• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Carroll

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote author=Krump link=topic=44801.msg1309721#msg1309721 date=1301838950]
[quote author=Wizardry link=topic=44801.msg1309718#msg1309718 date=1301838614]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=44801.msg1309711#msg1309711 date=1301837444]
I have some serious concerns over him but I think he's playing in one of the worst Liverpool sides for about 15 years.


[/quote]

Mate, that is hyperbole at its most extreme. There is no way on this earth this is our worst team in 15 years. It isn't even our worst team in the last 5 years without bringing the team Souness produced into it.


[/quote]

Unless you're talking dog years or something then Souness isn't in the period mentioned.
[/quote]

How does a season 15 years before the 2010/11 season not include a team Souness left us with?

Unless my maths is failing me - and it's happened twice this century already - that 15 years would encompass the 95/96 season which is the one immediately following Graeme's last one with us. Now I know that Souness wasn't managing that one but, if you read carefully, I referred to the team he produced which was, largely, 95/96.

Whatever, I can't imagine the measurement criteria people are using to say this is the worst team in 15 years or even 5 years. We finished 7th last season and, barring a remarkable crash, we'll better that this season so the criteria can't be league position.

Cups?? We didn't win anything under Rafa after the FA cup so we can't be worse than the seasons that followed the win over West Ham.

Performances on the pitch??? Given our form over the last 12 weeks you'd have needed to be blind and locked in a basement to think this is worse than the pungent crap we dished up under Rafa last season or indeed for about 3 of the seasons under Rafa.

I know it's every football fans inexorable right to ignore any dictionary that carries the word "perspective", but some semblance of rational thought and knowledge of our immediate past wouldn't go astray.
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44801.msg1309763#msg1309763 date=1301845438]
The team yesterday had no width, no pace, no creativity and non excistent attacking fullbacks and a midfield incapable of controlling the game.

It will take a massive summer to make us challengers again.
[/quote]

I blame Hodgson for sending Aquilani out on loan.
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44801.msg1309823#msg1309823 date=1301855018]
And I blame Benitez for fucking up what was a really good team
[/quote]

how, though, how? the only significant negative change to the squad from the 09 team to the point he was sacked was alonso being exchanged for aquilani and £13m. ok, not the best deal you'll ever see, but it's hardly irrepairable damage.
 
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309830#msg1309830 date=1301858300]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44801.msg1309823#msg1309823 date=1301855018]
And I blame Benitez for fucking up what was a really good team
[/quote]

how, though, how? the only significant negative change to the squad from the 09 team to the point he was sacked was alonso being exchanged for aquilani and £13m. ok, not the best deal you'll ever see, but it's hardly irrepairable damage.
[/quote]

.. and no replacement striker for the mis-firing Keane and the loss of the versatile, competent Arbeloa.
 
[quote author=ibromurph link=topic=44801.msg1309787#msg1309787 date=1301848148]
Btw, to clarify my positon.. I was just trying to wind up Krump. 😛 by quoting his bold "white Drogba" proclamation just before he signed.
Personally, I think and hope Carroll will be a very good, if not spectacular, effective striker for us, once we get a compotent midfield again.

Worth 35m? Probably not at the time, but he could pay off that price tag if he stays on the straight and narrow and gives ua 10 solid seasons as our number 9. I'll wait and judge Carroll when he's actually being given chances to miss in front of goal.
[/quote]

Mostly agree, but that fee wasn't just a valuation of the player. It was also a reflection of the fact that Torres' timing left us in deep doo-doo and that we therefore had to blow any competitors out of the water straight away to make sure we landed his replacement.
 
