West Ham agree fee in region of £15m with Liverpool for Andy Carroll

[Unbelievable]

Trying to get me head round this and I'm leaning towards the 'no thanks' bracket.

 

Unless he's seen as an impact player then he simply does not fit in to how we play now. We've evolved since he left and he has arguably gone the other way. Anyone with eyes could see our late success last season was based solely around the 4-3-3 we adopted. People on this forum were twisting about our direct play or 'hoof ball' in the middles stages. If Carroll comes then we should be prepared for plenty of that.

 

I would be astouned if this was the clubs solution to replace Ba should he leave, even though that is incredibly far fetched.

 

If the move back here completley rejuvinates him as a player and indeed as a person then it may work out, but unless he's prepared to sit on the bench and work 10x harder, then I cant work out why we need him.

 

 

I have eyes and yet I disagree. We got results earlier on in the season playing 442, and when we moved to 443 we sometimes moved back within or between matches. It's not like we were shit before we started playing 3 up top and then suddenly were on fire. I'd argue the return of Ben Arfa in the side and the sensational form of Cisse were more conducive to us being sometimes more pleasing on the eye in the latter part of the season, but neither would be lost if we did decide to move for Carroll, who would be very effective foil for either Ba or Cisse in a 442 (more so than them pairing up together arguably) and be an excellent option to bring on and move to 442 if for whatever reason 443 is not working out in a match (as we've also seen happen a few times).

[Jayson]

From a purely footballing perspective, it's a handy upgrade on Best. Absolutely nothing more.

 

Not worth the drama or the outlay, and i would count 50% of his current wages in that - before anything daft like a £13-17m transfer fee.

 

What?

 

He would still be third choice, like Best was. It would be an upgrade to our third choice striker - a potentially expensive one at that. How hard is that to understand?

 

Well, it's nonsense really. He would give us a completely different option either in a 442 partnering Ba or Cisse, or coming on if we need to play more direct in a match because things aren't going our way and we need to try something different. In terms of squad position you're probably right, in terms of ability and tactical options it's not even close FFS..

 

Why are people forgetting that he looked like a total f***ing carthorse for the majority of his time at Liverpool? I won't deny that he looked like a good player at the time he left us.

 

Because it can be explained? Just as Ba's form can be for us, unless you're one of those who wouldnt mind him hopping it now purely due to some poor form.

[Tiresias]

Do we even have the setup to exploit him as a plan B though? I guess 10 mins to go every game we're losing on comes Ryan Taylor for Ben Arfa and Carroll for Cisse?

[Dave]

I hope somebody is watching Debuchy. He might get lost and wander off in all this fuss.

 

This, i'll be f***ing seething if that goes tits up.

 

[wor jackie]

He'd be potentially 3rd choice striker but as mentioned, he'd be desperate to make it again here which could see him recapture his form and we could really get a good bargain out of it. We undoubtedly play better football now but Carroll is a brilliant alternative as we saw in the Sweden game and weren't we worst from set plays last year? Cisse, Ba, Carroll and the Ameobi's is earth-shatteringly better than when we had Carroll, Lovenkrands, Best, Nolan and Shola. Good move if it happens PLUS it completely takes every iota of piss out of Liverpool which I like.

 

[Minhosa]

The interesting element here is now 'Player Power'.

 

Now that he knows we're in for him, he's not going to want to go anywhere else. If, and I suspect this is the case, we've turned his head I just can't see him accepting going anywhere else and it's already clear Brendan Rodgers wants rid, he ain't gonna stay around there whatever happens.

 

Pardew and Llambias have always been extremely complimentary about him in public, literally from the minute he left to the programme note from DL about our fans slagging the lanky haired gypo off, they've never been anything other than fullsome in their praise of him.

 

He's coming back folks, the question is merely what the terms are.

[Yorkie]

Gah i just don't know what to think. Every rational thought inside me is saying that he's a cunt who doesn't deserve his chance for us again - and on top of that has been total garbage for 18 months. I'm not even concerned about a potential return to 'long-ball', cos i never saw us as that sort of team anyway, even under Hughton. It's the morality of it, and the potential fees involved.

 

There would be something quite romantic about it should it all work out, though. It's a tempting one but... i dunno. You've got your 'Nobby Solano returns', which was sensible in every way, as well as sentimental. This seems to be more at the 'Kevin Keegan returns' end of the spectrum. I just think we could get somebody better, and this is a shift from the typical transfer policy of the last couple years.

[steve_69]

Pardew has been quite vocal about wanting to address our lack of goals from set pieces. He said he wants to sign a cb who could get us 7-8 goals per season. Perhaps this is just a different answer to the same problem.  Doesn't mean we'll start playing long ball football at all. Can you imagine Cabaye, Santon, Ben Arfa etc playing aimless hoof ball?

[Tiresias]

I don't think he was so much off form at Liverpool as much as in a team not built to his strengths under a manager who had no tactical awareness. Here we have the awareness I expect but anyone to deliver balls from out wide?

[Jayson]

Will take a lot of convincing from Pards to get Carroll coming back to our fans & not feeling like hes admitting a huge failure still.

[Guest bimpy474]

The interesting element here is now 'Player Power'.

 

Now that he knows we're in for him, he's not going to want to go anywhere else. If, and I suspect this is the case, we've turned his head I just can't see him accepting going anywhere else and it's already clear Brendan Rodgers wants rid, he ain't gonna stay around there whatever happens.

 

Pardew and Llambias have always been extremely complimentary about him in public, literally from the minute he left to the programme note from DL about our fans slagging the lanky haired gypo off, they've never been anything other than fullsome in their praise of him.

 

He's coming back folks, the question is merely what the terms are.

 

Very true this, From Pards up they have praised the lad and not slated him at all.

[Minhosa]

He'll come back, we'll see then.

 

Agree with this.

 

He'll be back before his Liverpool contract is up for less than £10m.

 

We knew Taxfree, we knew...................

 

Oh look we got something right.

 

Pathetic.

 

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[Big Geordie]

'Lanky haired gypo'

[Unbelievable]

This is absolutely mind blowing to me.  It's like the last year and half didn't happen or something.  People would be totally happy to go back to the old game of long ball?  We're not that far removed from it but our style of play is so much better than it has been in recent memory yet 64% (accord to the poll at the moment of this post) people want to go back to our old style?  Is success not entertaining enough?

 

In short, I thought we had moved past this kind of s*** (said player and stupid board decisions) as a club.

 

6-7 games at the end of the season and were Barcelona.

 

[Guest bimpy474]

I don't think he was so much off form at Liverpool as much as in a team not built to his strengths under a manager who had no tactical awareness. Here we have the awareness I expect but anyone to deliver balls from out wide?

 

Aye, Liverpool didn't cross the ball for him at all, you dont have to play long ball to get crosses in for him. KKK was/is/always will be a crap manager and cunt of a homosapien.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I dont recollect us hoying it long in the Championship, or under Hoots in the Premier.......the lad is better than just hoying it to his head.

 

Agreed with the first bits. We played some good stuff under Hughton and although we did play direct at times, it wasn't simple hood ball which we did deploy under Pardew, with and without Carroll.

[BleedsBlackAndWhite]

I was against the loan idea to begin with but if we could get him back for a year and have an agreement that we get him for a certain fee then it's a good deal - if he does well then great let's have him for less than half of what we sold him for, if he bombs then he's Liverpool's expensive problem again.

 

Maybe i have missed something as the post are coming fast and furious and i am skim reading them.

 

What stops Liverpool from taking him back after the season if he does amazing and selling him on to another club for a bigger fee than arranged with us? or is that not an option?

[Guest bimpy474]

He'll come back, we'll see then.

 

Agree with this.

 

He'll be back before his Liverpool contract is up for less than £10m.

 

We knew Taxfree, we knew...................

 

Oh look we got something right.

 

Pathetic.

 

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

 

Well i had to that one in, i see it so often on here that i though it must my turn to use it

[Darth Crooks]

Pardew has been quite vocal about wanting to address our lack of goals from set pieces. He said he wants to sign a cb who could get us 7-8 goals per season. Perhaps this is just a different answer to the same problem.  Doesn't mean we'll start playing long ball football at all. Can you imagine Cabaye, Santon, Ben Arfa etc playing aimless hoof ball?

 

Carrol at CB? Could think of worse candidates

 

[Guest bimpy474]

I dont recollect us hoying it long in the Championship, or under Hoots in the Premier.......the lad is better than just hoying it to his head.

 

Agreed with the first bits. We played some good stuff under Hughton and although we did play direct at times, it wasn't simple hood ball which we did deploy under Pardew, with and without Carroll.

 

Aye, we did use much more long ball under Pardew than Hoots. I think the lad will be fine back here.

[Interpolic]

I was against the loan idea to begin with but if we could get him back for a year and have an agreement that we get him for a certain fee then it's a good deal - if he does well then great let's have him for less than half of what we sold him for, if he bombs then he's Liverpool's expensive problem again.

 

Maybe i have missed something as the post are coming fast and furious and i am skim reading them.

 

What stops Liverpool from taking him back after the season if he does amazing and selling him on to another club for a bigger fee than arranged with us? or is that not an option?

 

I think a lot of these loans with an option to buy have a fixed fee at the end of it where the loaning club gets first option.  Might be wrong, just seems to ring a bell.

 

If so then that would be a good deal for us but if not then I'd share you concerns.

[junkhead]

He's at home in Newcastle. The first time the fans roar him on, it'd be be like he never left. I have no doubt that he'll regain his form here. Not sure if Liverpool would deal with us though.

 

[Stuy_O]

Trying to get me head round this and I'm leaning towards the 'no thanks' bracket.

 

Unless he's seen as an impact player then he simply does not fit in to how we play now. We've evolved since he left and he has arguably gone the other way. Anyone with eyes could see our late success last season was based solely around the 4-3-3 we adopted. People on this forum were twisting about our direct play or 'hoof ball' in the middles stages. If Carroll comes then we should be prepared for plenty of that.

 

I would be astouned if this was the clubs solution to replace Ba should he leave, even though that is incredibly far fetched.

 

If the move back here completley rejuvinates him as a player and indeed as a person then it may work out, but unless he's prepared to sit on the bench and work 10x harder, then I cant work out why we need him.

 

 

I have eyes and yet I disagree. We got results earlier on in the season playing 442, and when we moved to 443 we sometimes moved back within or between matches. It's not like we were s*** before we started playing 3 up top and then suddenly were on fire. I'd argue the return of Ben Arfa in the side and the sensational form of Cisse were more conducive to us being sometimes more pleasing on the eye in the latter part of the season, but neither would be lost if we did decide to move for Carroll, who would be very effective foil for either Ba or Cisse in a 442 (more so than them pairing up together arguably) and be an excellent option to bring on and move to 442 if for whatever reason 443 is not working out in a match (as we've also seen happen a few times).

 

Cisse's goals and Ben Arfa's form no doubt yeh, but imo we looked a far far more dangerous side playing 4-3-3 than 4-4-2. I also think Cabaye looked much more comfortable in that formation than 4-4-2.

 

I admit Carroll offers something different, but again I'm not sure he's gonna come to want to come here and not start.

[Mick]

 

 

Very true this, From Pards up they have praised the lad and not slated him at all.

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Liverpool-striker-Andy-Carroll-worth-f-all-claims-Newcastle-MD-Derek-Llambias-article829815.html

[Sifu]

It's been mentioned but I do have some issues with Carroll's behaviour off the pitch. He is a cunt (even when he was playing for us) and I am concerned about what his presence would do to squad harmony. Seem to remember Soderberg saying that Carroll liked to get into random fights over nowt...