Guest neesy111 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MrSundlofer Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. What sort of example does that set? Give in to player demands or watch them walk out. This things happen all the time in football. If they regard him as invaluable to the team: offer him a better contract and reject offer from Liverpool. Bye the way, good post Thump 1892. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoU Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. What sort of example does that set? Give in to player demands or watch them walk out. Player demands!? He could have just rejected the bid from Liverpool. Also it doesn't seem unusual or unreasonable to me that young players get renegotiate their contracts quite often, when they make a name for themselves. Like going from being a championship striker to a top premiership striker and England international ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MrSundlofer Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? No, but he was one of our most valuable players? We could just have rejected the offer and sell him in the summer (and I think that was the plan.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Remember reading in SBR's book that it was standard procedure to "adjust" a players wages if a bid is rejected from another club to compensate for what the player might have earned at the new club - looks like another case of Ashley and co not understanding football! Having said that if you look at the names that Carroll is alongside in the highest transfers fees list you can empathise with the club a little bit; +£35m is a huge number, if only the equation was as simple as this, i'd rather have £35m invested in the squad with no Carroll than having the current squad with Carroll. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? And if they had given in to Carroll it is tantamount to giving every player in the squad an invitation to rush in and demand to renegotiate their contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoU Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? Of course not, just a damn important player for the clubs future and the fans. Is it unreasonable that his contract reflects that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I was out all day yesterday so couldn't properly follow what happened in full. Would it be correct to say that a 30m bid came in, was rejected, then a 35m bid came in, Carroll said I want a new contract (with presumably higher wages), Cashley and Lambias said no, so Carroll puts in a transfer request to make it easier for the transfer to be made? As far as I understand, they were discussing a new contract before the bids came in. What happened after the 35m bid came in is then up to discussion, Carroll says they withdrew from contract talks and that Derek asked him to hand in a transfer request. Pards and Derek says Andy is an illoyal liar! Why would they negotiate a new deal a few months after agreeing a massive one? It would appear that they offered to renegotiate in the summer after the pressure of the bids, but that wasn't good enough for Carroll/his agent so he jumped ship (and as Thumps script illustrates, the main parties probably all felt ok with that). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Carroll was happy to negotiate a new contract in October. It's not our fault or his that teams from the Champions League/Europe can come and dangle a double your pay offer in front of his nose. We aren't in a position to do that yet, solet's just take the money and rebuild. Andy Carroll is gone and now just another scouse cunt. End of story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thump 1892 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? No, but he was one of our most valuable players? We could just have rejected the offer and sell him in the summer (and I think that was the plan.) We wouldn't have done that. This is the last window without the Financial Fair Play rules so we wouldn't have got anywhere near that for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoU Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? And if they had given in to Carroll it is tantamount to giving every player in the squad an invitation to rush in and demand to renegotiate their contract. Just for the young players that establish themselves as key players for the team and a top player in the division. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. What sort of example does that set? Give in to player demands or watch them walk out. Player demands!? He could have just rejected the bid from Liverpool. Also it doesn't seem unusual or unreasonable to me that young players get renegotiate their contracts quite often, when they make a name for themselves. Like going from being a championship striker to a top premiership striker and England international ! You could argue that it's not unreasonable for the club to ask him to complete his first full season in top flight, and see how he gets on, before renegotiating in the summer, either. Seems AC didn't want to wait. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ads Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. Fucking sick to death of people saying things like this. He was earning a very good wage, and would have earned at least that for the next 5 1/2 years, playing for his boyhood club, wearing the 'famous' number 9 shirt that he dreamt about wearing, playing in front of 50,000 adoring fans every home game. For a geordie lad, that surely has to be worth more than a bigger pay packet somewhere else. He wasn't earning a fucking pittance here for christ sake. Whether it was him, his agent or Ashley and Llambias it was all done out of fucking greed, not for footballing reasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? Of course not, just a damn important player for the clubs future and the fans. Is it unreasonable that his contract reflects that. He could've waited untill the summer, he just signed a new contract ffs no need to be so greedy. as far as i'm concerned and this is coming from a guy whos been behind Carroll since he was in the reserves and never doubted his abillites, he can fuck off, he won't be as good with them as he was with us and hopefully he'll regret moving there. we'll manage without him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoU Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? No, but he was one of our most valuable players? We could just have rejected the offer and sell him in the summer (and I think that was the plan.) We wouldn't have done that. This is the last window without the Financial Fair Play rules so we wouldn't have got anywhere near that for him. And then we wouldn't have sold him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 The facts point to Mike wanting to sell and Carroll wanting to leave, and for £35 million you can hardly blame Ashley, he's absolutely fleeced Liverpool Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Andy Carroll is a disgusting human being. