The Footie Thread

[Foxholer]

I do not believe there is an option, as both the Premier League and FA Cup rules strictly forbid it.

I believe Arsene Wenger was one person vocal against the rule.

Not certain about PL, but FA Cup DOES allow it - with loaning clubs permission. Rule 15j

 

[Foxholer]

Did we? Here's the relevant extract from the competition rules;

(j) Temporary (loan) Transfers

1. (i) A player on a temporary (loan) transfer is ineligible to compete in the Challenge Cup Competition unless permission to do so is given by the lending Club in writing and a copy is received by The Association by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the date fixed for playing the Round. Any permissions must clearly state that the player has approval to play in The FA Challenge Cup Competition. A registered Trainee or a player who is registered on a Scholarship for work experience may play for another Club, subject to written permission being given by the Club that he is registered to and provided that such permission is received by The Association by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the date fixed for playing the Round. The Association will not give permission for players on loan or work experience to play against the lending Club.
2. (ii) A player recalled, at any time prior to the date of the Round, to his original Club from temporary (loan) transfer, in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement, may represent his original Club. Such player may only play in postponed and replayed matches if he had been recalled in time for the first match in accordance with sub- paragraph (i) above and (iii) below as applicable.
3. (iii) A player on temporary (loan) transfer is eligible to compete if transferred by the lending Club to the loaning Club after the date and time for player qualification for a round but must have been eligible to play in the original tie.
4. (iv) Players on season “long term loan agreements”, are not considered “loan” players for the purposes of the Rule, and are therefore eligible to play in the Competition.

So did Chelsea block Gallagher playing or did the FA?

Thats the area I refered to above.
The bit you emboldened simply states that it's not up to the FA to give permission.
So either Chelsea said 'No' or Palace didn't ask.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I read it as the first sentence of (j) 1 (i) says that the club can make the agreement, the last sentence simply says that the FA will not do it (i.e. it has to be the club and the FA don't want to get involved in the discussion other than being told about the agreement if it is made).

I'm reading it as part (j) 1 (i) states that for short term loans, the parent club has to give permission before each round for the player to be used; the reason as I understand it is that the player could return to the parent club but would be ineligible to play in the competition because they had played for the loan club, and cannot play for 2 clubs in the competition. Para (j) 4 (iv) removes the needful that permission to be given before each round by the parent club in the case of season long loans as there is no intention at the time of the loan to recall the player, but doesn't countermand the absolute statement that the FA will not allow loan players to play against the parent club; if it did, why would Palace have to ask to use Gallagher? The fact that this statement comes after the explanation of the need for the clubs to give permission makes it clear to me that the option never existed.

 

[Swango1980]

Not certain about PL, but FA Cup DOES allow it - with loaning clubs permission. Rule 15j

I found the attached.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Love him or hate him, you have to feel for his tragic loss.
That should happen to no-one.

Couldn't agree more. Even more unfair (if that is possible) in light of at least one generous contribution made by him to provide medical help to a sick child. The irony in that is just too cruel

https://www.foxsports.com.au/footba...y/news-story/fe56629861c0b80d27707e376dd63f75

Erik Ortiz Cruz suffers from cortical dysplasia — a brain abnormality that can cause up to 30 seizures each day — and requires an operation to remove part of his brain, which costs in the region of $110,000, with the added cost of further follow-up tests.

Spanish daily AS reports that Erik’s family, desperate for help, reached out to Ronaldo asking if he could donate some signed jerseys or boots to auction off.

MORE PAPER TALK FUN

​

Cristiano Ronaldo will pay the surgery of Erik Ortiz Cruz (10 months old), who has a brain disorder. #respect (as) pic.twitter.com/UyUjVtFzKC
— SocialRMadrid (@SocialRMadrid) March 11, 2014​

But the world player of the year went even further, agreeing to pay for all the treatments and visited the young Madridista in hospital.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

So what does calling it out some of the time prove then?

What does calling it out all of the time prove?

It’s not a personal attack on any particular club to call it as and when I see fit.

If you can’t differentiate between my posts then that’s your problem.

I’ve been pretty clear and consistent when it comes to diving and cheating, called out many of our players on here for doing so as I’m concious of not being biased.

Another reason I don’t pull every single one up is there’s too many blurts on here who’ll respond with “ yeah remember when Fowler dived at Highbury“ who just look to point score.

 

[Foxholer]

I found the attached.

That appears to be the same as the doc BIM and I posted readably. See post 26082 (my post above).
The gist being that it's up to the clubs, not up to the FA!

