Crocked Carroll will cost West Ham

Article by e-West Ham's Brandon Freeman

Click here to follow e-West Ham on Twitter!

West Ham fans have recently learnt that record-signing Andy Carroll will be sidelined for approximately four months after undergoing ankle surgery in Baltimore for torn ankle ligaments. The Geordie hitman was treated by world renowned surgeon Mark Myerson, which should serve as some comfort for us fans, knowing that Carroll will receive the best treatment possible and hopefully return earlier than expected.

Although injuries are par for the course for footballers and can seldom be avoided, I can’t help but feel deeply frustrated that Andy Carroll will miss another pre-season with West Ham, meaning that even when he does eventually return to first team action; it will take a lot of time for him to get match fit. Even more frustrating however, is that money must now be invested in another striker rather than strengthening other areas of the team such as the back-four. Speaking to West Ham TV earlier this month, Allardyce emphasised the necessity to bring in defensive reinforcement “there is still room for a young central defender…you would also say we need another left-back to go along with Aaron”, however it remains to be seen if the owners will be willing to make permanent signings in that area given the need to sign a striker.

As well as Carroll’s absence meaning the club will have to make signing a new striker a priority, the 6ft 3in striker will also cost West Ham in terms of his huge salary. For the second season in a row, a significant proportion of the wage bill will be taken up by a player who isn’t playing and serves only to highlight how poorly the club conducted their transfer business last summer, taking a gamble on a player who played just 16 times last season. Despite the decision to sign Andy Carroll being backed by most fans, speaking to talkSPORT co-owner David Sullivan admitted signing Carroll may have been a mistake saying, “We probably made a mistake by putting all our eggs in one basket…had we known what we know now we wouldn’t have signed the player.”

However, despite David Sullivan expressing some regret at signing an injury prone player, some small positives can be drawn from Carroll’s lengthy absence from the first-team. Firstly, the absence of our first choice striker may bring about the long awaited change in our style of play if Argentinean striker Mauro Zarate is incorporated into the team, perhaps providing the opportunity to play Ecuador’s world cup striker Enner Valencia alongside Zarate. Carroll’s absence may also hand a chance to Ravel Morrison, who may be able to link up with flair players like Zarate and Valencia better than Kevin Nolan, who has long had a highly productive partnership with Andy Carroll but may struggle to play behind Zarate or Enner Valencia.

Whether signing Carroll was a mistake or not remains to be seen, surely it can only be fair for us to judge a player based upon what he does on the pitch and we cannot blame Carroll for the injuries which have thus far plagued his time at West Ham. Personally, given the time to recover from his injury, I believe Carroll will return to first team action much earlier than last season and given regular football alongside flair players, he will prove what an asset he is to the team and begin to live up to the tag of West Ham’s record signing.

Do you believe it was a mistake signing Andy Carroll, or will the new recruits at Upton Park mean that Carroll isn’t as sorely missed as last season? Leave your comments below and follow our twitter page @e_westham for the latest news and views, all things West Ham.

© e-Football 2014 All rights reserved no part of this document or this website may be reproduced without consent of e-Football