Optimistic Nut Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 There's not a chance Carroll would have been allowed to go for that though given we rejected £30m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Ok I give up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 exactly.... chelsea is overpaid us... basically liverpool already set their price... 15 mill + carroll (because they aware chelsea wont give big sums of money because they got upper hand... Torres was already sulk). If liverpool gonna get direct 50 mill... why on earth they buy carroll... they can bid for aguero... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 That doesn't make any sense at all, Chelsea DID pay £50m for Torres. I don't understand this 'they wouldn't pay £50m'thing, either scenario they paid £50m for him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 it seem doesn't make any sense jon.... but business competition is tricky as that... Chelsea direct giving massive 50 mill to liverpool. its like giving rival a pistol to shoot urself. Chelsea rather giving us the money because they see us more weaker than liverpool. Would aguero come to us even we had 50 mill? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
High Five o Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 That doesn't make any sense at all, Chelsea DID pay £50m for Torres. I don't understand this 'they wouldn't pay £50m'thing, either scenario they paid £50m for him Did not understand this myself. Chelsea went £50m in red anyway you look at it. Liverpool payed £35m to us. Liverpool should have spent the £35m better, so should Chelsea with the £50m. There was only one winner, that's us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Ok so they wouldn't give Liverpool £50m because it would be mad to strengthen a rival so instead they give them £35m and one of the hottest young prospects in the country at the time. Makes sense Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It clear... chelsea wasn't rated Carroll at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What the fuck has happened in here? :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 So Chelsea said to Liverpool you must buy Carroll and we will pay £15m more for Torres? You are saying that because if Liverpool went elsewhere and bought say Lukaku instead Chelsea would have pulled the plug on the deal as they rated him or because he was just basically someone else and not Carroll. If that is the case, mike Ashley has photos of RA and JH humping the shit out of each other with two way dildos, it's the only thing that makes sense. Juni is wrapped up in Liverpool's propaganda, never thought he was the type so easily led. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Either way, we extracted a very good price for Carroll. Based on his form now it looks mental, but based on his form then it would have been cheap to sell him for £20m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Chelsea did not buy Carroll. Liverpool did. They didn't have to buy him for that amount of money. Tired of hearing about how 'Chelsea paid for Carroll'. No, they overpaid for Torres. Two wrongs don't make a right I believe the saying goes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What the f*** has happened in here? :lol: Wondering the same tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Chelsea did not buy Carroll. Liverpool did. They didn't have to buy him for that amount of money. Tired of hearing about how 'Chelsea paid for Carroll'. No, they overpaid for Torres. Two wrongs don't make a right I believe the saying goes. Well yeah, but they created the circumstances in which Liverpool thought it was OK to pay £35m for Carroll. They would never have paid that if they hadn't brought in £50m for Torres. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 i can't understand for the life of me what everyone's on about here liverpool said we'll sell you torres for whatever carroll costs + 15m (to pay off Suarez i believe) and Chelsea agreed, what's to argue about? Chelsea presumably had a limit they were also willing to pay for Torres so if liverpool had said aguero + 15m i'm sure it wouldn't have happened Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I don't get the deep discussion about it all, tbh. As far as I can see, Ashley simply held on for an off her deemed worth it. Liverpool held out for the same with Chelsea. They were both, especially in hindsight, over the odds. Just because they happened one after the other, doesn't mean there was some agreement in place between particular clubs. They just managed to persuade each other to squeeze the ridiculous amount they wanted out of each other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tisd09 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 This past page has been like a bad trip. WTF I'm confused. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 This past page has been like a bad trip. WTF I'm confused. makes two of us plus wormy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penn Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 i can't understand for the life of me what everyone's on about here liverpool said we'll sell you torres for whatever carroll costs + 15m (to pay off Suarez i believe) and Chelsea agreed, what's to argue about? Chelsea presumably had a limit they were also willing to pay for Torres so if liverpool had said aguero + 15m i'm sure it wouldn't have happened It's a ridiculous argument that I thought only Liverpool fans were stupid enough to buy. By this logic, if Ashley had accepted £20million for Carroll, Liverpool would have sold Torres for £35million, despite Ambramovich being willing to part with more and therefore screwing themselves out of £15million for no particular reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 i can't understand for the life of me what everyone's on about here liverpool said we'll sell you torres for whatever carroll costs + 15m (to pay off Suarez i believe) and Chelsea agreed, what's to argue about? Chelsea presumably had a limit they were also willing to pay for Torres so if liverpool had said aguero + 15m i'm sure it wouldn't have happened It's a ridiculous argument that I thought only Liverpool fans were stupid enough to buy. By this logic, if Ashley had accepted £20million for Carroll, Liverpool would have sold Torres for £35million, despite Ambramovich being willing to part with more and therefore screwing themselves out of £15million for no particular reason. what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGSC Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenny Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I'll have the David Silva please.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Was just gonna post that - has to be a wind-up, surely??!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Fuck off is that real. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts