• Liverpool Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • colin colin Mar 27, 2013 12:05 Flag

    Andy C on his way back to Anfield ?

    Jason...u post on Andy C is nonesense. No.1 Rogers didnt purchase Andy C and therefore feels free to toss him overboard from the club with no consequences to himself..ie blame it all on Kenny and just make the excuse "HE doesnt suit my style of play." When I said any other Prem manager would be happy to have him on the books I meant were they to find themselves in Rogers place where its as if he came for free to him as as I say Rogers didnt make the buy every other manager would keep him WHU PAID A 3 MILL LOAN FEE to us for him and obviously dont have the cash to fess up another 17 mill to us for his services hence them not taking up their "option to buy "
    No2 ...u fail when discussing his time at WHU to mention how much of the season he has spent out of the side injured that time alone might have seen him play sufficient matches to be a major scorer in Prem and therefore have lead to him winning those 12pts I mentioned he was capable of winning for a side by end of season...so it seems very convenient for u being a member of the IRWT BRIGADE ( Its no longer RAFA the second letter refers to its now Rogers ) to gloss over his absence from the side through injury.
    You speak of certain poor results the only result that matters to me this season so far has been the last one the totally spineless performance at St. Mary's where we were lucky not to be heading back to Liverpool with a club record cricket score like defeat...it was very nearly turning into a complete rout and Rogers couldnt do a damned thing about it other than sit around looking his usual glum self ! You say the problem hasnt been scoring its been defending ..will give u that weve witnessed some poor defending from time to time this season but of course the problem IS scoring u need to put the ball in the back of the net more times than the opposition ...how else do u think u get three pts out of any game ??? Its better to win five games 1.0 than to win one 5.0 (Norwich) and lose the other four. Its not how many u score in a match more where and when u score those goals.
    The other thing is it amazes me that for people so concerned about the clubs accounts and the FFP thing that so many are ready to take an immediate massive loss on Andy C...He is not a 10 mill bench warmer like Borini a man incidentally that u and Steer same intent on giving innumerable opportunities to prove he has ability and can contribute when he clearly has no ability yet where Andy C is concerned its "GET RID GET 10 MILL AND GET HIM DOWN THE ROAD !" So u are more than ready to see a 25 mill loss registered on the accounts ? One good season and this lad who is still young with his best yrs ahead of him and he could prove to be World Class and a prolific goalscorer..but rid of him for ten mill and maybe he could just go back to the TOON and come back to Anfield with them...and bury us ! Just like Southampton nearly did the other week...I think u need to rethink on the Andy C issue and consider that it may well be worth paying the approx 3 mill wages and just see if he can "prove his worth" and if he does if we do ultimately sell him we may even recoup that which was spent on him or close enough to it thereby making th club accounts look far better than they do currently rather than making them look even worse.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Just to clear up a detail Colin. The £35m fee for Carroll has long gone and is in the distant past. It's been reported on the accounts for that year. It's water under the bridge so to speak. Any money we get in is reported on this accounting cycle where it appears as cash in with no cash going out i.e. it's positive.

      Where it can be argued is that had we only paid £15m for him as an example it could be argued that we'd have an additional £20m floating in the bank which could have been put against the debt perhaps. Basically the link to todays value is a little weird

      Simple truth, for whatever reason, it's proved to be a bad buy. I used to argue with the IRWT crowd about value. They used to harp on about net spend which in many cases is a load of cack in my book. How is buying a player for £5m say with £5m wages and agents fees and all the other add ons, they never see sight of the first team but you sell them for £7m good value? It isn't and poor Carroll is up there with Aquilani I'm afraid. You basically pay a fortune for someone who contributes very little to the team. It's really bad business.

      Therefore in my book if Carroll is not going to offer any decent contribution then it makes no sense to hold onto him.

    • Colin,
      As much as you say my post was complete nonsense and how I chose to speak of certain things and not others, in your very passionate, (nobody will ever begrudge you that) response, you've done the same thing, and do so in nearly every thread when you're dead set on a particular result or idea. We're talking about Andy Carroll, and yet glossed over the Southampton game, which none of us really wants to re-live, but you keep mentioning, along with Rafa now, only god knows why.. After seeing him with Chelsea, I don't ever want to see him at Anfield again, other than the special events held, where he will always be welcome. Unless Rafa and Andy are being considered as defenders, which I think is viable for Andy, the Southampton game is a debacle and irrelevant. For everyone's sake, let's drop it and hope it never happens again.

      To explain my nonsense, I'd like to point out one thing and then ask some basic questions that can probably clear up the Andy Carroll story, I referenced his goals tally in full awareness of the games he's played and missed with West Ham. So, on to the questions that don't revolve around St. Mary's, Rafa, we go:

      - Why does Sam Allardyce not want to take up the option to keep Carroll?
      - Why did a man/manager, who would have a lump in his pants to have a lump it up the field option at his disposal, in Roy Hodgson, not select him for the recent England squad? He's played 90" 5 straight matches and scored twice, yet Roy went with a group of midgets..?
      - After showing some glimpses, including a nice goal against Sweden, when BR made it known he wasn't in his plans, why did nobody else besides Newcastle and WHU show any interest? That's the highest his value would have been!
      - When being fit the ENTIRE season in 2011/12, available 49 matches, why did Kenny start him ONLY 29 times, including being left on the bench in some of those matches where Suarez was banned for 9 games?
      - Who aside from Pardew, Allardyce, and Tony Pulis (brilliant/scary fit) is going to bid for him this summer?

      These are basic, and pretty rhetorical questions, and I included stats that benefitted him and you for the sake of a debate, yet 1+1 doesn't seem to add up in his case. You pointed out to Colyn Hobs and Loki, asking what have they got against the lad, and I think I'd be included there and have the same answer, absolutely nothing against him. But that begs the question, what have you got for the lad aside from your own personal affinity? Because you like him alot as a player, and find his value more than others, does not make it the right move to just keep him, justify 70-80k sitting on the bench, or enough for you to label it as things like "suicide" or an injustice like it's the worst move in LFC or football history? You can say likewise about my position, but I am at least supporting my reasons for why he should go (and will go) with tangibles, not "creative accounting" as you might label it, but rather with black and white facts, not stats.. 44 LFC appearances, 6 LFC league goals, and selected to start, when fit only over 50% of the time. Causing defenders a bit of a tough day at the office, isn't quite good enough, otherwise everyone would emulate Stoke's style and transfer policy. If I had seen the return of 35M from other big buys, as new owners at that time, and compared to now, I'd consider it more than financial suicide, I'd just down right consider suicide.