Jump to content

Speculation: Andy Carroll


wiggyrichard

Recommended Posts

no one is saying he is not a good player, however the only way Andy Carroll will be a success is if we get wide men in who can cross the ball. I think he'd join us however think we have more pressing areas that need to be resolved.

Shouldn't all wide men have the ability to cross a ball anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 743
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

wasn't there speculation that liverpool still owed us substantial amounts for downing that could be offset against a carroll transfer fee?

if say it were 8m, why don't we agree to take downing back for 5, and then they would only owe us 3?

that would really make my day, and not because i want downing back... overrated twot...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy Carrol is like a crossbreed between a young Emile Heskey and Peter Crouch, but with the discipline of Paul Gascoigne.

The notion that you need a big tall center tank is i bit outdatet in my opinion.

That boy is trouble, I hope we stay well clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont really see why he cant play with Bent, Bent stays high up the pitch, Carroll often drops deep. Bent is always on the sniff for a tap in, Carroll often has shots from outside the box. So what if he is big, we have Gabby, Weimann and Bent who arent so whats wrong with having another option. As for the money well its likely someone, somewhere will always be interested in a player like Andy Carroll, I doubt we'd lose much on him if it didnt work out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont really see why he cant play with Bent, Bent stays high up the pitch, Carroll often drops deep. Bent is always on the sniff for a tap in, Carroll often has shots from outside the box. So what if he is big, we have Gabby, Weimann and Bent who arent so whats wrong with having another option. As for the money well its likely someone, somewhere will always be interested in a player like Andy Carroll, I doubt we'd lose much on him if it didnt work out.

My god. Somebody who has actually been paying attention rather than spouting a load of lazy stereotypical tripe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ones we have at the moment can't! Also refer you to Walcott and Lennon!

What I'm saying is that if we were targetting wide men that the ability to cross the ball should be a neccessity instead of a luxury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you talk about people being on drugs for thinking one thing and then come out with, stuff like Bent is FIVE times the player Carroll is? Based on what? how do you qualify that? oh you cant can you.

I would imagine their respective first team stats back it up quite easily actually (without even looking)

Haha how to win a debate. I ask you how bent is 5 times the player Carroll is and you say "I would IMAGINE" followed by "without even looking" haha! How's the crack??

Not after a row, however if you're going to simply ridicule over people's post and therefore opinions, be prepared to justify yours.....

So HOW ( with proof) is bent 5 times better than Carroll! Or is it shock horror, just your opinion?

Boom!!

His goal scoring record kind of speaks for itself, Bent is undoubtedly, currently a better player than Carroll. Are you suggesting Carroll is better than Bent or are you just trying to prove a point about opinions ? :oops:

I would happily take Carroll. I dislike him, alot, almost as much as I dislike his fat head and the ridiculous hair he has connected to it. That being said towards the back end of last season, and his time at Newcastle he started to do the things that make him such a pain in the arse to play against.

There arent to many players in football like him, not at his standard. He is a real asset to any side, a number of issues contributed to him being a mahoosive flop at pool. I feel under a manager like Lambert he could thrive.

That being said its a lot of money and I dont think we would offer him 80k wages. Why go through brutal cost cutting just to chuck money about silly again ? That doesnt mean we cant get him. Even if we do spend 15 million on him ( subbed by knocking debt off Liverpool for downing deal ) I dont see that as a bad thing, aslong as it doesnt effect strengthening other areas of our side. Lambert undoubtedly knows we need newfaces and isnt stupid enough to blow our entire budget on one player.

I think its a long shot, and I wouldnt be bothered if we missed out on him, but id quite like him at the Villa.

Bingo!! Purely that. People just love to pass their own off as fact! We can disagree without resorting to smart arse comments etc!

Anyway as a person Carroll seems like a dick, however so does Ronaldo, balotelli and Rooney. We would all take those wouldn't we? Point being, I think he would make us a better team. As for "is he better than Bent?" there completely different types player. Hence wanting them to play together.

Don't think we will get him, but would like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you talk about people being on drugs for thinking one thing and then come out with, stuff like Bent is FIVE times the player Carroll is? Based on what? how do you qualify that? oh you cant can you.

I would imagine their respective first team stats back it up quite easily actually (without even looking)

Haha how to win a debate. I ask you how bent is 5 times the player Carroll is and you say "I would IMAGINE" followed by "without even looking" haha! How's the crack??