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? No, but he was one of our most valuable players? We could just have rejected the offer and sell him in the summer (and I think that was the plan.) 1. He handed in a transfer request. 2. We wouldn't get anywhere near that price in the summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnonel Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? And if they had given in to Carroll it is tantamount to giving every player in the squad an invitation to rush in and demand to renegotiate their contract. Just for the young players that establish themselves as key players for the team and a top player in the division. Could Ashly have done everything to keep Carrol? Yes. He could have paid him 200k a week, purchased him 15 houses in the bahamas, and a years supply of strippers, but that isnt the point is it? Its a management nightmare if you give in. Carrol isnt that special that he can demand an increase after a few months. Holy crap that is so presumptous. He had ample time to negotiate a 5 year contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thump 1892 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. f***ing sick to death of people saying things like this like. He was earning a very good wage, and would have earned at least that for the next 5 1/2 years, playing for his boyhood club, wearing the 'famous' number 9 shirt that he dreamt about wearing, playing in front of 50,000 adoring fans every home game. For a geordie lad, that surely has to be worth more than a bigger pay packet somewhere else. He wasn't earning a f***ing pittance here for christ sake. Whether it was him, his agent or Ashley and Llambias it was all done out of f***ing greed, not for footballing reasons. Completely agreed. I'm sure most of us would play for the club if our living and travel expenses were paid; wearing the shirt is pay enough for me if I'm honest. Now wearing the number 9? Not even worth thinking about how little I'd ask for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Remember reading in SBR's book that it was standard procedure to "adjust" a players wages if a bid is rejected from another club to compensate for what the player might have earned at the new club. Standard procedure under a regime that had no control over its spending. As I said before, it's fair enough for Carroll to use this rival offer to attempt to get a pay rise from NUFC (I've done that myself at work). But Ashley is well within his rights to tell him to bugger off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Remember reading in SBR's book that it was standard procedure to "adjust" a players wages if a bid is rejected from another club to compensate for what the player might have earned at the new club - looks like another case of Ashley and co not understanding football! Having said that if you look at the names that Carroll is alongside in the highest transfers fees list you can empathise with the club a little bit; +£35m is a huge number, if only the equation was as simple as this, i'd rather have £35m invested in the squad with no Carroll than having the current squad with Carroll. Interesting that is. According to a few on here thats completely ridiculous Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ads Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. f***ing sick to death of people saying things like this like. He was earning a very good wage, and would have earned at least that for the next 5 1/2 years, playing for his boyhood club, wearing the 'famous' number 9 shirt that he dreamt about wearing, playing in front of 50,000 adoring fans every home game. For a geordie lad, that surely has to be worth more than a bigger pay packet somewhere else. He wasn't earning a f***ing pittance here for christ sake. Whether it was him, his agent or Ashley and Llambias it was all done out of f***ing greed, not for footballing reasons. Completely agreed. I'm sure most of us would play for the club if our living and travel expenses were paid; wearing the shirt is pay enough for me if I'm honest. Now wearing the number 9? Not even worth thinking about how little I'd ask for. Exactly my point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 The facts point to Mike wanting to sell and Carroll wanting to leave, and for £35 million you can hardly blame Ashley, he's absolutely fleeced Liverpool Exactly, I'm not angry or disappointed in Ashley (for this) because any owner would have done the same. I'm gutted with Carroll over this though, he's destroyed my faith that any footballer could care about more than money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's clear Ashley wanted: the money from the transfer > Andy Carroll. He just could have offered Andy Carroll an improved contract and he still would have been here. So was Carroll bigger than club then? Of course not, just a damn important player for the clubs future and the fans. Is it unreasonable that his contract reflects that. The contract was only signed in October iirc, since when he's done a very good half a season and is now out injured for some time. The club said they would look at the contract in the summer when he's done a full season (less time missed when he's injured) and renegotiate then and I can't see that as being unreasonable. I really rate Carroll but Liverpool have taken a huge financial risk with this deal imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts