Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Rules relating to loan players?



BHAWise

New member
Oct 5, 2011
428
Seaford
A mate of mine is a Watford fan and told me because a number of the loan players are "on loan with view to perminant move" it doesn't count. Basically playing the system
 








Brighton Breezy

New member
Jul 5, 2003
19,439
Sussex
I think the loan system needs reworking.

A maximum or four loan players at any one time with clubs having to show that the player's wages with his parent club are at most 10% higher than the new club's top earner.
 


theonesmith

Well-known member
Oct 27, 2008
2,337
I think the loan system needs reworking.

A maximum or four loan players at any one time with clubs having to show that the player's wages with his parent club are at most 10% higher than the new club's top earner.

That sounds like a good system..
 




drew

Drew
NSC Patron
Oct 3, 2006
23,632
Burgess Hill
I think anyone moaning too much about loan system should remember we have a left back who earns £80,000 a week more than we pay him...

Nobody is saying there shouldn't be a loan system, just that it shouldn't be abused. Whatever rules apply between English clubs should apply to loans from other countries.
 


skipper734

Registered ruffian
Aug 9, 2008
9,189
Curdridge
I think the loan system needs reworking.

A maximum or four loan players at any one time with clubs having to show that the player's wages with his parent club are at most 10% higher than the new club's top earner.

That's better. This could well be taken care of under the new financial rules. Clubs like Man City probably shouldn't be able to afford the wages of expensive players, considered dead wood, on their books. Provided the FA have even thought about it.
 






Mutts Nuts

New member
Oct 30, 2011
4,918
Can anyone clarify the rules relating to loan players as, according to my calculations, from the 42 min when Neuton Piccoli came on, Watford fielded 7 players on loan! According to the link below, this would seem to suggest they were outside the rules (see rule 52 and in particular rule 52.3.1. I can't believe this hasn't been spotted so assume they are within the rules although I can't see it. Can someone point me in the right direction!

The Football League | About Us | Regulations | Regulations Detail | Section 6 - Players

53.2.6 Standard Loans which subsequently become permanent transfers (which can occur any time during the period of the Standard Loan) shall not count against a Club's quota of such Standard Loans for that Season.

By the above i take it that Watford must sign 2 of the loan players from saturday before the end of the season,any body at the fa policing this,is there a get out clause for every rule in the book or is it just this one.You could not make it up
 


watford?

New member
Nov 2, 2011
5
Hmm, I think a bit of edifying is in order.

Firstly, season long foreign loans count as transfers, not loans, which is why we can field as many as we like. Secondly they all - with the exception of chalobah - have a price agreed at the end of the season should we want them. Thirdly, they all wanted to come, none of them were forced. Abdi, forestieri, vydra and pudil have all agreed contracts already to be announced in January. Make no mistake, these are Watford players and if we want them we will sign them, which is why they do not play like loan players usually would. The only reason the majority of them weren't signed permanently in the first place was because of the transfer embargo during the late takeover.

As for the 'moral' carp - how is this any different to somebody buying millions of pounds worth of players? Nobody bats an eyelid when forest spend their millions with oil rich owners. We have obtained millions of pounds of players for squat, no financial risk or outlay from ourselves and players of true quality who are desperate to sign permanent deals for us, and if we can't afford them they will just be loaned to us again.

our owners simply moved existing playing assets to us instead of shelling out tens of millions. I fail to see the moral dilemma, it is more of a 'tin pot Watford aren't allowed to upset the applecart' dilemma as we found a way around the exclusive billionaire owner club which the top two divisions have become.

We are without a doubt in the best position of any club in the league. Run by a family who have taken two clubs to the top level by buying low and selling high using astute scouting and business deals. In their years at udinese they have taken them from bankruptcy in serie b to consistent champions league football while making over 100 million pounds profit. They took Granada from the Spanish third division to bbva survival in three seasons using a similar system to the one they are using with us.

Neuton can't get in the team in front of tommy hoban who debuted under zola.

We are in a unique, fortunate, honourable and above board position, and if it was successful we knew we would be the most evil team in the country, but that is fine. We have broken no rules and are no more immoral than Wigan, or yourselves. Our big money owner simply hasn't spent any money, that's all.

We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible. Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

Peace
 
Last edited:


theonesmith

Well-known member
Oct 27, 2008
2,337
Hmm, I think a bit of edifying is in order.

Firstly, season long foreign loans count as transfers, not loans, which is why we can field as many as we like. Secondly they all - with the exception of chalobah - have a price agreed at the end of the season should we want them. Thirdly, they all wanted to come, none of them were forced. Abdi, forestieri, vydra and pudil have all agreed contracts already to be announced in January. Make no mistake, these are Watford players and if we want them we will sign them, which is why they do not play like loan players usually would. The only reason the majority of them weren't signed permanently in the first place was because of the transfer embargo during the late takeover.

