Thetownend.com

25% => Players => Topic started by: ronnie21 on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 08:09:46



Title: Liverpool loanees
Post by: ronnie21 on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 08:09:46
Interesting small piece on the BBC this morning that a deal has fallen through between Liverpool and Wigan as they cannot agree on the fact that Liverpool expect their loanees to start at least 75% of games played.  There were a few on here questioning certain players over the past couple of seasons and saying they had to start regardless - they may have been right! ;)


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: tans on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 08:15:29
Sounds about right..



Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: michael on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 08:53:02
Had our Liverpool loanees played 75%+ of our games last season then we might have done better :)


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:02:44
 I'd say 75% was a reasonable figure, after all a loan deal has to give something to the loaning club, who are effectively giving you a player.

 So a season long loan sort should expect, if fit, to play about 30 odd games....leaves a bit of room for resting/rotation.

I shall miss Jordan Turnbull this season....came to think of him as one of our own, I suppose helped by him starting with us and being Wilts boy.

Hope he goes on to have a decent career.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Batch on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:37:10
Quote from: Reg Smeeton
 who are effectively giving you a player.
.

apart from the loan fee and whatever % wages .


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: sonicyouth on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:40:35
apart from the loan fee and whatever % wages .
Which is usually 0 under such agreements


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Reg Smeeton on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:41:16
apart from the loan fee and whatever % wages .

Well yes, but the recipient club are still getting a player they'd otherwise have no chance of signing.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: horlock07 on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:50:38
I'd say 75% was a reasonable figure, after all a loan deal has to give something to the loaning club, who are effectively giving you a player.

 So a season long loan sort should expect, if fit, to play about 30 odd games....leaves a bit of room for resting/rotation.

I shall miss Jordan Turnbull this season....came to think of him as one of our own, I suppose helped by him starting with us and being Wilts boy.

Hope he goes on to have a decent career.

There seems little point signing a player from a higher league and them not playing at least 75% of games, its not as if the lower league team gains anything from the development of the player unlike one from their own academy?

Do we know if this rule applied to our earlier loans from Liverpool or whether its a new thing since Klopp rolled up?


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Flashheart on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 09:52:44
75% is quite reasonable. Except if the player turns out to be shit and/or can't be bothered, although you'd hope that would be taken into account.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Batch on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 12:53:17
Which is usually 0 under such agreements

Is it, that's good then! I've only seen them mentioned in public when we are trying to offload players (Storey) to other teams. So I assumed they were commonplace.

It can cause issues when we have to play a player out of position (e.g. Turnbull at full back), but on the whole if we want better players than we can afford we have no choice.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Peter Venkman on Thursday, July 21, 2016, 13:05:40
75% is quite reasonable. Except if the player turns out to be shit and/or can't be bothered, although you'd hope that would be taken into account.
It is reasonable but I think if they turn out to be shit in the first few weeks they cannot be returned or recalled this season and have to stay for the full 6 month/1 year term as loans cannot be cut shirt from now on.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: singingiiiffy on Friday, July 22, 2016, 06:47:12
It is reasonable but I think if they turn out to be shit in the first few weeks they cannot be returned or recalled this season and have to stay for the full 6 month/1 year term as loans cannot be cut shirt from now on.

With the new loan rules of min 6 month it's a huge gamble on research and the players attitude. Even if you could send him back straight away it's a loan space wasted that you can't replace. Good luck power!


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Power to people on Friday, July 22, 2016, 15:22:53
I suspect that Power is waiting on what loans he can get before signing any more players - so going by previous maybe get players from Celtic & Southampton, think Powers contacts at Liverpool & Norwich have gone, then there is talk of this young striker from Palace coming when they return from their tour.

Would be nice to have a few more in by the season opener but I suspect as usual it will go right down to the last day of the transfer window


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Bob's Orange on Friday, July 22, 2016, 15:46:25
I'm going to say he's throwing quite a lot of eggs in the Keshi Anderson basket, based on nothing at all.


Title: Re: Liverpool loanees
Post by: Sippo on Friday, July 22, 2016, 16:12:26
Premier league clubs haven't been back that long in training, with major transfers going around. I would say it's still very early days regards to premier league loans..