I'd sincerely hope we'd do the same if we only had Pickford and Dixon available. Would you want them thrown in at the deep end in the derby?
No I wouldn;t but I'd respect the rules of the game and not ask the PL to change them just because one of my registered keepers is toon young! Newcastle should've put a recall clause in Darlow's contract - only themselves to blame
You aren't able to put a recall in if a fee has been paid, said fee will have been waived as part of the deal to sign the lad. The youngest lad won't be registered much in the same way Pickford, Dixon and Stryjek won't be registered for us. Under 21's don't need to be. Of Newcastle's 3 registered goalkeepers, not one is fit. I dislike Pardew as much as anyone but I'm not going to give him grief over looking after his team within the rules. That's just good management.
You guys loaned Man City a keeper under the same circumstances a few years back so you were obviously happy with the rules back then.
I havnt delved into the rule book in detail but my understanding is that Newcastle have 2 registered goalkeepers fit. This means, according to the rules, they are not entitled to an emergency loan, even though one of them is on loan at Forest. This means that in order for Newcastle to get an emergency loan the rules will need to be bent/broken. Am I correct in this or have I been misinformed??? Now if the rule book does go out of the window and your emergency loan plays a blinder on Sunday I will be f**ing foaming! Now if the rule book states that the player on loan at Forest does not count as a registered keeper and you's are entitled to an emergency loan, then I have no problem! Basically if the rules are bent (however unfair the ruling is) in order to help Newcastle out will Sunderland not have a right to appeal???? Taken from BBC sport.......... 'Newcastle also own Nottingham Forest keeper Karl Darlow, who they signed in the summer before loaning him back to the Championship club for the entire season. However it is understood that they cannot recall the 24-year-old. Premier League guidelines state that a club with only one fit and available goalkeeper is technically eligible to make an emergency loan signing. With Darlow and Woodman both counting as fit players, Newcastle's current situation does not meet those criteria.' It goes on to say that Newcastle have been given the go ahead to apply and the Premier League will listen
The FA consider the guy who is on loan to Forest as one of Newcastle's available goalkeepers. The fact is, he's not available so the FA have ****ed up somewhere along the line. This happens so infrequently that the FA have had no reason to address these rules. If Pantilimon and Mannone were injured for the rest of the season, on February the 2nd for example, none of you would be complaining if Poyet asked the FA for permission to sign an experienced goalkeeper.
It depends on how they perceive the "regestering" part of the rule to be fair. Darlow is registered as an employee of the club, but not registered as part of our 25 man squad or an available player. I think they'll (the FA) use common sense and say the term "registered" can be taken in a number of different ways and allow us to get a keeper in. Of course that will only happen if we're able to prove Alnwick is injured.
How can it be proved that he is injured??? I'm sitting here with a really bad back. There is no way I could jump in goal for a Tyne & Wear derby. There is also no way I can prove I have a bad back! What is the problem with Alnwick shoulder? Has it been determined??? Its a puzzler this one!
This post has moved to a Pardeaux topic. WTF (Wed/Thurs/Friday). Steve McQ: another thread, reply, mentioned play all - Fletch, Connor, and (yes) Jozy (in a deeper role behind F & C).th the s Hoping for that....considering the goalie fragility they have. "Let's go, Gus!"
I'm sure there are scans, x-rays etc that can prove any muscle/bone damage. We'll have to see what happens, If Jak is in goal then we'll have to get behind him. I feel for him, he's not good enough or experienced enough to be playing in the Premier League, it's not his fault.
He's under 21 so doesn't have to be registered to play, you're right. But Darlow isn't under 21 so that rule doesn't apply to him
You don't have to register young kids (under 21 I think) in your 25 man squad mate. How the hell are ya by the way? You been to the panto yet?
Its whether they can prove whether Alnwick injured his shoulder for me to be honest! Something smells fishy! Is there any footage of him injuring his shoulder? If so, what does the footage show? Does it show an obvious injury had just taken place?? I have no problem Newcastle getting an emergency loan, so long as the rule book has not been rewritten for their advantage. After all of this Alnwick will be fit and have a stormer against us probably! haha!
Haha that would be typical! I don't think the rules are fair if they're claiming one of Newcastle's keepers who is on loan is 'available'. City had Hart out on loan when they took Fulop off you lot, there's no difference, they'd have had another 10 'keepers on their books all in nappies, but they were allowed to take Fulop. Alnwick, Woodman, whoever else they have, shouldn't be considered as options by the FA. Typically, they could also get Schwarzer in and you stick 5 past him, Alnwick was only ever gonna concede 4 (that's what he does)... that's a better scenario for you mate!
It's tonight mate, just about to get my suit on and off to Nottingham for our traditional pre-Panto pub crawl. I've copped some tickets for the derby so it looks like being 2 Pantos in a week Nice to see you posting Terry, take care.
Well if Newcastle can 100% prove that Alnwick is injured, and if the rules are altered (however unfair they seem) in Newcastles favour I would like to think that Sunderland would be consulted regarding any rule change. I would also like to think that Sunderland would be happy to allow Newcastle to get an emergency loan in this case! As long as the keeper they get is ****!!! haha!
My opinion is in the fairness of the game, this is the FA's mistake, not Newcastle's. If the FA deem a player who is unavailable, as available, then they're to blame. Similarly though, I think Newcastle were stupid letting Fraser Forster leave permanently, the kid seems a die hard Newcastle fan and would have been happy going out on loan season after season I think. This season he'd have probably been given his shot at an extended run, if not the number 1 jersey.
