The mancityfans.net football forum

Hell I don't even know what to call it, but it sounds like another Twitch(y) Bitch because he couldn't get Bellamy. So I guess it is ok to dictate where our players go unless it is to him.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/27/premier-league-ban-player-loans


Premier League may ban player loans to stop clubs stockpiling

Craig Bellamy Tottenham hinted that Manchester City were dictating which clubs their surplus players, such as Craig Bellamy, could play at. Photograph: Joe Giddens/EMPICS Sport

Suspicions that Manchester City might be stockpiling players in order to prevent them signing for rivals could lead to the Premier League reviving attempts to outlaw player loans.

Digger can reveal that Richard Scudamore has twice made efforts to introduce rules preventing players from being loaned between top-flight clubs. The Premier League chief executive believes they are unnecessary since clubs' domestic-broadcast incomes, amounting to a minimum of £50m each from this season, mean there is plenty of cash to pay for outright transfers.

The moves were overruled by both the wealthier and the less-rich clubs as restrictive to their attempts respectively to farm out and to host players. Yet with City's first-team squad now expanding to 38 players, there is evidence the mood is shifting.

Last week Tottenham Hotspur's manager, Harry Redknapp, hinted that he thought City — whose wage offers have put players out of competitors' reach — were dictating which clubs their surplus-to-requirements players could play at. Redknapp predicted that Craig Bellamy would be prevented from playing at a club with Champions League pretensions. "I couldn't see them loaning him to someone like us," he said, before the Welshman signed for Cardiff City.

Some Serie A clubs did stockpile players in the 90s but City consider themselves victims of circumstance: no one will match their players' wages. The 25-man squad limits being introduced next Tuesday may have some influence.

But with no limit to the number of players clubs may loan out in any given season, there is nothing to prevent City – whose owner's spending was revealed here yesterday as having reached half a billion pounds – purchasing players who will never get a game for them.

That's completely wrong. We're not stockpiling players, we've loaned out 3 players (excluding kids with little or no 1st team pretensions). We've loaned Ned to Sunderland and Bellamy has gone to Cardiff because of the Welsh connection. Weiss is fully fringe. We've loaned ONE FUCKING PLAYER to prem opposition. Banning prem to prem loans would have little to no effect, it's other teams who are causing the problems. Bringing in 25 man squads so quickly was always going to leave some teams under pressure.

Redknapp is moaning because he wasn't able to fuck us out of a player and stop other teams from getting players. We wouldn't have sold Bellamy to him anyway, his days of tapping up and stealing our players is over, now fuck off.

Many years ago, the late Bill Shankly openly admitted he had bought players in order to stop close rivals having them. So none of this is in any way new.
Twitchy has a long history of screwing City for players: Berkovic, Cole, Distain and I have my suspicions about James. If he thought he was likely to get Bellamy, whilst we subsidised Spurs, he must have been dreaming. City have been wise to Twitchy for a long time and I think the manner we went about the benjani deal said a lot for our club.

As for City stockpiling players, City have a free choice to pick and choose the players they wish to target in the free market. Players have the choice to choose us if they so wish it.
Maybe Twitchy has found all his plain brown envelopes are empty...tough shit.

Twitchy ruins the taste of my tea, but fuck all can be done about that. I know he has loads of brown envelopes left. I know this for a fact

I don't get the sentiment here ... is he actually upset that we wouldn't loan a player to one of our direct rivals? Is he saying we shouldn't be able to decide where we loan our assets?

And does scudamore want no teams in prem loaning to each other, but loaning to championship is ok? What about players whose development will not be helped at that level? Does he want them to be loaned overseas? Doesn't he want young english talent to stay in the league?

Don't understand their viewpoints on any of this. Bizarro world.

kinkylola wrote:I don't get the sentiment here ... is he actually upset that we wouldn't loan a player to one of our direct rivals? Is he saying we shouldn't be able to decide where we loan our assets?

And does scudamore want no teams in prem loaning to each other, but loaning to championship is ok? What about players whose development will not be helped at that level? Does he want them to be loaned overseas? Doesn't he want young english talent to stay in the league?

Don't understand their viewpoints on any of this. Bizarro world.

There's always been a certain discomfort some of the blazers have with the loan system, part of it has nothing to do with us. Restrictions over the years have cleaned it up a bit. Redknapp is having a go because he's a toxic cunt who thinks it's part of his job to give us bad press, no matter who he works for.

The strongest arguments for the loan system are also the most compelling arguments against it. Getting young players experience by loaning them out is what allows big clubs to hold onto the registrations of so many young players and keep all the best talent for themselves. Once upon a time, ambitious young players played for lower division clubs and moved to prem clubs if they were good enough. Now they start with the prem club and the lower league clubs never get to see the profit when kids come good, it changes the dynamic in how they handle said players.

