Would anyone take Carroll back for the amount we'd have payed for Luuk De Jong?

I would.

I really don't understand the ridicule that people are spouting towards the idea of Carroll going to AC Milan.

Sure, he's not as technical that their other attackers like Ibra, Robhinho, Pato ect, but he's potentially a brilliant striker, and he just couldn't settle early on at Liverpool.

He's an awesome player in the right set up, and he'd be very useful in our campaign. He'd give us something different. Plus we could really use him while the Dembas are away in the ACoN.

Plus his movement and footwork have definitely improved at Liverpool. Even though he should have been used as more of a target man, instead of being pushed into becoming a lot more technical, his time at Liverpool has seen him improve technically.

He wins almost everything in the air, his knock downs are great, he worries defenses. I'm pretty sure Pards has said before that he'd take Carroll back in a heart beat.

I really am pissed off that Carroll still gets abuse from the fans. I believe there was much more going on behind the scenes than he was offered 80k a week at Liverpool, and he left for the cash.

I also don't think it's right to be so naive as to believe that it's as simple as signing a contract, staying or leaving. There might be other things going on in the background, and Carroll looked depressed as **** after leaving.

He spends a lot of time up in Newcastle, and I still believe he loves Newcastle and has always done so.

I know it's probably unrealistic to expect Liverpool to let Carroll go for 10m, but if they did, I'd have him back in a heartbeat.

 

Carroll back for 10m...yes
However, i'd rather have a smaller, faster striker (Aguero-esque) as we've already got Ba, Cisse & Shola

 

love him back ! never been so gutted about a player leaving

 

Yeah, he looked really unhappy when he was sitting in the back of that limo with a mile wide grin. He only started to look 'depressed' after a few weeks of playing like ****.

I wouldn't mind him back at the club, provided the money was right, but if he were to come back to Newcastle then there'd probably be even more expectation and pressure on him, and I don't think he could handle it. He was England's best forward at the Euros, so he does still have some amount of talent, and a move abroad could help him by taking away the pressure of the £35m price tag.

 

I'd be very surprised if this ever materialized, especially if he was forced out the door, and I'd say no to having him back for £10 million in all honesty.

He'd only sit on the bench if we kept Ba. Surely we'd want pace off the bench?

 

Yeah. I've really missed:-

1. The long ball game based around him
2. The assault charges
3. The court hearings
4. The bail conditions
5. The arson attacks
6. The breaking a team mates jaw.



We got £35m cash for a troublemaker and ended up with a tighter dressing room and a better team, playing a better style of football in the process.

He went for the big bucks, and having made his bed, he can now jolly well lie in it!

I wouldn't have him back in a lucky bag!!

 

Ba and Cisse aren't that great at winning things in the air though mate. They cannot be used as target men. Shola is alright, but IMO not a great 3rd choice, or someone to be relied upon, but rather an option from the bench to have impact in a game.

 

Absolutely.

Give him a head of steam, play the ball to his feet and he is a menace. £10m would be a steal

 

I actually hope he stays with us, think he is a great player...with lots of room for improvement. Would be interesting seeing him on loan at Milan also.

 

Just because he cracked a smile at a point after leaving Newcastle, doesn't mean he wasn't depressed.

I'm not saying there wasn't any part of the moved that he might of looked forward to but he never quite looked happy.

 

Why do people assume because someone is a 3rd choice that means he'll be on the bench? We can't play Ba and Cisse every game, we'll have to rotate constantly. 3/4th choice players will be getting 20+ games next season. More than just a bench warmer.

If we were mid table then obviously he'd just be a bench warmer, but next season, we'll have far more games.

 

We played the same long ball game plenty times last season without Carroll. That goal we scored against Manure at home was from a long ball from the keeper, knocked down by Shola to Ba who scored.

There's nothing wrong with a plan B.

We can play awesome 4-3-3 quality football, or long balls. It would work much better with Carroll than Shola.

 

Surprised this many people would have him back. I for one wouldn't. I was gutted when he left, felt like a jilted lover seeing him in a Liverpool shirt for the first few months! The fact is though that we have moved on and play a style of football that would not suit him.

When Carroll was here, banging them in, our game plan was very simple and very one-dimensional. We now have a much more effective approach with more people capable of getting on the end of chances. If we brought him back there is always the risk that we'd revert back to 4-5-1 to accommodate him and with the likes of Cisse, Ba and HBA around, I think we are better off as we are.

 

Why can't we play different styles and have different plans for different games?

Our passing style is very good, and lead us to some great victories, but our long ball tactics tortured a top class side in United, and we won 3-0.

There's also a difference between making a use out of long balls, and playing hoofball. You can still knock balls up top, and pass it well.

Remember when Spurs had Crouch and VDV up front? They made use out of long balls to Crouch, but at the same time they played great football, with fantastic players.

Playing long balls to a target man at times doesn't necessarily mean you play football.

 

This

 

And why do we think Carroll doesn't like a ball to his feet ?

The fact that he is good in the air has blinded a lot of people, Dagliesh for one, to the fact that he has a good left peg and likes to run (a bit like a deranged moose - - not classy but effective) with the ball at his feet.

And for those who mention the off field aggro, there's been none for well over a year. He looks to have learned that lesson

 

Happily have him back. The money would have to be right though and 10m is fair enough. The problem is though that he''d be back up and I doubt very much he fancies that scenario. I don't think its realistic and I don't think he'd take the pay cut necessary. If rumours are to be believed he is on somewhere between 75k-90k. Way out of our ballpark.

I do laugh at the notion that signing Carroll means long ball. He is useful as an outball but he was at his best for his when we played football and got it into his chest, thigh, feet. The long balls were just 50/50, maybe 60/40 in his favour. One of the biggest fallacies going for me. The only time he wants the ball aerial is from crosses when he is the best around to be fair.

No reason whatsoever why Carroll couldn't be used in the way we play now. Indeed he'd be better suited to it and would get more chances. His time under Hughton was simply about making the best of a very small squad and making sure we got out of the championship and later stayed in the PL. We were always moving our game on (Whether Hughton or Pardew) and he could easily have been part of that but for Liverpools silly offer tempting Mike.

As for commenting on his past troubles off the pitch, its just not relevant anymore. We're not talking Joey Barton and he has kept his nose clean for a long time now. I think we can easily put it down to youthful exuberance, not a reason to ever give up on a player.

 

Has anyone read the quotes that the Carroll story comes from?

I'm guessing no.

Non-story.

 

I doubt anyone disagrees with this. It is more an interesting theoretical question than a realistic option. There is not much indication that Carroll will leave, we would be about Liverpool's last choice to sell to and we might well be Carroll's last choice to go to.

Also, he would have to take a 40% wage cut.

 

That's kind of my point. We tortured Man Utd, at times playing the long ball with Ba and Shola up front. Don't get it twisted though. There was a lot more to our game that night that simply pumping the ball up to Shola. That said, if we can do that without spending £10m+ on Andy Carroll, to me that means he isn't needed.

I'm not saying I'd be gutted if Carroll came back (for the record I don't think he will). I just don't think we need him and personally think we are a much more dangerous side without him.