I agree with this entirely. There is no doubt we have exploited the rules. We haven't broken them, just made the most of insufficient regulation. I still feel uneasy about the whole loan situation, particularly when using words such as 'exploit' which suggests something sinister. It does feel as if we have had a bit of an advantage over our Championship rivals. Fair enough we were just lucky the Pozzo's chose us, but I do agree the rules need updating. Not so sure I am too comfortable about the idea of buying from Udinese for £1. I think, regardless of the money going from one pocket to the other, it still has to be the same amount that any other club would expect to part with. I don't agree with pessimistic cynicism, but I can't help think we are going to pulled up for some dodgy money transferring in the future
If we still have all the loan players, when and if the FA/FL get around to changing the rules where will that leave us, as they will not be able to apply this retrospectively? So as long as we keep the current loanees we could be home and safe. They may come a cropper with European legislation regarding the restraint of trade and companies' abilities to transfer its employees between one European division and another, if both the employer and employee are willing. Also will they apply the same vigourous methods to FFP as they currently do to seeing if someone is fit and proper? I somehow think they will.
No worries BBW ,as long as whatever we do is legal and taxes are paid , if we stay within whatever the rules of the day are ,which I am sure the Pozzo`s would then there is no problem . What it does do is make it harder for lets say Posh to team up with Lazio and try to do what we did this season . Infact I am sure the rules will change to stop little clubs competing with big clubs ( maybe getting a little too cynical now ).
There should be no effect at all, Zen - the rule change is due to be discussed during the summer I believe - and by that time, all the players involved will either have gone back or be on permanent contracts. Of course, the next ten 'loans' could prove problematical.
This is the right thing, provided it either comes into effect before the opening of the summer transfer window, or otherwise comes into effect the following season. Although officially regarding "international transfers" as loans could have unintended consequences down the line, given how strongly the league is clinging to the emergency loan system.
Load of rubbish if they change it, how can you exploit aloophole if thats the rules. there are no rules saying it can't be done. Other clubs can do it if they want. And some say that we have an unfair advantage when it comes to doing that, but some clubs have, or had an unfair advantage when it came to buying players. We could't afford 7 figure sums for players before, so technically, that gives others the advantage.
i don't disagree with that Lloydinio...i think the fact that it's something new makes others nervous...so they kick off..
I think that the loaning of players rather covers up the larger issue of multiple club ownership. While banned here, remember Maxwell his family and Derby, Oxford and almost Watford, how long will it be before the powers that be try to impose some similar ruling across Europe or even wider? With football clubs being part of groups with holding companies etc it seems very difficult these days to actually know who owns them. Pozzo Snr does not own WFC we are told, Pozzo Jnr does. How many other family members are there? It has been shown far too often that the FL does not have the resources to do a fit and proper person check, so just how good would they be at working their way through a maze of inter-company links. If you want to see just how difficult that is have a look at the owners, or even non owners who have had their sticky fingers in the Pompey pie.
Correct...that's the main issue, and surely once the temporary transfer policy is changed, they will start to look at it, but that is easier to get round i'm sure...
The real threat is if the football authorities banned co-ownership of clubs. This is not allowed in national associations, simply so that clubs owned by the same person(s) cannot play each other. Risk of collusion. But if co-owned clubs in different national associations were drawn against each other, in say the Champions League(!) , what then? This is no longer just a theoretical possibility but is a real probabality, so it will be the next item on the agenda.( But not for a year or two.) I don't see why the rich owners of an English Premier league club might not take a leaf out of the Pozzo book and buy an Italian or Spanish club to run in a co-ordinated fashion. How would we react to that? Would it be unfair? But remember that for the Pozzo's this is as much about developing players for profitable sale as it is about driving the clubs they own up to the highest level in each nation. Other owners might have different motives.
From what I can make out this is a good thing for watford, The Pozzo's will then definitely let us keep who we want from the current batch and then loan us 2 more next season and possibly some more transfers, no one will be able to moan anymore, on top of that this will stop other clubs doing this, and, lets be honest after the success we have had with the system other teams will try it
Can we be so sure that it is an easy option for the Pozzo's to change "loans" into " permanent transfers" for a nominal fee? To do this they would have to cancel the players contract at Udinese or wherever, and offer a new one at Watford. This could only be done during the transfer windows. The player and his agent would have to agree, and might expect better terms and/or commission. The contract could not be on worse terms than the players current club, so we might have to break our wages ceiling (if it still applies) with implications for the wages of others at the club. Other clubs could come in with offers to tempt a player who is known to be changing contracts. So not a simple process. Maybe this is why it is taking so long to sort out the situation of the players we currently have on loan.
No contract is ever easy. However it will not be beyond the wit of creative accountants and the like to devise "guarantees and options" so that for example Udinese would have the first option to buy back a player if they sold him in such a way that the player was on as good terms as before any initial transfer etc.. I am sure if the Pozzos would like I could offer my services ... for a price
I may be putting it too simply, but my understanding is that if a player is not under contract at any club, he may sign for a club outside of the transfer window. So if the Pozzos cancelled a player's contract at Udinese, then that player could, in theory, sign for Watford the next day - irrespective of the time of year. Or is there some kind of cooling-off period between contract cancellation and re-signing?
Vic - No any player out of contract can sign for a club outside of the window. I think the view is that with the pending sanctions from the FL hanging over us from Bazgate, it would not be a wise move to cancel the loan players contracts and re-sign them directly to Watford as "out of contract" players. Keeping a low profile is probably something we need to do..
