magorific Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Anyone else think Dalglish's car-crash management has much to do with Carroll's woes? (lumped long balls from Carragher & co rather than early balls in from wide areas). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Anyone else think Dalglish's car-crash management has much to do with Carroll's woes? (lumped long balls from Carragher & co rather than early balls in from wide areas). I think this is so actually. I just think that Dalglish isn't the best sort of manager to get the best out of Carroll. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 I'd have him back like. Could do with someone to keep Perch company on the bench. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Could he rediscover his form if he returned to his home town ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiLvOR Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 I think it wouldn't work having him back. Would he intergrate well with the team again behind the scenes? Not so sure. Would love to be proved wrong but I can't see him coming back anytime soon, if ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Some funny stuff in the mailbox on F365. Turns out they may have overpaid. And it's Comolli's fault, of course. http://www.football365.com/mailbox/7299111/Andy-Carroll-As-Bernard-Bresslaw-And... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Has had his hair chopped Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 This is where it REALLY does downhill, can't think of a player who has ever recovered from chopping off their locks tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Or maybe Liverpool is his bizarro world. So chopping it off will restore his powers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Totti. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Or maybe Liverpool is his bizarro world. So chopping it off will restore his powers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Has had his hair chopped pics? x Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Has had his hair chopped Pics? I quite liked it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Really sad. I want to see too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I've no pics, just know the lad who did it. It's much shorter apparently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 You've 'bumped into' Carroll in each corner of the UK and now you know his barber? Lovejoy is the male version of that girl from He's Just Not That Into You. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Going off his previous ITK I am guessing Carroll has in fact got extensions and now looks like Rapunzel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magpie99 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Going off his previous ITK I am guessing Carroll has in fact got extensions and now looks like Rapunzel Yeah, he is playing like her too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It wasn't liverpool who paid 35 mill for carroll but it was chelski... Liverpool term was easy 15 mill + Carroll & Torres is dead cert want away... & Chelski must paid whatever Newcastle asking. I don't know why Liverpool fans still keep banging they are over paid 35 mill for Newcastle. It was Abramovich pocket we getting rob. Liverpool own money was for buying Luiz Suarez. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It wasn't liverpool who paid 35 mill for carroll but it was chelski... Liverpool term was easy 15 mill + Carroll & Torres is dead cert want away... & Chelski must paid whatever Newcastle asking. I don't know why Liverpool fans still keep banging they are over paid 35 mill for Newcastle. It was Abramovich pocket we getting rob. Liverpool own money was for buying Luiz Suarez. Liverpool could have, for example, spent £7m on Demba Ba. Ridiculous argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It wasn't liverpool who paid 35 mill for carroll but it was chelski... Liverpool term was easy 15 mill + Carroll & Torres is dead cert want away... & Chelski must paid whatever Newcastle asking. I don't know why Liverpool fans still keep banging they are over paid 35 mill for Newcastle. It was Abramovich pocket we getting rob. Liverpool own money was for buying Luiz Suarez. They could simply reject Ashley's "Torres - 15m" proposal. They could still get 50m from Chelski for Torres and spend elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I highly doubt Chelski would paid 50 mill for Torres... because Torres head already else where. Chelsea got upper hand in those situation. But Liverpool try to be sneaky to get the best of the deal by including Carroll for the term. In the end Chelski was overpaid us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I highly doubt Chelski would paid 50 mill for Torres... because Torres head already else where. Chelsea got upper hand in those situation. But Liverpool try to be sneaky to get the best of the deal by including Carroll for the term. In the end Chelski was overpaid us. I really don't know Liverpool is that generous to fight till the last day after such a long saga for Newcastle. No wonder we have to sell Enrique that cheap. Good pals ah? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Here the article... mentioned Torres price was depend on Carroll price... mentioned by liverpool chairman. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/6723796/ If we ask & get only 20 mill for carroll... torres to chelsea was just 35 mill. No way on earth chelsea was putting & paying 50 mill direct to liverpool.... thats mean u strengthen your title challenger rival. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts