Unbelievable Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 From a purely footballing perspective, it's a handy upgrade on Best. Absolutely nothing more. Not worth the drama or the outlay, and i would count 50% of his current wages in that - before anything daft like a £13-17m transfer fee. What? He would still be third choice, like Best was. It would be an upgrade to our third choice striker - a potentially expensive one at that. How hard is that to understand? Well, it's nonsense really. He would give us a completely different option either in a 442 partnering Ba or Cisse, or coming on if we need to play more direct in a match because things aren't going our way and we need to try something different. In terms of squad position you're probably right, in terms of ability and tactical options it's not even close FFS.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaus Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Playing long ball is the way to get the best out of carroll, however using that would be detrimental to the rest of the team and how they play together IMO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 From a purely footballing perspective, it's a handy upgrade on Best. Absolutely nothing more. Not worth the drama or the outlay, and i would count 50% of his current wages in that - before anything daft like a £13-17m transfer fee. What? He would still be third choice, like Best was. It would be an upgrade to our third choice striker - a potentially expensive one at that. How hard is that to understand? Surely the point is he could be much more than a 3rd choice striker though. The Carroll we had for half a season was nigh on unplayable at times, as good a striker as I've ever seen in tha air and by no means bad on the deck either. It'd be a very competitive battle for spots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest koye Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 How many games did he actually play under Pardew? Can't have been many Three games. Liverpool, City, Spurs. Scored against Liverpool and City. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 How many games did he actually play under Pardew? Can't have been many Looks like just 3 games actually, forgot about that. Scored 2 goals & assist. Was Pool, Man City & Spurs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I hope somebody is watching Debuchy. He might get lost and wander off in all this fuss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 We'll be taking a big step backwards if he's Demba's replacement. Ba is such a better player and goalscorer overall than Carroll, imo. I think its clear now that we've worked through a list of targets that haven't come off and our finger has slid down to Carroll. Despite our calibre of players I'm still sceptical as to our style of play reverting back to what it was back in January/February under Pardew. I disagree with that. We've seen an opportunity after it became reasonably public knowledge that Liverpool would let him go, nothing more sinister than that. I agree. We know what the club are like for waiting for the right player/deal to come along, De Jong didnt happen so if they can still get a striker in without having to shell out, it means they can wait for who they want. Its a no lose situation for us if it comes off. Carroll will get a few goals in the Waffa too for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I would only take him back on loan like, certainly wouldn't want it to be permanent without him proving himself. Anything over £10m would be poor business on our part as I doubt we'd ever be able to shift him for more than that after making mugs of Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Another thing is that i honestly can't see why the player would want to come back here. If he wanted to leave Liverpool on loan, it would be to rejuvenate his career - which has taken an early wounding. But doing it here would come with a shitload of baggage: he'd have to win back the fans' hearts as well as trying to sort out his actual football. Don't see how it would be a sensible option for him, unless he's changed his mind about Pardew. It just seems a pretty mental fit for all three parties; us, Liverpool and Carroll. I think there are two sides to that. You could say that he'd thrive playing and living in his home region and wants to win back the fans. Look at Pienaar. Go on, look at him. As much of a cunt i think Carroll is (and a fucking lucky one at that, should we actually complete this transfer/loan deal) - i'd have to owe him at least an ounce of respect for taking on the challenge of reinstating his name into 'Geordie folklore', for want of a better phrase. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Despite our calibre of players I'm still sceptical as to our style of play reverting back to what it was back in January/February under Pardew. This is an important point btw. Carroll was long gone and yet we'd not made this supposed seismic shift to better football. http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,91772.0.html This was after 26 games. We were comfortably 6th. There are some posts in there that might look embarrassing looking back, but it can't be denied that there were loads of games last season that didn't exactly qualify as 'carpet football'. Pardew's style of play with these players was still being questioned over two-thirds of the way through the season. It's ridiculous IMO to suggest we're a completely different side now, since we came back up we've played some great stuff and some dogshit. The intention might be there to progress to better football every week, but if it is then we must believe Carroll can fit into this anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Just been reading this and a few other forums I frequent, my view: I've seen some complaints that this will signal 'hoofball' or the end of 4-3-3. The first thing is that I really cannot see Ba leaving as there seem to be no suitors who are in a better position than us, so would Carroll even be first choice? As third choice we couldn't get much better tbh. I like the sentiment of a free flowing 4-3-3 but it was probably destined to be a predominantly 4-4-2 set up most of the time. I see no real reason why with better footballers in defence (Debuchy, hopefully) our style of play will be poor in a 4-4-2. Also, I'm not sure about the hoofball. When he played for us we complained there was too much long ball and said he is actually much more effective when we work it around. People sometimes forget how well he was developing as an overall footballer from Jan 2010 onwards. We may see a few punts now and then because he's so big, but I think with the quality of players in our side we'll mix it up and play mostly the passing football we all seem to crave. The 5-1 was his best display for us I think, and he was a menace on the ground as well as in the air. Sounds as though I'm really pro this deal, but I voted no actually. Burnt his bridges for me with the dive. But should we get him I could see it working well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This is absolutely mind blowing to me. It's like the last year and half didn't happen or something. People would be totally happy to go back to the old game of long ball? We're not that far removed from it but our style of play is so much better than it has been in recent memory yet 64% (accord to the poll at the moment of this post) people want to go back to our old style? Is success not entertaining enough? In short, I thought we had moved past this kind of shit (said player and stupid board decisions) as a club. 6-7 games at the end of the season and were Barcelona. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Would hate it if it was a loan. Firstly because we would basically being doing those bastards a favour by trying to get him back in form. Secondly because if he came back and was brilliant it would hurt the fans when he left again. oh and if we did sign him for money and he turned out he couldn't recapture his old form again then the joy of taking all that cash off liverpool would be gone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This is the very definition of a deal I'm on the fence about. PROS: Still quite young Clearly loves the club and the city Unquestionably talented, albeit perhaps in a style not conducive to attractive football Presumably chastened after what would be an embarrassing 18 months Loan means risk is small; I'll withhold judgment on the future fee until it's known CONS: How will his high wages be perceived in a tight dressing room w/ few high earners? What role would be play? Would he be amenable to 3rd choice status? Where would the future fee come from? Does his presence necessitate hoofball? Can he play on the ground? I find myself leaning more towards trusting Pards and the staff. I don't think they would sanction it unless Carroll and the squad were onboard. Carroll is a serious talent and if a return home can't generate the best from him, we won't pay a fee, and that'll be that. If he plays to his potential, the fee will seem quite reasonable. Quite a way to liven up a dull as f*** last few weeks, though. Aye great summing up that. Same thoughts/conclusion for me. Gotta trust in Pards after last season & the potential is there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliassenfredrik Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Also it's too easy to say he's got no ball ability whatsoever, which first of all isn't true, secondly people's judgment is clouded because of the way the deal happened and his goal tally last season. His technique is fine, and his potential is undeniable. Carroll was piss poor in like 1/2 to 3/4 of the season, the same way Ba was piss poor from basically January/February to May. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 He'll come back, we'll see then. Agree with this. He'll be back before his Liverpool contract is up for less than £10m. We knew Taxfree, we knew................... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Would be happy with a loan back. If it's a replacement for Ba I wouldn't be pleased, but as a different option coming from the bench or starting certain away games, I'd be very happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 From a purely footballing perspective, it's a handy upgrade on Best. Absolutely nothing more. Not worth the drama or the outlay, and i would count 50% of his current wages in that - before anything daft like a £13-17m transfer fee. What? He would still be third choice, like Best was. It would be an upgrade to our third choice striker - a potentially expensive one at that. How hard is that to understand? Well, it's nonsense really. He would give us a completely different option either in a 442 partnering Ba or Cisse, or coming on if we need to play more direct in a match because things aren't going our way and we need to try something different. In terms of squad position you're probably right, in terms of ability and tactical options it's not even close FFS.. Why are people forgetting that he looked like a total fucking carthorse for the majority of his time at Liverpool? I won't deny that he looked like a good player at the time he left us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Because its the most effective way of using him. He is average at best in terms of passing and movement. An effective long ball bully. Can't believe people don't think he has more to his game than this after seeing such a vast improvement in his overall game in the space of 12 months with us. As me and a few others said at the time, it was probably the steepest improvement I've ever seen in a player within that amount of time. He's gone backwards a bit now of course, but he's still young. His all round game during those 12 months (call it a purple patch if you like, whatever) was outstanding, he was arguably the best striker in the league before Christmas in our first season back up and he was looking like a total world beater. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanSkÃrare Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This perception of his inability to play good football is a bit weird. It derives from the impression people have of him at Liverpool. They've been fucking shit for the entire time he's been there. Remember his performance against the mackems for example. Couldn't do any wrongs, linked up well, showed signs of pace and was a menace all round. I he offers so much more than just his heading, he showed it so much when at Newcastle. It's up to the team not to resort to launching it towards him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Also think playing in the black and white once again would add that bit extra to his game that's been missing at Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mackem Logic Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Hmmm, still undecided about this. Don't like the idea of him coming on loan, if there was a chance he'd find his form again, and go back to LOLerpool. And even at £17m (if that is the buy-out fee), not sure I'd want us to pay that much for him, to bring him back premanently. Also as other comments, not sure I want our style of play/formation to change to accommodate him. He struggled at LOLerpool because they didn't hoof it/cross it onto him, and England had to resort to that when he played in the Euros. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 He'll come back, we'll see then. Agree with this. He'll be back before his Liverpool contract is up for less than £10m. We knew Taxfree, we knew................... Oh look we got something right. Pathetic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuy_O Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I hope somebody is watching Debuchy. He might get lost and wander off in all this fuss. This, i'll be f***ing seething if that goes tits up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I dont recollect us hoying it long in the Championship, or under Hoots in the Premier.......the lad is better than just hoying it to his head. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts