Carroll`s career so far in Liverpool

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Sweet Jesus.

[Inglez 0]

[Craig 6670]

For your own safety (and our sanity!) I'm sticking you in the 'creche' LM.

 

And quite frankly I don't care what you think about it.

[Brock Manson 0]

I'm still pretty surprised that Carroll has had such a shoddy season. He looked like developing into an effective PL striker for us.

 

Even when he was here, he looked a bit like Bambi on ice when he made his England debut. Has the media and the increased spotlight contributed to his lack of success at the scousers, or is it more because King Kenny is making a bit of a hash of it?

 

I think if they stopped being over-reliant on Suarez (who despite all the silky skills when he isn't cheating), a guy who doesn't actually score a particular great deal and had him supplying knock-downs and lay-offs then he'd replicate his form with us.

 

[/desperate vain attempt to resurrect the thread]

[Holden McGroin 6471]

For your own safety (and our sanity!) I'm sticking you in the 'creche' LM.

 

And quite frankly I don't care what you think about it.

 

BOOOOOMMMMMM

[Davey Dave 0]

Cheers Craig. I was getting a bit sick of him picking fights and re-igniting arguments for no reason.

 

Fair enough he's not wholly guilty but I would like ONE morning without the usual shite.

[Gemmill 44234]

The creche needs to be renamed the loony bin.

 

Begging people who have him on ignore to respond to him. Have some self respect dickhead.

[JawD 99]

I'm still pretty surprised that Carroll has had such a shoddy season. He looked like developing into an effective PL striker for us.

 

Even when he was here, he looked a bit like Bambi on ice when he made his England debut. Has the media and the increased spotlight contributed to his lack of success at the scousers, or is it more because King Kenny is making a bit of a hash of it?

 

I think if they stopped being over-reliant on Suarez (who despite all the silky skills when he isn't cheating), a guy who doesn't actually score a particular great deal and had him supplying knock-downs and lay-offs then he'd replicate his form with us.

 

[/desperate vain attempt to resurrect the thread]

 

I liked Carroll when he was here, I thought he was excellent at holding up the ball and seemed to link up well with Nolan. I would still like him here as he would give us something when Ba was out. I think AC could play alongside Cisse as well.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

I'm still pretty surprised that Carroll has had such a shoddy season. He looked like developing into an effective PL striker for us.

 

Even when he was here, he looked a bit like Bambi on ice when he made his England debut. Has the media and the increased spotlight contributed to his lack of success at the scousers, or is it more because King Kenny is making a bit of a hash of it?

 

I think if they stopped being over-reliant on Suarez (who despite all the silky skills when he isn't cheating), a guy who doesn't actually score a particular great deal and had him supplying knock-downs and lay-offs then he'd replicate his form with us.

 

[/desperate vain attempt to resurrect the thread]

 

Long may his bad form continue.

 

I read about 'Stevie G' thinking that they've even got a chance of breaking into the top 4 this season, despite being 10 points off. I'd worry about the likes of Sunderland, Fulham, Swansea and Stoke overtaking Liverpool if I was in his shoes, they're only another couple of bad results away from being right in the mix with the aforementioned. Then again with Saint Stevie they'll probably find a way to end up in the top 6, a jammy goal during the last game of the season or something.

Edited March 15, 2012 by Monroe Transfer

[Happy Face 29]

I'm still pretty surprised that Carroll has had such a shoddy season. He looked like developing into an effective PL striker for us.

 

Even when he was here, he looked a bit like Bambi on ice when he made his England debut. Has the media and the increased spotlight contributed to his lack of success at the scousers, or is it more because King Kenny is making a bit of a hash of it?

 

I think if they stopped being over-reliant on Suarez (who despite all the silky skills when he isn't cheating), a guy who doesn't actually score a particular great deal and had him supplying knock-downs and lay-offs then he'd replicate his form with us.

 

[/desperate vain attempt to resurrect the thread]

 

I liked Carroll when he was here, I thought he was excellent at holding up the ball and seemed to link up well with Nolan. I would still like him here as he would give us something when Ba was out. I think AC could play alongside Cisse as well.

 

If Ba goes another 4 games without scoring his goal rate for the season will drop below Carroll for 10/11 at Newcastle.

Edited March 15, 2012 by Happy Face

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Positive thinking as always, HF.

[Happy Face 29]

Positive thinking as always, HF.

