Much ado about nothing. He is their player and they are right to recall him. These trials are sent to test us! Let's laugh at adversity and do the business on the pitch. We will be champions.
Stockdale was their player and Fulham were well within their right to recall him. Don't see the problem to be honest Tickler.
Looks like hes coming back: @stockogk1313 @A9Mac @westenmc maybe soon pal 1st of jan not that far away
Quite true Fez - an excellent philosophy. I'm less certain about the "we will be champions" bit but would be very happy if it's correct. Whatever happens we'll have been in for a season of watching some excellent football with enough off pitch intrigue to keep us on our toes. It's great being a City supporter.
This whole situation just highlights the fact, we should have signed a keeper in the summer! Should have put a good bid on mannone or myhill, both would have come and if the offer was good enough, I'm sure their clubs would have excepted
Jol has treated us with utter contempt. He 's taking the ****ing piss recalling Stockdale to cover in goal. If he had a shred of decency he'd have registered himself as a player/manager and put himself on the bench. Everyone would have been happy then. Especially me and Tickles.
He might be talking about a permanent, he may of got back to Fulham and told Jol he is pissed off with the way he is treating him and put in a transfer request, who knows the conversation between Stockdale, Brucie and the Allems before he left?
I feel a right tit now you've explained it properly Carmine. If only tickles had explained it like you we wouldn't be falling out all the time. I bow to your superior brain power. By this logic then surely SB tonight will say "Reet lads way Alex is out, I'm playing. I,m going up for corners and trekking all the penalties divnt ya nah
Its the only solution as far as Fulham are concerned. Why would they allow him to play tonight and perhaps get injured.That is a daft proposal. The whole loan thing needs a shake up. Loans should be either for the whole season or until the next window opens.Then a replacement can be found. Recalls between windows are just stupid.We consolidate our position by adding Stockdale & Meyler to potentially have it taken away by recalls. What is the point of having an emergency window and then a gap until the next actual window. This business about loan fees is also a bit flaky and hints that our management have been out negotiated in favour of saving money.What is a "normal " fee.At least if this is paid we would have securted the players for the full period . Seem to remember SAF recalled loanees when PNE sacked his son.How is that any way to run a football league. Also seem to remember we had someone on loan from Sunderland when we were in BPL and they recalled when our position was better than theirs.Can not remember the player concerned but if true again made mockery of the loan position.
There's no limit on the total number of loans, just the number of loans at any one time. So it'll make no difference.
There are limits, but they're all over the place because there's different ones based on ages of players, type of loan, club they're coming from, and given the combinations involved probably what colour underwear they wear when they go out on the pull. The general arrangement though is that transfers count as one of the most permanent deals. So if you have a player on an emergency loan and then on a long term one from January he just counts as a long term loan. Likewise they stop counting towards your loan limits if you make them permanent. Goalkeepers are generally excluded though due to being a specialised position. If you're ever left with only 1 fit keeper you will be allowed to sign one. The exception to the exception being if like Fulham you have another keeper out on loan. You're then made to recall those players before you're allowed to sign another (QPR got collared with it last year because some muppet there gave Elvijs Putnins a contract just because he was a nice kid)
