
As I say, we have failed to score more than one goal in 18 of the last 20 matches. The two times we did so were against 10 man Leicester and against Blackburn - when Kelman scored both.
Clean sheets is how we got promotion and how we will survive. It is "parking the bus" and reliant on set pieces. If we want to progress as a Club that has to change as it will only take us so far.
Leaburn and Dykes offer a lot more than Kelman has in recent times .
A fit Leaburn is much more an asset than the Kelman who has appeared for us ,
Leaburn adds to us defensively as well as offensively.
I agree the way we play is utter shit , there is no genuine class or skill from the midfield so we are reliant on some magic to appear and I fancy Leaburn and Dykes to provide it more than the cowardly lion
Leaburn - 1 goal and 1 assist in 1,643 minutes.
Kelman - 4 goals and 0 assists in 1,171 minutes.
Dykes - 1 goal and 3 assists in 665 minutes
To me, at home anyway, it's Dykes and Kelman (with Leaburn and Godden to sub on in the final 15/20 if necessary) starting with TC in a front three, keep Carey in a two and sacrifice one of our water carriers. It's not something that NJ will do even though we play with a back five.
1 -
se9addick said:There’s been far too much chopping and changing upfront, some forced and some not. I’d go with Dykes and Kelman for a sustained period now.
For the amount of dough we spent on him, we should have made him a regular starter and play to his strengths. Jones has f***** up on this one imo.
1 -
Came on here to say exactly this.se9addick said:There’s been far too much chopping and changing upfront, some forced and some not. I’d go with Dykes and Kelman for a sustained period now.
Need to pick a pair, whatever it is, and play them for a run of games to build some confidence and understanding.
No one is a perfect pick and they all offer their own strengths and weakness. Dykes has added some nouse, but I don't think he'll score many.
Leaburn is perhaps the best technically and an asset defending corners, but his inexperience shows at times. Maybe more goals potential than Dykes if he were to get service (that's another issue entirely but part of the problem).
TC brings pace and scares defenders with his pressing and direct running, but end product and decision making is very hit and miss and his natural inclination is to pull wide which can isolate his partner and doesn't lend itself to the kind of movement that might exploit the strengths of Dykes and Leaburn. We do, at least, look more threatening when he plays, although how much of that threat turns into something real is debatable.
Kelman definitely has goals in him - he has a sharp touch and powerful shot with little back lift in and around the box. He has been struggling to get chances though - maybe Dykes will be a better foil for him. He does work hard and press well though.
Godden is perhaps the most rounded of the 5 options and is another one that has that bit of nouse and probably better movement/poachers instincts than Kelman. But is he fit enough?
I think I'd be leaning towards Dykes and Kelman to start for a while, but I'd also like to see TC on the pitch more. It's not a straightforward call.5 -
I just dont rate Kelman. ok, may score goals in L1, but is def at his level in L1.0
-
Championship level finishing, L1 all round play4
-
I think we should pick it depending on the opposition. Dykes and Kelman would be my most common pairing. If we’re up against a top team like an Ipswich, Southampton, Boro etc then I’d probably go with TC instead of Kelman just because it means we can be more defensive and he’s a threat with pace on the counter. If we think we can bully a team like we did at Leicester and I think we thought we could against Pompey then go with Leaburn and DykesExiled_Addick said:
Came on here to say exactly this.se9addick said:There’s been far too much chopping and changing upfront, some forced and some not. I’d go with Dykes and Kelman for a sustained period now.
Need to pick a pair, whatever it is, and play them for a run of games to build some confidence and understanding.
No one is a perfect pick and they all offer their own strengths and weakness. Dykes has added some nouse, but I don't think he'll score many.
Leaburn is perhaps the best technically and an asset defending corners, but his inexperience shows at times. Maybe more goals potential than Dykes if he were to get service (that's another issue entirely but part of the problem).
TC brings pace and scares defenders with his pressing and direct running, but end product and decision making is very hit and miss and his natural inclination is to pull wide which can isolate his partner and doesn't lend itself to the kind of movement that might exploit the strengths of Dykes and Leaburn. We do, at least, look more threatening when he plays, although how much of that threat turns into something real is debatable.
Kelman definitely has goals in him - he has a sharp touch and powerful shot with little back lift in and around the box. He has been struggling to get chances though - maybe Dykes will be a better foil for him. He does work hard and press well though.
Godden is perhaps the most rounded of the 5 options and is another one that has that bit of nouse and probably better movement/poachers instincts than Kelman. But is he fit enough?
I think I'd be leaning towards Dykes and Kelman to start for a while, but I'd also like to see TC on the pitch more. It's not a straightforward call.1
