Guest neesy111 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. it means to me that they aren't prepared for players to take the piss. if carroll wanted the new contract at the end of the season after having a good season then he may have had a point...not 3 month after agreeing a contract just because someone has bid for him and that is the crux here, he wouldn't have been wanting a new contract if liverpool hadn't bid and offered huge wages. pure greed. Exactly, why didn't Carroll ask for new contract last week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 This is starting to feel like the South Park episode "Two Days Before The Day After Tomorrow", when everyone just forgets about the issue at hand and are just focusing on who is to blame. Honestly, I don't really care. I'm blaming Carroll, but I can certainly see why people will blame Ashley/Llambias. Let's just hope we can keep our decent run going and get a win on Wednesday; Carroll would not have played that game anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I also have no doubt now that Carroll was forced by the club into submitting a transfer request. But, after he said he wanted to leave. how forced ? he was told if you want to leave submit a request, pretty normal wouldn't you think. I mean he said he wanted to leave, and th club said they would only let him go if he put it in writing that he wanted to go. Forced in the sense that he'd rather have went without submitting the request. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 How can anyone take this: “And then I was allowed to talk to Liverpool. The owner then made it clear to me that I was not wanted at the club. “Saying that his own helicopter is waiting for me to go down to talk to them. “So being shown I’m not wanted I said OK I will talk to them. Then suddenly the bid was rejected. And decide that our poor owner was caught offguard by the whole thing. The poor guy obviously wanted to keep Carroll till he wanted more money. He wanted him out of the door man. We werent rejecting anything, it was all negotations & manipulation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Striker Andy Carroll says Newcastle asked him to hand in a transfer request before his £35m move to Liverpool. The 22-year-old, who signed a new deal in October, claims he was in talks over an improved contract when it became clear that he was no longer wanted. No you are twisting the words for your own benefit, the club said they would not offer him a new one because they had given him one just 2 months earlier. He and his agent took this as a sign the club didn't want him and hence the transfer request. how could they take it as a sign that the club didn't want him and not just that they didn't see why they should hand out a new contract after the players played half a dozen games or so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. So whenever a player has a good patch, he should get another payrise 2 months after his last? I'm on the board's side when it comes to not giving him a new contract. Not claiming they're completely blameless, but I'm not arguing on the lack of new contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You're missing the point, I'm asking why Carroll would have submitted a transfer request if he didn't want to go. Because it was made clear that he wasn't as much wanted as the £35M. But you don't need to submit a transfer request to be sold, you just need to agree to leave. (I won't post this again, sorry, I know it's going round in circles) The transfer request thing...I think it's a case of Ashley etc trying to run things "by the book." "I'll leave if I don't get a new contract!" "Can we have that in writing?" I think that's the hookline and sinker, well played by Ashley & Co in business respects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnonel Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I also have no doubt now that Carroll was forced by the club into submitting a transfer request. But, after he said he wanted to leave. how forced ? he was told if you want to leave submit a request, pretty normal wouldn't you think. I mean he said he wanted to leave, and th club said they would only let him go if he put it in writing that he wanted to go. Forced in the sense that he'd rather have went without submitting the request. tough shit then, if you want out then do it through the proper channels. (see given) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 He did not deserve a new contract months after signing another one, wasn't 30k a week enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 How can anyone take this: “And then I was allowed to talk to Liverpool. The owner then made it clear to me that I was not wanted at the club. “Saying that his own helicopter is waiting for me to go down to talk to them. “So being shown I’m not wanted I said OK I will talk to them. Then suddenly the bid was rejected. And decide that our poor owner was caught offguard by the whole thing. The poor guy obviously wanted to keep Carroll till he wanted more money. He wanted him out of the door man. We werent rejecting anything, it was all negotations & manipulation. Yeap, after submitting the transfer request. Not before, AFTER. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. it means to me that they aren't prepared for players to take the piss. if carroll wanted the new contract at the end of the season after having a good season then he may have had a point...not 3 month after agreeing a contract just because someone has bid for him and that is the crux here, he wouldn't have been wanting a new contract if liverpool hadn't bid and offered huge wages. pure greed. Ofcourse he wouldnt have wanted it otherwise. Surely a bid of 35 million for a player changes things quite drastically no? This is a remarkable situation. If someone is being valued by anywhere near that much he isnt usually on anywhere near 30k a week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... That's a fair shout, something I've wondered. Surely could've grabbed one or two players from them to help us for the rest of the season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 How can anyone take this: And then I was allowed to talk to Liverpool. The owner then made it clear to me that I was not wanted at the club. Saying that his own helicopter is waiting for me to go down to talk to them. So being shown Im not wanted I said OK I will talk to them. Then suddenly the bid was rejected. And decide that our poor owner was caught offguard by the whole thing. The poor guy obviously wanted to keep Carroll till he wanted more money. He wanted him out of the door man. We werent rejecting anything, it was all negotations & manipulation. Do you blame Mike Ashley for wanting to sell Carroll for 36m. There's not many clubs in the world who would have turned that down, in fairness. It's all helped by Carroll's actions and the fact that he is "trouble". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. So whenever a player has a good patch, he should get another payrise 2 months after his last? I'm on the board's side when it comes to not giving him a new contract. Not claiming they're completely blameless, but I'm not arguing on the lack of new contract. As I said in another post, it makes you wonder what was negotiated in October. Did he settle for less then? But Ashley giving Carroll use of his helicopter hardly creates the idea they wanted to keep him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... So true we were losing a striker at the end of the window, we should have demanded a player on loan from them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Carroll said: “I was in talks about a new contract and talking to the gaffer about that." OK, end of story. Really. That's it. he has backed up what Pards said... because if you are in talks about a proper new deal its not with your manager its with your Chairman. Yep. In fact the story is quite clear now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 How can anyone take this: “And then I was allowed to talk to Liverpool. The owner then made it clear to me that I was not wanted at the club. “Saying that his own helicopter is waiting for me to go down to talk to them. “So being shown I’m not wanted I said OK I will talk to them. Then suddenly the bid was rejected. And decide that our poor owner was caught offguard by the whole thing. The poor guy obviously wanted to keep Carroll till he wanted more money. He wanted him out of the door man. We werent rejecting anything, it was all negotations & manipulation. Yeap, after submitting the transfer request. Not before, AFTER. No, he asked for the transfer request after we rejected the 2nd bid. Which happened after Ashley offered him his helicopter. Go read it again. You're being sold nonsense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You're missing the point, I'm asking why Carroll would have submitted a transfer request if he didn't want to go. Because it was made clear that he wasn't as much wanted as the £35M. don't forget the extra £50k per week aswell. And probably a bung to match the Liverpool sweetener and then of course his agent would want his slice of the action whichever way it went. In total Dekka and Ashley were probably looking at a £50M to keep him on the books. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... That's a fair shout, something I've wondered. Surely could've grabbed one or two players from them to help us for the rest of the season. There isn't one player in their squad who i'd have taken. Might as well hike up the price Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. it means to me that they aren't prepared for players to take the piss. if carroll wanted the new contract at the end of the season after having a good season then he may have had a point...not 3 month after agreeing a contract just because someone has bid for him and that is the crux here, he wouldn't have been wanting a new contract if liverpool hadn't bid and offered huge wages. pure greed. Ofcourse he wouldnt have wanted it otherwise. Surely a bid of 35 million for a player changes things quite drastically no? This is a remarkable situation. If someone is being valued by anywhere near that much he isnt usually on anywhere near 30k a week. tough, thats one of the things with contracts, had he stayed and been shit would he have took a pay cut ? no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 so Carroll pretty much admits he was after more money. OK thats not cool, but its also clear the club aren't prepared to stump up to keep better players at the club. Don't expect much progress from now on. Both are to blame. it means to me that they aren't prepared for players to take the piss. if carroll wanted the new contract at the end of the season after having a good season then he may have had a point...not 3 month after agreeing a contract just because someone has bid for him and that is the crux here, he wouldn't have been wanting a new contract if liverpool hadn't bid and offered huge wages. pure greed. Ofcourse he wouldnt have wanted it otherwise. Surely a bid of 35 million for a player changes things quite drastically no? This is a remarkable situation. If someone is being valued by anywhere near that much he isnt usually on anywhere near 30k a week. Just because a club is desperate enough to bid ridiculous money for a player, doesn't mean we should give him a payrise. Especially two months after his last payrise. That's the worst bit, 2 months, he couldn't even wait until the end of the season before trying it ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 He did not deserve a new contract months after signing another one, wasn't 30k a week enough. Clearly because of his 1 England appearance thinking he deserves 70-80k a week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... That's a fair shout, something I've wondered. Surely could've grabbed one or two players from them to help us for the rest of the season. Who? Their team is fucking garbage apart from their two new strikers man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 What I dont understand in addition to all the other noise is why we didnt get some other players from liverpool? ngog on loan, take some of the youngsters, etc They obviously desperately wanted him, why not rape their youth academy at the same time.... That's a fair shout, something I've wondered. Surely could've grabbed one or two players from them to help us for the rest of the season. Who? Their team is fucking garbage apart from their two new strikers man I can't say I know who, I know fuck all about the Liverpool squad, but surely there would have been a couple of players in there they would've parted with who could've played a fair role for us, even just until the end of the season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts