January Transfer 'Window'..

[Blue in Munich]

Except the other teams in Belgium. Dont Chelsea have six players at one Belgian club?

Hardly fair on the rest of the Belgian league. I know Man U used to (or still do) have a tie up with Royal Antwerp, but there are failings in the loan market as far as I'm concerned when it gets to this level. What is to stop Chelsea or City buying 5 world class strikers and loaning them out to all but the top end of their rivals, who can play and score against all of their other rivals, but not themselves. Nothing, I presume. I think Chelsea have been surprised that Liverpool have nearly matched them up to now, despite Moses's worse efforts.

Imagine if they had loaned Lukaku to Liverpool and Moses to Everton. If Liverpool were 8 points clear of Chelsea by now, could they just as easy pull the plug on the deal, half way through the season.

No we don't; it's actually 5 players at Vitesse Arnhem, one of whom only went in this window, so for the bulk of the season it's been 4 rather than 6 players there. The Belgian League don't seem to have an issue with it, nor UEFA, and if we are going to develop youth players this way surely it makes sense that they play together. As for the bolded section;

Oussama Assaidi. Liverpool asset. On loan at Stoke City. Scored the winner against Chelsea.

So, no problem with Liverpool ACTUALLY loaning out a striker to someone who isn't one of their top end rivals, so playing and scoring against their rivals but not against Liverpool, but you are concerned that Chelsea and Man City MIGHT do what Liverpool have actually done. Really?

 

[Liverbirdie]

No we don't; it's actually 5 players at Vitesse Arnhem, one of whom only went in this window, so for the bulk of the season it's been 4 rather than 6 players there. The Belgian League don't seem to have an issue with it, nor UEFA, and if we are going to develop youth players this way surely it makes sense that they play together. As for the bolded section;

Oussama Assaidi. Liverpool asset. On loan at Stoke City. Scored the winner against Chelsea.

So, no problem with Liverpool ACTUALLY loaning out a striker to someone who isn't one of their top end rivals, so playing and scoring against their rivals but not against Liverpool, but you are concerned that Chelsea and Man City MIGHT do what Liverpool have actually done. Really?

I do actually. I dont think players should be allowed to be loaned to other clubs either in the same division, or the same country. That way it takes all of the machinations out of it.

The bolded section - just an obvious example of what could potentially happen if left unchecked. I also think that it is wrong that one club can use another foreign club as a "partner" club. It makes a mockery of the Belgian league. Do you not, or are you only interested in what is good for CFC and not the interests of the game as a whole?

 

[USER1999]

Arsenal have a big tie in with Beveren in the Belgian league, so I guess they just accept that they are a feeder league for the bigger leagues in Europe.

 

[LanDog]

As a United fan I really hope we sign a couple in the window. The problem with January is that there's not always the necessary talent available at the correct price.

I could see someone like Cabaye coming in, possibly Matic from Benfica (the kinda player the Fellaini was supposed to be) Koke from Atletico is a real prospect, another from Atletico, Arda Turan would be able to do great things at United. Iker Muniain from Bilbao is a tremendous talent.
And Luke Shaw, he's fantastic right now and is only gonna get better
But on the whole, we need 2 CM's, a winger and a replacement for Evra

 

[Papas1982]

As a United fan I really hope we sign a couple in the window. The problem with January is that there's not always the necessary talent available at the correct price.

I could see someone like Cabaye coming in, possibly Matic from Benfica (the kinda player the Fellaini was supposed to be) Koke from Atletico is a real prospect, another from Atletico, Arda Turan would be able to do great things at United. Iker Muniain from Bilbao is a tremendous talent.
And Luke Shaw, he's fantastic right now and is only gonna get better
But on the whole, we need 2 CM's, a winger and a replacement for Evra

Think Shaw is a nonstarter. Doesn't want to leave and is a Chelsea fan. He'll replace cole soon enough Fellaininis just a big lump Everton utilised well. But he's never gonna start up top ahead of Rooney or Rvp. Think UTD need quality wingers or a complete system rethink.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I do actually. I dont think players should be allowed to be loaned to other clubs either in the same division, or the same country. That way it takes all of the machinations out of it.

The bolded section - just an obvious example of what could potentially happen if left unchecked. I also think that it is wrong that one club can use another foreign club as a "partner" club. It makes a mockery of the Belgian league. Do you not, or are you only interested in what is good for CFC and not the interests of the game as a whole?

I would prefer to see players loaned to foreign teams or other leagues within the parent club's country so that these incidents don't occur, I just find it somewhat amusing that your example points the finger at two clubs who might do it whilst your own actually has done it but you let that one slide past (bit like Mignolet and Eto'o the other week then).

My primary interest as a Chelsea fan is in Chelsea, but I also realise that if what is good for Chelsea isn't good for the game then in the long term it isn't good for Chelsea. However if UEFA and the Belgian League are happy with the arrangement then I don't necessarily think there is the same level of problem with the loan that you do.

As for feeder clubs I presume you weren't happy with this then;

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-fcs-deal-belgian-club-3434467

 

[Liverbirdie]

I would prefer to see players loaned to foreign teams or other leagues within the parent club's country so that these incidents don't occur, I just find it somewhat amusing that your example points the finger at two clubs who might do it whilst your own actually has done it but you let that one slide past (bit like Mignolet and Eto'o the other week then).

My primary interest as a Chelsea fan is in Chelsea, but I also realise that if what is good for Chelsea isn't good for the game then in the long term it isn't good for Chelsea. However if UEFA and the Belgian League are happy with the arrangement then I don't necessarily think there is the same level of problem with the loan that you do.

As for feeder clubs I presume you weren't happy with this then;

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-fcs-deal-belgian-club-3434467

Bloody Belgians, the're just like a two-bit whore. No I'm not happy about it,although I've not seen any evidence of this partnership, they probably just send us chocolates for xmas, them no-good varmints. Right enough of the cowboy talk.

I just think that if the loan system is left unchecked, it is open to abuse, especially by the richer clubs.We may one day be in this bracket again (not anytime soon) and I would hate it if we stock-piled players (we did, but with youth, rather than senior players, under Benitez). I also don't think it is right in the same division, albeit Lukaku to Everton or Assaidi to Stoke. I also think that no more than two players should be able to go to the same club from the same club.

UEFA should be taking a closer look at the whole system and start putting safeguards in.

Separately, can we have Bertrand for £5 mill, we need a good left back, unless you want to try a loan deal first with a view to buy............

 

[Blue in Munich]

Bloody Belgians, the're just like a two-bit whore. No I'm not happy about it,although I've not seen any evidence of this partnership, they probably just send us chocolates for xmas, them no-good varmints. Right enough of the cowboy talk.

I just think that if the loan system is left unchecked, it is open to abuse, especially by the richer clubs.We may one day be in this bracket again (not anytime soon) and I would hate it if we stock-piled players (we did, but with youth, rather than senior players, under Benitez). I also don't think it is right in the same division, albeit Lukaku to Everton or Assaidi to Stoke. I also think that no more than two players should be able to go to the same club from the same club.

UEFA should be taking a closer look at the whole system and start putting safeguards in.

Separately, can we have Bertrand for £5 mill, we need a good left back, unless you want to try a loan deal first with a view to buy............

I understand your concerns about the loan system, I just don't see it as a realistic possibility as I don't think that decent strikers will be happy to be bought by one club to be farmed off to another as a "secret agent" for the parent club; much as they are greedy sods, they also want the glory. I would also rather see a total limit on loan players than a per club limit if they are to be limited, but I remain unconvinced of the necessity.

Just to correct one error in your post; you appear to have typed "Bertrand" and "good left back" in the same sentence..... Seriously, I like him as a left sided midfielder, but I'm not convinced about him as the last line of defence.

