We need to bring in at least 2 strikers in January. Not fussed if AC comes back - not because I don't think he's a good player but as mentioned earlier, there will always be a temptation to play the long ball to him (through no fault of his own). Get two decent strikers who are suited to this style of play rather than bringing back a Plan B.
Borini was/is "suited to his style" (apparently). Say for instance we have a budget of £20mill in Jan (as if) then why spend on two £10mill players? Buy one twice as good and bring AC back in as cover even if it's only for 6 months. He can still play in Europe (if we're still in it) and the cup games. I just don't buy this argument about him "not fitting BRs style". Basically we can have one headless chicken in Borini who is no more than a willing runner (and a pretty expensive one at that), or we can have another headless chicken who at least know's how to hit a ball... and head it...and rough up centre halfs and...score the odd goal He's decent with his feet so at what point can anyone say definitively whether or not he will "fit BRs style"? Some argue he can, some argue he can't but nobody actually knows (BR certainly doesn't because he's never given him the time of day). Give him 6 months. If he's awful then at least no-one can say he didn't get a chance. If he proves BR wrong then we have another forward in the squad. I really don't understand the issue BR has with him in all honesty. The argument about playing the long ball I can understand being made but quite simply it's a bullshit argument. If a player keeps hoofing it up to AC....then tell him ****ing not to. The same argument was made when Crouch was here and it was as much a crock of **** then as it is now.
I think some of you have got it spot on when you say AC is not the problem. Carroll was not the problem at this club. The rest of the players were. BR knows that Andy does in fact fit his style (calling him a HOOF-HEAD-BALL-GOAL player is ignorant) and has sent him to a club where he wont be ruining his run of form. It was the rest of the teams mentality to hoof it to him that was the problem, and that's been around since Hodgson. Whenever they were too lazy to run, too tired to continue on, too surrounded to make a pass, they'd just punt the ball vaguely to Carroll/Torres/Ngog and hope for the best. No striker in the world will excel with that style. What BR has done is isolated him from the team and tried to teach them to play a fluid attacking football that any striker would thrive in. Without Carroll, players like Shelvey, Downing, Henderson and Johnson are learning that they can't just play that style - it's sloppy and antiquated. They've been forced to learn how to keep the ball, dribble, pass, move and play with the feet instead of in the air. No matter who comes into such a good system, they will succeed if they get the right kind of service. Take Mario Gomez. He also used to be critiqued on his footwork and he could have easily been ignored early on in his career. Who would have thought that someone without finesse could be so clinical? Well, his manager for one. His managers taught the team to pass into feet, to tiki taka into the battering ram and eventually they realised it. Then he started scoring like mad. Even today in the national team he plays worse than at club level because his national teammates don't know that they should pretend he's one of them too. (He's still pretty good there, don't get me wrong). I watched the friendlies this year and it was evident that it was a hoof mentality the second Carroll came onto the pitch, and he was getting frustrated. He wasn't getting proper service and that's obviously a factor in his lack of goals. With an improved squad around him, he can come back in the winter or in the summer and know that he'll be getting passed to feet, not to his head and he'll have much better link up with the rest of the team. That being said, if we end up going for anyone else, it doesn't matter as that style works. Assuming we get better at it until then, anyone we get can rest assured he'll get good service and chances.
translation service: 1. andy carroll wants to keep his big wages. he knows nobody will give him what he's on with us. 2. Rodgers said he hadn't thought about bringing him aback.. translation is he doesn't want him at all and hates his guts.
Agree with this. I dont understand this "Carroll is not Rogers type of player", when Danny Graham is a similar type of player (just not as good) and Im pretty sure Brendan had him at Watford and Swansea. Dont know whats going on here, must be more than just the type of Striker Carroll is.
Admitting you can't use Andy Carroll is an admission of failure, a lack of flexibility or competence. It was said last season we needed a striker. BR shipped one out and he was supposed to be replaced by Borini, another young striker without the rep of Carroll. Indeed, only a rep for changng houses and clubs often in a short space of time. Borni vs Caroll is no contest. AC every time.
