Reader Comments (11)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Michael Kenrick
1 Posted 01/12/2018 at 06:08:08
Very glad to see this finally happening. Although why not from next season?
Ian Bennett
2 Posted 01/12/2018 at 07:54:07
Seems positive, and fair to big clubs that it's not started next season – it gives clubs time to prepare for it. It is a nonsense that Chelsea can have 40+ players out on loan, with most nowhere near a first-XI start.

I do see that the big clubs will continue to work around it with sale and buy-back, sell-on clauses, and first options on players they have placed with cooperative official and unofficial feeder clubs.

This might stop buying young talent for the sole purpose of loaning them out to gain increase in transfer value. But if the ex-trainee proves it – they'll still get their cut or first dibs, if they prove they can make the level. The big clubs always win.

Brian Williams
3 Posted 01/12/2018 at 08:30:35
Although the big clubs may initially use the sale and buy-back option, I think the so-called smaller clubs may well decide to push back and eventually say "no deal."

It's going to take a concerted effort by the "smaller" clubs to not give in to the bigger ones and force them to deal with transfers in a fairer way.

Once the bigger clubs start to face the possibility of being stuck with a larger number of players, more than they want, because the smaller clubs won't be held to ransom, we could see a wind of change.... or at least a breeze!

Mike Allison
4 Posted 01/12/2018 at 08:55:04
The link didn’t work for me, so I couldn’t read any details. Is it six loans full stop? It seems to me that there’s a world of difference between loaning out your youth academy products for development and hoovering up young players to treat them as financial assets. There should be no limit on the former, whereas the latter is a significant problem.
Steve Pugh
5 Posted 01/12/2018 at 09:08:36
Mike #4, how about putting in a clause saying that players that have been at the club for more than four years don't count towards the total?
Mike Allison
6 Posted 01/12/2018 at 14:31:32
Yeah I would think that it’s fairly easy to make a distinction within existing classifications. In particular, whether a player was at the club before their 16th, 17th or 18th birthdays could be a factor. This could force clubs to only buy players they actually intend to pick, whilst being able to loan out the youngsters who came through their own system.
Alan J Thompson
7 Posted 01/12/2018 at 16:03:26
Strewth, does this mean clubs may have to improve players through coaching?

Less facetiously, this is only half an answer as some sort of competition is needed to stretch younger players or to extend, or limit, feeder clubs used in lower divisions of some European leagues.

Some sports in other countries have a sort of warm-up game between clubs' youth teams prior to the main game and without having to change in the car park.

Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
8 Posted 01/12/2018 at 18:42:35
Sorry, Mike. I've fixed the link now.

About your point of (paraphrasing) local players who grow up with the club, versus imports who are transferred in by the endeavours of scouts, the like of which have earned us a transfer ban at this level — I wonder if there would be a way to protect one while discouraging the other?

It would be a bit like the Homegrown business they brought in a few years back now, rules which I have to wonder were ever effective? You never heard of anyone being hauled up or disciplined for not having enough so-called homegrown players?

Even so, I wonder if you could implement a ban on transfers below a certain age? Maybe that's what they've done in effect by imposing a minimum age before you can sign a professional contract.

Aidan Wade
9 Posted 04/12/2018 at 10:14:40
Great – the likes of Chelski hoovering up talent with no intention that they should ever play is bad for football. It's only unusual that FIFA are acting in the interest of the game rather than gold bars for once.
Simon Smith
10 Posted 05/12/2018 at 09:59:27
If I'm totally honest I don't have an issue with the loan system, imo almost everyone benefits.

Clubs like ours get the extra players we need, and allow us to move lads out who need game time to stand a better chance of getting in our first team, or give themselves a chance of a permanent deal elsewhere.

Clubs like Chelsea use it to make money, but again, I have no problem with that, that is their way of keeping up with clubs like Man Utd who have more income due to fan-base.

Imo we shouldn't break a system that's currently okay.

Jay Wood

11 Posted 13/12/2018 at 20:41:41
With the football authorities recently reported as saying they are going to re-assess the mass signing and loaning of young talent by the more monied clubs, the Peterborough chairman has come up with a very novel proposal which will resonate with our North American fan base: A PL draft-style loan system of young players to clubs in the lower leagues.


It's an interesting read and a very innovative idea that merits further exploration, IMO.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb