I wasn't aware that you can have more than 2 loans in at once, the caveat is they need to be made permanent at the end of the loan. Premier League rule V.7.6 states: Not more than 2 Temporary Transfers shall be registered by a Club at the same time except that there shall be excluded from that number: V.7.6.1. any Temporary Transfer which become permanent;â
It means if we sign, for example, Livermore on a permanent he is no longer counted, even though we have had him on loan. I think.
I was thinking of it more like us with Boyd, e.g. he originally came on load but with a perm deal at the end of the season meaning he wouldnt have been counted as one of our two last season.
According to the HDM this is correct (Boyd senario), therefore you can have as many as you want over the two as long as they become perm signings at the end of the loan period
He wasn't counted because he was an emergency loan, done in February when the emergency loan window opened. That window doesn't exist for PL teams so all loans we bring in are 'long-term' loans (i.e. half a season or full season but it would have to be half a season at this stage) and are subject to a maximum of 2 domestic ones at any time. What I don't understand is why there's all this speculation about Ince being allowed to go on loan when he's out of contract in the summer anyway so he'll have effectively left Blackpool if he does leave on loan. Surely if there's interest they should be trying to get a fee for him? Unless it's being done to ensure Ince himself gets a big signing on fee in the summer as a free agent...
Ren is right, you can only have two domestic loans at any time, so if we wanted to loan another player, we'd have to make Livermore permanent, or shoot Graham.
So wtf does this mean? "Premier League rule V.7.6 states: Not more than 2 Temporary Transfers shall be registered by a Club at the same time except that there shall be excluded from that number: V.7.6.1. any Temporary Transfer which become permanent;”
It just means that if you have a player on loan, you can make his loan a permanent deal and he no longer counts as a loan player, as we did with Gardner.
Is there anything to stop 2 clubs coming to a private agreement to sell a player to the other club and buy him back at the same price, thereby getting by this maximum 2 loan rule?
Transfers aren't private. In any case the second part would have to be written into the first part (to protect both clubs from being shafted) and that wouldn't be possible.
This has been raised a few times in the past, as far as I'm aware, the rules prevent it from happening.
Taken from HDM If our research is right, City would be able to sign Ince on loan, despite having Danny Graham and Jake Livermore already at the KC on loan presently, but would need to take him on a permanent deal at the end of the campaign. Current Premier League rule V.7.6 states: Not more than 2 Temporary Transfers shall be registered by a Club at the same time except that there shall be excluded from that number: V.7.6.1. any Temporary Transfer which become permanent;” I suppose the opening line, 'if our research is right....' says it all really if you can't loan more than 2 players
Ince won't happen. Bruce would not be able to guarantee a starting place with Brady and Aluko coming back.
This. In the Premierleague you're only allowed 2 domestic loanees at a time. There's additional rules about only being allowed 1 from any one club (eg 1), and to complete 2 deals in any one window (eg 2) and 3 in a season (eg 3) etc. It's some of those additional rules that the HDM researched rule circumvents. eg1) Cardiff had to sign Fabio on a permanent because they have Zaha on loan. eg2) When we had Gardner and King on loan, and wanted to bring in McShane. Not only did we have our loan spots filled, but we had to sign one of them permanently to let us bring McShane in. We didn't have the option of terminating one of the loans to complete the deal as we were still in the summer window. This season with terminating Graham's loan it was different because any replacement would have been signed in the January window when we were allowed to make another 2 (except for eg3). eg3) The rules say you can only have 3 domestic loans a season. With us having Livermore and Graham from August, if they'd both gone back to their clubs we'd have only been able to sign one more loanee despite having 2 spaces. If we signed one of them permanently and the other was recalled though we'd have been able to sign 2 more loanees as the permanent signing's loan wouldn't count.
Sorry if this is a daft, or previously asked question, but would one solution have been to take a player near the end of their contract (say Ince) on a full contract to the end of the season, when either way they'd be a free agent? It would amount to exactly the same as the short term loan for all but the rule wouldn't it?
I think it depends who it is. For example with Ince they will receive a loan fee, compensation from his next club, as well as solidarity payment if he makes a move for a fee after. Unless the buying club is willing to pay as much as that potential amount (as I believe a transfer fee replaces compo payments) it's in their favour to send him on loan. Obviously that only counts for younger players.
Normally yes, other than for what Mr Hat said. With Ince there's always the possibility that rather than going to Monaco (and Blackpool getting next to nothing) he'll do enough for Palace to impress one of the big boys over here and sign for them instead. That way Blackpool get more compo as well as managing to get the loan fee.