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309830#msg1309830 date=1301858300]
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44801.msg1309823#msg1309823 date=1301855018]
And I blame Benitez for fucking up what was a really good team
[/quote]

how, though, how? the only significant negative change to the squad from the 09 team to the point he was sacked was alonso being exchanged for aquilani and £13m. ok, not the best deal you'll ever see, but it's hardly irrepairable damage.
[/quote]

Being handed £40m, to then spend on a right back (who now plays on the left) and a central midfielder (who now plays in Italy) was a boss move. And that was 12 months after spending £20m on Keane and then not giving him a chance, just to prove some stupid fucking point at the expense of the team, like some spoiled brat. Not for the first time either.

*Cue Rosco going into hyperbole mode again about Keane, while Pete reminds us about how much money we didn't lose on Rafa's shit judgement*
 
It's not hard to see how the team dropped from the one in 09

Keane -> nobody... god knows what happened to the money?

Riise -> Dossena -> nobody... again what happened to the money we got for the round Italian?

Alonso -> Johnson + Aqualini -> Johnson

Mascherano -> Ming + Koncheski + Poulsen -> Ming

You can see that our transfer window dealings from the Winter of 09 until the Winter just gone has just taken value out of the squad.

EDIT - God I hope it doesn't end as follows:-

Torres -> Suarez + Carroll -> Suarez
 
[quote author=Hansern link=topic=44801.msg1309728#msg1309728 date=1301840255]
Worst thread ever. He'll be an excellent player for us, without a doubt.

Just returned after nearly 3 months out, not fit, playing in a team without widt, creativity, pace and not a cross in the box to save his life. Its one of the worst teams ever, at the moment.

He's going to be one of the best strikers in the country for years to come.

Oh, and he's still only 22...
[/quote]

I said, 'he needs to play himself back in', I realise he's been out injured.

I just don't see a 35M footballer in him. David Villa, 35M yeah. Andy Caroll? No fuckin chance.
 
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=44801.msg1309711#msg1309711 date=1301837444]
I have some serious concerns over him but I think he's playing in one of the worst Liverpool sides for about 15 years.

I was tempted to check out the starting midfields for all the Premiership teams yesterday, but I'm afraid I'd find out that at least 12 teams fielded a better midfield than us this weekend.
[/quote]

Apart from the "15 years bit" this is pretty much spot on.

We are absolutely shite.
 
I understand why we overpaid for Carroll - we pretty much got a great deal for Torres and decided to splash the cash asap on a young English striker...

In hindsight... If Carrol would be injured and unfit until April i dont see why we didnt hold off until summer.. 35 million with several months to negotiate with teams could have strengthened the entire squad dramatically. I havent written off Carroll yet but this huge transfer fee is always going to be a bit of a monkey on his back. If we held off we could have reduced that fee quite dramatically..

35 million in theory could have landed us Jarvis, Adam Johnson and Kiebling....

My biggest concern with the signing of Carroll is the type of Football we will play. 35 million will dictate Dalgish's decisions to ensure Carroll's an integral part of the first team, if the squad isnt focused to playing towards his strengths he will never justify the hefty fee.

Similar to Crouch - i believe the big striker has their role to play in a top 6 team, but they should be plan C or D... not Plan A.

Carrol will never justify that hefty fee, but i believe he is capable of being a 'success' at the club. The term success is dependent on how the fans view his role. I dont believe the media or opposing fans will ever consider him a success and will like to constantly remind us of the transfer fee. if we try and forget his transfer fee and play him as one of the cogs in the machine instead of the engine that runs the show he will be extremely instramental in returning us to where we belong.

If we have any aspirations to win the league - Carroll should never be our best player.
 
the only significant negative change from the 09 team to the point of benitez's sacking was the exchange of alonso for aquilani and £13m.

keane had already gone.
riise had already gone.
arbeloa was replaced by johnson, a different kind of player but one of equal class.
 
Carroll will never be a 35M footballer and I still think it was a strange purchase, especially given we were only going to get limited use of him this season.

That said, if we stop fucking up every transfer window and buy some decent players that can rustle up a bit of service between them, he'll prove a good addition to the squad.

As weird a transfer as it was, it probably still represents better business than some of the other big deals we've seen in recent times - Kaka for 55M, 30M+ for Shevchenko, 20M for Jo, Eto'o + 45M for Ibra and so forth and so forth.
 
People need to forget about the fee. It's like adding a £20m player in a transfer window, the only reason it was £35m is because it was proportionate to the Torres deal. If we'd sold Torres for £35m and bought Carroll for £20m no one would have been bothered about how big the fee was for the latter. It was January and the market was inflated.

He's not a £35m player, but he could prove an important part of the team WHEN the team is completed. I don't think the fee necessarily means that we are building the team around him, I think that's a bit naive tbh. He's an option we can utilise, and he's alot better on the ground than people are giving him credit for.

Next season, hopefully teams will be worrying about not just how to negate the threat of Carroll, but how to stop Suarez, how to combat giving away setpieces against us and how to stop the threat of a quality wide player.

He's played a couple of games while half fit aswell, give the lad a chance for fucks sake. It's obvious that we overpaid, but that'll be irrelevant if he becomes a major part of whatever vision Kenny has for us.
 
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309956#msg1309956 date=1301903691]
People need to forget about the fee. It's like adding a £20m player in a transfer window, the only reason it was £35m is because it was proportionate to the Torres deal. If we'd sold Torres for £35m and bought Carroll for £20m no one would have been bothered about how big the fee was for the latter. It was January and the market was inflated.

He's not a £35m player, but he could prove an important part of the team WHEN the team is completed. I don't think the fee necessarily means that we are building the team around him, I think that's a bit naive tbh. He's an option we can utilise, and he's alot better on the ground than people are giving him credit for.

Next season, hopefully teams will be worrying about not just how to negate the threat of Carroll, but how to stop Suarez, how to combat giving away setpieces against us and how to stop the threat of a quality wide player.

He's played a couple of games while half fit aswell, give the lad a chance for fucks sake. It's obvious that we overpaid, but that'll be irrelevant if he becomes a major part of whatever vision Kenny has for us.
[/quote]

i disagree about the fee. if it had been 35 and 20 then i'd have been pretty happy with the carroll fee but extremely disappointed with the torres fee. i don't really buy - or agree with - john henry's 'torres + £15m' explanation, for me it should've been more like torres + £25m.

i still feel pretty much like i did on deadline day: the fee was £10m over the odds, at least, the season had little left to play for, and in any case he was going to be injured for a fair chunk of it. it would've made more sense to have just taken a deep breath and waited for the summer window, so we could've got real value for the £50m we got out of chelsea.

still, this doesn't mean that carroll won't work out for us, just that i think we took an expensive, unnecessary risk. it was bad business imo.
 
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
 
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309961#msg1309961 date=1301904216]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309956#msg1309956 date=1301903691]
People need to forget about the fee. It's like adding a £20m player in a transfer window, the only reason it was £35m is because it was proportionate to the Torres deal. If we'd sold Torres for £35m and bought Carroll for £20m no one would have been bothered about how big the fee was for the latter. It was January and the market was inflated.

He's not a £35m player, but he could prove an important part of the team WHEN the team is completed. I don't think the fee necessarily means that we are building the team around him, I think that's a bit naive tbh. He's an option we can utilise, and he's alot better on the ground than people are giving him credit for.

Next season, hopefully teams will be worrying about not just how to negate the threat of Carroll, but how to stop Suarez, how to combat giving away setpieces against us and how to stop the threat of a quality wide player.

He's played a couple of games while half fit aswell, give the lad a chance for fucks sake. It's obvious that we overpaid, but that'll be irrelevant if he becomes a major part of whatever vision Kenny has for us.
[/quote]

i disagree about the fee. if it had been 35 and 20 then i'd have been pretty happy with the carroll fee but extremely disappointed with the Torres fee. i don't really buy - or agree with - john henry's 'Torres + £15m' explanation, for me it should've been more like Torres + £25m.

i still feel pretty much like i did on deadline day: the fee was £10m over the odds, at least, the season had little left to play for, and in any case he was going to be injured for a fair chunk of it. it would've made more sense to have just taken a deep breath and waited for the summer window, so we could've got real value for the £50m we got out of chelsea.

still, this doesn't mean that carroll won't work out for us, just that i think we took an expensive, unnecessary risk. it was bad business imo.
[/quote]

I think there were other factors involved too (tax on the received fee, if it had stayed sat there until the Summer/other players not being available and us needing a striker), though I agree about us overpaying, I thought we were trying to say 'look at us, we're spending big', to save face regarding the loss of Torres.
 
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
 
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309964#msg1309964 date=1301904748]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309961#msg1309961 date=1301904216]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309956#msg1309956 date=1301903691]
People need to forget about the fee. It's like adding a £20m player in a transfer window, the only reason it was £35m is because it was proportionate to the Torres deal. If we'd sold Torres for £35m and bought Carroll for £20m no one would have been bothered about how big the fee was for the latter. It was January and the market was inflated.

He's not a £35m player, but he could prove an important part of the team WHEN the team is completed. I don't think the fee necessarily means that we are building the team around him, I think that's a bit naive tbh. He's an option we can utilise, and he's alot better on the ground than people are giving him credit for.

Next season, hopefully teams will be worrying about not just how to negate the threat of Carroll, but how to stop Suarez, how to combat giving away setpieces against us and how to stop the threat of a quality wide player.

He's played a couple of games while half fit aswell, give the lad a chance for fucks sake. It's obvious that we overpaid, but that'll be irrelevant if he becomes a major part of whatever vision Kenny has for us.
[/quote]

i disagree about the fee. if it had been 35 and 20 then i'd have been pretty happy with the carroll fee but extremely disappointed with the Torres fee. i don't really buy - or agree with - john henry's 'Torres + £15m' explanation, for me it should've been more like Torres + £25m.

i still feel pretty much like i did on deadline day: the fee was £10m over the odds, at least, the season had little left to play for, and in any case he was going to be injured for a fair chunk of it. it would've made more sense to have just taken a deep breath and waited for the summer window, so we could've got real value for the £50m we got out of chelsea.

still, this doesn't mean that carroll won't work out for us, just that i think we took an expensive, unnecessary risk. it was bad business imo.
[/quote]

I think there were other factors involved too (tax on the received fee, if it had stayed sat there until the Summer/other players not being available and us needing a striker), though I agree about us overpaying, I thought we were trying to say 'look at us, we're spending big', to save face regarding the loss of Torres.
[/quote]

yes, i agree that it was PR that was basically the main reason we splurged the money. not a good reason imo.

don't think the tax would be an issue: we've got until 31 july of the summer window to spend that money in the current financial year, and in any case i presume the H&G years have left us with substantial losses that we can write off future profits against, not to mention that we'd make the tax saving in the following year anyway by spending the proceeds and reducing profits, so it's only a time (interest income) saving at best.
 
Excellent post Mark and I agree completley.

You can see how dangerous he actually is when he's given the service he needs. He's a great link up in attack, but with zero pace and creativity around him it's near impossible to create chances.

Shame that we now don't have anyone who can put in a decent cross. And when was the last time one of our "wingers" ran past their full back and crossed from the byline?

He gets hoofballs from our own 20 yard line to work with, and that is just shite.
 
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309967#msg1309967 date=1301904874]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
[/quote]

makes me laugh when some people say they want rid of johnson, we need more like him not less.
I remember arguement on this board where some people were saying we don't need width, ha ha that's right we don't need width...

I think this summer nesv (or whatever tey call themselves these days) need to put up or shut up, they will have my eternal gratitude from saving us from the brink but if they don't want us to disappear into mediocrity they need to address several positions where the current incumbent is barely competent.

also (though it makes not one jot of difference in the grand scheme of things) we are fucking shit to watch.
 
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309980#msg1309980 date=1301905849]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309967#msg1309967 date=1301904874]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
[/quote]

makes me laugh when some people say they want rid of johnson, we need more like him not less.
I remember arguement on this board where some people were saying we don't need width, ha ha that's right we don't need width...

I think this summer nesv (or whatever tey call themselves these days) need to put up or shut up, they will have my eternal gratitude from saving us from the brink but if they don't want us to disappear into mediocrity they need to address several positions where the current incumbent is barely competent.

also (though it makes not one jot of difference in the grand scheme of things) we are fucking shit to watch.
[/quote]

There's different arguments about width, we just need quality outwide Neil, in some sense. We need pace but it doesn't have to be the prime requirement, we just need someone out there who will provide a different aspect to our play, whether it be through good service or a more direct threat.

The midfield definitely needs a different addition too. Playing two players that don't really excel in an attacking sense leaves us flat and inviting pressure, we've put up with it for about three seasons now. We need a ball player in the middle of the park, Gerrard and Ming can be the options for the advanced role, with either filling in in one of the deeper berths when needs must.
 
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309988#msg1309988 date=1301906063]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309980#msg1309980 date=1301905849]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309967#msg1309967 date=1301904874]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
[/quote]

makes me laugh when some people say they want rid of johnson, we need more like him not less.
I remember arguement on this board where some people were saying we don't need width, ha ha that's right we don't need width...

I think this summer nesv (or whatever tey call themselves these days) need to put up or shut up, they will have my eternal gratitude from saving us from the brink but if they don't want us to disappear into mediocrity they need to address several positions where the current incumbent is barely competent.

also (though it makes not one jot of difference in the grand scheme of things) we are fucking shit to watch.
[/quote]

There's different arguments about width, we just need quality outwide Neil, in some sense. We need pace but it doesn't have to be the prime requirement, we just need someone out there who will provide a different aspect to our play, whether it be through good service or a more direct threat.

The midfield definitely needs a different addition too. Playing two players that don't really excel in an attacking sense leaves us flat and inviting pressure, we've put up with it for about three seasons now. We need a ball player in the middle of the park, Gerrard and Ming can be the options for the advanced role, with either filling in in one of the deeper berths when needs must.
[/quote]

I want the midfield to have an overhaul. two wide players (rather than any converted strikers) one holding midfielder (who is worth a shit) and an attacking midfielder. just a solid, creative, balanced midfield.

as for how width is provided, I'm not asked how it happens as long as it happens though I suspect it will more likely to happen if it is provided by a wide player of pace and creativity than someone who is slow, cumbersum and being asked to play a role.
 
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309980#msg1309980 date=1301905849]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309967#msg1309967 date=1301904874]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
[/quote]

makes me laugh when some people say they want rid of johnson, we need more like him not less.
I remember arguement on this board where some people were saying we don't need width, ha ha that's right we don't need width...

I think this summer nesv (or whatever tey call themselves these days) need to put up or shut up, they will have my eternal gratitude from saving us from the brink but if they don't want us to disappear into mediocrity they need to address several positions where the current incumbent is barely competent.

also (though it makes not one jot of difference in the grand scheme of things) we are fucking shit to watch.
[/quote]

Not really, Neil.

The point people disagreed with was not that we need width, but that a priority was attacking fullbacks.

Fullbacks are mainly required to defend, and having them roam forward isnt a substitute for proper wide midfielders.

Johnson was a luxury we could ill-afford, but there were many factors tying our hands then and there was little choice.

Still, he is a good player and we just need to make the best use of him we can, and I think Kenny's experimenting witrh wing-backs and putting Johnson at LB is trying to do just that.
 
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309977#msg1309977 date=1301905791]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309964#msg1309964 date=1301904748]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=44801.msg1309961#msg1309961 date=1301904216]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309956#msg1309956 date=1301903691]
People need to forget about the fee. It's like adding a £20m player in a transfer window, the only reason it was £35m is because it was proportionate to the Torres deal. If we'd sold Torres for £35m and bought Carroll for £20m no one would have been bothered about how big the fee was for the latter. It was January and the market was inflated.

He's not a £35m player, but he could prove an important part of the team WHEN the team is completed. I don't think the fee necessarily means that we are building the team around him, I think that's a bit naive tbh. He's an option we can utilise, and he's alot better on the ground than people are giving him credit for.

Next season, hopefully teams will be worrying about not just how to negate the threat of Carroll, but how to stop Suarez, how to combat giving away setpieces against us and how to stop the threat of a quality wide player.

He's played a couple of games while half fit aswell, give the lad a chance for fucks sake. It's obvious that we overpaid, but that'll be irrelevant if he becomes a major part of whatever vision Kenny has for us.
[/quote]

i disagree about the fee. if it had been 35 and 20 then i'd have been pretty happy with the carroll fee but extremely disappointed with the Torres fee. i don't really buy - or agree with - john henry's 'Torres + £15m' explanation, for me it should've been more like Torres + £25m.

i still feel pretty much like i did on deadline day: the fee was £10m over the odds, at least, the season had little left to play for, and in any case he was going to be injured for a fair chunk of it. it would've made more sense to have just taken a deep breath and waited for the summer window, so we could've got real value for the £50m we got out of chelsea.

still, this doesn't mean that carroll won't work out for us, just that i think we took an expensive, unnecessary risk. it was bad business imo.
[/quote]

I think there were other factors involved too (tax on the received fee, if it had stayed sat there until the Summer/other players not being available and us needing a striker), though I agree about us overpaying, I thought we were trying to say 'look at us, we're spending big', to save face regarding the loss of Torres.
[/quote]

yes, i agree that it was PR that was basically the main reason we splurged the money. not a good reason imo.

don't think the tax would be an issue: we've got until 31 july of the summer window to spend that money in the current financial year, and in any case i presume the H&G years have left us with substantial losses that we can write off future profits against, not to mention that we'd make the tax saving in the following year anyway by spending the proceeds and reducing profits, so it's only a time (interest income) saving at best.
[/quote]

Agree with this.

I dont think it was all PR though; I think it was mainly desperation. The time frame of the Torres transfer did probably mean that anyone bought would have to be English, and that's always going to hurt the chequebook. It's to the oowners credit that they recognised we needed 2 good strikers instead of just one (a point Vladders has been banging on since the Keane days incidentally).

There's been some talk about how the Torres transfer was more drawn out than we realised, but the speed (and the fact that our negotiation tactic was to basically write out a blank cheque)at which we moved probably does suggest that we actually were caught napping.
 
[quote author=Avvy link=topic=44801.msg1310008#msg1310008 date=1301907843]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309980#msg1309980 date=1301905849]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=44801.msg1309967#msg1309967 date=1301904874]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=44801.msg1309962#msg1309962 date=1301904253]
I don't think carroll is a waste of money, if the summer comes and goes and we haven't bought at least one qulity wide player THEN I'll think carroll is a waste of money because at the moment all carroll is is an excuse for our defenders to hoof it.
[/quote]

Saturday was one of the prime examples of why we need a wide player. When Johnson left the pitch it was game over in that sense, we lost our only real outlet and the midfield just imploded because of it's lack of a natural creative player (besides Ming, who needs movement around him anyway).

Says it all when our biggest threat outwide is a fullback playing out of position.
[/quote]

makes me laugh when some people say they want rid of johnson, we need more like him not less.
I remember arguement on this board where some people were saying we don't need width, ha ha that's right we don't need width...

I think this summer nesv (or whatever tey call themselves these days) need to put up or shut up, they will have my eternal gratitude from saving us from the brink but if they don't want us to disappear into mediocrity they need to address several positions where the current incumbent is barely competent.

also (though it makes not one jot of difference in the grand scheme of things) we are fucking shit to watch.
[/quote]

Not really, Neil.

