Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Have to go back to January 1995 to find a transfer that has caused such a split in opinion: a previously unheard of obscene amount of money for a huge fan favourite #9 goalscorer. Similarly, both have been sold to 'rival' clubs and left a seemingly huge void at the front of our attack. For Beardsley, we can hope for Ben Arfa to be half as good; for Kitson, it would seem that Leon Best is more than capable of filling his place. Both times, the club's ambition has been called severely into question by angry fans. However, this time, there'll be no iconic images of Keegan on the Milburn steps to defend the sale. Were you angrier then (and have subsequently had your fears allayed by the 'success' of the following two years) or is the sale of Carroll really that much worse because he's a 'local hero'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends how we replace him. We replaced Cole with Ferdinand so we were fine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCONA Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 We sold the title, wasn't ideal. Here we sold our ambition. But I think cole was worse still Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was worse for me, but I can't help thinking that was because I was younger and it felt more emotional. Never really thought about it from a more objective point of view tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 At the time, I didn't doubt the intentions of that board and felt they wanted the best for the club. The area was on a high, the club flying, atmosphere electric and we were only going in one direction. My attitude then was 'we'll have done it for the right reasons and he'll be replaced with an awesome player'. Cole was an unbelievable asset but he never claimed to be the local hero. The Carroll sale is a great fee, no doubt about it for a lad with massive potental/minimal experience. Build in his personal problems/unstable personality and he's a big gamble. I just wished the current board were straight with us. It smacks of Anelka leaving Arsenal but we don't have a Wenger, nor a long term view on developing youth in the same way Arsenal clearly do. If Ashley did have - I'd accept the argument that we'll invest say £15m into the youth set up/signing kids with potential and £20m on the first team as being for the greater good. Mute argument though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 We got 36 million, the 8th biggest transfer fee ever recieved, 10m more than Rooney, 11m more than Beckham. We've lost a very good player but there's plenty more fish in the sea. Less than a year ago Carroll wasn't good enough for the championship and we would have sold him for 5m. I will save my outrage for when Ashley doesn't significantly reinvest that money back into the first team. Life goes on, Andy Carroll was a cunt and certainly not bigger than the club. In Liverpool there will be no Nolan to look after him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Add the Supermac option and it gets my vote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenige Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Trusted Keegan first time around although was gutted to see him go. This time, surprised he went but for that money we'd have been crazy not to. Where's the option for 'not fussed about either'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Trusted Keegan first time around although was gutted to see him go. This time, surprised he went but for that money we'd have been crazy not to. Where's the option for 'not fussed about either'? Yep - I'd opt for that. With the additions of Ireland & HBA we've now got the best bullets we've had in ages but a less reliable choice of guns to fire them. New couple of guns in the summer and we're arguably stronger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was moved on by Keegan because he wanted a target man- and went After Les Ferdinand. will we go after someone better than Carroll now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends how we replace him. We replaced Cole with Ferdinand so we were fine. Not until the summer, we stumbled through the rest of that season with Paul Kitson and Ruel Fox IIRC. We went from being title-challengers to missing out on Europe completely. Massive short-term sacrifice by the owners and management for what was, ultimately, deemed to be for the long-term good of the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was moved on by Keegan because he wanted a target man- and went After Les Ferdinand. will we go after someone better than Carroll now? If Ferdinand was better than Cole, why didn't SAF go for him? Why didn't Ferdinand win every possible English domestic trophy/award? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was moved on by Keegan because he wanted a target man- and went After Les Ferdinand. will we go after someone better than Carroll now? If Ferdinand was better than Cole, why didn't SAF go for him? Why didn't Ferdinand win every possible English domestic trophy/award? you will have to ask saf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was moved on by Keegan because he wanted a target man- and went After Les Ferdinand. will we go after someone better than Carroll now? If Ferdinand was better than Cole, why didn't SAF go for him? Why didn't Ferdinand win every possible English domestic trophy/award? you will have to ask saf Doesn't seem to be an obvious reason why Ferdinand wouldn't move to Manchester and Cole would (both were happy to move to NE1). Ferdinand cost the same as Cole (£6m cash). Would appear that SAF, arguably the greatest British manager to have been in the game, chose to go for Cole over Ferdinand. This would suggest that Ferdinand wasn't necessarily a better player than Cole, although he was very effective, so we didn't take the Cole money and buy somebody better. Why would we have to "go after someone better than Carroll now"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Taggart wanted a sniffer type striker whereas KK wanted a target man simples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnbull2000 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Carroll was becoming a player for whom I could feel pride and optimism. Even in defeat, it was a pleasure to have him score. No other player than Shearer gave me that feeling. If we still had Fat Fred, this would never have happened IMO. Ashley doesn’t give a f*ck this club’s fans and it’s traditions. All that matters to him is that he recoups every penny he’s put in before selling, and is willing to undermine the manager and the players to achieve this. What’s even worse is that our manager is this c*nts gambling buddy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gray Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Worse now because we can't replace AC. £35m is crazy money, but it may as well be £5m when we go looking for a replacement with our wage cap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spizz energi Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 They both sucked equal dick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole was moved on by Keegan because he wanted a target man- and went After Les Ferdinand. will we go after someone better than Carroll now? If Ferdinand was better than Cole, why didn't SAF go for him? Why didn't Ferdinand win every possible English domestic trophy/award? you will have to ask saf Doesn't seem to be an obvious reason why Ferdinand wouldn't move to Manchester and Cole would (both were happy to move to NE1). Ferdinand cost the same as Cole (£6m cash). Would appear that SAF, arguably the greatest British manager to have been in the game, chose to go for Cole over Ferdinand. This would suggest that Ferdinand wasn't necessarily a better player than Cole, although he was very effective, so we didn't take the Cole money and buy somebody better. Why would we have to "go after someone better than Carroll now"? Maybe i just imagined ferdy was better back in the day?? maybe i Imagined all the fuck ups Ashley has made? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Cole hurt a lot more because I was young, and when you're 9 or 10 years old these people are your heroes. You worship them. When you grow up you just see them for what they are, mercenary cunts. No connection with them like you did when you were a kid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends how we replace him. We replaced Cole with Ferdinand so we were fine. Not until the summer, we stumbled through the rest of that season with Paul Kitson and Ruel Fox IIRC. We went from being title-challengers to missing out on Europe completely. Massive short-term sacrifice by the owners and management for what was, ultimately, deemed to be for the long-term good of the club. But we did go on to finish second the following two seasons. I wouldn't say it was the sale of Cole that caused us to miss out on the title - Shearer and Ferdinand was a brilliant partnership. Granted it's just before my time () so i'm not as clued up on the subject as some. The point still stands, however. As devastating a blow as it is to lose Andy Carroll, the gravity of this situation will be measured by how we deal with it. The noises that Pardew's making (who, btw, i think has handled the aftermath impeccably) suggests we'll deal with it correctly. It's largely down to Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Different kettle of fish because then you could buy/sell anyone when you wanted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends how we replace him. We replaced Cole with Ferdinand so we were fine. Not until the summer, we stumbled through the rest of that season with Paul Kitson and Ruel Fox IIRC. We went from being title-challengers to missing out on Europe completely. Massive short-term sacrifice by the owners and management for what was, ultimately, deemed to be for the long-term good of the club. But we did go on to finish second the following two seasons. I wouldn't say it was the sale of Cole that caused us to miss out on the title - Shearer and Ferdinand was a brilliant partnership. Granted it's just before my time () so i'm not as clued up on the subject as some. Well, this is the thing - the short term aim of the club was to challenge for the title that season. The longer term aim was to be regular title challengers, something we certainly achieved the next season but then the whole plan fell apart when KK walked out (Hi, Lee). With Cole and Beardsley scoring all over, we'd sprung a surprise the season before and finished 3rd, this being in the days when title contenders weren't pre-determined by the league's rules. In the season Cole left, we'd won our first 6 games and were starting to be seriously talked about as title challengers (not too dissimilar to Spurs this year maybe?). He was the focal point of our attack and genuinely struck fear into every team we faced. When he was sold, we were left with Beardsley crowded out every game, as Kitson didn't draw the same attention from opposition defences as Cole did. Our season petered out as we dropped out of any title race and limped towards the end of the season. The point still stands, however. As devastating a blow as it is to lose Andy Carroll, the gravity of this situation will be measured by how we deal with it. The noises that Pardew's making (who, btw, i think has handled the aftermath impeccably) suggests we'll deal with it correctly. It's largely down to Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends how we replace him. We replaced Cole with Ferdinand so we were fine. Not until the summer, we stumbled through the rest of that season with Paul Kitson and Ruel Fox IIRC. We went from being title-challengers to missing out on Europe completely. Massive short-term sacrifice by the owners and management for what was, ultimately, deemed to be for the long-term good of the club. But we did go on to finish second the following two seasons. I wouldn't say it was the sale of Cole that caused us to miss out on the title - Shearer and Ferdinand was a brilliant partnership. Granted it's just before my time () so i'm not as clued up on the subject as some. Well, this is the thing - the short term aim of the club was to challenge for the title that season. The longer term aim was to be regular title challengers, something we certainly achieved the next season but then the whole plan fell apart when KK walked out (Hi, Lee). With Cole and Beardsley scoring all over, we'd sprung a surprise the season before and finished 3rd, this being in the days when title contenders weren't pre-determined by the league's rules. In the season Cole left, we'd won our first 6 games and were starting to be seriously talked about as title challengers (not too dissimilar to Spurs this year maybe?). He was the focal point of our attack and genuinely struck fear into every team we faced. When he was sold, we were left with Beardsley crowded out every game, as Kitson didn't draw the same attention from opposition defences as Cole did. Our season petered out as we dropped out of any title race and limped towards the end of the season. The point still stands, however. As devastating a blow as it is to lose Andy Carroll, the gravity of this situation will be measured by how we deal with it. The noises that Pardew's making (who, btw, i think has handled the aftermath impeccably) suggests we'll deal with it correctly. It's largely down to Ashley. tw@t keegan said he sold cole then because our play had become a bit too one dimentional- everything went to him, and that he didnt offer an ariel threat. He had also been led to believe ferdinand would be available- but was then made to wait until the summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 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