It was probably the most famous January transfer window ever. Not only was the most money spent in this window, there were surprises as to which players clubs chose to spend big money on.
Few predicted that Liverpool would make a hasty, ‘itchy-feat’ bid for Andy Carroll if the Fernando Torres move went through, but if you’d told me that on the deadline of the January transfer window Liverpool would bid £35 million for him, I’d have thought you were a patient at the Betty Ford Clinic.
Not only is that a record transfer fee for a British player, it’s a British record transfer fee for a player who has played only 80 games for Newcastle and has just one England cap to his name.
The greatest irony is that he cost more millions than he’d scored goals at the Tyneside club.
Questions must also be raised on whether Carroll is the ideal replacement for Torres. Although the two are similar in height they play two very different styles and have different qualities.
When Liverpool sold off Torres and replaced him with Carroll, they lost a cat-like, skillful, ‘pacey’, tactically astute, goal poacher and excellent finisher and replaced him with a battering ram with great aerial, ability, a masterful left-foot, deceptive pace and a good work rate.
Although Carroll has no doubt got bags of potential and a big future ahead of him, he does not ideally fit Liverpool’s system and he is not worthy of commanding such a transfer fee. Obviously, Carroll will play in a lone striking role with support from the penetrating wingers Suarez and Kuyt, but he does not have the pace or agility to run in behind defenses and split offside traps like Torres.
Instead, Carroll will rely on aerial support and accurate passes in the box, and will need to utilise his strength and heading ability so that players like Suarez and Gerrard can play off him.
Liverpool’s issue is that their service from out-wide isn’t as reliable as they’d like it to be. Suarez is a player that prefers to cut inside rather than pass a ball, and Kuyt’s pace and guile is beginning to decline.
Unless Liverpool can bring a pacey winger and another striker who can play off Carroll into the side, this signing could be a total loss for both club and player.
The Fernando Torres deal is even more ridiculous. Chelsea have spent £50 million on a player who doesn’t even fit into their tactical system and form-wise looks like his best years are over. Both Torres and Didier Drogba are best utilised as single strikers and in Chelsea’s 4-3-3 system there is only room for one of them.
This will naturally prompt Chelsea to move back to their old 4-4-2 diamond formation so they can accommodate both strikers.
In this formation Drogba formally played a semi-holding role due to his strength, both in the air and on the carpet, and Nicholas Anelka played off him due to his pace and ability to finish.
This system was scrapped due to its dysfunctional nature and Ancelotti’s knowledge that Drogba was a more reliable goal-threat and that Anelka was effectively ‘past it’.
The arrival of Torres means that Chelsea will have to revisit this tactical system, where Drogba will be required to play the same holding role and Torres will have to play off him due to their similarities in height and the obvious fact that Drogba is the stronger player and Torres the faster and arguably the better finisher.
Taking into account that both players are best suited to playing alone, this is going to reduce their impact as it is, but to further exacerbate the situation, playing Drogba in a holding role means you effectively negate his pace and power and as a result, this will have an adverse effect on his goals to games ratio as it did with the previous formation.
Not only is there little value in either transfer, theoretically, neither of them appear to work tactically. Both clubs would have found better replacements for their attacking woes elsewhere.
Maybe Carroll should have been purchased by Chelsea?
He’s a similar player to Drogba, probably not as quick but better in the air and he’d have gotten the appropriate support from players like Cole, Malouda and Kalou from out-wide. His similarity to Drogba means he could have been his long-term successor.
At £35 million Carroll would have been steep, but he’d have taken half of Torres’ wage and fit into the system quite nicely.
Chelsea could also have waited till the summer and signed Romulu Lukkaku of Anderlecht. The Belgian not only looks like Drogba but plays like him. He’s as strong as an ox, lighting fast and has a great tactical knowledge of the game. He’s also a proven goal-threat despite his age (17) with 25 goals in 54 games in the Belgian Pro League, meaning there aren’t many worries about him fulfilling his potential.
Although the player is high in demand, he’s a Chelsea supporter and a reasonable offer for the youngster would have be expected to end in a deal.
The amount Chelsea would pay for Lukkaku would have meant, Chelsea would have been able to buy Lukkaku and Luiz for under £50 million which is what Torres cost.
Liverpool, on the other hand, probably should have found a way to keep Torres.
Yes, £50 million is a lot of money and Torres is out of form, but at his best he cannot be replaced for any amount of money, and the signing of Luis Suarez looked to be the right sort of move to provoke a change in form for the Spaniard.
For years Torres was isolated up-front and without cogent strike assistance and Liverpool simply didn’t have the funds to buy big. But, ironically, when they finally do and make a useful signing who would give Torres his best chance of regaining his form he hands in a transfer request.
Manager Kenny Dalglish could have used his legend status at the club to convince the striker to stay.
The fans may have seen him as a Judas figure, but if he’d not been sold and pledged his future to the fans I’m sure he’d have been forgiven.
You’d think that Torres could have handed in his transfer request at darker times, yet he managed to do it when things looked so bright. It is this information that convinces me that had this point been sternly communicated by Dalglish, Torres would still be a Liverpool hero.
I think even if he was made to stay he’d have had enough love for the club to give his utmost on the pitch. Sure, he’d not have been loved straight away but he could have earned it back.
At the end of the day, these two purchases create problems for Chelsea, Liverpool and Newcastle; Chelsea and Liverpool have spent a ridiculous amount of money on a players who don’t fit into their respective tactical systems, Liverpool have lost a player who fit into their system perfectly and Newcastle have lost the local hero who’d been touted of taking the same sort of strides as Toon hero Alan Shearer and never looked like leaving.
Bar the difference in context and situation it’s times like these you truly understand one of Sir Alex’s most famous quotes: “Football – bloody hell!”
Dael
Guest
I know which deal made sense... Suarez for 22 million. Fernando Who? Thanks for coming.
Marcel Proust
Guest
Yes, the Guardian is our very special left-of-centre North London liberal journal. Its sport section is pretty interesting. Are you lot in Aussie able to read all of that stuff too ? Try The Daily Telegraph too. It's the right-of-centre equivalent of The Guardian. Its sport section is pretty good. You can read it online. The Daily Telegraph in England is a respectable broadsheet. I believe that the Sydney Daily Telegraph is less impressive.
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
"our" very own Fowler gets stuck into Torres: http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2011/02/04/liverpool-legend-fowler-blasts-torres/
James Gray-Foster
Roar Pro
Yeah the Guardian is brilliant. One of the best newspapers in the world and some brilliant football journalists on there too.
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
There's some terrific discussion attached to that Guardian article, I highly recommend it for all soccer afficionados. I loved this one quote: "While that's still true today, in general, footballers are more athletic and more all-rounded. They can play multiple positions, most of them adequately. This allows more flexibility and fluidity, making the formation less relevant. Arsenal line up with a 4-3-3 formation but really it functions more like a 2-3-2-2-1 (the two central defenders, the wing-backs + the dm, the two central midfielders, the two attacking mids, and the striker). Barca arguably don't even have a formation. They have a defensive unit, and then 6 guys who go into the opposition half and either run with the ball, shoot, or pass it around. " Either run with the ball, shoot, or pass it around - that's quite funny!
MyLeftFoot
Roar Guru
This is interesting, I made a very similar point the other day: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/dec/22/the-question-how-tactics-develop-2010 " If there has been one lesson from 2010, it is that the gulf between club and international football is vast, and getting wider. "
Ben of Phnom Penh
Guest
I think Suarez is the key component here, not Caroll.
James Gray-Foster
Roar Pro
Torres in a wide position? It's a waste of his talents. He's a finisher who runs onto balls and finishes them. If you play him in that sort of position he's expected to hold the ball for longer periods, constantly run at defenders, cut into the box and be prepared to deliver the ball from wide areas. Oh, and not to mention, he's got awful work-rate and this position requires a load of running. Not his ability at all. It's naturally going to drop his conversion rate and it means that Kalou and Sturridge will be further deprived of game time. It's not impossible, but it's changing Torres' natural style of play. 10 years playing the way he's played and then he's expected to play an entirely different role. It's going to be hard for any player.
Elliot Lodge
Roar Pro
The way Chelsea set out this morning gives a great indication of where they are heading tactically with the aquisation of Torres. The feeling that Torres and Drogba are too similar and they can both only play in one striker systems is a common one, and a fairly valid argument, given their history. This morning, Chelsea played a 4-3-2-1, a slight variation from the 4-3-3 which they usually employ. The 4-3-3 which has become so typical of the side under Ancelotti sees Anelka play wide down the right and Malouda down the left, obviously with Drogba in the centre. Today, Anelka and Kalou (in for Malouda) played more centrally, running direct at the defenders, looking for Drogba. I have been one of Nicolas Anelka's harshest critics but todays game was perhaps his best in a Chelsea shirt. The feeling seems to be that Torres will line up alongside Anelka in that role just behind the front man of Drobga. Its not a position Torres will be used to, but given his fast footwork and skills, I am a strong believer that he is good enough to adapt. This formation is one which will put fear into the any defence. The width will continued to be provided by Ashley Cole and Jose Bosingwa (or perhaps Ivanovic may move out wide). Chelsea reallty dont possess any natural wingers, florent Malouda aside. Reverting to a 4-4-2 would probably throw someone like Essien or Ramires out of position. This way, Chelsea can maintain the three men in the centre of midfield, with Mikel playing the holding role. Expected line up for Sunday: Cech Ivanovic - Luiz - Terry - Cole Mikel (Ramires) Essien - Lampard Anelka - Torres Drogba now that is a fearsome line-up, Champions League glory beckons.
