The mancityfans.net football forum

..and have offered to pay all of his £90k per week wages for the duration of the loan.

City have rejected the deal for some reason!?

The one and only reason I can think of is that there is some concern over Kolarovs' fitness, maybe he's carrying an injury/still not fully over the early season ankle injury. We'll be lucky to get a permanent offer for him so it really does sound like a good deal to me

Maybe Bridge didnt want to go????

Mark ( Blue Army ) wrote:Maybe Bridge didnt want to go????

It was reported that the club had rejected the deal rather than the player.

King Kev wrote:

Mark ( Blue Army ) wrote:Maybe Bridge didnt want to go????

It was reported that the club had rejected the deal rather than the player.

Not sure why we would reject it then

left back goes something like this, yeah?

Kolorov
Zabaleta
Lescott
Boateng
Bridge
Barry

5th choice I think. Is Cunningham still around?

King Kev wrote:..and have offered to pay all of his £90k per week wages for the duration of the loan.

City have rejected the deal for some reason!?

Wasn't there something about them (or City) not agreeing to pay his bonuses?

Dingus McDouchey wrote:left back goes something like this, yeah?

Kolorov
Zabaleta
Lescott
Boateng
Bridge
Barry

5th choice I think. Is Cunningham still around?

He's on loan at Leicester with Svennis

we should just give them adebayor, bridge, and any other players we want to unload. I hope they stay up.

This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

halnone wrote:we should just give them adebayor, bridge, and any other players we want to unload. I hope they stay up.

Good call mate

bluelogic32 wrote:This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

Surely the fact that the cannot play against us means they'll only be helping our cause by playing our rivals.

I think we want to sell him, not loan. IF we have no good offers come January 30th we will ring West Ham again I bet.

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:

bluelogic32 wrote:This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

Surely the fact that the cannot play against us means they'll only be helping our cause by playing our rivals.

I'd actually send him on loan with provision he DOES play against us.

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:

bluelogic32 wrote:This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

Surely the fact that the cannot play against us means they'll only be helping our cause by playing our rivals.

I'd actually send him on loan with provision he DOES play against us.

Not much 'help' for sure. And what is this 'EPL'?

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:

bluelogic32 wrote:This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

Surely the fact that the cannot play against us means they'll only be helping our cause by playing our rivals.

I'd actually send him on loan with provision he DOES play against us.

That's just mean.

I was really disappointed to see that the club rejected the loan deal for Wayne Bridge, as I thought that it made perfect sense for the club NOT to sell anyone in this window. It makes me wonder about what the club's strategy is, as Bridge is 4th/5th choice in his position.

This being the last full window before the FFP rules come in, would appear to be City's last real throw of the dice before they have to start getting their house in order. Therefore there seems little sense in realising assets now, when they can be sold in the summer and the received monies can count towards the club's income and help to offset any incoming transfers in the 2011/12 season.

I would be very happy to see SWP / Adebayor / RSC / Bridge go out on loan with a view to a permanent deal in the summer window as I believe this would help the club towards balancing the books. Granted they will probably only bring in 20/25m between them, but it all counts.

Perhaps in this case, West Ham are not in a position to agree a future transfer given that they are odds on to be playing in a different league this season.

bluelogic32 wrote:This goes for bridge and anyone else, i don't think anyone will get moved within the EPL..the club doesnt seem to like giving the competition any room to work with when rumours pop up.

Jo was loaned to Everton, Hart to Birmingham and we currently have Onuoha at Sunderland.

When it comes to lending players to other clubs in the Prem, we have form.

Don't rate Bridge as the answer at FB but his defensive performance v Juve was twice as good as anything Kolarov has produced, against a better player than any of those Kolarov has faced.

Ted Hughes wrote:Don't rate Bridge as the answer at FB but his defensive performance v Juve was twice as good as anything Kolarov has produced, against a better player than any of those Kolarov has faced.

Were you not calling for ages for more attacking intent from Mancini? It is early days for Kolarov in a new league, but he was specifically brought in for attacking intent, which he has tried to do.

Im not sure you can have your cake and eat it Ted, give Kolarov some time. It took Evra a whole season to bed into the prem by comparison. You seem to want everything to be perfect at the snap of the finger.