 

[Liverbirdie]

I understand your concerns about the loan system, I just don't see it as a realistic possibility as I don't think that decent strikers will be happy to be bought by one club to be farmed off to another as a "secret agent" for the parent club; much as they are greedy sods, they also want the glory. I would also rather see a total limit on loan players than a per club limit if they are to be limited, but I remain unconvinced of the necessity.

Just to correct one error in your post; you appear to have typed "Bertrand" and "good left back" in the same sentence..... Seriously, I like him as a left sided midfielder, but I'm not convinced about him as the last line of defence.

I don't see how a total loans thing would work, unless you applied it as a maximum per club (either in or out).

Ok 4 mill for left winger Bertrand then. Cissokho isn't pulling uo trees, thank god he's only a loanee.....unconvinced on Enrique,also.

 

[MadAdey]

What the rich clubs look to be doing in my eyes is buying any remotely prospective youngster to stop others buying him on the off chance he does turn out to be special. But he is not yet up to scratch so they then ship him off to another club and leave him there for a couple of years to see how he develops. To me it is just a way that enables the richer clubs to get first choice of future stars.

So the likes of Man City and Chelsea can do this as they do have the funds that they can use to buy up £30M of young unproven talent. Clubs like Liverpool etc are not that rich that they can tie up that sort of money on the off chance that it works.

 

[Fish]

What the rich clubs look to be doing in my eyes is buying any remotely prospective youngster to stop others buying him on the off chance he does turn out to be special. But he is not yet up to scratch so they then ship him off to another club and leave him there for a couple of years to see how he develops. To me it is just a way that enables the richer clubs to get first choice of future stars.

So the likes of Man City and Chelsea can do this as they do have the funds that they can use to buy up £30M of young unproven talent. Clubs like Liverpool etc are not that rich that they can tie up that sort of money on the off chance that it works.

This has/had been done for years well before the 'rich clubs' you elude to.

 

[Papas1982]

This has/had been done for years well before the 'rich clubs' you elude to.

Maybe, but not to the extent of clubs having the likes of Mata or Jevatic etc kicking their heels in the reserves......

 

[Fish]

Maybe, but not to the extent of clubs having the likes of Mata or Jevatic etc kicking their heels in the reserves......

They weren't bought as youngsters to develop or in the same vein were discussing were they, they just don't suit the new, or should I say return of Jose and what he wants players to do. As such they have only just become surplus to a degree and will be offloaded to finance new deals, if we decide to go into the market that is :mmm:

 

[Papas1982]

They weren't bought as youngsters to develop or in the same vein were discussing were they, they just don't suit the new, or should I say return of Jose and what he wants players to do. As such they have only just become surplus to a degree and will be offloaded to finance new deals, if we decide to go into the market that is :mmm:

So the likes of Man City and Chelsea can do this as they do have the funds that they can use to buy up £30M of young unproven talent. Clubs like Liverpool etc are not that rich that they can tie up that sort of money on the off chance that it works.

That pretty much covers Jovetic, and if not Mata then Schurle/de bruyne.

The discussion started talking about clubs stock piling players to keep them out of clutches of rivals, their age isnt relevant. They're still being used to the same effect. Jose has already said he wont sell him to a rival, which is his prerogative. But Mata has no future at Chelsea and is basically just being kept away from any club that could hurt them.

But, If hey're not good enough example then as has already been shown there are plenty of other that could be listed. At many big clubs. Unfortunately, if you're a sugar daddy club you are gonna have these accusations made against you. As although it happened in the past, it was done using a clubs own money. But, to be fair its a business stratefy they want to take so thats up to them. I'm sure it happens in other businesses. I just personally think that the whole structure of footy could do with a change. But that wont happen as clubs are too powerful. These financial guidelines are pointless. Clubs owners are still allowed to invest certain amounts whilst also accruing certain levels of debt.

 

[MadAdey]

This has/had been done for years well before the 'rich clubs' you elude to.

