Jump to content
IGNORED

Afobe v Stoke (Merged)


Jerseybean

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, The Bard said:

Ofcourse.  It's the rules

Thanks, didn’t appreciate that it’s a given, thought it was something negotiated between the two clubs involved.

Just taken a look at the EFL rules re loan players and rule 58.4 actually says that a player will not be permitted to play against his parent club, however, it then goes onto say that if the parent club give written consent this rule can be over-ruled! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Bard said:

Ofcourse.  It's the rules

Not sure i's the rules, always use to be a gentleman agreement. You weren't allowed to put an actual clause in the deal. 
Amounts to the same thing though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jerseybean said:

Thanks, didn’t appreciate that it’s a given, thought it was something negotiated between the two clubs involved.

Just taken a look at the EFL rules re loan players and rule 58.4 actually says that a player will not be permitted to play against his parent club, however, it then goes onto say that if the parent club give written consent this rule can be over-ruled! 

Correct, but we seem to be the only country that has this rule. Players loaned out in Spain, Germany, Italy etc always seem to play against their parent club. If you've loaned out a player with a view to moving him on I see no point in stopping him playing, nor if he's loaned with a view to get him games. I would scrap the rule. If the opposing manager doesn't want to play him because of doubts about his intensity in such a game that's a different matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure his parent club would ensure that he can't play against yhem just like we ensured that Pato can't play against us.

I agree with the OP that suggested a forward 3 of Andi, Nic and Kasey.

That, along with say Josh and Adam behind them and a back 5 of whoever we can muster with Jay, Bailey and Tomas all on the treatment table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jerseybean said:

Thanks, didn’t appreciate that it’s a given, thought it was something negotiated between the two clubs involved.

Just taken a look at the EFL rules re loan players and rule 58.4 actually says that a player will not be permitted to play against his parent club, however, it then goes onto say that if the parent club give written consent this rule can be over-ruled! 

Lets be serious here, with the way he's playing for us if you were Stoke would you let him play against you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad this has been brought up as I've been thinking the same thing. I too assumed it's a given that he won't be allowed to play for us but because nothing was mentioned in any of the articles when he signed for us, that's what made me wonder. If you compare it to when Pato was loaned out to Derby, one of the first things specified was the fact that "Paterson will not be eligible to play against Lee Johnson’s side when the teams meet in the 2019/20 season" whereas nothing with Benik. Also, with the fact there is an option to purchase him at the end of the season, I wondered if that had any bearing on the rules....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Not sure i's the rules, always use to be a gentleman agreement. You weren't allowed to put an actual clause in the deal. 
Amounts to the same thing though.

Nah. Loan deals is the rules.  Permanent deals you can't insist either way,  nor have a gentleman's agreement. Big furore a few years ago when Tim Howard moved from United to Everton and a gentleman's agreement was in place that he couldn't play the game between the two teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

Nah. Loan deals is the rules.  Permanent deals you can't insist either way,  nor have a gentleman's agreement. Big furore a few years ago when Tim Howard moved from United to Everton and a gentleman's agreement was in place that he couldn't play the game between the two teams. 

Yeah, checked after I posted, though I'm sure it must have changed . They can only play against their Parent club with written permission, not sure who would actually do this, always a chance he'd come back to bite you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He definitely won't be eligible v Stoke.

A Plan B might be Palmer behind Weimann, kind of a 4-4-1-1.

Plenty of ways to work it- could have the same back 4, maybe Brownhill-Nagy-Massengo-Eliasson ie bringing back the 4-4-1-1 of 2 seasons ago. Bit asymmetrical.

Or could go with O'Dowda-Brownhill-Nagy/Massengo-Eliasson with obviously Palmer-Weimann in the 1-1. O'Dowda can come inside, 3 centrally in certain phases- Weimann can pull wider higher up the pitch, overloads possible.

Or even:

                   Bentley

         Moore Baker Williams 

Hunt Brownhill Massengo Nagy Rowe

                Palmer

               Weimann

Versatility aplenty, Brownhill can pull right to help with doubling up if 2 v 1, Weimann can pull left in order to in theory help Rowe, can also come inside to help to outnumber as and when, though with a packed middle it may not be necessary. It's imperfect but with the number of absentees solutions will be a bit mix and match.

*Subject to injuries, hitches in recovery etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

He definitely won't be eligible v Stoke.

A Plan B might be Palmer behind Weimann, kind of a 4-4-1-1.

Plenty of ways to work it- could have the same back 4, maybe Brownhill-Nagy-Massengo-Eliasson ie bringing back the 4-4-1-1 of 2 seasons ago. Bit asymmetrical.

Or could go with O'Dowda-Brownhill-Nagy/Massengo-Eliasson with obviously Palmer-Weimann in the 1-1. O'Dowda can come inside, 3 centrally in certain phases- Weimann can pull wider higher up the pitch, overloads possible.

Or even:

                   Bentley

         Moore Baker Williams 

Hunt Brownhill Massengo Nagy Rowe

                Palmer

               Weimann

Versatility aplenty, Brownhill can pull right to help with doubling up if 2 v 1, Weimann can pull left in order to in theory help Rowe, can also come inside to help to outnumber as and when, though with a packed middle it may not be necessary. It's imperfect but with the number of absentees solutions will be a bit mix and match.

*Subject to injuries, hitches in recovery etc.

Alternatively LJ might just replace Afobe with Semenyo. That’ll piss Famara off even further 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Yeah, checked after I posted, though I'm sure it must have changed . They can only play against their Parent club with written permission, not sure who would actually do this, always a chance he'd come back to bite you.

Chelsea allowed their loanees at Derby to play against them in the EFL Cup last season.  Not sure, but maybe Cup ok, league not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hasn’t Fammy scored a couple in the last few games against Stoke?

Give him a couple of weeks training alongside AW and start those two up top; refuse to believe he’s become a bad player overnight, and Stoke is a good opportunity for him to find some form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Chelsea allowed their loanees at Derby to play against them in the EFL Cup last season.  Not sure, but maybe Cup ok, league not.

Yep Cups are different. The site I read it on said as standard in the Prem loanees don't play against parent clubs but can, if agreed in cups. The EFL there is a clause in the loan contract that has to be triggered to let a player play against his own club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Steve Watts said:

Nah. Loan deals is the rules.  Permanent deals you can't insist either way,  nor have a gentleman's agreement. Big furore a few years ago when Tim Howard moved from United to Everton and a gentleman's agreement was in place that he couldn't play the game between the two teams. 

Didn`t we do the same when we sold Christian Roberts to Swindon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Weimann our most productive player so far this season (2 goals, 2 assists?), he simply has to play. But I still think he'll be somewhere wider right side with Famara up top. I just think Johnson will want that extra aerial strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Almost always it's a no- can't remember any in the League playing against parent club.

Given how this was seemingly rushed out this loan, I cannot see it myself.

I can remember David Seal playing against us for Northampton (IIRC) whilst on loan.... He scored at least one! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

A clause has to be activated to allow the player to play. I see absolutely no benefit for the Parent club in this so I'd think he's unavailable.

I find it funny how a club can deem a player not good enough for them so loan him out but then not want them to play against them!

Can you imagine if we had loaned out Nicky Hunt and refused him the chance to play against us?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Almost always it's a no- can't remember any in the League playing against parent club.

Given how this was seemingly rushed out this loan, I cannot see it myself.

Ha ha, we once let David Seal who was on loan at Northampton from us play against and he scored and we lost 2-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

I find it funny how a club can deem a player not good enough for them so loan him out but then not want them to play against them!

Can you imagine if we had loaned out Nicky Hunt and refused him the chance to play against us?!

To be fair, we made it very clear Jamie Patterson ain’t playing against us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Busterrimes said:

Ha ha, we once let David Seal who was on loan at Northampton from us play against and he scored and we lost 2-1

3/1 wasn’t it. Colin Cramb scores for us. A long way to go to lose to your own player. I was ******* fuming.  So nothing definitive but most on here think he is not available!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

I find it funny how a club can deem a player not good enough for them so loan him out but then not want them to play against them!

Can you imagine if we had loaned out Nicky Hunt and refused him the chance to play against us?!

I think it was mentioned before, didn't we loan David Seal to Northampton and he scored against us as they beat us. There is always that chance, and is it worth risking when you don't have to?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I think it was mentioned before, didn't we loan David Seal to Northampton and he scored against us as they beat us. There is always that chance, and is it worth risking when you don't have to?
 

True, but there is as much chance of the player that is forced to play as the replacement scoring the winner than there is the one on loan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I do think it’s rich of a club to say ‘pay wages (or a proportion we accept) but the days leading up to our two fixtures this bloke is redundant’. 

It could bite our arse like Seal, and others, but the league rules should not be in favour of the loaning out club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CotswoldRed said:

We don't need him to beat Stoke. Let him have a rest..... 

It's a weird one because I think the expectation will be that we beat Stoke. If that doesn't happen, we'll have lost momentum and we all start doubting ourselves again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, mozo said:

It's a weird one because I think the expectation will be that we beat Stoke. If that doesn't happen, we'll have lost momentum and we all start doubting ourselves again...

Stoke away is a hard game despite the form they are on. It would be crazy of them to let him play against us, why would they do that? Has anyone mentioned what happened when we stupidly allowed David Seal to play against us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Different competition- maybe it's even a default position that loanee can face parent club?

In PL, the opposite seems to apply. Championship unless specificed I think...certainly don't expect Afobe to be eligible here.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/26972498

Had to have a quick check above to make sure memory was in the right place 

 

Seems it was because Chelsea put in the agreement it wound cost 5 million for the two games, which counts as influencing another club. 

 

Uefa declared that as void, so he could play

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bristolboy_06 said:

You can play against loan clubs but it’s up to the parent club to decide when the loan was agreed.

Pretty sure nowadays its a rule, that it cannot happen. At least in the league.

Not always been the case i know. I remember David Seal scoring against us. Very embarrasing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Am I making it up or did Courtois play against Chelsea in the Champions League whilst on loan at Atletico?

Quite possible.
As mentioned by someone earlier, the player is only ineligible if that is a term of the loan agreement when the loan deal is made.
 

As the two play in different countries and both teams would have had pretty high European coefficients, the actual chances of the two sides facing each other would have been very slim, so no need for the "can't play against parent club" clause to be added. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing how shrewd Mark Ashton is maybe he left the can't play against Stoke clause out of the contract? :whistle:. Just imagine the Stoke fans if Benik popped up with the winner.

I'm sure this happened to us in the past. David Seal at Northampton if I recall correctly? :innocent06:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54.8 During the period of any Temporary Loan Transfer, a Player shall not play against his Transferor Club without the prior written permission of the Transferor Club (which, if given, must be indicated on the appropriate Temporary Loan Transfer form).

Guidance

The EFL will permit Clubs to amend a loan agreement to include permission where this is agreed by both Clubs and the Player at a later date.

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

54.8 During the period of any Temporary Loan Transfer, a Player shall not play against his Transferor Club without the prior written permission of the Transferor Club (which, if given, must be indicated on the appropriate Temporary Loan Transfer form).

Guidance

The EFL will permit Clubs to amend a loan agreement to include permission where this is agreed by both Clubs and the Player at a later date.

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

So, to summarise... Nobody on here has seen the loan agreement, so therefore nobody actually knows 100% whether he can play or not! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest StaffordshireStokie
On 01/09/2019 at 20:49, The Batman said:

I've a bad feeling about the Stoke game. Hoping their awful run will continue after the international break. 

 

Our awful form doesn't look like ending anytime soon, if we can screw up a  1-0 lead at Birmingham (who were woeful on the day) then you definitely have a chance! I remember coming on here at the beginning of the year and saying you guys could well put the final nail in rowetts tenure and lo and behold it happened how ironic that we play each other again at a crucial stage in Nathan Jones' tenure also! a defeat and i feel he's a goner fans have turned on him and all his promises of promotion and exciting attacking football in pre season have not come to fruition thus far he's massively out of his depth and he makes at least 6 changes every game and changes formations on a weekly basis all you'll need to do on Saturday is score and our heads will drop were that frail mentally! It's got  a third stint of Tony Pulis written all over it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...