oldtype Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Man U fan I know told me he'd bite my hand off for a carrick-Nolan swap. Tells you all you need to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Man U fan I know told me he'd bite my hand off for a carrick-Nolan swap. Tells you all you need to know. That Nolan is a lot better than some of our fans give him credit for? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Quite like Carrick myself, albeit his level has dropped. If he applies himself he's got plenty to offer. His drop in form is interesting. It's like Fergie doesn't rate him at all anymore. Quite the departure from a couple of years ago. Smacks of big boy reject and his next move would represent a risk for the buyer in terms of whether they could improve his form. Also, with Tiote doing so well, I'd be inclined to be after an attacking midfielder with a view of being Nolans replacement over the medium term. Not sure therefore that we could justify the wages Carrick would be on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Just tells me that oldtype's mate is crazy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 I wouldn't swap Nolan for Carrick either, not a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Me neither, because of his worth to us as a team, but Nolan would look drastically out of his depth in Manure's midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_69 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Carrick is past his best. No thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Carrick is wrongly categorised as a defensive midfielder because he sits so deep. He's a ball player who needs time to operate, time to get that extra touch in and then he looks like quite a classy player as his range of passing is quite impressive. He was much more forward thinking at Spurs though, he just seems to be happy now to patrol the middle of the park. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Carrick is wrongly categorised as a defensive midfielder because he sits so deep. He's a ball player who needs time to operate, time to get that extra touch in and then he looks like quite a classy player as his range of passing is quite impressive. He was much more forward thinking at Spurs though, he just seems to be happy now to patrol the middle of the park. Would you need him alongside a Tiote though? I'd prefer a Nolan/Ben Arfa anyday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Carrick is wrongly categorised as a defensive midfielder because he sits so deep. He's a ball player who needs time to operate, time to get that extra touch in and then he looks like quite a classy player as his range of passing is quite impressive. He was much more forward thinking at Spurs though, he just seems to be happy now to patrol the middle of the park. Would you need him alongside a Tiote though? I'd prefer a Nolan/Ben Arfa anyday. I wouldn't want us to sign Carrick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Remember what happened the last time we got a midfielder on the decline from Man U? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Remember what happened the last time we got a midfielder on the decline from Man U? OVERHEAD KICK GALORE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 He's on about Smith, surely? We at least had one decent season from Butt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. Carrick is miles better than both. Don't really want him here like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 I just wanted to say "OVERHEAD KICK GALORE" tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 He's on about Smith, surely? We at least had one decent season from Butt. http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00981/alansmith1909getty_981023c.jpg But I agree, Carrick's miles better but we've no need for him. Like Butt and Smith we'd just be signing them because he's available and he's come from Man Utd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Because it's a stupid thing to say. We stick in a bid for Ronaldo, "Hang on lads, do you remember the last player we bought from Real Madrid". They may be midfielders, and they may be on the decline, but Carrick is better than both Smith and Butt, so the fact we got both of them when they were on the decline is a pointless thing to say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Because it's a stupid thing to say. We stick in a bid for Ronaldo, "Hang on lads, do you remember the last player we bought from Real Madrid". They may be midfielders, and they may be on the decline, but Carrick is better than both Smith and Butt, so the fact we got both of them when they were on the decline is a pointless thing to say. Carrick is on the decline, just as Butt and Smith were when we bought them. Ronaldo is a whole different kettle of fish to Michael Owen, not even worth discussing that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 I wouldn't want us to sign Carrick, but he's superior to both Smith and Butt when we bought them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Because it's a stupid thing to say. We stick in a bid for Ronaldo, "Hang on lads, do you remember the last player we bought from Real Madrid". They may be midfielders, and they may be on the decline, but Carrick is better than both Smith and Butt, so the fact we got both of them when they were on the decline is a pointless thing to say. Carrick is on the decline, just as Butt and Smith were when we bought them. Ronaldo is a whole different kettle of fish to Michael Owen, not even worth discussing that. But them being on the decline says nothing about their ability. They are three completely different players and at different ages/stages of their career. I'd rather take each case seperately then say "Let's not get Carrick because the last midfielder we got from Man U that was on the decline, turned out to be shit" - surely it's a crazy predecent to have? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It is idiotic to let your past dictate your future. Each decision should be made on an individual basis by looking at the possible positives and negatives. Personally I think Carrick has a lot left and may be rejuvenated by playing here. I wouldn't mind him, as long as he doesn't get a 4.5 year contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Because it's a stupid thing to say. We stick in a bid for Ronaldo, "Hang on lads, do you remember the last player we bought from Real Madrid". They may be midfielders, and they may be on the decline, but Carrick is better than both Smith and Butt, so the fact we got both of them when they were on the decline is a pointless thing to say. Carrick is on the decline, just as Butt and Smith were when we bought them. Ronaldo is a whole different kettle of fish to Michael Owen, not even worth discussing that. But them being on the decline says nothing about their ability. They are three completely different players and at different ages/stages of their career. I'd rather take each case seperately then say "Let's not get Carrick because the last midfielder we got from Man U that was on the decline, turned out to be s***" - surely it's a crazy predecent to have? I was barely stating it as precedent, just making a light hearted passing comment. No need to take everything at face value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 It's irrelevant who he's on about. How? It's the entire basis of his post. Because it's a stupid thing to say. We stick in a bid for Ronaldo, "Hang on lads, do you remember the last player we bought from Real Madrid". They may be midfielders, and they may be on the decline, but Carrick is better than both Smith and Butt, so the fact we got both of them when they were on the decline is a pointless thing to say. Carrick is on the decline, just as Butt and Smith were when we bought them. Ronaldo is a whole different kettle of fish to Michael Owen, not even worth discussing that. But them being on the decline says nothing about their ability. They are three completely different players and at different ages/stages of their career. I'd rather take each case seperately then say "Let's not get Carrick because the last midfielder we got from Man U that was on the decline, turned out to be s***" - surely it's a crazy predecent to have? I was barely stating it as precedent, just making a light hearted passing comment. No need to take everything at face value. Fair enough, I don't have a light hearted-o-meter though. I just read it differently Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Carrick will be 30 come the summer. He was 27 the last time he had a good season. He's on the decline. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now