You suggested that Oscar could be sent back if he was out injured. If he was out injured for 12 months, I'm sure they would send him back. My point being there is an incentive from both clubs that if a player has a serious injury, it can be in the best interests of both parties to cancel the loan.
I suggested there had been talks between the clubs and it seems from the article Man City had given options to the club regarding Delap and the Article also qoutes LR as stating that Acun and Tan had made the decision to keep Delap who himself thanked the club for making it so obviously there was discussions and options given and the decision was obviously down to this club what Man City had discussed.
This debate has been done to death. We maybe could have sent him back to Man City if we didnt want him for the end of the season or didnt want him for the future. Not that we had the option to do so, more that we could have spoken to them about whats possible. They could have rejected it or agreed to it, we'll never know. From recent interviews though it is sounding like it was definitely discussed internally once we knew how bad his injury was. As Liam said, credit for Acun and Tan for making that decision... whether that was Man City said its up to us and we decided to keep him, who knows...
I was (somewhat) right in my memory of the Ayala issues. https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpools-roy-hodgson-criticised-hull-3346054 Liverpool wanted to treat him and we refused, which they claim worsened the injury. It's why I think it's in the best interests of both clubs sometimes to cancel loans in the event of long term injuries. And it does happen.
I think sometimes they go back to the parent club for the rest of there treatment as its best for them but the club he was loaned too still pays the wages. Pretty sure that's sometimes the case.
So I'm not sure why Man City didn't just rule him out for the season (which they were apparently able to do) if we were still required to pay his wages. They put him through an intensive rehabilitation program to push to get him back and fit for us. Why? I suspect there's a lot more that goes on behind the scenes than some want to believe.
Quite simply because it was what they thought was best for his long term development and their asset. Nothing more nothing less.
They thought rushing him back and risking further injury for the sake of 5 games was in their best interest? Not ours? That's staggering to me, but I'll defer to you.
I know you weren't, I was using it as an example seeing as that was the player the discussion was prompted by.
I've no idea what the situation was with Delap I'm just glad he's back playing for us and hopefully next year.
Clearly not, they didn't rush anything, they handled his rehab and made sure he was 100% ready for a return to us. It's quite clearly in their best interest to have their players playing.
Rushing might be the wrong word, but they very easily could have just ruled him out for the season and booked him in for surgery and we would have still been paying his wage so no downside to them. I'd have thought putting him in cotton wool ahead of next season rather than getting him through a more rigorous rehab program just for the sake of 5-7 games isn't worth it. As 1moreagain posted, there was clearly a decision made at some point.
Who said he's been rushed back? He's back playing because his parent club deemed him fit to. The fact your trying to make it something it isn't it quite staggering to me, but then again.....