The point people disagreed with was not that we need width, but that a priority was attacking fullbacks.

Fullbacks are mainly required to defend, and having them roam forward isnt a substitute for proper wide midfielders.

Johnson was a luxury we could ill-afford, but there were many factors tying our hands then and there was little choice.

Still, he is a good player and we just need to make the best use of him we can, and I think Kenny's experimenting witrh wing-backs and putting Johnson at LB is trying to do just that.
[/quote]

with regards to attacking fullbacks, our team is set up in such a way that the width has to come from the fullbacks meaning they have to spend more time upfield meaning there is more chance of them getting caught out of position, they stay compact and in position then lose an attacking outlet.

I thought we could get away with having wide midfielders that come in field every five seconds if our fullbacks were attacking enough, we can't, to get some actual wide midfielders in.
 
How is Carrolls fee relevant.
The reasoning behind the critiscisms of Rafa and the old Americans was that money was wasted and NOT reinvested. If we had REPLACED Keane we would probably have won the league, how much we lost on him is neither here nor there. The important aspect is IF a player fails and is moved on (even for a loss) as many players will always be, that THAT loss isnt used as an excuse to stop re-investment.
To judge Carroll right now is a joke, but to judge him based on a fee invested over a five year contract when we have no idea:
A:If he will succeed
B:How that spend will impact us later in the market
is beyond ridiculous.
I think hes going to be great. If he for some reason isnt and we sell him for a huge loss, the only way that will be worthy of bitterness is if he isnt replaced regardless of cost with a better player.
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=44801.msg1310029#msg1310029 date=1301911845]
How is Carrolls fee relevant.
The reasoning behind the critiscisms of Rafa and the old Americans was that money was wasted and NOT reinvested. If we had REPLACED Keane we would probably have won the league, how much we lost on him is neither here nor there. The important aspect is IF a player fails and is moved on (even for a loss) as many players will always be, that THAT loss isnt used as an excuse to stop re-investment.
To judge Carroll right now is a joke, but to judge him based on a fee invested over a five year contract when we have no idea:
A:If he will succeed
B:How that spend will impact us later in the market
is beyond ridiculous.
I think hes going to be great. If he for some reason isnt and we sell him for a huge loss, the only way that will be worthy of bitterness is if he isnt replaced regardless of cost with a better player.


[/quote]

mate, i just don't see how a transfer fee isn't relevant - it just is. the point is could that £35m have been better spent if we'd held fire and waited for the summer window? i think it could have been. what if we'd spent £50m on him? still irrelevant?

tbh i'm just not following you at all - am i missing something?
 
We know that we overpaid for Carroll. That is not in dispute. We paid a premium for getting him in the January window and at the last minute because with Torres out the door, we only had Suarez as a recognized striker (forget N'gog). That's understandable. No point in beating him with the price tag. He didn't set it.

He hasnt looked the business but has shown signs that he could be a huge asset. The lad came to us injured and is finding his feet at a new club while regaining fitness.

Judge him once we get in quality wingers to provide ammunition and he is fit. The transfer fee usually points to the star quality and ability of a player. Carroll's quality and ability will shine through.

Writing players off so soon is ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

keniget
    • Like
    • Love
  • Locked
Elliot
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
3K
Fabio
Fabio
Frogfish
  • Locked
Should I stay or should I go?
Replies
5
Views
398
StevieM
StevieM
rurikbird
    • Like
  • Locked
The midfield puzzle
2
Replies
50
Views
1K
rurikbird
rurikbird
Farkmaster
    • Like
  • Locked
"I don't claim to be a deity." -God
Replies
2
Views
306
Dreambeliever
Dreambeliever
Frogfish
    • Like
  • Locked
Should they stay or should they go.
2 3
Replies
85
Views
2K
737Max
737Max
Back
Top Bottom