Not after a row, however if you're going to simply ridicule over people's post and therefore opinions, be prepared to justify yours.....

So HOW ( with proof) is bent 5 times better than Carroll! Or is it shock horror, just your opinion?

Boom!!

This might be a private row but just in case anyone is wondering, Bent has scored 173 goals from 403 starts in his career (1 goal per 2.3 games) and Carroll has got 45 goals from 159 career starts (1 goal every 3.5 games).

So Bent is clearly the more effective forward, but not 5 times better. For every 100 games you get about 44 goals from Bent and 28 from Carroll, so about 1.6 times better. No need to exaggerate - but he is much better than Carroll.

However, Carroll does have youth on his side, so he is the one most likely to improve his stats and his more physical style of play probably unsettles defences more so may create more opportunities for his team mates.

Thanks for the facts. So he's 1.6 times better :winkold: IF they were to be compared like for like. They are completely different players. One a poacher, who prays in the box and the other a target man who leads the line. You'd expect one to score more than the other.

How did Withes and Shaw's goal ratio stack up?? Happened they played quite well together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing MattyB is the kind of person who questions his mother's maths skills when she says 'you're dinners on the table. that's the tenth time i've shouted you'

I only ever let your mum shout once :shock: Haha! I'm kidding obviously......twice sometimes.

Seriously though, the only point I was making is that's YOUR opinion and that's perfectly cool, just accept others without say "you got to be on crack" etc etc!

Ok mum I'm on my way. Are you sure you called me 10 times? Only heard 3.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont really see why he cant play with Bent, Bent stays high up the pitch, Carroll often drops deep. Bent is always on the sniff for a tap in, Carroll often has shots from outside the box. So what if he is big, we have Gabby, Weimann and Bent who arent so whats wrong with having another option. As for the money well its likely someone, somewhere will always be interested in a player like Andy Carroll, I doubt we'd lose much on him if it didnt work out.

My god. Somebody who has actually been paying attention rather than spouting a load of lazy stereotypical tripe.

Exactly. Bent is an automatic pick at the moment, so it would do him good to have some genuine competition in the ranks. Carroll is also left footed to it makes a nice striking partnership in addition to the reasons Houlston stated.

As for international football, it's normally Rooney + 1 for England, but if these two played alongside each for their club, there's every chance of being picked as a two for the WC. So, if the Plop do owe us money then I think there's a great case for bringing Carroll in. Plus we're very unlikely to lose money on him as he's only 23.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway as a person Carroll seems like a dick, however so does Ronaldo, balotelli and Rooney. We would all take those wouldn't we?
No.

You seriously wouldn't take any of those? Really? I don't believe you. Reasons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway as a person Carroll seems like a dick, however so does Ronaldo, balotelli and Rooney. We would all take those wouldn't we?

You can't compare Carroll to Ronaldo..

Ronaldo is one of the best players in the world, so yeah he deserves to be a bit of a cocky arrogant dick, because he has the talent.. But carroll does not, and still acts like a dick.

I don't want someone like carroll at villa, he is a troublemaker and we already have enough of those atm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway as a person Carroll seems like a dick, however so does Ronaldo, balotelli and Rooney. We would all take those wouldn't we?

You can't compare Carroll to Ronaldo..

Ronaldo is one of the best players in the world, so yeah he deserves to be a bit of a cocky arrogant dick, because he has the talent.. But carroll does not, and still acts like a dick.

I don't want someone like carroll at villa, he is a troublemaker and we already have enough of those atm.

Fair enough. I wasnt suggesting they were similar in quality, just that if a player is good enough (and Carroll is good enough for villa) then we should get them if at all possible, even if there a bit of a dick.

Is he one of those players that now has a reputation as a "troublemaker" when in fact he may of actually made a mistake and now grown up a bit? Serious question? Im not aware of any problems whilst at Liverpool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing Ronaldo and Carroll is wrong IMO. The former has a reputation of being arrogant and has a big ego. However, that is down to him being the best as well as being the person he is - with the cars and the supermodel girls etc. Carroll has a history of alcoholism and violence, something Ronaldo would never stand for. Ronaldo's dad was an alcoholic I think, so he knows what might come with that lifestyle. And look at him, he is fit and never injured because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â