 

[Foxholer]

I'm reading it as part (j) 1 (i) states that for short term loans, the parent club has to give permission before each round for the player to be used; the reason as I understand it is that the player could return to the parent club but would be ineligible to play in the competition because they had played for the loan club, and cannot play for 2 clubs in the competition. Para (j) 4 (iv) removes the needful that permission to be given before each round by the parent club in the case of season long loans as there is no intention at the time of the loan to recall the player, but doesn't countermand the absolute statement that the FA will not allow loan players to play against the parent club; if it did, why would Palace have to ask to use Gallagher? The fact that this statement comes after the explanation of the need for the clubs to give permission makes it clear to me that the option never existed.

On the contrary...If 'the option never existed', there wouldn't have needed to all the stuff above that sentence!
Ths 'can't play for 2 clubs' is simply one of the reasons why a club wouldn't give permission'.

 

[Swango1980]

That appears to be the same as the doc BIM and I posted readably. See post 26082 (my post above).
The gist being that it's up to the clubs, not up to the FA!

That is incorrect. Parts i) to iii) are about playing the FA Cup in general. There is absolutely nothing mentioned in those parts about playing against the parent club.

Part iv) then states that they cannot play against the parent club. Permission will not be given. It doesn't matter what the parent club do.

You seem to be reading the rule the wrong way round. As if part iv) is the subject of all parts of the rule (I.e players playing against the parent club), and i) to iii) the caveats. If this were the case, it would have read something like "a player cannot play against their parent club, unless the parent club give permission..."

 

[Swango1980]

That appears to be the same as the doc BIM and I posted readably. See post 26082 (my post above).
The gist being that it's up to the clubs, not up to the FA!

Another explanation specifically about Gallagher is attached:

 

[Foxholer]

Another explanation specifically about Gallagher is attached:

That 2nd 'quote' would be more compelling if it refered to actual regs (it's just another unverified opinion as it stands). While the doc BIM and I are quoting is a 2019/20 one, it's still on the FA's site as published Rules, so it should still be current.
On re-reading BIM's post 26035, I agree that, if it's 'the association giving permission for a loan player to play', then it specifically states that they won't give permission for him to play against the loaning club (so don't bother applying).
Whatever the reason, he didn't play and Palace are now out. So, for me, that ends my 'interest'!

 

[davemc1]

Sep van den Berg played for Preston against Liverpool in the Cup this year whilst on loan from us.

 

[Swango1980]

Sep van den Berg played for Preston against Liverpool in the Cup this year whilst on loan from us.

That was in the EFL Cup, not the FA Cup. Different rules.

 

[Tashyboy]

Didn’t Tuchel say in an interview that he’d bumped into Gallagher in a restaurant and explained his reasons as to why the club wouldn’t give Palace permission for him to play against Chelsea?

Whilst on that subject I think it’s unfair generally as you have a really good player, play against your 2or3 main rivals to help take points off them but they can’t play against the club they’re owned by.

For example, Gallagher had an influence in taking points off City a few weeks ago.

Yup he did, it was in the link I posted at 9.40pm

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Yup he did, it was in the link I posted at 9.40pm

Presumably the answer was that he was having a blinding season and Chelsea didn't want him helping to knock them out. As his parent company, that seems perfectly fair.

Does it need to be more complicated than that?

 

[Swango1980]

Presumably the answer was that he was having a blinding season and Chelsea didn't want him helping to knock them out. As his parent company, that seems perfectly fair.

Does it need to be more complicated than that?

Nope, it doesn't even need to be that complicated. The much simpler explanation was that he was simply not permitted to play. Even if representatives of Chelsea football club wrote lovely long letters begging for Gallagher to play, and delivered them by hand to the FA.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

Yup he did, it was in the link I posted at 9.40pm

Apologies Tashy i never seen it, i had to put you on ignore after seeing THAT photo??

 

[PJ87]

Diop confirmed as injured for several weeks

Semi final gets tougher

First we lost ogbonna for most of season (imo our best defender)
Then zouma (monster on and off the pitch it seems)
Now diop our back up is out

Dawson can't do it alone

Rice can play there but we would miss him in midfield

Johnson from the full back to CB?

Soucek to CB?

Or one of the youth team

Going to be interesting

 

[pendodave]

Rice can play there but we would miss him in midfield

Not exactly on topic, but I reckon a team of 11 Rices beats any other single player team in the prem...

 

[PJ87]

Not exactly on topic, but I reckon a team of 11 Rices beats any other single player team in the prem...

Ooo I dunno, he is pretty crap at shooting it seems ...... Well not as good as he should be but then Antonio is awful at shooting at times so you could be right!