Emergency keeper loan / Hart / Brum [All merged]



We've all ready, technically, got a player to play that position, an international one at that, so legally, what can we do?
.[/quote]

faroe islands :
Population
- March 2010 estimate 48,703 [1] (205th)
- 2007 census 48,797
- Density 35/km2 (171st)
91/sq mi[/quote]

Sadly that is irrelevant, because that is what will be argued. International, is international. That's how it technically is and how it will be seen.
So having him there, does that mean he'll have to start or can we loan in a better keeper, legally?
I mean what are we and what aren't we allowed do, because we cannot get this wrong.
 
There is a light said:
Do you think he's that good now?

He is our keeper.

On current form can you name a better keeper in the PL ? I can't.

He's not our keeper either, he's Birminghams by virtue of an agreement WE made with them until the end of the current season, only Birmingham have the ability to allow him back to us, that is not in City's control.

One other thing, he may not want to come back, because he may feel he was treated like shit by City.

I would hope however, that if Birmingham allow it, and then the PL sanction it, he would see it as another great chance to stake a claim for the WC, not that continued good form at Birmingham wouldn't do that anyway, but it would make him look ambitious to be the best, and that may make Capello look more favourably on him too, it would also present him with the chance to be City's number one next season, which I hope he is.
 
cleavers said:
There is a light said:
Do you think he's that good now?

He is our keeper.

On current form can you name a better keeper in the PL ? I can't.

He's not our keeper either, he's Birminghams by virtue of an agreement WE made with them until the end of the current season, only Birmingham have the ability to allow him back to us, that is not in City's control.

One other thing, he may not want to come back, because he may feel he was treated like shit by City.

I would hope however, that if Birmingham allow it, and then the PL sanction it, he would see it as another great chance to stake a claim for the WC, not that continued good form at Birmingham wouldn't do that anyway, but it would make him look ambitious to be the best, and that may make Capello look more favourably on him too, it would also present him with the chance to be City's number one next season, which I hope he is.

The only way I see us getting Hart back for the last few games is if we let him go back to them next season, I can't see them handing him over, because they are desperate to hold on to him.
I guess the question is is that would we be prepared to do that if the occasion came about.
 
Shooter 83 said:
Bunch of deluded morons here, coming from a club who have already took advantage of the situation in the past. YCMIU.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.villatalk.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=61398&postdays=0&postorder=asc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.villatalk.com/index.php?name ... torder=asc</a>

I quite like this.....

If it helps them pip spurs to 4th then they should be allowed to do it
If it helps them pip us to 4th then it is utterly outrageous !
 
IrishMacca said:


We've all ready, technically, got a player to play that position, an international one at that, so legally, what can we do?
.

faroe islands :
Population
- March 2010 estimate 48,703 [1] (205th)
- 2007 census 48,797
- Density 35/km2 (171st)
91/sq mi[/quote]

Sadly that is irrelevant, because that is what will be argued. International, is international. That's how it technically is and how it will be seen.
So having him there, does that mean he'll have to start or can we loan in a better keeper, legally?
I mean what are we and what aren't we allowed do, because we cannot get this wrong.[/quote]


Thats just ridiculous, they cant base who we loan on the current goalkeepers international status. An "emergency loan" is an "emergency loan". If the Juventus for example agreed to loan him, we could have Buffon in the squad on saturday. Regardless of Gunnar's handfull of caps for the Faroes.
 
cleavers said:
There is a light said:
Do you think he's that good now?

He is our keeper.

On current form can you name a better keeper in the PL ? I can't.

He's not our keeper either, he's Birminghams by virtue of an agreement WE made with them until the end of the current season, only Birmingham have the ability to allow him back to us, that is not in City's control.

One other thing, he may not want to come back, because he may feel he was treated like shit by City.

I would hope however, that if Birmingham allow it, and then the PL sanction it, he would see it as another great chance to stake a claim for the WC, not that continued good form at Birmingham wouldn't do that anyway, but it would make him look ambitious to be the best, and that may make Capello look more favourably on him too, it would also present him with the chance to be City's number one next season, which I hope he is.

You said the world! I agree though, there is currently no-one better in the league and he should start for England in the WC finals. It would definitely raise his profile at the best possible time and there is a chance if he plays well, he would stay at City and keep the shirt for the start if the season. If he keeps a few clean sheets he could be playing Champions League football next season. I would be amazed if he didn't want to come back to further his career as this could be a big opportunity for him.

Birmingham may own his registration until the end of the season, but long term he is a City player. I know what you're saying, we don't have any right to him until the agreement is over or is ended by Birmingham. I suspect though that we have been more than reasonable with them. If I was Garry Cook I would be pointing out that they would rather have us as friends than enemies as I am sure we will be in the position to loan other players again in the future.
 
dandeman2008 said:
IrishMacca said:
We've all ready, technically, got a player to play that position, an international one at that, so legally, what can we do?
.

faroe islands :
Population
- March 2010 estimate 48,703 [1] (205th)
- 2007 census 48,797
- Density 35/km2 (171st)
91/sq mi

Sadly that is irrelevant, because that is what will be argued. International, is international. That's how it technically is and how it will be seen.
So having him there, does that mean he'll have to start or can we loan in a better keeper, legally?
I mean what are we and what aren't we allowed do, because we cannot get this wrong.[/quote]


Thats just ridiculous, they cant base who we loan on the current goalkeepers international status. An "emergency loan" is an "emergency loan". If the Juventus for example agreed to loan him, we could have Buffon in the squad on saturday. Regardless of Gunnar's handfull of caps for the Faroes.[/quote]

Could we though. What can we actually do because I can't see us being allowed to sign a starting keeper, the points being made that we have an international keeper, (where he's from is irrelevant) he is a player who can play the position and that should be enough, fine we need a player for the bench and we've been allowed to loan a keeper in, so I pressume it will be for that position because I can't see us being allowed to sign a half good keeper to start.
It'd piss off a lot of people, a lot of clubs, I mean could you imagine if it had happened to Spurs instead, or Man U, we'd have a fit.

I'd love to know where we stand legally in this though because I can't see us being allowed sign anyone anyway good.
 
There is a light said:
You said the world!

No that was in response to the Buffon suggestions, earlier I said in the PL.

There is a light said:
I agree though, there is currently no-one better in the league and he should start for England in the WC finals. It would definitely raise his profile at the best possible time and there is a chance if he plays well, he would stay at City and keep the shirt for the start if the season. If he keeps a few clean sheets he could be playing Champions League football next season. I would be amazed if he didn't want to come back to further his career as this could be a big opportunity for him.

Birmingham may own his registration until the end of the season, but long term he is a City player. I know what you're saying, we don't have any right to him until the agreement is over or is ended by Birmingham. I suspect though that we have been more than reasonable with them. If I was Garry Cook I would be pointing out that they would rather have us as friends than enemies as I am sure we will be in the position to loan other players again in the future.

I agree on that though, however I can see McLeish chucking most of his toys from his cot.
 
IrishMacca said:
dandeman2008 said:
faroe islands :
Population
- March 2010 estimate 48,703 [1] (205th)
- 2007 census 48,797
- Density 35/km2 (171st)
91/sq mi

Sadly that is irrelevant, because that is what will be argued. International, is international. That's how it technically is and how it will be seen.
So having him there, does that mean he'll have to start or can we loan in a better keeper, legally?
I mean what are we and what aren't we allowed do, because we cannot get this wrong.


Thats just ridiculous, they cant base who we loan on the current goalkeepers international status. An "emergency loan" is an "emergency loan". If the Juventus for example agreed to loan him, we could have Buffon in the squad on saturday. Regardless of Gunnar's handfull of caps for the Faroes.[/quote]

Could we though. What can we actually do because I can't see us being allowed to sign a starting keeper, the points being made that we have an international keeper, (where he's from is irrelevant) he is a player who can play the position and that should be enough, fine we need a player for the bench and we've been allowed to loan a keeper in, so I pressume it will be for that position because I can't see us being allowed to sign a half good keeper to start.
It'd piss off a lot of people, a lot of clubs, I mean could you imagine if it had happened to Spurs instead, or Man U, we'd have a fit.

I'd love to know where we stand legally in this though because I can't see us being allowed sign anyone anyway good.[/quote]

The league doesnt decide who can and cant sign for you though. We have been granted permission to sign someone by a certain date and we will. Dont forget, 3 of our keepers are injured. We have a 23 year old who's only previous experience of English football was a couple of games at Wrexham in the Conference. There are no rules stating what player we can sign, just that it has to be a Goalkeeper.
 
Let's clear something up, we currently have 10 keepers:

Given
Hart
Taylor
GUNNAR
Gonzalez
Karius
Wood
Tobias Johansen
The other Johansen
Nathan something or other.

Given, Taylor, Gonzalez, the other Johansen are all injured.
Nathan something is a schoolboy thus can't play in the league.
Hart and the good Johansen are out on loan.
Wood hasn't got a squad number.

This leaves us with GUNNAR and Karius surely? Both are professionals on professional contracts?

EDIT: Forgot Mentel was released.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.