Unbelievable

Where has that 25% bollocks come from? Either way, I'm not interested in a permanent deal unless it's a real steal, and this ain't it. Hope they've got it wrong.

An actual quote from the player today probably goes a long way towards explaining why he chose them over us in my opinion:

Nothing on the Voetbal International site. Sounds like more bollocks from talksport.

As much as I can see why we're after him, I wouldn't want us to shell out anywhere near that much before he's proved to be a good fit and able to recapture his earlier form in a season long loan. For that kind of money as a permanent transfer I'd rather we look elsewhere.

If that was true, why did Rodgers specifically hint at a Carroll loan, not an actual transfer out of the club?

Were Spurs midtable when they bid 25 milion? I'm not. I just fail to see why people would be so opposed to bringing Carroll back on loan, thus saving money for other priority positions and giving us a different option up top. As I've already said, I won't shed a tear if we don't get him in as long as we get another quality forward in and I will completely trust Carr, Pardew and Mike for once in whatever decision they make, as they've earned that trust. I'm not advocating buying Carroll at 15 million if we have better options just to get one over Liverpool or anything. I do happen to think that a lot of people are oversimplifying what getting Carroll back in would mean for our set-up and underestimating what the player himself could add to our squad though, as you may have noticed..

The very same one that we had a loan bid rejected for yes. Sorry i was rather stupidly working on what Liverpool want to do rather than what they wont accept What makes you think we will offer what Liverpool want? We do a deal on our terms or we walk away, it's that simple.

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=295667.0 Some of the comments, christ are these fuckers clueless. 13 million plus Ba.. We'll offer a 1 million loan fee and to pay half of his wages for a year loan, with maybe a fixed fee at the end of that, and if they don't accept that they can fuck right off.

The same Carroll we're trying to get for a nominal loan fee?

Were Spurs midtable when they bid 25 milion?

At the moment, he's a big asset to a lower-to-mid table Premiership team, because although he's not that versatile, he is guaranteed to cause defences a certain amount of trouble. If your aim is survival or consolidation (as was the case with us when we came up), then he's your man. For teams who are aiming to win things, his movement doesn't look good enough for the kind of intricate interpassing and swapping of positions that teams like that use to open up defences. And they're the clubs who pay big wages and transfer fees. He's yet to prove that he can make that jump. Liverpool thought he could and have now changed their minds. None of the mega-clubs seem to think he's ready. Ashley, the arch-gambler, seems willing to take the chance. He could be proved right of course. Me, I'd go for Hoilett. He's not worth 15 million because he's not good enough to play in a side that can afford £15 million. Stop embarassing yourselves please. He's 23, an important player for your national team and he was valued at considerably more than 15 million by several clubs at the top end of the table only 18 months ago. He IS 23. That much is true. He's not an important player for England and many rubbish English players are valued very highly based on very little. You're getting nowhere with your crusade tbh. Spurs bid 25 million for him, and Liverpool got him for 35 million a mere 18 months ago. Those are the facts, like it or lump it. His value has undeniably dropped since then, but to say he will never again be valued at anything over 15 million or play for a team in the top half of the table is just shortsighted. I'm not on a crusade btw. I'd be exstatic if we manage to unearth another Cisse don't get me wrong, but the fact we've been priced out of a move for a relatively unproven prospect like Luuk de Jong should tell you those bargains aren't as easy to find as some suggest.

At the moment, he's a big asset to a lower-to-mid table Premiership team, because although he's not that versatile, he is guaranteed to cause defences a certain amount of trouble. If your aim is survival or consolidation (as was the case with us when we came up), then he's your man. For teams who are aiming to win things, his movement doesn't look good enough for the kind of intricate interpassing and swapping of positions that teams like that use to open up defences. And they're the clubs who pay big wages and transfer fees. He's yet to prove that he can make that jump. Liverpool thought he could and have now changed their minds. None of the mega-clubs seem to think he's ready. Ashley, the arch-gambler, seems willing to take the chance. He could be proved right of course. Me, I'd go for Hoilett. He's not worth 15 million because he's not good enough to play in a side that can afford £15 million. Stop embarassing yourselves please. He's 23, an important player for your national team and he was valued at considerably more than 15 million by several clubs at the top end of the table only 18 months ago.

