Liverpool FC Forum

by **Kenny Kan** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 am

D___C » Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:20 am wrote:Definitely not looking too good for Carroll. We didnt need the press conference to know that he is not a Brendan Rodgers type player.

The Euros again summed up what Andy Carroll is all about. Get the ball into the box and feed him direct service, or, hit long balls from the back that he can latch on to. He is very good at this (fantastic headed goal against Sweden, and he won virtually every flick on against Italy when he came on) but this is a direct method of play that no successful side plays, and England were outclassed and outpassed. Newcastle played this direct way when he was with them... they sat in the lower half of the table.... he leaves, they replace him with players who are good on the floor, they start passing it and move right up the table. Conversely we sign him, become more direct, and slip lower down the table with Newcastle bypassing us on the way. For Carroll to excell means playing a direct method.. so while he as an individual benefits the team as a whole suffers. No successful side plays in a style that caters to Carroll.

The template for Rodgers is Barcelona, and there could barely be a player more unsuited to such a style as Andy Carroll. He possesses neither the technique on the floor nor mobility to be compatible with this method of play. McGarry has spoken to Rodgers and made it clear that if there was an offer anywhere near close to what we paid for him (lets say 18 to 20m) then Carroll would be off.

My own view on the matter is i would like to keep him and hope he develops on the floor. He is a real handful in the air, destroyed Terry over two games at the end of the season, and its a great option to have, but we aint moneybags Man City/Chelsea, we cannot afford to have a player Kenny paid 35m for as just being an option. He is either a first choice forward or we cash in and get around half the money back. I just cannot see him being the forward in a Brendan Rodgers team.

You've basically said what you've been saying all of last season long, just paraphrasing it.

by **ethanr** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:48 am

You act surprised KK.

by **parchpea** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:12 am

Given reported comments by Rodgers today it does appear as if Carroll
is now surplus requirements, a misfit under the new regime.

It now looks more likely than not he will be loaned out with a view to buy
I should imagine.

by **Benny The Noon** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:51 am

Which reported comments ?

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:40 am

I can't help but think we will rue selling a striker who is just coming good.

by **JC_81** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:59 am

Maybe Carroll doesn't completely fit with Rodgers' philosophy in that he's not great on the deck, but that doesn't mean we can't adapt to make use of him. Especially given we paid so much for him and seemingly don't have much left for other players this summer.

I've said before we can still be a passing team that finds the right angles in the final third to provide good crosses and chances for Carroll rather than lumping it from deep.

Look at the great Czech side of the late 90's. Technically gifted players, especially Nedved, but they dominated possession against teams while still getting the best out of their giant striker Jan Koller. Koller had a better touch than Carroll perhaps but was much less moblie with similar talents in the air.

The other thing is that we don't have the players Barce or Spain do so we're not going to be able to play exactly like them. Not yet anyway. We need our own style but taking bits from that style of play that we can. I don't think Carroll will be shipped out this summer, but maybe in the longterm he won't be the ideal fit for us.

by **Benny The Noon** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:00 am

There is lots of reading between the lines and rumours and adding 2 and 2 and coming up with 5 with regards Carroll and what Rodgers said yesterday. Rodgers said a lot of good stuff about Carroll and gave him a lot of praise and said he is a good young player do clubs will be interested in him but he said there have been no bids for him. He also said lots of players will have to prove themselves and adapt to new systems. People suddenly read that to mean Carroll doesn't fit in and he is gone.

And it's no surprise Kerry pipes up as soon as there is any rumours about Carroll.

by **crazyhorse** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:11 am

I disagree with those saying Andy is not a Rogers type player. He played all last season with a big lump up front in Danny Graham who is half the player Andy is.

What he did was put quick, clever, skilful players around him.

by **stmichael** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:14 am

john craig » Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:59 am wrote:Maybe Carroll doesn't completely fit with Rodgers' philosophy in that he's not great on the deck, but that doesn't mean we can't adapt to make use of him. Especially given we paid so much for him and seemingly don't have much left for other players this summer.

I've said before we can still be a passing team that finds the right angles in the final third to provide good crosses and chances for Carroll rather than lumping it from deep.

Look at the great Czech side of the late 90's. Technically gifted players, especially Nedved, but they dominated possession against teams while still getting the best out of their giant striker Jan Koller. Koller had a better touch than Carroll perhaps but was much less moblie with similar talents in the air.

The other thing is that we don't have the players Barce or Spain do so we're not going to be able to play exactly like them. Not yet anyway. We need our own style but taking bits from that style of play that we can. I don't think Carroll will be shipped out this summer, but maybe in the longterm he won't be the ideal fit for us.

excellent post.

by **D___C** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:04 pm

Kenny Kan » Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:10 am wrote:
D___C » Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:20 am wrote:Definitely not looking too good for Carroll. We didnt need the press conference to know that he is not a Brendan Rodgers type player.

The Euros again summed up what Andy Carroll is all about. Get the ball into the box and feed him direct service, or, hit long balls from the back that he can latch on to. He is very good at this (fantastic headed goal against Sweden, and he won virtually every flick on against Italy when he came on) but this is a direct method of play that no successful side plays, and England were outclassed and outpassed. Newcastle played this direct way when he was with them... they sat in the lower half of the table.... he leaves, they replace him with players who are good on the floor, they start passing it and move right up the table. Conversely we sign him, become more direct, and slip lower down the table with Newcastle bypassing us on the way. For Carroll to excell means playing a direct method.. so while he as an individual benefits the team as a whole suffers. No successful side plays in a style that caters to Carroll.

The template for Rodgers is Barcelona, and there could barely be a player more unsuited to such a style as Andy Carroll. He possesses neither the technique on the floor nor mobility to be compatible with this method of play. McGarry has spoken to Rodgers and made it clear that if there was an offer anywhere near close to what we paid for him (lets say 18 to 20m) then Carroll would be off.

My own view on the matter is i would like to keep him and hope he develops on the floor. He is a real handful in the air, destroyed Terry over two games at the end of the season, and its a great option to have, but we aint moneybags Man City/Chelsea, we cannot afford to have a player Kenny paid 35m for as just being an option. He is either a first choice forward or we cash in and get around half the money back. I just cannot see him being the forward in a Brendan Rodgers team.

You've basically said what you've been saying all of last season long, just paraphrasing it.

How could i when most of what i have written applied to the last two months? (Euros, and Rodgers being manager). Also the last para deals with his end of season performances when he gave Terry a hammering.

Its common knowledge what type of game suits Carroll, and its common knowledge what type of game Rodgers plays. When Rodgers was appointed, there was a reason everyone asked "what does this mean for Carroll"?. The incompatibility is there for everyone to see. It was a crazy signing by Kenny, which was then compounded by bringing in a new manager who would have never signed him.

In the Euros for England (and for us, and Newcastle) when the ball was played on the floor Carroll was anonymous. He's essentially a spare part lumbering slowly around, not getting involved. Compare that with Ibramhimovic.. involved in everything on the floor and the ball stuck to him like glue. Carroll only became involved when the ball (as he demanded) was hit high. Had England had Ibramhimovic against Italy the midfielders/defenders would have had someone to pick out and keep hold of the ball, and then hope to build an attack. Carroll doesnt possess the quality in possession to do this, hence the only option was to play the ball up to him aerially (and he won virtually every flick on) but the ball quickly returns to the opposition. He won endless flick ons but this is not a successful method of play. Possession is king, pass and move is the way every successful side plays.

I take John Craigs point in that we aint exactly blessed with options (cash) and having spent so much may just have to go with Carroll and see what happens.

by **stmichael** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:16 pm

D___C » Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:20 am wrote:
The template for Rodgers is Barcelona, and there could barely be a player more unsuited to such a style as Andy Carroll. He possesses neither the technique on the floor nor mobility to be compatible with this method of play.

It's about options though. Barca don't need a player of Carroll's ilk because their tiki-taka football works 99% of the time. They tried a more physical approach upfront with Ibrahimovic and they bombed him out after a year. We aren't going to pass teams off the park from the get go as it will take Rodgers at least two seasons to get us where he wants us in terms of personnel. I don't see us having loads to spend unless we sell. For this reason, loaning Carroll out makes no sense as it would decrease his value. If Rodgers doesn't want him then we should just sell him for as much as we can get.

by **Benny The Noon** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:23 pm

I must have watched a different Carroll during the Euros because plenty of times I saw the ball played into Carrolls feet and he was good - he either held the ball up , layed it off or turned the defender marking him. The problem is the supply to him wasnt the greatest when he did play.

He doesn't have the best touch in the world but to call him a spare part or anonymous is very false

by **ycsatbjywtbiastkamb** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:31 pm

just been listening to the radio there, if andy carroll goes out on loan as the likes of joe cole are in the echo saying this is a fresh start for him then rodgers is off his f**king head.
i will be well p*****d off if carroll goes out on loan and we bring in this borini, are we only looking at players rodgers has worked with before? are we going to get back to the top of the game by signing ex chelsea youth team players and ex swansea players?
signurdsson? cole? kalou? borini? allen?
is this jobs for the f**king boys or something?
give me the big geordie any day of the week and if dempsey arrives at this club rodgers for all his words in the press conference is a yes man.

by **RichardLFC1** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:52 pm

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:31 pm wrote:just been listening to the radio there, if andy carroll goes out on loan as the likes of joe cole are in the echo saying this is a fresh start for him then rodgers is off his f**king head.
i will be well p*****d off if carroll goes out on loan and we bring in this borini, are we only looking at players rodgers has worked with before? are we going to get back to the top of the game by signing ex chelsea youth team players and ex swansea players?
signurdsson? cole? kalou? borini? allen?
is this jobs for the f**king boys or something?
give me the big geordie any day of the week and if dempsey arrives at this club rodgers for all his words in the press conference is a yes man.

It would surely go against The FSG plan of trying to sign Younger players. Carroll is 23 ?? i think he could be fantastic if not this year then next. Look how he bullied Man utd Chelsea last season.

by **red till i die!!** » Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:54 pm

i watched that interview with rodgers yesterday and no way did he even suggest or imply andy was on his way out.
that didnt stop that cretin maddock running a story this morning that he was off.these journos suit their own agenda.
over the last couple of years weve watched quality players leave this club only to be replaced with far inferior ones.
it makes no sense to offload andy on some loan deal as its echoing the aqualani situation all over again.letting andy go for borini is imo a mistake and will weaken the squad.
i really hope borini isnt the player that rodgers claimed "would excite the fans" as he wont,a welcome addition yes but not at the expense of carroll.

on another note its looking like the borini transfer has substance and if aqua isnt used as part of that exchange then someone at the club needs a slap. :nod

Liverpool FC Forum

Andy Carroll signs for West Ham

Who is online