OzzieMandias

Gutted that it's Liverpool, like. I could have handled it better if it was Chelsea or Man U.

This is why the romantics are putting themselves through ludicrous contortions trying to blame it on anyone except the player who obviously wanted to go for the £££. Anything rather than forsake that illusion.

I'll make my mind up on this one when the money is either spent or not spent. We didn't do much with the Woodgate money and ended up losing our manager who would piss all over the current one. fucking hell man mick - how long before you spot the trend. You mean the tendency of many posters to descend into gibbering lunacy?

£35 million for selling a young player who's handed in a transfer request? Worse than Hitler tbh.

Its not the order of events I'm arguing with, its the events themselves. Anyone who reckons Carroll was made to put in a transfer request is a lunatic in my book (and that includes that horrible saggy faced contemptuous twat on SSN). But to answer your questions. Obviously yes we've sold our best striker, no I'm not happy but I'm not as suicidal as some on here. All Newcastle fans deserve much better, from Andy Carroll. But as good a player as he is and as much as I supported him because he was a Newcastle player I've never been under the illusion that he's anything but a horrible big headed twat in reality, so it doesn't surprise me that much. Where it puts Ashley's plan is actually totally in Ashley's hands, he can do alot with that money if its spent on the right players. £35m spent on 4 quality players would put us in a much better position then we were with Carroll in the side and no new players. I actually do believe we can progress, but the key will be the summer. The club should no longer be losing big money and we've received £35m for Carroll, so I expect major moves in the summer. Without them I'll lose any belief in Ashley. Doubt we'll receive £35 million all in one lump, like.

Mike could quite easily have said, No, Andrew, I will not allow you to leave, your transfer request is refused. This is not unheard of in the world of professional football.

I'm sorry, but this is the just about the dumbest argument I've ever heard on here -- and that's saying something.

Carroll handing in a transfer request will have cost him a fortune, he hasn't done that for PR. Presumably it costs him a little less than the extra dosh he'll make from his salary at Liverpool over the life of the contract.

agreed

I think it's a totally moronic argument.

Hopefully they'll do the decent thing and remove themselves from the gene pool -- or at least stop spouting shite on here.

In a midfield with Joey Barton, Hatem Ben Arfa and Stephen Ireland, it'll be a sane fourth player who doesn't fit in.

What a daft thread! Any good player who's ever done well for us, except the one or two on whom we made a handsome profit.

Be perfect, really. After a season of loyal bench-warming at Man City, he can have a taste of life in the second tier while Fraser Forster becomes a Premier League legend.

If he's good enough to play for one of the regular CL clubs, he'll end up playing for one of those clubs. I imagine we might be able to hang on to him for a couple of seasons, though.

In the light of the new evidence that has been brought to light during this discussion (thanks Mick!), I am happy to amend my original statement: People keep saying this. We "know" no such thing, What we DO know (those of us who have been paying attention, anyway) is that a) Ashley has put about £136.5 million into the club so far while just £1 million out*, and b) he has said that all money from player sales will go back into the squad, and that, from the accounts published so far, this has indeed been the case. *Assuming Greg's reading of Mick's illegible (to me) posting is correct.

Illegible here.

The fact is that he has taken money out of the club which goes against "Ashley has taken absolutely no money out of the club so far." Where the money came from that he did take out is anybodies guess but it did come out during the financial year so it had to come from somewhere. He hasn't been in a position to take much out because the club hasn't produced enough cash to pay the bills. We've been told that we're on our way to breaking even so nothing will stop him taking money out again, even if he has to put more in later, like he did during the year ending 30th June 2009. If you're right -- and the jury is out until you provide any kind of actual proof that you are -- then I agree that this destroys the literal sense of my statement. The general point I was making -- that it flies in the face of all available evidence to assert that we "know" that Ashley will "trouser" any money that might come in from the sale of Carroll -- remains, however, untouched.

http://www.sundaysun.co.uk/news/north-east-news/2010/05/02/newcastle-united-accounts-reveal-111m-debt-79310-26358985/ Last set of accounts show that the club owes him £111 million, and that “Subsequent to the year end, the ultimate controlling party, Mr MJW Ashley, has advanced additional funding of £25.5m.” So obviously he's taking out loads, like.

The last set of accounts. OK, I understand that you can't be bothered to make your case.

I, on the other hand, find it hilarious.

It's more like £250 million.

Ashley has taken money out of the club and it was in out accounts, he didn't take much but it was a few £million. Link?

People keep saying this. We "know" no such thing, What we DO know (those of us who have been paying attention, anyway) is that a) Ashley has taken absolutely no money out of the club so far, and b) he has said that all money from player sales will go back into the squad, and that, from the accounts published so far, this has indeed been the case. I don't really want it to happen, because we all need our heroes, but there's a rational argument for selling Carroll for big bucks and using the proceeds to rebuild the squad, much as Everton did with Rooney. It would be nonsense to try to do this now, though, days before the end of the transfer window.

get over it homo.