As for the 'moral' carp - how is this any different to somebody buying millions of pounds worth of players? Nobody bats an eyelid when forest spend their millions with oil rich owners. We have obtained millions of pounds of players for squat, no financial risk or outlay from ourselves and players of true quality who are desperate to sign permanent deals for us, and if we can't afford them they will just be loaned to us again.

our owners simply moved existing playing assets to us instead of shelling out tens of millions. I fail to see the moral dilemma, it is more of a 'tin pot Watford aren't allowed to upset the applecart' dilemma as we found a way around the exclusive billionaire owner club which the top two divisions have become.

We are without a doubt in the best position of any club in the league. Run by a family who have taken two clubs to the top level by buying low and selling high using astute scouting and business deals. In their years at udinese they have taken them from bankruptcy in serie b to consistent champions league football while making over 100 million pounds profit. They took Granada from the Spanish third division to bbva survival in three seasons using a similar system to the one they are using with us.

Neuton can't get in the team in front of tommy hoban who debuted under zola.

We are in a unique, fortunate, honourable and above board position, and if it was successful we knew we would be the most evil team in the country, but that is fine. We have broken no rules and are no more immoral than Wigan, or yourselves. Our big money owner simply hasn't spent any money, that's all.

We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible. Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

Peace

And if it works and you do well then maybe other Championship clubs will adopt it, and us fans will be lucky enough to see inter reserves vs udinese reserves, vs barca reserves vs munich reserves..
 




Mutts Nuts

New member
Oct 30, 2011
4,918
Hmm, I think a bit of edifying is in order.

Firstly, season long foreign loans count as transfers, not loans, which is why we can field as many as we like. Secondly they all - with the exception of chalobah - have a price agreed at the end of the season should we want them. Thirdly, they all wanted to come, none of them were forced. Abdi, forestieri, vydra and pudil have all agreed contracts already to be announced in January. Make no mistake, these are Watford players and if we want them we will sign them, which is why they do not play like loan players usually would. The only reason the majority of them weren't signed permanently in the first place was because of the transfer embargo during the late takeover.


As for the 'moral' carp - how is this any different to somebody buying millions of pounds worth of players? Nobody bats an eyelid when forest spend their millions with oil rich owners. We have obtained millions of pounds of players for squat, no financial risk or outlay from ourselves and players of true quality who are desperate to sign permanent deals for us, and if we can't afford them they will just be loaned to us again.

our owners simply moved existing playing assets to us instead of shelling out tens of millions. I fail to see the moral dilemma, it is more of a 'tin pot Watford aren't allowed to upset the applecart' dilemma as we found a way around the exclusive billionaire owner club which the top two divisions have become.

We are without a doubt in the best position of any club in the league. Run by a family who have taken two clubs to the top level by buying low and selling high using astute scouting and business deals. In their years at udinese they have taken them from bankruptcy in serie b to consistent champions league football while making over 100 million pounds profit. They took Granada from the Spanish third division to bbva survival in three seasons using a similar system to the one they are using with us.

Neuton can't get in the team in front of tommy hoban who debuted under zola.

We are in a unique, fortunate, honourable and above board position, and if it was successful we knew we would be the most evil team in the country, but that is fine. We have broken no rules and are no more immoral than Wigan, or yourselves. Our big money owner simply hasn't spent any money, that's all.

We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible. Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

Peace

The rules clearly state that the loaned players over and above the 5 allowed must be signed by the end of the Season.Hope fully when you fail to meet this obligation you will be deducted points as punisment and not merely fined
.
 


Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,747
The Fatherland
The rules clearly state that the loaned players over and above the 5 allowed must be signed by the end of the Season.Hope fully when you fail to meet this obligation you will be deducted points as punisment and not merely fined
.

What it Watford buy 2 players for 1p at the end of the season then sell them back to Udinese for 1p?
 


trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,955
Hove
And if it works and you do well then maybe other Championship clubs will adopt it, and us fans will be lucky enough to see inter reserves vs udinese reserves, vs barca reserves vs munich reserves..

This. And good English players will have even fewer first team opportunities.
 






Uncle C

Well-known member
Jul 6, 2004
11,711
Bishops Stortford
We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible. Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

Peace

You had your turn, so dont take the moral high ground. Did anyone mention Elton John?
 


skipper734

Registered ruffian
Aug 9, 2008
9,189
Curdridge
Watford..... Conveniently exploiting lots of loopholes. Most of which are specifically banned between Clubs and Owners in this Country, however you attempt to justify it.
 


HastingsSeagull

Well-known member
Jan 13, 2010
9,433
BGC Manila
Hmm, I think a bit of edifying is in order.

Firstly, season long foreign loans count as transfers, not loans, which is why we can field as many as we like. Secondly they all - with the exception of chalobah - have a price agreed at the end of the season should we want them. Thirdly, they all wanted to come, none of them were forced. Abdi, forestieri, vydra and pudil have all agreed contracts already to be announced in January. Make no mistake, these are Watford players and if we want them we will sign them, which is why they do not play like loan players usually would. The only reason the majority of them weren't signed permanently in the first place was because of the transfer embargo during the late takeover.