I'm sorry Sewelly, but to suggest he has no clever movement or composure in front of goal after you've just re-watched all his goals knowing what Jayson has just laid out in front of you (60% of those were not headers) you are just being biased and unwilling to admit you were talking rubbish when you claimed he was fully dependent on crosses in my humble opinion. However, seeing as we're apparently not going to agree even faced with the same facts and footage, let's agree to disagree and hope we bring in the best possible forward we can get to compliment our Demba's, whoever that may be. Edit: I would also like to add, as pointed out previously by another poster as well, that as far as through balls are concerned, Carroll back then was dependent on service from the likes of Alan Smith and Nicky Butt from central midfield, so it's hard to count that against him, as I don't believe even Ba or Cisse would have exactly thrived on such service.

Same.. We know no shame..

None of our wingers/midfielders are seemingly the type to be putting crosses in for him. Ben Arfa cuts inside and prefers to shoot, take players out of the game, play a through ball, cut a ball across the box etc. By all accounts (I'm trusting madras on this) Marveaux is a similar player if he can keep fit. Cabaye loves to look for incisive passes. Jonas for me is far better at that side of the game than he is the traditional crossing. Even Santon if he's played at left back is liable to cut inside and run towards goal then look for a pass to a teammate (Cisse's first vs Chelsea). The only player in our potential set-up next season that may be in a prominent position to swing crosses over is Debuchy and he's not even an NUFC player as of right now. Thing is - Ben Arfa for eg can put a good cross in because he has the technique and skill to do so, like for Cisse's first against Liverpool. But it isn't any of those players strengths and we shouldn't be asking them to set up like that on a regular basis. Broken record but I see him adding to nothing to us but as maybe an effective plan B which is what he is right now at Liverpool anyway. This is doing my head in, you both implying he is completely dependent on crosses and only scores from headers. I urge you to have a look back at the goals he's scored for us and Liverpool. There's quite a few headers there, maybe even 50% of his goal tally, but there's also plenty of scorchers, tap ins and well worked goals. I could understand this argument coming from a supporter who only looks at a player's main attribute and goes from there, but you both have seen him with your own eyes playing for us for crying out loud.

You must have missed his FA Cup final goal. Cisse would have been proud of that bit of skill.

It's easy to suggest "someone pacey and able to operate wide in the 4-3-3", it's proved a lot harder to actually come up with a name that's a major improvement over what we have and who is willing to come here. It looks like Hoilett's just turned us down for crying out loud, so I would like to challenge you: name names. Also, you seem to have fallen face first for the "tall = needs crosses" fallacy. Thought you were better than that. Of course Carroll needs crosses. I thought you were bigging him up on the basis of how he played for NUFC first time round. His aerial prowess was about £30m worth of that £35m. You were suggesting crosses from the wide areas in open play were you not, seeing as you mentioned full backs and wide players? How many times in a match do we get an opportunity to swing a set piece (corner or free kick) in the box? 10? 15? How effective have we been in converting these half chances last season? Not very, have we? I can only remember a Ba header for a corner. Also, most of his goals for us in the Premiership didn't come from crosses. You must have forgotten about his sweet left foot. To suggest Carroll is all about crosses is completely misunderstanding what he is about. No wonder you are so dead against this move. I also notice you have once again ignored my question of who else you'd get that we could realistically attract and who would be a more effective addition to our current range of forwards? Dunno, I didn't know about the availability of Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Cisse, Santon, Tiote... Isn't that what Graham Carr is supposed to specialise in? Yes he does have a good left foot but his aerial game is most definitely the biggest and best part of his game and our players all play their best stuff on the floor. His movement for example is not as lumbering as some of his displays last season suggested but compared to Ba and Cisse, it is infinitely worse than both when the likes of Cabaye, HBA, Jonas, are looking to slide a pass. As I said in reply to johnnypd ealier, maybe the fact we are in for Carroll is an indication that we have been unable to unearth another gem for the forward line. Your Cisse's don't grow on trees you know? Look, I fully trust Carr, Pardew and even Mike by now to do what's best for the club. If they are in for Carroll it suggests to me they think he represents the best piece of business of (or maybe even over) the forwards we have identified as priorities this summer (on our terms, i.e. loan deal with option to buy). I can see their reasoning, you can't which is fine. I hope we manage to find somebody better value and who fits our current assets better. I'm not sure that player exists however..

You're making it sound like we're trading the pair for Carroll if we do a deal. Going back FFS.. So you accept that when they're both fit and available (did either have a single injury last season), he sits on the bench? If Pardew feels a starting formation of 433 is the best way to go, yeah probably. How many times has that happened last season? You'd seriously drop Ba or Cisse for him in a 4-4-2? All about opinions but i think that's barmy. Yes, in a flash. Seeing what Ameobi or Best's (relatively decent) target man play did to Demba Ba and just imaging a lethal striker feeding of knock downs from Carroll as well as Carroll and either of them working the through balls from the likes of Cabaye and Ben Arfa would have me quite excited. From what I've seen so far, Ba and Cisse seem excellent at their own specialist area, but I'm not convinced they work so well as a parnership. Early days though, but I can certainly see the potential in either of them being partnered to Carroll.

It's easy to suggest "someone pacey and able to operate wide in the 4-3-3", it's proved a lot harder to actually come up with a name that's a major improvement over what we have and who is willing to come here. It looks like Hoilett's just turned us down for crying out loud, so I would like to challenge you: name names. Also, you seem to have fallen face first for the "tall = needs crosses" fallacy. Thought you were better than that. Of course Carroll needs crosses. I thought you were bigging him up on the basis of how he played for NUFC first time round. His aerial prowess was about £30m worth of that £35m. You were suggesting crosses from the wide areas in open play were you not, seeing as you mentioned full backs and wide players? How many times in a match do we get an opportunity to swing a set piece (corner or free kick) in the box? 10? 15? How effective have we been in converting these half chances last season? Not very, have we? I can only remember a Ba header for a corner. Also, most of his goals for us in the Premiership didn't come from crosses. You must have forgotten about his sweet left foot. To suggest Carroll is all about crosses is completely misunderstanding what he is about. No wonder you are so dead against this move. I also notice you have once again ignored my question of who else you'd get that we could realistically attract and who would be a more effective addition to our current range of forwards?

Scott Sinclair (not good enough for me but the type of player i mean) So not Scott Sinclair then..

You're making it sound like we're trading the pair for Carroll if we do a deal. Going back FFS.. So you accept that when they're both fit and available (did either have a single injury last season), he sits on the bench? If Pardew feels a starting formation of 433 is the best way to go, yeah probably. How many times has that happened last season?

It's easy to suggest "someone pacey and able to operate wide in the 4-3-3", it's proved a lot harder to actually come up with a name that's a major improvement over what we have and who is willing to come here. It looks like Hoilett's just turned us down for crying out loud, so I would like to challenge you: name names. Also, you seem to have fallen face first for the "tall = needs crosses" fallacy. Thought you were better than that.

You're making it sound like we're trading the pair for Carroll if we do a deal. Going back FFS..

Dirty dealings? What was reported in the Dutch media is Anita had a face-off meeting with Overmars recently and has apparently argued he wants a new contract or a transfer fee for which Ajax would be willing to let him go. Maybe Skysports got the wrong end of the stick?

Wonder where Sky got this from BTW. There's nothing in the Dutch media as far as I can gather, and the biggest ajax fansites are not reporting anything of the sort.