They’re not in Europe this season. Seems an odd move for 6 months.Juve wants him but with probably zero loan fee, no obligation to buy (= they wont buy him) and us paying large part of his weekly salary for next 6 months too.
best would be if we can get a PL club to make offers, Newcastle probably most in need of a midfielder but doubt they would like to make it permanent either on higher salary.
I was reading this morning that we are considering loan offers from Juventus and Newcastle. Why would be consider a loan move ? Phillips has barely played for us, is 28 years old and will surely never come back if he does go on loan. This must be on the only opportunity to recoup most, if not all, of the money we spent on him. He’s hardly like to increase in value as he gets closer to his thirties.
That has to be it, although just a few short weeks ago the Dippers and Spurs were also part of a long list of Clubs that were “interested“I can only think that we have asked if anybody wants to make us an offer and the answer has been ‘no’.
That's at least three flaws.The main flaw I see with Philips, is his lack of mobiility, He don't move into the right positions, he's slow, he almost seems to actively hide when he shoud be getting in a position to receive a pass.
But what a smile for the team's photographsThey’re not in Europe this season. Seems an odd move for 6 months.
Many reasons why the club that owns his contract would pay his wages whilst hes away on loan.Genuine question. I've never been quite clear as to who “picks up the tab” (as the Americans have it) on loans. Surely it's not the club loaning the player out? Why would they actually pay for one of their players to be playing for another team? Or is that written into their contract at the outset? I always presumed that it's the club accommodating the player who pays their salary. I'm also not sure about what that salary has to be. Does it have to be contractually equal to what they were being paid at the loaning club?