 

He's not scored in 420 minutes.

 

We've not won a game since he scored.

 

This isn't negative, it's just the way it is.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Well yeah, it sort of alludes to how reliant we are on his goals, we need him scoring to win it seems.

 

He couldn't keep up that scoring rate for the whole season to be fair to him, even Van Persie will go a couple of games without scoring. I think the mixed service to him, and Pardew trying to integrate Ben Arfa and/or Cisse into the starting 11 hasn't helped either.

[Happy Face 29]

Spot on.

 

But I wasn't even making that point. In a comparison between Ba and carroll, what was cut and dry in December (Ba's an improvement) is looking less accurate every game he goes without scoring, while unable to hold up the ball as well.

 

Those hat-tricks and braces early on might have flattered the fella. When Shola came on on Monday night he gave Ba a lesson in pressing play and holding onto the ball when isolated.

Edited March 15, 2012 by Happy Face

[JawD 99]

Its a none issue saying as he scores on sunday.

[Brock Manson 0]

The braces and hatricks were well taken but then he had the chances to take them!

 

As MT says, we're integrating new players into the starting line up and chances are becoming more limited. Fact is he's had one or two chances that have hit the woodwork so it's not as if he's thought 'ah I've got a decent tally, may as well sit around for another club to sign me up'.

 

Carroll scored the majority of our goals in a side that was set up to allow him to do so. Now our focus is more on the team as a whole and so after him the goalscorers are spread out amongst the squad (admittedly rather thin mind).

 

You've also got to take into account he's been deployed in a deeper role since he returned from the ACN.

[Baggio 0]

You usually find that stats drop off over a longer period, for example Carroll was more prolific for us in the Premiership in10/11 than Sheared was over him whole career, a completely pointless stat of course but there it is.

 

Where as Carroll's league record at Liverpool is worse than Shola's record here, another pointless stat to add to the thread.

[PUGATRON1000 0]

Leazes: Stick to the facts and stop asking "what if FF had stayed?", speculating about a non-existent situation is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

 

meanwhile:

 

Leazes: I know exactly what will happen IN THE FUTAAR.

 

You couldn't make it up.

 

show me where I have ever said "what if FF had stayed". Other people ask me that, you dope.

 

And yes, I'm making a judgement on the future, just as I made one years ago that Mike Ashley would use NUFC as an advertisement vehicle for Sports Direct and would not attempt to challenge the heights seen before, settling for premiership survival to promote the company. He will sell a player to make a profit if this isn't done operationally, he will never attempt to match the clubs we used to compete with and finish above that are now attempting to match the sugar daddies. He is a retailer by instinct, he will buy and sell players like he does with his companies to try and do it, everything has a price, He will not back his managers fully as a manager of NUFC ought to be. We are competing with the 2nd rate selling clubs.

 

As the financial whizz kids dismissed this as "nonsense", and still do, and continue to do so, you tell me what is nonsense about that.

 

You couldn't make it up, indeed you couldn't.

 

Then you can leave the intelligent debate to the people who know about the football club and aren't deluded fuckwits.

 

"He bought us so he could promote Sports Direct" - What a crock of shite, he could have sponsored Man U AND fucking Chelsea for that kind of money you loooooooooonnn-atic!

[PUGATRON1000 0]

For your own safety (and our sanity!) I'm sticking you in the 'creche' LM.

 

And quite frankly I don't care what you think about it.

 

BOOOOOMMMMMM

 

BA- BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM

[Happy Face 29]

Leazes: Stick to the facts and stop asking "what if FF had stayed?", speculating about a non-existent situation is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

 

meanwhile:

 

Leazes: I know exactly what will happen IN THE FUTAAR.

 

You couldn't make it up.

 

show me where I have ever said "what if FF had stayed". Other people ask me that, you dope.

 

And yes, I'm making a judgement on the future, just as I made one years ago that Mike Ashley would use NUFC as an advertisement vehicle for Sports Direct and would not attempt to challenge the heights seen before, settling for premiership survival to promote the company. He will sell a player to make a profit if this isn't done operationally, he will never attempt to match the clubs we used to compete with and finish above that are now attempting to match the sugar daddies. He is a retailer by instinct, he will buy and sell players like he does with his companies to try and do it, everything has a price, He will not back his managers fully as a manager of NUFC ought to be. We are competing with the 2nd rate selling clubs.

 

As the financial whizz kids dismissed this as "nonsense", and still do, and continue to do so, you tell me what is nonsense about that.

 

You couldn't make it up, indeed you couldn't.

 

Then you can leave the intelligent debate to the people who know about the football club and aren't deluded fuckwits.

 

"He bought us so he could promote Sports Direct" - What a crock of shite, he could have sponsored Man U AND fucking Chelsea for that kind of money you loooooooooonnn-atic!

 

He's spent just over half what etihad did on the man city 'deal'.

[ChezGiven 0]

You usually find that stats drop off over a longer period, for example Carroll was more prolific for us in the Premiership in10/11 than Sheared was over him whole career, a completely pointless stat of course but there it is.

 

Where as Carroll's league record at Liverpool is worse than Shola's record here, another pointless stat to add to the thread.

For a so-called statistician, HF is the biggest exponent of biased facts on this forum.

[Happy Face 29]

You usually find that stats drop off over a longer period, for example Carroll was more prolific for us in the Premiership in10/11 than Sheared was over him whole career, a completely pointless stat of course but there it is.

 

Where as Carroll's league record at Liverpool is worse than Shola's record here, another pointless stat to add to the thread.

For a so-called statistician, HF is the biggest exponent of biased facts on this forum.

 

Filling in for Leazes?

[ChezGiven 0]

You usually find that stats drop off over a longer period, for example Carroll was more prolific for us in the Premiership in10/11 than Sheared was over him whole career, a completely pointless stat of course but there it is.

 

Where as Carroll's league record at Liverpool is worse than Shola's record here, another pointless stat to add to the thread.

For a so-called statistician, HF is the biggest exponent of biased facts on this forum.

 

Filling in for Leazes?

It's been going on for years, it's just good fortune that I am here to set everyone straight.

[PUGATRON1000 0]

 

"He bought us so he could promote Sports Direct" - What a crock of shite, he could have sponsored Man U AND fucking Chelsea for that kind of money you loooooooooonnn-atic!

 

He's spent just over half what etihad did on the man city 'deal'.

 

Which I'm sure we'd all agree was a ridiculously over inflated "scam" of a "deal", made only to try and legitimise any future spending under the fair play rules? non?

[Happy Face 29]

Which I'm sure we'd all agree was a ridiculously over inflated "scam" of a "deal", made only to try and legitimise any future spending under the fair play rules? non?

 

That's why I put 'deal' in quotes, however....

 

 

The renegotiated deal with Etihad (link here) will earn City a little under £350m over the next decade – and covers stadium and campus naming rights and other elements as well as the shirt money.

 

The deal has led to scepticism in some quarters, as discussed on sportintelligence.com, because of concerns it is just a tool to help City bypass Uefa’s new Financial Fair Play regulations.

 

But independent experts among a range of industry insiders consulted by sportingintelligence believe a £20m-a-year deal for City’s shirt is easily defensible.

 

Arsenal’s ongoing deal with Emirates is instructive. At the time it was announced in late 2004, the combined £90m net deal for stadium (15 years) and shirts (eight years) looked massive. Now Arsenal’s current £5.5m annually for their shirts looks paltry compared to their biggest rivals.

 

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/08/23/premier-league-shirt-deals-surge-to-117-5m-on-back-of-citys-etihad-uplift/

 

as well as "Why Manchester City’s alleged Financial Fair Play ‘dodge’ is not actually dodgy at all – and might even be an undervaluation of their worth"

 

There's many, many differences. City's £340m+ deal covers stadium name AND shirts AND the training complex, but on the other hand Etihad don't take ownership of the club and brand it as they see fit either.

 

When you say he could sponsor Man U and Chelsea for that kind of money what do you mean? Neither club is selling their stadium rights. That's deemed priceless. Their shirt deals are currently £20m and £14m a year respectively, so it would have cost Ashley £340m to put Sports Direct on their chests for 10 years, £100m MORE than he's spent here at Newcastle.

 

Shirt Sponsorship deals are worth much more than stadium sponsorship deals that have been done of course, mostly because the general consensus is that renaming a ground with a century of history is bad for a sponsor and the club rather than good. Ashley's challenging that consensus. Either no-one else is listening as he's failed to sell the naming rights, or he prefers to keep the branding for Sports Direct. He's certainly had much more news coverage out of it than Aon have had from being on Man U shirts.