What do Andy Carroll and David De Gea have in common?

Welcome to another edition of The Green Room. Further debate on all things Liverpool FC and the Premier League. Two mysteries and two players to discuss in the huddle this week. Why did Liverpool sign Andy Carroll? and the next one, which is akin to the meaning of life is, why did Manchester United sign David de Gea?

After yesterday’s performance, this is a question I have to ask. I’m sure, for all Liverpool fans, this is tantamount to sacrilege for me to question Kenny Dalglish’s judgement in the transfer market but nonetheless I have to do it. I know we’re only two games into the season but thus far, other than the last 20 minutes of yesterday’s game, I’ve not seen Liverpool play anywhere like they did in the latter half of last season. In both cases, Carroll was not playing for the most part. Carroll huffed and puffed and pushed and bundled his way through the game with precious little to show except another disallowed goal following another questionable attempt to win the ball.

The only time Liverpool really looked like they were going to get anything from the game was when Luis Suarez and Raul Meireless came into the fray. Was it simply down to the fact that Arsenal were down to 10 men? Was it really down to the fact that Arsenal lost arguably their best performer on the day in Emmanuel Frimpong? Was it pure coincidence that the two goals were born out of the efforts of the two aforementioned substitutes? None of those points are true. The only certain fact is that Liverpool continued to adopt the route-one method up until Suarez and Meireles came into the game. After this their approach was different, their passing improved, their movement improved, albeit against 10 men. It’s beyond argument that Liverpool do not play with as much purpose or flair when Carroll is in the side. Fair enough, the passing was a little better this week but the end product was again severely lacking.

Apart from the fact that Carroll looks incredibly laboured and slow, I’m yet to see him actually go past a player and create a decent chance without the predictable “knock-on”. As I said last week, Liverpool have to improve, and yesterday they did so immeasurably in the time it took for two players to leave the pitch and two to enter. Liverpool’s game took another dimension when we neglected the direct game and took a more considered approach, and I’m sure Dalglish will come to realise this as the season goes on. 

Let’s face it, if you send over £100m on players, it doesn’t follow that they’re all going to come good. Same goes that if you pay £35m for a player that also doesn’t define his future success or failure. Sometimes you just have to hold your hands up.

Speaking of hands up, this brings me onto the next great mystery. Why on earth did Sir Alex Ferguson sign David de Gea? In the same way that Andy Carroll is never going to be a John Toshack, David Gea is never going to be a Peter Schmeichel.  In the best case you have the same dimensions. Believe it or not, Schmeichel and De Gea are both the same height at 6ft 1in but after that, the similarity ends. Schmeichel was a huge presence in the United goal mouth and the impression was always that if you ever got past the defence, you’d have to get past Schmeichel which was a job in itself.

Schmeichel’s command of the area was also second to none and his positioning was only bettered, perhaps, by the Arsenal no. 1 David Seaman. I don’t see any of this in De Gea. Yes, he looks as if he’s a god shot-stopper, but for me, he doesn’t have the presence needed to intimidate attackers, to get that bit more out of his defence.  It’s generally accepted that goalkeepers mature later than outfield players and at 20 years of age, it’s certainly feasible that De Gea may never have the time to develop the talent he undoubtedly has. Schmeichel was 28 when signed for United so they probably got the best years out of him.

I’m not sure De Gea has the next four or five seasons to prove himself so it’s one hell of a big ask from Ferguson. Similarly David James went to Liverpool at the age of 22 and I personally believe he was a better goalie by the time he went to Aston Villa when he was near on 30. Ultimately as with all these things and all things Sir Alex Ferguson, time will tell, and the old Scot is rarely wrong when it comes to choosing a player. Let’s see if this turns out to be the next Peter Schmeichel, the next Mark Bosnich or the next Roy Carroll… Hold on, that last name sounds familiar!

Ben Green @Mrbengreen

Comments

[f]

your a shit journalist. k.

[Matt]

Couldn't agree more. Waste of big coin that could have brought augero or save some cash and buy Forlan we see how well the two play together at international level.

[Blindside]

I have already said this last night to some effect. Carroll is simply swanning around the field. Notice when he headed and the keeper saved there was absolutely NO passion in his body language. he simply turned away and sauntered off as if it was a practice game. We came to life ONLY after Suarez and Meireles entered the fray!
Have always said that Carroll is much over-rated and it would be best to sell him on though I doubt anyone would buy!!

[anon]

you stupid..stupid article

[kk]

junk article

[FredDibner]

Good article - because of the money spent on him, Carroll has been fortunate in that people are not pointing out the obvious deficiencies in his game, let's face it, he's a big slow lump and certainly not the type of player that a club wishing to finish in the top four would look at. A terrible waste of money. We should have taken Dan Sturridge from Chelsea. Qucik and mobile.

De Gea is a good player but far too young to deal with the pressures from a club such as Man U.

[David]

I think that you havent got a clue about football, the player brings liverpool so many different options and styles of football. if anything kenny should of played both strikers yesterday. Carrol is a world class player and have no doubt that he will score and asset many goals. as for your article, i think you need to find a need day job...

[jon]

Good post. An injured Aquilani joined lfc for £17mln and made 18 appearances from a possible 38 scoring 2 goals while Andy Carrol cost £35mln has made 6 appearances from a possible 22 scoring 2 goals.
Now the difference between the 2 according to the media is Aquilani is an injury prone expensive flop who has to be sold while Andy Carrol is a beast of a player who needs time and the media encourages people to look past the price tag.
Another similarity is both were bought injured but according to many, it was criminal to buy an injured Aquilani while an injured Carrol was worth gold.Now this is just comparing players but if we look at similar positions.that is £17mln midfielders in the last 2 or so years against aquilani such as Chelsea Zhirkov or United Anderson, we will find that Aquilani is not the flop he is said to be otherwise why has nothing been said about the above 2.On the other hand, we will have to compare £35mln Carrol to £38mln Aguerro and £35mln Falcao but Caroll seems to be the expensive one and offers less.

[sparq]

World Class Carroll ? I really don't know about that.....only time will tell.
You certainly can't judge a player who only played 20 odd games for Newcastle and 5 or 6 games for Liverpool.

Judge Carroll after he's had 2 full season's a Liverpool. I recon he'll prove he is a decent striker, notching up 20 goals a season. Like I said, only time will tell.

De Gea, only 20 looks decent, but like all new keepers at a new big club, sometimes they get the jitters.

He can be at United for the next 5 seasons, and still you won't have seen the best of him.
Again, only time will tell.

Sparq