I have always believed it is unfair that clubs such as Chelsea, City etc who have massive squads are allowed to loan players to other prem teams. For example Luakaku has played well for Everton and could well score against top 6 clubs, but then does not play against Chelsea. Not only is he scoring against Chelsea's rivals he does not play against them so Everton are less effective when playing Chelsea. It's even worse if its a Goalkeeper or central defender as the loan player may hold the whole defence together, but against his own club does not play and his own club have more opportunity to score. I think a rule should be brought in that you can't loan a player to a team in the same league. Some players may also think twice about joining a club if they know they will not get 1st team experience or play on loan for another prem club.
fair...... hmmmmmmm... there are many angles to that. first it seems to allow clubs to build a bigger squad and hoover up a few marginal players and see how it goes, then offset the wages by loaning them out for 3 years second it seems to allow players who are really not ready end up on a big wage at a big club and then vanish off never to be seen. I remember we signed someone on a free from bayern then loaned him right out. he never actually set foot in anfield. third it does seem to allow certain clubs to benefit.. i'm not even talking this league. what about utds so called feeder club they sued to loan guys to in belgium or holland. they must have been artificially propped up in their league as a result. Last year lukaku may well have kept west brom up and at the start made them look way way better than they were. This year he could be firing everton into the CL. Chelsea will say they benefit from this by having the player finally return ready to play... and team in spain have this sort of relationship a lot. Real had players like that we were trying to buy a while back. I think its reasonable to think about a rule where players can't go on loan in the prem as the loan system for kids would not necessarily be affected... lets call a spade a spade here. barry aint a suitable loanee. he should have been sold but he refused to reduce his wages to go. everton pay what half his wages... i don't know... but they aint paying 150k per week. lukaku is only 20 its reasonable for him to be loaned probably so really... should chelsea be allowed to hoard players is the real question. I'd probably say yeah stop loans but then clubs like real could hoover them up and loan in spain.... it has to be a global rule not just england.
Maybe a rule that a player can only be loaned out once ?? Surely there's a conflict of interest for pl clubs loaning to other pl clubs.
Lukaku is the perfect example. With him, Everton are a threat to just about any team in the league, without him they are significantly weakened, he makes that much difference. Therefore, him being loaned to them gives Chelsea a potential advantage over their rivals. IMO, that is just not right. Chelsea or Man City could just buy a forty or fifty man squad of star players and loan them to every club in the league bar their direct title challenging rivals!
I remember, on old BBC 606 @ 2006, doing a facetious post on the Chelsea board called "A Modest Proposal", which jokingly suggested just that. I never expected it to actually come to pass!
Another thing is Chelsea loaning about 6 of their players to the Dutch team that are now 2nd in the league I think? What happens to them if Chelsea suddenly pull the plug? They have a team that suddenly drops down the table and can't challenge in their own league, let alone Europe because all their best players leave after 1 year. Another is the keeper for Athletico who has been loaned to them for 3 years by Chelsea now. Surely there has to be some kind of cap between how many loans of one player to the same club? No problem with players going on loan to teams in same division but think an age limit of under 21 should be included as pointed out above, Barry being loaned out at the age of 32/33 is defeating the whole object of a loan
I did. As soon as the loaning ruling was changed to allow loans to clubs in the same division. It was obviously going to happen at some point.
On another point, we've also gained from having Assaidi score against Chelsea and Everton to take points off them, so it has benefitted us in the same way, but still don't think should be allowed
Loans have changed. They're no longer solely about a young player gaining experience. In Barry's case he's in the last year of his contract so won't be returning to City. He went out on loan as no one would have matched his £100k per week wages & he wasn't going to give up his contractual rights, so a loan suited all 3 parties
Then he shouldn't be a greedy twat and take a reduction in wage. Doubt he's really going to miss that 50k over 1 year?
No, if someone meets a release clause in a players contract then the selling club don't have to be happy Unless you were referring to loan deals then probably... unless they can't afford the wages so have to get rid on loan (Remy @ QPR) Edit: Oh, and you're Crazy
We need Cove's opinion on Vitesse - Chelsea's loan club. I've read that some fans are okay with it as it promotes the strength of the league (better players) but the average attendance has dropped for Vitesse fans over the years since being taken over. I don't think that it's fair since it knocks some deserving side out of Europe in Holland, then the good players get recalled to Chelsea, and Vitesse is knocked out, but still good enough to win the league, etc. As for the premiership loan thing, I don't mind it at all. However there must be more rules - no clauses prohibiting the player playing against them, for example. Or a maximum of 2 or 3 loanee's above the age of 23.
I think we can safely say chelsea are totally abusing this system firstly. Secondly i think we can all agree that everton would be 10th right now if not for the rich two clubs propping them up. It's simply a question of Uefa not setting good rules and so peoepl locally can do what they like. I don't know about a maximum of players going into a club. 3 playrs would transform almost any team really... 3 players out would seem to make some sense. maybe put a time period on it... 3 players out for longer than 6 months? allow kids go for a month still... who knows. Clearly vitesse is a much bigger issue than say everton... why? they get CL out of it and they can get 20-30mil in money in. they tip the whole balance of the league then!