James Gray-Foster
Roar Pro
Mintox, I'm aware that Carroll can be played in a number of ways, and that Liverpool have penetrating wingers, but that's the point. For Carroll to be effective he has to play a holding role in 4-4-2 diamond and Suarez will need to play off him, or Liverpool will need to cross him the ball and give him space. Because of his size and his aerial qualities he's not going to be nearly as effective with Kuyt and Suarez cutting inside. Liverpool need a balance. They need to give him balls in the air to utilize his aerial ability and they need players cutting inside and making runs to giving him space. As you know, he's not as fast or agile as Torres and he's not really a poacher, so he's not going to be chasing as many through-balls and scoring as many one-touch finishes due to his physique and certain qualities. He's going to be powerful and direct. He actually reminds me of Shearer, albeit not quite as quick, but more menacing and powerful. He's a maverick in the air and you give him any space to shoot he'll put it away. He also works remarkable hard and a useful passer of the ball. But at his age and taking his inexperience into account 35 mil is just silly. Thanks for the comments lads. I appreciate the feedback and discussion.
tommy_doleman
Roar Pro
Agree with Mintox, Liverpool have brought in Dalglish to begin this rebuilding phase the club admittedly needs to have, after a tenure of poor management and poor signings that stretch back to the Houllier days. It's a win-win-win for all parties as far as I'm concerned. Chelsea have bagged themselves one of the best strikers in the world who will no doubt flourish with more confidence and better players around him. Plus he is available for the Champions League which is a big plus and as you say, he wants trophies. Liverpool have purchased two players who will freshen the club up for Torres who was unhappy, lacked confidence and disillusioned. To get 50 million for him was a great deal for Liverpool and in Carroll and Suarez, they have purchased a guy who's young, exciting and will be the next thing for England - while Suarez's goals to game ratio is exceptional (and he's only 24 himself). I expect Liverpool to be back competing for the Champions League spots either next season or the season after. Newcastle have made 35 million on a player who's not worth that much. It's hard to turn down that sort of money (though I think the Toon Army will tail off and finish sort of 13th 14th now as a result. 4-4-2 Diamond with Gerrard in behind Suarez and Carroll sounds super to me.
mintox
Guest
Carroll doesn't need to be a like for like replacement for Torres. Their are many different ways to play with a leading striker in a 4-2-3-1. Liverpool are rebuilding, it will take time and Torres wanted to leave to win trophies before he is too old. The club is bigger than any player, if he wants to go then let him (for 50 million of course), they should only keep players who want to stay and fight for the cause. Liverpool don't use wingers, they play 4-2-3-1, the wide attackers like Kuyt and Rodriquez, cut inside to create space for the full backs. Hence they don't need to be pacy. It's more important that liverpool recruit better full backs than quick wingers.
pj
Guest
Actually, you could say Liverpool paid virtually nothing - Babel roped in 6 million quid (up to 8 potentially with bonuses), so add that to Torres' 50 million pounds and they've basically got two potentially brilliant forwards, both almost certain first teamers to replace one, rather jaded, first teamer and a bit player. The more I think about these transfers the more I think it could be awesome for Liverpool. Kenny has form in managing raw strikers and turning them into talents - take Alan Shearer, for example. When Kenny got him, he was a very raw striker - a scoring rate at Southampton of one goal in just under every six games or so, and only one rather lacklustre English cap, paid a record British transfer fee at the time (3.3 mill), and turned him into one of the EPL's, and England's, best strikers to date with a scoring ratio at Blackburn of one goal in almost every game (138 games played, 112 goals scored for Rovers). The parallels here are huge and if Kenny's able to repeat the feat with Andy Carroll then Liverpool could be a huge force in the next two or three season.... This year's still probably a write off, but they can still get a Europa League spot if they get their act together. Time will tell, in any case.
Lu
Guest
ok maybe i'm a little quick to say they'll be relegated, but all these rumours about carroll being pushed out won't galvanise the team, fans or management. Ashley is a fool, Pardue has been average everywhere his managed, and the squad is neither here nor there.. they may survive the drop, but they will not be top half contenders.
Stoffy18
Roar Guru
Lu, Is that some kind of joke? Newcastle isn’t going anywhere, I'm still happy to place them in the top half of the table come seasons end. 35 million pounds was an over bid by Liverpool for sure, but aren't all deadline transfers? I mean the reds could hardly afford a rejected bid, alas, heading into the later half of the season with a depleted number of forwards on their list (Kuyt is a midfielder, N'Gog is no out and out striker and Babel is gone). As Brett said, with the 50 mill in hand, Liverpool only paid 8 million pound for two scoring strikers, i'd take that over Torres. "Questions must also be raised on whether Carroll is the ideal replacement for Torres. Although the two are similar in height they play two very different styles and have different qualities." - The Torres legacy got burned with the transfer, i mean, they didn't hesitate in throwing Carroll the number 9 jersey, so why should they be looking for a replacement, they should want a change. Just putting it out there, 6.3 compared to 6.1 is a massive height difference in football, especially for a striker.
Lu
Guest
Newcastle just got paid 35m pounds to get relegated..
Brett McKay
Guest
James, I'd reckon Liverpool and Newcastle would argue it all makes perfect sense. Now sure, Liverpool probably have paid 'overs' for Carroll, but essentially, they've got Suarez and Carroll for what, 5-6M quid?? If Torres didn't want to be there, they might as well cash him in while he was still worth something to someone else.. And Newcastle? Well, they're laughing all the way to the bank, aren't they.....