madras Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 More fool Liverpool fans then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhilB Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 For £35m, I'd say they could have got pretty much any other striker in the league, bar Rooney or any of the Man City ones. That's what it all comes down to, they pissed it away on Andy Carroll, when they possibly could have had RvP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." could that be cover for "oops we made a boo boo" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhilB Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." could that be cover for "oops we made a boo boo" No, he more or less said the same thing a few weeks after the transfers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." could that be cover for "oops we made a boo boo" No, he more or less said the same thing a few weeks after the transfers. So you are happy the board thought it was more important to please the fans short term (with Andy Carroll) than long term? If you would have hold on to that money, Aguero was sold for the same amount in the summer (I know that Liverpool wouldn't have been able to compete with City for wages, but that's the sort of player you should get for that kind of money). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 I like the fact that they've paid so much for him that Red Sox fans started getting worried Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 i just love the idea of chelsea saying "you agree a fee with noocarsel for whatever and add 15mill on, naw problem" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhilB Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." could that be cover for "oops we made a boo boo" No, he more or less said the same thing a few weeks after the transfers. So you are happy the board thought it was more important to please the fans short term (with Andy Carroll) than long term? If you would have hold on to that money, Aguero was sold for the same amount in the summer (I know that Liverpool wouldn't have been able to compete with City for wages, but that's the sort of player you should get for that kind of money). I'm happy they're willing to spend money, why wouldn't I be? That they take the fans seriously is a boost after Hicks and Gillet so no criticism from me. Andy Carroll is still young, has a lot to learn and at times has shown why we wanted him, at others a dismal failure. It's up to him to adapt to Liverpool, if he can't then he'll be sold on, an expensive flop. Personally, I don't like him as a player or a person and wouldn't have spent 5 million on him. I hope he comes good because he's now a Liverpool player, but if he doesn't I won't lose any sleep over the fee. What makes you think any of the players you mention would have come to Liverpool with no European football? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 i just love the idea of chelsea saying "you agree a fee with noocarsel for whatever and add 15mill on, naw problem" That's the part which does it for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 then why not hang onto the cash until the summer when the market where its less insane? face facts it was an insane decision to sign carroll and liverpool threw away 35m which could have been much better spent We didn't have enough strikers. The owners would have been seen as the new Hicks and Gillet if they would have hung on to the money. do you really think they are that bothered for 4 month ? Asked if Liverpool did overpay for Carroll and the other players, Henry suggested the new owners did, to reassure fans: "There was a lot of criticism in Boston that we weren't going to spend money on the Red Sox after we did the Liverpool transaction," Henry explained. "Then there was the fear we wouldn't spend in Liverpool." could that be cover for "oops we made a boo boo" No, he more or less said the same thing a few weeks after the transfers. So you are happy the board thought it was more important to please the fans short term (with Andy Carroll) than long term? If you would have hold on to that money, Aguero was sold for the same amount in the summer (I know that Liverpool wouldn't have been able to compete with City for wages, but that's the sort of player you should get for that kind of money). I'm happy they're willing to spend money, why wouldn't I be? That they take the fans seriously is a boost after Hicks and Gillet so no criticism from me. Andy Carroll is still young, has a lot to learn and at times has shown why we wanted him, at others a dismal failure. It's up to him to adapt to Liverpool, if he can't then he'll be sold on, an expensive flop. Personally, I don't like him as a player or a person and wouldn't have spent 5 million on him. I hope he comes good because he's now a Liverpool player, but if he doesn't I won't lose any sleep over the fee. What makes you think any of the players you mention would have come to Liverpool with no European football? You're happy that they are wasting money on players that aren't worth half as much as you're paying for them? Wouldn't you rather they'd have kept the money and spent it wisely in the summer instead of an insanely expensive gamble? One that didn't pay off, might I add, as you failed to qualify for Europe anyway, which surely must have been the point? I don't think you would have had any chance in signing Aguero, City were always going to get him, but I don't think tempting Arsenal with a £35m offer for Van Persie (early in the summer, before they lost Fabregas and Nasri), and throwing some of that cash you wasted at Downing or Henderson towards his wages would have been impossible. Money talks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 I like the fact that they've paid so much for him that Red Sox fans started getting worried I love that there are fans on this side of the world that say Lebron James suiting up for Liverpool would be more exciting to watch and he'd be more useful than Carroll. Sad how far Andy's stock has dropped Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 wait so your happy for money to be utterly thrown away on Carroll, Henderson and Downing £70m plus on those 3 boggles the mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Lebron is the biggest shithouse in the world ever Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PhilB Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 wait so your happy for money to be utterly thrown away on Carroll, Henderson and Downing £70m plus on those 3 boggles the mind Henderson is a good player and getting better, still young and best is yet to come, I'll judge whether he was worth 16 mill at the end of the season, maybe next season even. Downing has lost a bit of form lately, but was playing really well before that, I'm happy to judge him at the end of the season too. I've said what I think Carroll was worth. I don't give a lot of attention to fees, if the manager thinks the player is good for Liverpool then I'll go along with it, and it's open to opinion as to whether it's been 'utterly thrown away' We're a better squad than last year, we're playing better football and we're a younger team. Still a work in progress but going in the right direction imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 wait so your happy for money to be utterly thrown away on Carroll, Henderson and Downing £70m plus on those 3 boggles the mind Its the Liverpool way... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 wait so your happy for money to be utterly thrown away on Carroll, Henderson and Downing £70m plus on those 3 boggles the mind I don't give a lot of attention to fees, if the manager thinks the player is good for Liverpool then I'll go along with it, and it's open to opinion as to whether it's been 'utterly thrown away' This certainly seems to be the opinion of Liverpool fans these days. I somehow feel that not too many were saying the same thing this time last year though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Will turn out to be the worst pound for pound Liv signing ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 wait so your happy for money to be utterly thrown away on Carroll, Henderson and Downing £70m plus on those 3 boggles the mind I don't give a lot of attention to fees, if the manager thinks the player is good for Liverpool then I'll go along with it, and it's open to opinion as to whether it's been 'utterly thrown away' This certainly seems to be the opinion of Liverpool fans these days. I somehow feel that not too many were saying the same thing this time last year though. They definitely wouldn't be saying it if they were Hodgson signings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 How long is Carroll's contract again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 How long is Carroll's contract again? 5 ½ years IIRC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 How long is Carroll's contract again? 5 ½ tears IIRC. Tidied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 How long is Carroll's contract again? 5 ½ years IIRC. Ta. He should really make a New Year's Resolution - stop drinking and stop going out so much in 2012 otherwise the next 4 and a half years will be crap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 How long is Carroll's contract again? 5 ½ tears IIRC. Tidied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts