Rocking Red Cyril Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 As both Bennett and cox have arrived, out of favour , from their respective clubs.Is this loan time a possible precusor to a permanent signing in January or just a "get out jail" card till January ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Who knows, a 'try before you buy' maybe, or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocking Red Cyril Posted October 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Yes, what I thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristol south end Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Think the same can be said for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFiGO!?! Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Permanent signings are overrated. Have we learnt nothing from the Nicky Hunt experience! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 All depends how they do,if they do ok then maybe we will sign them,if they do brilliant then qpr will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 It's always worth a thorough evaluation of a player before giving them a contract as Tony Dinning was saying only recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheatus59 Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Permanent signings are overrated. Have we learnt nothing from the Nicky Hunt experience!So what do we do then , just use loans all the time ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheatus59 Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 I have a feeling we could go back for Matt Smith again when he's fit . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie andrews Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 I have a feeling we could go back for Matt Smith again when he's fit .(dr) who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheatus59 Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 (dr) who?Not him , he irritated me too much ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Not him , he irritated me too much !but at least he would regenerate every couple of years. Would save a fortune on transfer fees! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldstandrobin Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 but at least he would regenerate every couple of years. Would save a fortune on transfer fees!he was b*****y hopeless marking Dale.K from Scaro Utd though last season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse With No Name Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 So what do we do then , just use loans all the time ?swindon tried that last season and look at them now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marina's Rolls Royce Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 The regular 'he's coming back' chatter by some City fans regarding Matt Smith ever since he went back to Fulham does not seem to be shared by the club or, indeed, Matt Smith. In possible reported £15 m worth of bids for other strikers Matt never appeared on the radar. Perhaps at some stage we can just put him down to having been a great loan in L1 at the right time with the right partner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 I do think it`s wishful thinking but tbf he was (and still is) out with a long term injury so I doubt even we would have paid xm for a player who couldn`t feature till Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottsciderarmy Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Think Bennett might be a chance permanent after the loan, as Norwich are in the Prem and he's been deemed not good enough for the Prem, so I'm sure if he does well the option to buy him will be there however Cox has a year and a half left on his contract and he is solid cover at this level for Reading and I imagine at present he isn't needed but should they get injuries then he would be needed, so imagine we are being used to keep him up to speed fitness wise in case he is needed. He would more likely be available at the end of the season, than in January. That is however just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Depends who they look to sign in January I suppose. He`d have a year left then and perhaps it would represent their best chance of getting a fee if he isn`t in their plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottsciderarmy Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 The regular 'he's coming back' chatter by some City fans regarding Matt Smith ever since he went back to Fulham does not seem to be shared by the club or, indeed, Matt Smith. In possible reported £15 m worth of bids for other strikers Matt never appeared on the radar. Perhaps at some stage we can just put him down to having been a great loan in L1 at the right time with the right partner? Matt Smith openly said when he came here it was to get match fitness before going back to Fulham, and Fulham said the same thing. Never at any stage did the player or his club give the impression he was coming to us to get fit for them. Matt Smith wanted to be playing for Fulham and we helped him achieve that. I am sure that if come January Matt Smith was told by Fulham he was not in their plans he wouldn't be against coming back here, but I would imagine the reason we didn't pursue him was at the time his club did wish to sell and player didn't wish to move, so any attempts by us to try and sign him would have been pointless so we focused our attentions elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Just as an aside, can we extend the Jan loans when the window opens if we want to? I know we couldn`t with Matt Smith but that was because of rules relating to the number of clubs he`d already played for in one season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottsciderarmy Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 These loans can't be extended no.The rules on loans are4 Long Term Loans per season (5 months or longer) - These can be extended up to a whole season4 Short Term loans per season (1-3 months maximum)Of which you can't loan more than 3 players from one club at any one time and 5 within one season.4 Loans maximum of players under the age of 244 loans maximum of players over the age of 24No more than 8 loans in total per seasonOnly 5 loaned players can be part of a match day squad at any one time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Right. So none of our current ones that are less than a season already can be extended under any circumstances and if we want to keep that player any longer we have to buy them. I think it`s only Baker and Robinson (?) on season long ones at the moment isn`t it?The age restriction rule seems a bit strange though given that most teams would want to send youngsters out to get experience it seems odd to restrict it to 4 under 24. I reckon we`ve used our allocation of them already (Baker, Moore, Robinson, Bennett).Also, if we were to sign one of our loanees permanently in Jan I presume his loan up to then counts as one of the 8 - you don`t get a bonus one I suppose?I think permanent signings are desperately required come Jan as the loan market will be as good as closed to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Bennett is 26 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Ah right thanks. Just assumed he was younger for some reason. One left then unless Hamer`s under 24 which I don`t think he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 As both Bennett and cox have arrived, out of favour , from their respective clubs.Is this loan time a possible precusor to a permanent signing in January or just a "get out jail" card till January ?Reading fans think so but not silly money please like the 6 million touted in the transfer window. What do you reckon is worth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Year left, 28, never really set it alight 1 - 1.5 tops I should think and that will depend on how he does for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 I do think it`s wishful thinking but tbf he was (and still is) out with a long term injury so I doubt even we would have paid xm for a player who couldn`t feature till Christmas.Matt Smith has been in contention to play for weeks. Think they were just using caution until after the break. It was a 6-8 week injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marina's Rolls Royce Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Matt Smith openly said when he came here it was to get match fitness before going back to Fulham, and Fulham said the same thing. Never at any stage did the player or his club give the impression he was coming to us to get fit for them. Matt Smith wanted to be playing for Fulham and we helped him achieve that. I am sure that if come January Matt Smith was told by Fulham he was not in their plans he wouldn't be against coming back here, but I would imagine the reason we didn't pursue him was at the time his club did wish to sell and player didn't wish to move, so any attempts by us to try and sign him would have been pointless so we focused our attentions elsewhere.Sorry but your post doesn't make sense to me- I've highlighted the relevant bits I don't follow.In any event, my comment wasn't about what Fulham or what Matt Smith said but a comment about the regular " he's coming back" chatter by fans when everything else points to the contrary and always has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Matt Smith has been in contention to play for weeks. Think they were just using caution until after the break. It was a 6-8 week injury. Ah right. Thought he was out for longer than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Ah right. Thought he was out for longer than that.Think their keeper is out longer on the same collision and injury. It's a moot point anyway because he's very much apart of Fulham's plans and wasn't going to go anywhere. His partnership with McCormack is deadly and they saw it last season and was on its way this season before the injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.