That Torres Miss

Dumbstar said:
Newcastle were driving the price. If we decided £35 million was too much for Carroll then Chelsea would never have given us £50 million for Torres, ad infinitum. Anyway that's old covered ground.

Carroll on current form and future potential is at least a £15million player which somebody would pay today if we sold him. So we've lost £20 million from that deal (i.e. 35m-15m). Which still puts us £30 million up from the Torres money.

Disclaimer: I think Andy's worth more but keeping it simple for the audience in here.
Click to expand...

:wenger: you gotta hand it to Dumbstar, just when you think he can't be any more stupid he somehow manages to plumb new depths.

As for Torres, I think the missed chance (and it wasn't a terrible miss, by any means) disguised a very good performance. Better than anything Carroll has produced this season by a country mile.
 
Shouldn't the words 'Miss' and 'Torres' in the thread title be interchanged?
 
Zen said:
Well the medical staff didn't advise him to play, nor did they with Fabregas. Both WANTED and choose to play at the World Cup themselves, just like Rooney did both times when he really shouldn't have gone and was clear none were fit in the warm ups, and in Rooneys case, the games he played for Utd at the end of that season.

At the end of the day, if you can run without severe pain through painkillers, then 90% of players will go against medical advice to play in a world cup, especially when in Torres' case, you are hot favourites to win it.

Unlike the other two, Torres followed that season playing nearly every week(37 prem games) and mostly this season, Rooney got his American break thing after the contract and Fabregas got a break through injury/extended rest. Torres just kept playing, and hasn't really stopped since and with Villa probably out, is likely to start at the Euros despite form anyway.
Click to expand...

Rooney's issues was down to us rushing him back into the fold because Berbatov was failing to provide adequate back up in the run in. Torres Injury issues started back in 08/09 'well before the world cup' and Liverpool persisted to play him injured.

There has to be a point where good managers and physio's refuse to allow the player to play. It's what annoys me so much about junior football and coaches pushing players to play injured. People are so selfish that they can't see the bigger picture and end up potentially breaking down and turning to shit. Liverpool should have done it at the start of 10/11. Nobody knew that Torres was going to leave in January.
 
"Carroll on current form and future potential is at least a £15million "
:lol:

"Disclaimer: I think Andy's worth more but keeping it simple for the audience in here." :lol::wenger: Real idiot
 
So on current form, Andy Carroll is worth around 20 million. That means when he's really on form he must be worth close to 35 million. Good deal for Liverpool, then. Value signing.
 
Dumbstar said:
Newcastle were driving the price. If we decided £35 million was too much for Carroll then Chelsea would never have given us £50 million for Torres, ad infinitum. Anyway that's old covered ground.

Carroll on current form and future potential is at least a £15million player which somebody would pay today if we sold him. So we've lost £20 million from that deal (i.e. 35m-15m). Which still puts us £30 million up from the Torres money.

Disclaimer: I think Andy's worth more but keeping it simple for the audience in here.
Click to expand...


You signed Torres for £20+ million. So you made around £30 million profit from his sale, and lumped the heap on Carroll, £35 million. I make that £20 million plus £35 million in purchases, and £50 million in sales. A loss of £5 million. So if you were to sell Carroll for £15 million, you'd be £10 million up. Where do you get this £30 million up from the Torres money? Liverpool fans always "forget" the original outlay when proving how great they are in the transfer market. You'd think the amount you scousers bang on about net spend you's would be able to do the maths right. (I was conservative with Torres original fee, but thought I'd keep it simple for the audience).

Basically, what Liverpool did was buy a rough uncut diamond, polish it, make it look all pretty and stuff, then sell it at a profit to a rich man who likes pretty shiny things. Then with that profit, they bought a bag of shit. Now they just need to find someone who likes blowing big wads of cash on bags of shit. Is Houllier back in management yet?
 
That £30million "up" from the Torres money was spent on Henderspaz and Adam btw. Good luck with making your money back on those two as well. You might make a few million on Suarez though.
 
The Neviller said:
You signed Torres for £20+ million. So you made around £30 million profit from his sale, and lumped the heap on Carroll, £35 million. I make that £20 million plus £35 million in purchases, and £50 million in sales. A loss of £5 million. So if you were to sell Carroll for £15 million, you'd be £10 million up. Where do you get this £30 million up from the Torres money? Liverpool fans always "forget" the original outlay when proving how great they are in the transfer market. You'd think the amount you scousers bang on about net spend you's would be able to do the maths right. (I was conservative with Torres original fee, but thought I'd keep it simple for the audience).

Basically, what Liverpool did was buy a rough uncut diamond, polish it, make it look all pretty and stuff, then sell it at a profit to a rich man who likes pretty shiny things. Then with that profit, they bought a bag of shit. Now they just need to find someone who likes blowing big wads of cash on bags of shit. Is Houllier back in management yet?
Click to expand...

You're right, I forgot the original outlay on Torres. But isn't that in itself a paradox? We spent £20million on Torres, got goals galore out of him for at least a few years that we would have probably got from a £30+ million striker. Then his value plummutted to around £10million on age, injuries and form and we got rid for £50million.

Not a simple case of £50m - £20m for Torres, surely?

As for the where we wasted the eventual cash, its a fair point but irrelevant to the Torres/Carroll value discussion.
 
Dumbstar said:
You're right, I forgot the original outlay on Torres. But isn't that in itself a paradox? We spent £20million on Torres, got goals galore out of him for at least a few years that we would have probably got from a £30+ million striker. Then his value plummutted to around £10million on age, injuries and form and we got rid for £50million.

Not a simple case of £50m - £20m for Torres, surely?

As for the where we wasted the eventual cash, its a fair point but completely irrelevant to the Torres/Carroll value point.
Click to expand...

Correct.

It's actually a simple case of £50m - £26.5m.

A profit of £23.5m. Which is near enough to what you spent on Stewart Downing.

In other words, you broke the Liverpool transfer record to sign Torres, won pretty much feck all with him in the team, then sold him for a profit which was spent one of the worst wingers in the top half of the league this season.

Oh and you also spent thirty five million pounds on Andy fecking Carroll.

Well done.
 
Dumbstar said:
You're right, I forgot the original outlay on Torres. But isn't that in itself a paradox? We spent £20million on Torres, got goals galore out of him for at least a few years that we would have probably got from a £30+ million striker. Then his value plummutted to around £10million on age, injuries and form and we got rid for £50million.

Not a simple case of £50m - £20m for Torres, surely?

As for the where we wasted the eventual cash, its a fair point but completely irrelevant to the Torres/Carroll value point.
Click to expand...

Well surely it must be, since that is precisely what net spend is. Purchase price minus sale price, or vice versa. It's Liverpool fans who love net spend though, so I'm sure you do have different rules. Like conveniently forgetting certain parts.

It's not irrelevant in the post you quoted, since I didn't mention any waste elsewhere, only that you bought a bag of shit with your profit. One bag of shit is all i mentioned. One big ragbag useless lanky bag of shit. I never mentioned the fat Scottish bag of shit or the two other English bags of shit.
 
Oh god, I forgot Downing, yeah another HUGE loss if you decided to sell that too. Amazing we got Young for like £5m less, and despite being injured isn't 0+0 in goals and assists.
 
Chelsea could actually still get £25m for Torres based on his hype and name alone, I mean if Milan, Inter and Corinthians are more than willing to pay £20m+ and his far higher wages and all the complications for Tevez, pretty sure they'd cough up similar for Torres.

Other than a period of like 3 months in the Premiership, Carroll has nothing to prove his worth on.
 
Zen said:
Chelsea could actually still get £25m for Torres based on his hype and name alone, I mean if Milan, Inter and Corinthians are more than willing to pay £20m+ and his far higher wages and all the complications for Tevez, pretty sure they'd cough up similar for Torres.

Other than a period of like 3 months in the Premiership, Carroll has nothing to prove his worth on.
Click to expand...

That would be extremely stupid as Tevez is currently (despite not playing much) a better and more potent striker than Torres.Torres is a joke of his former self
 
It would be ridiculous, but more ridiculous things have happen......like Liverpool paying £35m for Carroll for instance. The way football works, you know there are people out there controlling the game should he be thrown on the open marker that would match that value, maybe a little less, but still.
 
Andy Carroll will be the punchline in pubs for the next 50-60 years. Ronny Rosenthal is finally a free man.
 
Zen said:
Chelsea could actually still get £25m for Torres based on his hype and name alone, I mean if Milan, Inter and Corinthians are more than willing to pay £20m+ and his far higher wages and all the complications for Tevez, pretty sure they'd cough up similar for Torres.

Other than a period of like 3 months in the Premiership, Carroll has nothing to prove his worth on.
Click to expand...

Now we're delving into deeper markets. Torres sold a lot of shirts in Spain and Asia while he was the bee's bollocks. His hype was, rightfully, huge a few years ago.

I'm not understanding the hate for Carroll. Obviously he's not a great striker, and may never be. But the price tag is not his fault and he could do a solid job once he gets his fitness and head in order. He's finally finding some form and should start against Spurs tonight. I guess we'll find out.
 
Dumbstar said:
Now we're delving into deeper markets. Torres sold a lot of shirts in Spain and Asia while he was the bee's bollocks. His hype was, rightfully, huge a few years ago.

I'm not understanding the hate for Carroll. Obviously he's not a great striker, and may never be. But the price tag is not his fault and he could do a solid job once he gets his fitness and head in order. He's finally finding some form and should start against Spurs tonight. I guess we'll find out.
Click to expand...

There's no hate apart from Erica's friend. Most of us love both the fact that he plays for you, because he is pretty useless and love even more that you payed 35 million for a player that will never be more than a ponytailed Heskey. And even that is a long way to go for him.
 
Yeah no hate for Carroll.....just a poor kid victim to Liverpools legendary stupidity.
 
I feel sorry for Carroll, he must be feeling pretty shit. There is no way Newcastle were going to turn down £35m(!), but do you think he wanted to leave?

I don't feel sorry for Torres. It's kind of sad I guess but the fact he's played for Liverpool and now Chelsea means my sympathy is non-existent.
 
Its got to the point with Torres that when he is in a "dangerous" position, one on one or with the ball at his feet and a clear sight of goal, I find myself thinking: "Its OK, its only Fernando."

Yet I feel absolutely convinced that once he gets a goal or two his confidence will return and he will turn out to be a decent striker again. Maybe not like in his best years at Liverpool, but still very good.
 
He looked like he may have been starting to recapture some form (to at least make him an average goalscorer) and then he went and got himself sent off. Has he scored since then?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
:wenger: you gotta hand it to Dumbstar, just when you think he can't be any more stupid he somehow manages to plumb new depths.

As for Torres, I think the missed chance (and it wasn't a terrible miss, by any means) disguised a very good performance. Better than anything Carroll has produced this season by a country mile.
Click to expand...

Very true. Thought he played pretty well overall. Great assist, kept the ball well and had some fantastic touches. better than everything I have seen from carroll so far.
 
kouroux said:
Andy Carroll :lol: Even after all this time I cannot get used to that fact.He impersonates Adidas' motto "impossible is nothing"
Click to expand...

I think Andy Carroll is an excellent striker who will definitely score against us at the weekend.
 
Cross aside I thought Torres was awful. Did nothing incisive whatsoever.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
If that's the sort of standards you apply to the performance of strikers, watching Andy Carroll must cause you physical pain.
Click to expand...

It has caused me plenty.

Did well in his last game, hope he keeps it up against spurs.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
If that's the sort of standards you apply to the performance of strikers, watching Andy Carroll must cause you physical pain.
Click to expand...

It's hilarious how desperate they are to make out that they got a great deal.

Dumbstar thinks Torres went from being the best striker in the world to a £10m player in little over a year while Carroll is still worth "much more" than £15m, ergo another successful transfer for Liverpool FC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.