Pros and Cons of Football Loans

Do people even read what Wenger said?  

Wenger said: 'It would be best if players are loaned only in lower divisions or abroad - and even abroad I'm not convinced it is right.'
'We have to make players available against the teams that loan them out, or the system is not defendable.'

Raptorgunner wrote:Do people even read what Wenger said?  

Wenger said: 'It would be best if players are loaned only in lower divisions or abroad - and even abroad I'm not convinced it is right.'
'We have to make players available against the teams that loan them out, or the system is not defendable.'

the last part makes sense, and as far as I know it's only in the premier league loanees can't play against their 'mother' clubs, in the Bundesliga that's normal.
Idiotic rule, imo.

i can see  the reasoning behind it tbf.

you're sending the guy out to gain experience, you're giving him to another team for free, you're paying his wages etc.... you can't afford to have him score against you in a crucial game or compromise your title chances for example.

and i'm pretty sure that wenger would've said the same thing had he been on the receiving end of a devastating goal from a loanee.

" it's not fair !! we're paying that guys wages ! it's a conflict of interest ! rules must change "

The players are not free though, clubs pay good money for their service.

Raptorgunner wrote:Do people even read what Wenger said?  

Wenger said: 'It would be best if players are loaned only in lower divisions or abroad - and even abroad I'm not convinced it is right.'
'We have to make players available against the teams that loan them out, or the system is not defendable.'

I always found this a pit peculiar - in Germany all loaned players normally play against their parent clubs - actually they even try to give their very best there, just to show them they'd better have kept them. (E.g. this weekend, Richie Sukuta-Pasu scored the 1:1 for the draw against his parent team 1.FC Kaiserslautern who very likely will miss their promotion to the Bundesliga due to that: http://www.bild.de/sport/fussball/richard-sukuta-pasu/schiesst-lautern-den-aufstieg-weg-35394900.bild.html )

farfan wrote:you can't afford to have him score against you in a crucial game or compromise your title chances for example.

In Germany that's normal. See above.

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Raptorgunner wrote:Do people even read what Wenger said?  

Wenger said: 'It would be best if players are loaned only in lower divisions or abroad - and even abroad I'm not convinced it is right.'
'We have to make players available against the teams that loan them out, or the system is not defendable.'

the last part makes sense, and as far as I know it's only in the premier league loanees can't play against their 'mother' clubs, in the Bundesliga that's normal.
Idiotic rule, imo.

rwo power wrote:

Raptorgunner wrote:Do people even read what Wenger said?  

Wenger said: 'It would be best if players are loaned only in lower divisions or abroad - and even abroad I'm not convinced it is right.'
'We have to make players available against the teams that loan them out, or the system is not defendable.'

I always found this a pit peculiar - in Germany all loaned players normally play against their parent clubs - actually they even try to give their very best there, just to show them they'd better have kept them. (E.g. this weekend, Richie Sukuta-Pasu scored the 1:1 for the draw against his parent team 1.FC Kaiserslautern who very likely will miss their promotion to the Bundesliga due to that: http://www.bild.de/sport/fussball/richard-sukuta-pasu/schiesst-lautern-den-aufstieg-weg-35394900.bild.html )

Oh. Well, that's something I think Bundesliga should abolish. For me, it's too easy to raise the question that will all loanees try their hardest against their parent clubs.

Also, what if there's qualification for next season's CL or EL on the line? Would a loanee want to play his best against his parent club, where he is likely to be playing next season, if his temporary team winning would mean his parent club failing to qualify for Europe? I don't think loanees should be allowed to play against their parent clubs.

Art Morte wrote:Oh. Well, that's something I think Bundesliga should abolish. For me, it's too easy to raise the question that will all loanees try their hardest against their parent clubs.

For some reason there has never been a question about this here. For the first time, Sami Hyypiä brought this up in the current (!) season when he decided not to play a player he had on loan, but actually no one really understood it here. (It was probably as Sami Hyypiä was so long in the PL that he took that decision, but no person who grew up with the Bundesliga would ever consider it strange not to play a loaned player against the parent club.)

Art Morte wrote:Also, what if there's qualification for next season's CL or EL on the line? Would a loanee want to play his best against his parent club, where he is likely to be playing next season, if his temporary team winning would mean his parent club failing to qualify for Europe? I don't think loanees should be allowed to play against their parent clubs.

Actually this happened before, and it would be expected of the loanee to do his very best against his parent team. In fact, I remember some coach last year who said in such a case that he would be more upset with the loaned player if he wouldn't try his very best.

Well if I was a player out on loan, facing my parent club and knowing that winning the game would mean my parent club missing out on next season's CL, I wouldn't try to win. It would feel damn stupid, in fact. You'd probably, at your parent club next season, get a cash bonus, too, since you (and the other players) are in the CL now and depending how far you go there. No, it just sounds stupid, loanees playing against their parent clubs.

It is probably just a different tradition. In the BL it was never an issue, while in the PL it obviously is.

I don't see how it is an issue.

