I understand some of these "loan" signings could actually be with us for 2/3 seasons in a pernament transfer type deal BUT must say surely once the season really gets going a few of these loan players will hardly be pleased to come over here into our cold climate and just sit around on the bench or in the stands? Afterall I see no reason to drop the likes of Doyley,Hogg,Murray,Taylor and Big Nos so would be pretty annoyed if they are just to so an unknown can fit in. Infact the one area we really needed to improve was up front and by all accounts one guy is still injury and the young Bleck hardly impressed on Tuesday albeit that was his deubt.
All International loans count as permanent transfers so there is no limit to the amount of international loans we can have.
I think we had established that, but had moved on to wonder whether or not the FA would view that as a loop hole that needed closing, now that we were taking full advantage of the ruling.
i'm sure, when the FA get their act together, there will be some fall out from what has been happening, and we'll find the loophole blocked, though that could take a while. Meanwhile, there has to come a time when some people leave...to make room for all these players. We just have to get past the word 'loan'...it seems, by all accounts, it's not the kind of loan we're used to! Good to see Tommy Hogan and Sean Murray get renewed contracts..at least that means it's not all about the loan players!
I suggest that the FA realise that whatever they do to "block this loophole", if two clubs are owned by the same person/family, then they can subvert any re-drawing of the foreign loan rules, simply by making the moves "permanent" followed by a "permanent" move back again. So instead of Watford signing 12/13/14/15 players "on loan", they simply sign 12/13/14/15 players on permanent transfers and then transfer them back when necessary....... How can the FA legislate for that?
i'm guessing they can't....thing is, there are no rules because as far as i know, this is a unique situation..a family of clubs. It's slipped under the radar in Europe, perhaps the FA will bring it to the attention of the powers that be, and then maybe there will be rules..but that could take a very long time...maybe.
How about: "Any UEFA club that trades with, or enters into an agreement with, another UEFA club in a deliberate attempt to avoid UEFA regulations will be deemed to have breeched those regulations. The clubs involved will be subject to the punishements for breaking the avoided regulations plus any other sanction that UEFA chooses to impose." That is sufficiently vague to allow UEFA to do whatever they want AND it increases opportunities for bribery and corruption. If the Pozzos keep UEFA sweet then we will have no probems but if the relationship sours .... who knows?
i think that's the thing..it's not the FA we have to worry about...this is international, UEFA is bound to do something...and yep, that gives them every opportunity to do what they want...which is what they do anyway!
Surely it would fall down there? How can anyone prove that there was deliberate intent? Anyway, I can't see UEFA objecting - they've sanctioned the Pozzos doing this for the last three years and Vladimir Romanov for the last six - that's plenty of time to have done something about it if they wanted to.
In europe any european citizen can ply his trade in any member state, like to see the FA try to stop that.
WO seems to confirm them and we could sign them on a pernament basis next season. http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sp...ption_to_sign_Udinese_quintet/?action=success
Well - regulating on the number of loanees one club can sign doesn't fall into the category of refusing someone the right to work in a member state. Given the number of clubs there are,and the structure of the game, in the UK, there are be plenty of opportunities for players wishing to come here. The only stumbling block for them would be their own perception of their own worth - in other words, they may not want to play in the lower levels where the money on offer is not so attractive. And that certainly would not be a case of the FA refusing them the right to ply their trade here.
CLUB A Field one loanee from a UK club in the starting 11 and have 5 loanee's on the bench, again all from UK clubs. This club would get fined as they would be breaking the rules, the rules being only 5 home based loanee's in any matchday squad. CLUB B Field 11 (ELEVEN) foreign loanee's in the starting 11. No fine as this is well within the rules. Is that fair?? Is that right??
I used to rile my gooner acquaintances by suggesting they should be playing in the French league. Need to keep my head down now...
Well, it seems that the "rules" allow an unlimited number of overseas loanees, it is unlikely that the football authorities will/can do much about it, and so it will be a fact of life for a few seasons at least. But is it good for the club and for the kind of football we play? Zola now seems to be confused by the number of players at his disposal. Training must be very strange.What formations and routines do they practice? How can he keep all these players occupied and what will he do with all of them? Do the players know where they stand in terms of their role in the club and their future? Can such uncertainty be good for team spirit ? Did Zola actually ask for all these players or what? Surely a bit of focus is needed around the squad . Too much of a good thing can make you sick .
might try and have a dig around and see if i can find out some of those answers Roger...if i can...would be nice to know what's going on
