A loan was the best option with Bertrand as neither he nor Saints would be certain it would work. Toby was looking for a move to the PL, but even Ron was surprised he came to us...remember we had just signed Gardos. Toby was like a bonus. It probably also made financial sense as we were trying to stockpile a few players. I think we need another striker (unless we are very sure of JRod and Gallagher)...I come out in a cold sweat when I even think of a wounded Pelle Definitely need a GK.
Chosen wisely, I don't have a problem with loans as long as they come with an option to buy. Bertrand has checked out as the real deal. I only wish Toby had an option to buy in his contract. Mind you, if Saints make the top4 he may well decide that he'd like to stay here anyway. However, Saints wouldn't be exactly short on players wanting to come here either. So, Saints appear to have played this loan game very well so far.
There are implications that there are some complexities in this option (more than just the player needing to agree terms)
Toby has mentioned that he can be called back. After he said this it was raised with Ron in a presser, he said that Toby can't be called back before the end of the season. So it isn't the usual loan with a right to buy agreed.
I have no idea what the other part could be. I am sure I read something about Athletico still need to decide they don't want him (which doesn't make sense because of the agreed price). It could be something to so with Spanish contract law (I am not aware of another example of a loan to buy from Spain in recent times) However I am sure I read a link the other day suggesting they have lined up a CB from Galatasary which I imagine will move him closer to their exit door. The main concern will be whether he (and/or his agent) think they can negotiate a "better" move for him. Man United need a CB (and probably a right back). So do Arsenal (I am still stunned they nicked Chambers when they could have got him to cover the same two positions with much more experience and accomplishment). Then of course there is always Liverpool, who haven't worked out it doesn't matter who you have in defense if the other 6 outfielders have no intention of covering them and your most defensive midfielder is an ageing Gerard....
While a good player is always a good player, we mustn't assume they will be as successful at every club. I do think we make players look good because of the style of football we play...the way everyone knows where the other players are and cover for them. You could transplant one of those players to another team and they wouldn't be as successful without the back up. I would suggest Lovren at Liverpool as an example.
One of life's mysteries. Could be that Toby didn't want to be tied or that he had to convince Atletico to let him come on loan when they weren't sure they wanted to let him go.
I completely agree and hopefully players will start to see the same based on things such as the above example But I am not holding my breath. I am obviously not a professional sportsman but I would like to think that somewhere along the line being made to look like a mug week in week out and booed by fans and abused online (Lovren) might not be worth doubling your pay. It sounds like a no brainer to double your money but in theory a competitive sportsman should think about a bit more than just that - i think that was why there was so much outrage when the Bogarde thing first happened at Chelsea and he showed no intention of trying to play. Or maybe it is different when you double your money and don't play (and therefore don't get subject to the abuse)
No I ment why do you think it isn't a normal loan with the option to buy? Koeman said he can't be recalled until the end of the season. Which is when his loan ends anyways, with a option to but it is only a first refusal thing anyways. The player still has to agree to join you.
It was Toby that made an issue you of it...seemed to want to make it clear that it wasn't that simple. It wasn't just me he confused...because the journos raised it as an issue.
I'm interested as to whether Skacel was a total one-off in bucking that trend. It seemed a very sensible deal structure but i've never seen it repeated. The only reason we knew about it was because the player changed his mind.
Maybe it was along the lines of... "I'm not sure what the hell I've let myself in for by coming to this club that the press have already written off for relegation, so I'm keeping my options open." Now we're sitting in second place in the PL he might see things slightly differently.