When in loan, the player needs to fulfill all his duties as a temp member of the team, including playing against the parent club.

Simply put, footballers should always play their best regardless of the teams they play against, and the circumstances of their contract.

Everton boss Roberto Martinez has lauded English football's "vital" loan system, which he has used to great effect this season.

Martinez brought in Romelu Lukaku, Gerard Deulofeu and Gareth Barry on season-long loan deals last year, and that trio have been influential in guiding the club to the brink of Champions League football.

Following a run of six straight Premier League wins, Everton sit fifth in the table - a point behind fourth-placed Arsenal having played a game fewer than the London club.

And ahead of his side's trip to Sunderland on Saturday, Martinez waxed lyrical about the loan system, claiming that any criticism of its use is "ridiculous".

"The loan system is something that has to be part of the game," he said. "Young players need an opportunity to develop, but it is difficult to find a loan relationship that works.

"People will go against it, it has its pros and cons. From our point of view the loan system is vital but to criticise it is ridiculous. It would be like criticising us for giving youngsters opportunities.

"Sometimes young players get attracted to the glamour of a young club but you need to be realistic.

"It can be very, very difficult for a young player to have an opportunity in the first team.

"You could find many examples of players who have been treated unfairly just because they are not part of the long-term future of the club."

M99 wrote:Everton boss Roberto Martinez has lauded English football's "vital" loan system, which he has used to great effect this season.

Of course he would. He and Everton have made an absolute mockery of it.

The current format needs to be scrapped.

I think this deserves a topic of its own. I'm trying to find the other loan discussion stuff that we recently had in some other thread and merge it here.

There is clearly nothing wrong with the loan system. What a stupid thing to be moaning about.

How on earth has he "made a mockery of it" ffs? I think people are just mad that the players they've gotten on loan have helped them a lot this season. If those players had flopped, no one would be saying anything. Very stupid to start criticizing the loan system.

The only argument one can make is saying the players should also be allowed to play against their parent clubs, which is a reasonable point but also very debatable. Not the same as indirectly suggesting it should be scrapped or cut down massively though.

Few decent articles here that are worth reading when you calm down.

http://www.ftbpro.com/posts/ian.stewart.palmer/515492/football-s-loan-system-makes-a-mockery-of-the-premier-league

http://www.footballrants.com/uncategorized/time-to-scrap-ludicrous-loan-system/2486

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1180925/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Loan-strangers-make-mockery-game.html

http://thetwounfortunates.com/trading-places-time-to-reform-the-football-leagues-loan-system/

The_Badger wrote:Few decent articles here that are worth reading when you calm down.

http://www.ftbpro.com/posts/ian.stewart.palmer/515492/football-s-loan-system-makes-a-mockery-of-the-premier-league

http://www.footballrants.com/uncategorized/time-to-scrap-ludicrous-loan-system/2486

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1180925/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Loan-strangers-make-mockery-game.html

http://thetwounfortunates.com/trading-places-time-to-reform-the-football-leagues-loan-system/

Before I answer any of the questions posed in those articles(of which I've seen several of them spewed over and over again), I want to know what YOUR take is on it. What is your problem with the loan system and what do you think is the solution?

I think this rule forbidding loaned out players to feature against their parent club is terrible, and in fact a distortion of competition.

I obviously don#t think there's anything wrong with being able to loan or loan out players.
If you come to agreement to let another club have your player on a temporary basis, what's the problem?

But what can't be part of that agreement imo is restrictions on how to use the player.
Because then you give another club 3 great players, they can play against your competition but not against you?
Ridiculous.

For example, this thing with Cortouis that Atletico would have to pay Chelsea were he to feature in an potential tie between them is outrageous imo.
He's loaned out, he plays for Atletico, and that's it. If he saves a Hazard pen, well, tough luck.
UEFA should render such an agreement mute.

well of course whinger made these comments

he was scared of lukaku wasnt he?

always need to complaint

Hapless_Hans wrote:I think this rule forbidding loaned out players to feature against their parent club is terrible, and in fact a distortion of competition.

I obviously don#t think there's anything wrong with being able to loan or loan out players.
If you come to agreement to let another club have your player on a temporary basis, what's the problem?

But what can't be part of that agreement imo is restrictions on how to use the player.
Because then you give another club 3 great players, they can play against your competition but not against you?
Ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Wanting a player whose wages you still pay(and is still your player) to not be able to play against you is ridiculous?

For example, this thing with Cortouis that Atletico would have to pay Chelsea were he to feature in an potential tie between them is outrageous imo.
He's loaned out, he plays for Atletico, and that's it. If he saves a Hazard pen, well, tough luck.
UEFA should render such an agreement mute.

Absolutely no bloody reason UEFA should render it mute. It was in the deal signed, and Athletico were well aware of the terms and accepted the deal(probably not thinking that they'd advance far enough to possibly face Chelsea). A deal is a deal. Signed contract. You can't just decide to bend the contract to favour yourself when things seem to be getting inconvenient for you. Business doesn't work that way.

Hapless_Hans wrote:I think this rule forbidding loaned out players to feature against their parent club is terrible, and in fact a distortion of competition.

I obviously don#t think there's anything wrong with being able to loan or loan out players.
If you come to agreement to let another club have your player on a temporary basis, what's the problem?

But what can't be part of that agreement imo is restrictions on how to use the player.
Because then you give another club 3 great players, they can play against your competition but not against you?
Ridiculous.

For example, this thing with Cortouis that Atletico would have to pay Chelsea were he to feature in an potential tie between them is outrageous imo.
He's loaned out, he plays for Atletico, and that's it. If he saves a Hazard pen, well, tough luck.
UEFA should render such an agreement mute.

Nah, the English loan system, where you cannot face your parent club, is the way it should be. You have to be sure of impartiality.

It's a common rule in many of our institutions. A judge is disqualified to sit a case if the defendant is his sister. A government official is disqualified to decide on a grant application if the applier is his brother's company. A police officer is disqualified from conducting an investigation of which outcome will have an effect on him. You don't have to witness against your spouse and a doctor shouldn't operate on a family member. It's just common sense that when there's a conflict of interest or even the possibility of it, you shouldn't be involved.

^Spot on.

Blue Barrett wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:I think this rule forbidding loaned out players to feature against their parent club is terrible, and in fact a distortion of competition.

I obviously don#t think there's anything wrong with being able to loan or loan out players.
If you come to agreement to let another club have your player on a temporary basis, what's the problem?

But what can't be part of that agreement imo is restrictions on how to use the player.
Because then you give another club 3 great players, they can play against your competition but not against you?
Ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Wanting a player whose wages you still pay(and is still your player) to not be able to play against you is ridiculous?

For example, this thing with Cortouis that Atletico would have to pay Chelsea were he to feature in an potential tie between them is outrageous imo.
He's loaned out, he plays for Atletico, and that's it. If he saves a Hazard pen, well, tough luck.
UEFA should render such an agreement mute.

Absolutely no bloody reason UEFA should render it mute. It was in the deal signed, and Athletico were well aware of the terms and accepted the deal(probably not thinking that they'd advance far enough to possibly face Chelsea). A deal is a deal. Signed contract. You can't just decide to bend the contract to favour yourself when things seem to be getting inconvenient for you. Business doesn't work that way.

ok, in the end it's Atletico's fault for agreeing such terms - I'm not saying UEFA should render this specific example mute, there would have to be rules of course.

But then this applies to your other argument as well.
You agree to loan out the player, why shouldn't this deal stand? Why should there be a rule disallowing the player to feature?
Also you don't pay all of his wages, you pay part of it.

And I don't get this conflict of interest thing. What conflict of interest? If a club doesn't have space for a player and gives him to another club, why wouldn't the player be motivated to perform as well as he can, to show them what they're missing.

I think it's a shitty rule, we don't have it and it works just fine.
There's no complaints about it neither in the media, by players, or by parent or receiving clubs.
It's proven to be beneficial and conflict of interest never was a problem.

Art Morte wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:I think this rule forbidding loaned out players to feature against their parent club is terrible, and in fact a distortion of competition.

I obviously don#t think there's anything wrong with being able to loan or loan out players.
If you come to agreement to let another club have your player on a temporary basis, what's the problem?

But what can't be part of that agreement imo is restrictions on how to use the player.
Because then you give another club 3 great players, they can play against your competition but not against you?
Ridiculous.

For example, this thing with Cortouis that Atletico would have to pay Chelsea were he to feature in an potential tie between them is outrageous imo.
He's loaned out, he plays for Atletico, and that's it. If he saves a Hazard pen, well, tough luck.
UEFA should render such an agreement mute.

Nah, the English loan system, where you cannot face your parent club, is the way it should be. You have to be sure of impartiality.

It's a common rule in many of our institutions. A judge is disqualified to sit a case if the defendant is his sister. A government official is disqualified to decide on a grant application if the applier is his brother's company. A police officer is disqualified from conducting an investigation of which outcome will have an effect on him. You don't have to witness against your spouse and a doctor shouldn't operate on a family member. It's just common sense that when there's a conflict of interest or even the possibility of it, you shouldn't be involved.

Makes perfect sense really.

Well, UEFA have spoken.

In response to media reports referring to the situation of Club Atlético de Madrid goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois, UEFA would like to reiterate its position.

The integrity of sporting competition is a fundamental principle for UEFA.

Both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations contain clear provisions which strictly forbid any club to exert, or attempt to exert, any influence whatsoever over the players that another club may (or may not) field in a match.

It follows that any provision in a private contract between clubs which might function in such a way as to influence who a club fields in a match is null, void and unenforceable so far as UEFA is concerned.

Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned accordingly.

http://www.uefa.org/about-uefa/administration/news/newsid=2088774.html

Tbh, I don't know why this issue is only just coming up considering Courtois played against us in the Super Cup 2 years ago. Unless its only recently been inserted into his deal.


All this could possibly be avoided if we don't draw Athletico though. Draw in a few mins.