You did not see players of the standard you do now struggling to get a game at their club. This is not a direct dig at any one specific club as there are so many out there doing it. But when you look at the reserve team at some of these clubs it is beyond belief. Chelsea and man city could probably push for a champions league position with their 2nd eleven.

 

[Fish]

You did not see players of the standard you do now struggling to get a game at their club. This is not a direct dig at any one specific club as there are so many out there doing it. But when you look at the reserve team at some of these clubs it is beyond belief. Chelsea and man city could probably push for a champions league position with their 2nd eleven.

There are a lot of myths surrounding all this, Chelsea's current numbered squad is only 26 players, as an example, when Man Utd dominated the early 90's, theirs were similar between 24-27.

Current submitted Arsenal squad numbers are 44, Man Utd 42, L'pool 37 and Man City's is 57! Even Swansea have 45. These are the initial squad/shirt numbers that have to be submitted in August for the 2013/14 season, there will be the odd player in & out here and their due to the transfer market ending September, but only a couple of anomalies. By comparison Chelsea's playing squad number of 26 is rather small, isn't it, especially when Villa, Cardiff, Palace, I could go on, have many more, so, we have a smaller amount of 'quality players' to rotate as and when required rather than a huge amount of players that may never get a run out! Where's the 'stock piling'?

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/...ier-league-squad-numbers-seasons-2013-14.html

 

[Papas1982]

Those numbers can be looked at 2 ways, I would suggest that most of the other teams have higher numbers for 2 reasons. 1 they include their youth players who qualify under the home grown rule and, secondly Chelsea either don't have any or have no faith in their youth system. Something chelsea can't do as they either don;t have enough or deem them not good enough. PLayers like Eachran for eaxmple, many chelsea fans i know wanted him to be given a chance recently ut he gets farmed out whilst you bring in more big name players. I'm sure if we looked at the total value of squads, your 'mere' 26 would value quite highly.

Bonus of a night shift is the time for research, the 42 players listed for UTD includes the 3 players they have loaned out. Liverppol squad total of 37 listed with 7 pf those loaned out. Chelsea have a squad list of 26 including Moses who is loaned out, in addition to that they have a further 24 players loaned out, giving them a squad of 50. Not so small maybe. All figures can be manipulated to show what you want.

 

[Fish]

Bonus of a night shift is the time for researcayers listed for UTD includes the 3 players they have loaned out. Liverppol squad total of 37 listed with 7 pf those loaned out. Chelsea have a squad list of 26 including Moses who is loaned out, in addition to that they have a further 24 players loaned out, giving them a squad of 50. Not so small maybe. All figures can be manipulated to show what you want.

erm, I said that was the August submitted squad numbers and 'obviously' there was movement prior to the end of September!

Josh will come back a much stronger and better player rather than sitting on the bench only getting a bit part role currently. I'd rather good talent like that be in a position to fight for a regular place, which he wasn't ready to do IMO. The same goes for young Sam Hutchinson and other youngsters on loan.

 

[Papas1982]

Sorry fella, but I dont quite get your point? In one breathe you imply that Chelsea are in someway better than the teams you mentioned due to their small squads. And then when that's proven incorrect you say that it was only old data (making your point original point mute).

 

[Fish]

Sorry fella, but I dont quite get your point? In one breathe you imply that Chelsea are in someway better than the teams you mentioned due to their small squads. And then when that's proven incorrect you say that it was only old data (making your point original point mute).

I haven't implied anything and haven't been proved incorrect, I simply highlighted the fact of submitted squad numbers across certain clubs as of August as required by all clubs to do and clearly stated that their would be a couple of anomalies here and there due to the period being extended to September due to the transfer deadline being different! You have attempted to push our squad up to 50 by using and adding our 24 loan players to our numbered squad, but make no allowance for the other clubs I've highlighted, who obviously have a certain amount of players also out on loan, don't they? Now that's manipulation :smirk: