Unbelievable

Which wide ranging conclusions are these?

Doesn't sound like he's jumping with joy at the prospect of Andy rejoining..

Bugger, wanted him here. Good signing for them.

That can't be it. There's no nudity in it.

Probably us telling them to go on strike to get the price down. I reckon Mike & Decka would try any underhand tactic to drive the price down. Mind you, so long as we get the signing over the line am I really bothered? I don't know how they do it, but they've got getting players willing to run through brick walls to sign for us down to a tee apparantly. We are absolute masters in using player power effectively to our benefit. I must see me this video they show prospective players!

"Topic des tomates lancées à Debuchy" No idea what lancees means but I reckon that's something about Debuchy being the topic of tomatoes lancees = thrown/launched

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

Awaiting confirmation I think. FC Twente are believed to be in talks with Luc Castagnois as his replacement.

As long as we don't get burned by the tactic backfiring people will like it. Wouldn't have been the same if Colo would have got injured costing us our European challenge after the failure to get a back up centre back in last January.

"Topic des tomates lancées à Debuchy"

Yet when we are in for another club's best player people expect the other club to just bend over and get frustrated when they don't. Luuk de Jong anyone? In another thread somebody said it would be "easy" to get another top striker for under 10 mill as an alternative to Carroll. Cisse was an exceptional deal which came about due to the fact Freiburg suddenly were prepared to sell for half their original asking price. Unfortunately something like this doesn't happen very often. What worries me slightly is Mike has proven before he is willing to gamble on not getting a player in if he feels there's no exceptional deal to be made (centre back all of last season).

Whats he know, he hasn't even signed for us yet.

This thread..

Seems reasonably fast and quite strong for his age and size. I don't think he will ever be an effective threat in the air though, but he is a combative, tenacious little player who keeps a team ticking over by keeping possession (likes to play the simple ball instead of the Hollywood cross). You know who he reminds me off actually in the way he played today: Vurnon Anita!

Are we really? If we do reasonably well in all competitions we will hit somwhere around that mark. I'm sure I read Fulham played what was in effect an extrahalf a season with added UEFA Cup/FA/League The started in the very first qualifying round, I think. I just don't like presuming we will have loads of extra games when we might not. Perhaps I am just pessimistic. Seeing as that argument is only really relevant when it comes to the number of strikers, not the actual players, are you happy to go into a full season with 4 competitions with 3 strikers only, one of which can't run for more than half an hour? If you are, you're not nearly as pessimistic as you think.. No, of course not. I recognise we need another forward, not Carroll though. Although my post wasn't directed at the Carroll debate, more at the general acceptance that we will have loads more extra game. It was slightly irrelevant looking back as we still need another forward.

Now THAT's what I call pessimistic. If we lose Ba we'll no doubt go for 2 strikers, as we would then only have Cisse and Shola left..

Are we really? If we do reasonably well in all competitions we will hit somwhere around that mark. I'm sure I read Fulham played what was in effect an extrahalf a season with added UEFA Cup/FA/League The started in the very first qualifying round, I think. I just don't like presuming we will have loads of extra games when we might not. Perhaps I am just pessimistic. Seeing as that argument is only really relevant when it comes to the number of strikers, not the actual players, are you happy to go into a full season with 4 competitions with 3 strikers only, one of which can't run for more than half an hour? If you are, you're not nearly as pessimistic as you think..

Are you working your way back in time? Keep at it, in a few hours you may remember when Carroll played for us and ripped defenses apart in the black and white.

Are we really? PL - 38 EL - 10 FA - 3 CC - 3 You have no way of knowing that, you're guessing. If we win our Europa League qualifier we're immediately looking at the group stages, so 10 is not unrealistic unless we drop at the first hurdle. Fuck knows how far we'll go in the domestic cups but add in the preseason matches and that figure is hardly unrealistic and could even be on the low side if we manage to go far in the CC or FA Cup for once.

Why would he come to SJP to not sort his move? Is he doing a stadium tour?

Its a pretty insane thing to re-read, people just losing their f***ing marbles to be honest but mostly due to the "Ashley's forced Carroll to leave and will pocket the money" bullshit. I'm not sure how many people actually believed he was worth more than £35m and if they did well.. I don't know what to say to that Happy to say I made it pretty clear in that thread that I didn't think Carroll was worth what Liverpool were offering even at the time of the transfer. As far as Carroll's current value goes, I think he's worth about £15m, that's what I generally always thought he was worth outside of the extra you want to sell an important player late in the window. But I don't think he's worth £15m to us right now. I agree with people who say he shouldn't be a starter for us and I don't think £15m is a good fee for a third choice striker (fourth choice if we play three up front with Ben Arfa). Having said that I wouldn't pay £16m for De Jong either and given the choice of £16m for De Jong and £12m for Carroll (which is what you mentioned earlier though it looks like they want more than that) I'd probably go with the later. Earlier in that famous January transfer window I distinctly remember Spurs being reportedly in for him (didn't 'arry actually say something in public to that effect as well) and the transfer fee quoted was 20 million plus, which a lot of people on here also rejected out of hand as unrealistic. There's a lot of history rewriting going on it seems: back then he was the brightest English striker prospect and the player everybody talked about. That 35 million bid didn't come out of the blue. It may seem daft now, but he was actually well worth over what we're supposedly ready to pay to get him back now (and only if he impresses in a loan first if reports are correct).

Well, all the players' wifes and girlfriends were out of town tbf..

I don't know how to say it in English. "football féminin" Quick, say you have undergone gender transformation or you'll never get rid of the perverts on here..

Bullshit, it was down to Pardew's tactics and lack of trust in his players as to why we played it long. We played some lovely stuff towards the end of the season with those two you mention at the back for example. Pardew changed the shape and system of the side to suit our players and gave them more freedom hence our better football and better results even. This long ball stuff is grossly overplayed if you ask me. It's not as if we only hoofed it long in the 442 formation, then didn't ever punt it long as soon as we turned to 433. Tim Krul has kicked it long all season for example, as have some defenders (Simpson, Williamson being the main culprits), which suggests it's also a tactical preference from Pardew. Maybe he just likes to mix it up? One thing is for sure though: a long ball to Carroll with Cisse and/or Ba feeding off the knockdowns looks a lot more effective on paper than punting it long to Cisse as we have also done aplenty in this supposed carpet football period.