So we shouldn't be able to decide where we loan players we own? Oh yeah, that makes lot of fucking sense again.

We aren't 'stockpiling' players but going through second phase of building our squad and some of the players from first phase has become surplus to requirements but we can't ship them off because of their wages. However, even if we were, so what? From financial point of view it's not very clever but there's nothing wrong with that.

Absolutely shocking. Cook, Marwood and Mancini should hold their head's in shame. Who on earth do we think we are? Our employees should be able to leave the club when they want and go where they want. For us to think that this is something we should have some sort of influence over is a disgrace.

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:So we shouldn't be able to decide where we loan players we own? Oh yeah, that makes lot of fucking sense again.

We aren't 'stockpiling' players but going through second phase of building our squad and some of the players from first phase has become surplus to requirements but we can't ship them off because of their wages. However, even if we were, so what? From financial point of view it's not very clever but there's nothing wrong with that.

Spot on, when was the last time we bought a Premie League player and stuck him in the reserves? That would be stockpiling, the sort of thing Celtic and Rangers do north of the border. We have only ever bought players for the first team, now that the 25 man rule is in place and we have a new manager some of those players brought in by the previous regime have been deemed surplus to our requirements by the new man but it is completely up to us who we sell players to and even more so who we loan them too should we want to hold on to their registration for the time being.

And WTF has the Scudamore bit got to do with us? It wouldn't bother us at all, we'd just loan players further afield, Twitchy is the one who was trying to get our players on loan

Bellamy didn't go to a 'top flight' club & we didn't buy Ned so how do these thick fuckers apply it to us?

Strange watching that team last night knowing that Bellamy would have performed better than anyone on it & we've given him to Cardiff. One of the strangest episodes even in City's bizarre existence.

Has anybody taken the time to actually have a look at Spuds squad. Excluding players who will never get near the team, they have 28 quality premier league players.

Their fucking squad is bigger than ours

We have off-loaded far more players during the Summer than we have brought in.

johnpb78 wrote:Has anybody taken the time to actually have a look at Spuds squad. Excluding players who will never get near the team, they have 28 quality premier league players.

Their fucking squad is bigger than ours

John - Please stop using the truth and reality in an argument about City. It spoils the tabloid agenda and Arry love in that they have going.

Heard Bob Wilson quoted as saying today that City wont loan Shay Given but that "Shay also has a say in things" - errr, no he doesnt Bob Im afraid, and loaning him to Arsenal just cos it would suit Arsene nicely as they cant afford his fee and wages does us absolutely no favours, so go and do one please.

As for Shitknapp, the tabloid hacks best mate, when is his trial so the bent ba*tard can squirm in court? It would be hard to manage Spurs in the Champs lge from a cell wouldnt it.

Ted Hughes wrote:Bellamy didn't go to a 'top flight' club & we didn't buy Ned so how do these thick fuckers apply it to us?

Strange watching that team last night knowing that Bellamy would have performed better than anyone on it & we've given him to Cardiff. One of the strangest episodes even in City's bizarre existence.

Some very rose tinted glasses you've got with regards to Bellamy, there were plenty of games last season where he was anonymous and in the 2nd game in the space of 4 days he'd have either been not available or complaining that he wasn't picked against Liverpool. Our squad is no weaker for him having gone

ronk wrote:

kinkylola wrote:I don't get the sentiment here ... is he actually upset that we wouldn't loan a player to one of our direct rivals? Is he saying we shouldn't be able to decide where we loan our assets?

And does scudamore want no teams in prem loaning to each other, but loaning to championship is ok? What about players whose development will not be helped at that level? Does he want them to be loaned overseas? Doesn't he want young english talent to stay in the league?

Don't understand their viewpoints on any of this. Bizarro world.

There's always been a certain discomfort some of the blazers have with the loan system, part of it has nothing to do with us. Restrictions over the years have cleaned it up a bit. Redknapp is having a go because he's a toxic cunt who thinks it's part of his job to give us bad press, no matter who he works for.

The strongest arguments for the loan system are also the most compelling arguments against it. Getting young players experience by loaning them out is what allows big clubs to hold onto the registrations of so many young players and keep all the best talent for themselves. Once upon a time, ambitious young players played for lower division clubs and moved to prem clubs if they were good enough. Now they start with the prem club and the lower league clubs never get to see the profit when kids come good, it changes the dynamic in how they handle said players.

Totally agree ronk. Small club uncovers a talented English player, prem clubs show interest, price is inflated, cant blame selling club, could keep them in business for the next few years, prem club says "nah" or waits for a shitty tribunal when the smaller team always gets ripped off.