As for the 'moral' carp - how is this any different to somebody buying millions of pounds worth of players? Nobody bats an eyelid when forest spend their millions with oil rich owners. We have obtained millions of pounds of players for squat, no financial risk or outlay from ourselves and players of true quality who are desperate to sign permanent deals for us, and if we can't afford them they will just be loaned to us again.

our owners simply moved existing playing assets to us instead of shelling out tens of millions. I fail to see the moral dilemma, it is more of a 'tin pot Watford aren't allowed to upset the applecart' dilemma as we found a way around the exclusive billionaire owner club which the top two divisions have become.

We are without a doubt in the best position of any club in the league. Run by a family who have taken two clubs to the top level by buying low and selling high using astute scouting and business deals. In their years at udinese they have taken them from bankruptcy in serie b to consistent champions league football while making over 100 million pounds profit. They took Granada from the Spanish third division to bbva survival in three seasons using a similar system to the one they are using with us.

Neuton can't get in the team in front of tommy hoban who debuted under zola.

We are in a unique, fortunate, honourable and above board position, and if it was successful we knew we would be the most evil team in the country, but that is fine. We have broken no rules and are no more immoral than Wigan, or yourselves. Our big money owner simply hasn't spent any money, that's all.

We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible. Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

Peace

Starbucks, Amazon and Jimmy Carr did nothing wrong in the law's eyes either........ look how public opinion went in their cases........... not to mention all the MPs who did things within the rules with expenses and family members etc.
 




BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
Assuming that Watford do buy some of those players they will have to do so by 31st Jan when the window closes because they cannot buy anybody after then and still do it by the end of the season. Ist FEB could prove interesting if they haven't bought them by then.
 


genre b. good

New member
Oct 22, 2012
104
Thirdly, they all wanted to come, none of them were forced.

Presumably they said that when they signed? Not really a surprise.

As for the 'moral' carp - how is this any different to somebody buying millions of pounds worth of players? Nobody bats an eyelid when forest spend their millions with oil rich owners. We have obtained millions of pounds of players for squat, no financial risk or outlay from ourselves and players of true quality who are desperate to sign permanent deals for us, and if we can't afford them they will just be loaned to us again.

Lots of people bat an eyelid at Forest, Man City, etc, and most rational people hate that aspect of modern football (see Stand AMF). Being no different to a bad thing isn't a good thing. Obtaining millions of pounds of players with no financial risk is pretty much spending beyond your means. If the Pozzo family leave you will struggle and they will presumably move a lot of assets back to Udinese first.

our owners simply moved existing playing assets to us instead of shelling out tens of millions. I fail to see the moral dilemma, it is more of a 'tin pot Watford aren't allowed to upset the applecart' dilemma as we found a way around the exclusive billionaire owner club which the top two divisions have become.

But you still have rich owners, they just spend by proxy through Udinese.

We are without a doubt in the best position of any club in the league. Run by a family who have taken two clubs to the top level by buying low and selling high using astute scouting and business deals. In their years at udinese they have taken them from bankruptcy in serie b to consistent champions league football while making over 100 million pounds profit. They took Granada from the Spanish third division to bbva survival in three seasons using a similar system to the one they are using with us.

Highly astute scouting is great, and replacing your best players every year with cheaper ones is great in principle - but using Arsenal as an example, it is clear that it doesn't always work. Even if the scouts keep delivering, the bigger clubs will either take the scouts or take the players first.

Our big money owner simply hasn't spent any money, that's all.

Bollocks, they just spent it at Udinese rather than at Watford. Similarly, if Udinese start having financial problems then they will filter through to Watford and players won't be the only assets moving between the clubs.

We spent years doing things the 'right' way, and whet was our reward? Big money owners buying other teams and pricing us out the market, losing our best academy prospects for the lowest bidder and then the big one EEEP, which made our whole business plan of producing British talent impossible.

Erm you were in the premiership recently - how is that different to any reward you may get out of this arrangement? You still won't be able to compete with the top premier clubs and your plan of importing foreign talent just means that bigger clubs will take your players and your owners will get a bit more money for them. It's a bit like West Ham signing Tevez and Mascherano.

Now we can keep our best prospects and tell big money teams to f*** off when they bid for our kids.

But you can't, the business model you describe above involves selling the players off ("high") or moving them back to Udinese/Granada. The Pozzo family even said as much, they want to stop you selling people off cheaply but they still expect the players to leave - just to the bigger clubs. Out of interest, who have Watford sold in recent years? Only one I really know of is Ashley Young, who for £9 million would presumably still be sold under the Pozzo plan.

If this happened to my club, I would feel considerably disconnected from the club I grew up with. Same if they changed the colour of the kit on a whim, or moved the club to a different town.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here