Arsene wants loan rules changed

Arsene wants loan rules changed

Arsene Wenger believes the rule which prevents an on-loan player appearing against the club who technically owns him is one which needs to change.

Previously, it was possible for players to play against their parent club but since the 2009-10 season this has changed and Wenger believes this is wrong.

“If the loan is a loan he should be capable to play against everybody,” said Wenger. “That is the only thing I believe. And it’s the same with Bendtner.  There was one period where you had the choice and I never, never refused the choice. I always said yes, you can play against us. Even though, one time, Francis Jeffers I think was on loan and scored against us.

“I allowed Jermaine Pennant to play against us with Leeds and I always allowed the players to play. I would allow Bendtner to play too.”

It’s an interesting discussion but that rule is designed to remove any possible conflicts of interest. Would a player playing against his ‘own’ club on the final day of the season score a goal which might send them down or cost them the title? Despite the professionalism of most players, for this reason alone it’s probably worth maintaining the current rule.

However, Arseblog News believes that the loan rules do need to be changed, but not for this issue. What needs to change is the rule that allows a club like Sp*rs to take Emmanuel Adebayor on loan while paying just a fraction of his wages.

If Man City and other sugar-daddy clubs, for whom resources are nigh on endless, want to stockpile players then that’s entirely up to them. However, if they have a squad that’s too big and they need to send players on loan then the club taking the player should pay 100% of that player’s wages.

As it stands Man City are subsidising Sp*rs, the same way they did with Cardiff when sending Premier League quality Craig Bellamy to play for them last season. Every goal Adebayor scores against Man City’s rivals aids the club that owns him and surely this is a situation which has to be made more fair.

If a club can’t afford the wages of a particular player then they should not be allowed to sign him. Or the player in question should agree to a wage cut for the duration of that season (and knowing some players the way we do that’s never going to happen).

Adebayor is currently going through his ‘Look at me, I’m trying hard phase’ for Ken Dodd‘s team but that won’t last. And then he’ll go back to Man City, where he’s unwanted, and they’ll try and move him out again whilst soaking up the losses.

The big lanky lazy twat.

SIMILAR ARTICLES

42 COMMENTS

  1. “However, if they have a squad that’s too big and they need to send players on loan then the club taking the player should pay 100% of that player’s wages….If a club can’t afford the wages of a particular player then they should not be allowed to sign him. Or the player in question should agree to a wage cut for the duration of that season…”

    That actually makes a lot of sense. Brilliant idea.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1

    • Haven’t seen the article in question, but someone mentioned Adebayor saying something along the lines of ‘we (players) all only play to earn money’.

      That being the case, no further questions Your Honour, the man’s a cunt, as charged.

      Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5

      • It’s not something anybody wants to encourage, we all want to see footballers play for the joy of playing, and I really hate Adebayor, but how does playing for money make him a cunt? If you think of it logically, then he’s perfectly within his rights. He signed a contract to play football, not one to play football with x level of enthusiasm.

        Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

      • You’re absolutely right Feygooner, it’s his prerogative. However I’ve personally had it up to here with players, such as him, that we’ve had in the recent past where it’s all been about them, in a number of cases to the absolute detriment of The Arsenal. The list goes on and on.

        Give me the boys we’ve now got over any of them.

        And I’ll just re-phrase my initial judgement in that, notwithstanding his desire to only play for personal financial gain, which is his right, but conversely, taking a number of other offences into consideration, Adebayor is a cunt.

        Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1

    • i think it makes a lot of sense but not for the reasons outlined in the article, more because of the 25 player squad regulation.

      if citeh were forced to include all hughe’s hilarious buys in their squad, rather than simply offloading them and buying better replacements, imagine how fucked off mancini would be.

      and even if they tried selling adebayor for 2p, he’s on £170K a week. He’d do a winston bogarde before going to his boyhood love at the lane, no matter how fucking enthusiastic he is for them

      and citeh would be fucked.

      loans should be restricted to players below the age of 21 (or 25 if recovering from a serious injury) who have come through a club’s youth system.

      you should not be allowed to send out purchased players. that’s financial doping, baby!

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      • The point is that Citeh shouldn’t be allowed to buy a tonne of players and then loan them out, only to not be played against them. Hypothetically if Citeh were to loan out two or three very good players to mid-to-bottom clubs then they’d be taking points off of all of Citeh’s title rivals leaving them in the clear because those players wouldn’t be allowed to play against their parent club. It could realistically head in that direction, and it would be rigging the Premiership.

        Add that to their £400m blowjob naming rights and a new £200m kit deal they’re supposedly going to sign with Umbro and they’ve just “magically” banked over half a billion pounds whilst other clubs can barely get any financial investment.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  2. The loan system is nonsense in so many ways.I believe loans between premier league teams should be banned unless it is for experience.So if a young player has appeared in the premier league on no more than say five occasions that will be ok but people like Adebayor,Benoyoun,Bendtner etc should be properly signed or go on loan to a lower division team if they are prepared to.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

  3. Its simpler and more basic – players should not be loaned to clubs in the same competition/laegue. This removes any potential for manipulation of the competition either directly (a players actions in any specific game) or indirectly (by not playing against his parent club and thereby weakening the team and de-facto altering the level playing field). I agree that the loaning club should not be permitted to pay more than (say) 10% of his total renumeration packagae including any bonus or sponsorship deals the player has with any connected party to the club (avoids club sponsor paying player directly under the guise of a sponsorship deal). However the fundamental issue still remains that NO CLUB should be allowed to pay more than 60%(?) of their match day gate revenue in wages (and define wages as total taxable renumation including sponsorships a player gets).

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      • Don’t agree with you or Brian above – I think loaning players between teams is absolutely fine. Plus you couldn’t stop it even if you wanted to under EU freedom of movement regulations etc.

        Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

      • Don’t mean to argue but if players couldn’t go out on loan to clubs in the same league then Wilshere wouldn’t of gone to Bolton. There’s not much to disagree with there.

        Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • I think a 100% wage loan is very reasonable (between sides in the same league) while banning loans between same-division sides entirely feels much more absurd.

      Case in point: Jack Wilshere, Sturridge, etc.

      If the clubs can’t afford the players in the first place (i.e. Adebayor), then this would mean that they can’t. You’ve got to live within your means. If you pay only 30% of his wages and you get to play him for 1 full season, you pretty much have the parent club bankrolling you to win.

      The biggest problem is that the parent club will lose money from paying 70% of wages. Losing so much money would be fine if the player was being played regularly and is there only to gain experience, but when an unwanted play like Adebayor is sent there just to offload him, the parent club will then waste money for absolutely nothing (although Adebayor was ‘absolutely nothing’ in Man City either way).

      Something that is more reasonable would be the player accepting a paycut-loan, i.e. even if the borrowing club couldn’t pay his full wages but can only pay half and the player accepts the loan, the player will only receive whatever wage the borrowing club can offer. It is eventually up to the player whether or not they will accept the wage cut.

      This is much more logical and fair. It’s up to the players: do they value playing time or money more? It’s their turn to prioritize properly. Bellamy for example, said he uses his wages to pay for kids in Africa, so he obviously showed that he valued his wages very well.

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  4. If UEFA allow City and others to take the piss out of the financial fair play rules then who pays the loan player’s wages is pretty much irrelevant.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Just like you, I think that Wenger has got it totally wrong. It’s a clear conflict of interest when an on-loan player plays against his ‘parent’ club. How can you be certain that he is going to give his best against a club that is possibly paying some of his wages? And I don’t agree that an on-loan player should play in the same division as his parent club. Why should Adebayor be able to play and score against us, in the Premier League, but not against one of our biggest rivals, Man City?

    By the way: I fancy us to win 3-1 tonight and book our passage into the knock-out stages.

    PS. Wouldn’t it be great if both City and United ended up in The Thursday Night Club next year?

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

    • I can’t recall ever watching a match on a Thursday and I’m not about to start anytime soon, but the knowledge that Nasri is playing, while I’m tucking into my Thursday night Spag Bol, will warm the cockles.

      Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0

  6. If Ade scores goals and as a result Sp*rs end up taking points of Man Citys direct competition for the domestic titles they may well view playing 80% of his wages as a brilliant investment… and not “wasting” money as some suggest.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  7. There are two sides to that “final day” argument.

    Let’s look at the other one. Say you are minnow club X who have a player on loan from one of the big boys. Said loan player has become your most influential midfield provider.
    Final day of the season, you get to play his home club. They’re fourth in the league, six points clear of fifth and four shy of third.

    You need three points to stay up and the current rules have just made it that much harder to get ‘em.

    The argument in favour relies on a club who are poor enough to possibly go down: a) loaning out a good player and b) not recalling him when it all goes obviously pear-shaped. i.e. they’d not only have to be shit, they’d have to be run by utter bleedin’ idiots too.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • you can only imagine that citeh loaness would be motivated as fuck to help anyone other than citeh

      after all, from being £170K a week king pin, adebayor is now behind tevez in the opinion of mancini

      so i can’t imagine he’d be wanting to do them any favours at all. quite the reverse, in fact.

      same with god’s fucking gift, let’s face it. he’d want to “prove” that being on the flank was wrong and stick one to wenger. he’d hardly be motivated to help us out, the ungrateful sod.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. I don’t think Adebayor should be allowed to play for The Scum because A- he’s a cunt and B- they are cunts, and as they saying goes, two cunts don’t make a right…..or something like that.

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1

  9. I guess this whole thing is a bit of a mess really. Someone’s not going to be happy, whatever they do.
    If they’re asking teams to fork out a players entire wages for a loan, then there would be complaints if this were only the case for Premier League clubs. Championship clubs and below would suffer if they couldn’t afford to bring in a Premiership starlet here and there, and I can imagine this giving shitter teams like Sunderland the arsehole as they wouldn’t get their obligatory United players on loan every season.

    I can’t see them changing the rule on who you can and can’t sign, but I do think that players should be allowed to play against their parent clubs. Surely it should be up to the coach of the side they are on loan to who decides whether the player would still do a job against their parent club, then, if they don’t perform it’s their own fault for picking them.

    Also, would the player not feel driven to perform so they stand a better chance of being picked when they return?

    It does seem unfair that a team like City could potentially just buy a load of superstars and then just loan them out and get them to fuck up all the other teams who might be a threat. It’s going to be tough to stop it though. Money talks unfortunately.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  10. I just want to add something to feygooners comment/question about what makes Adebayor a cunt.

    Simple really. The fact he’s a cunt makes him a cunt. I thought that when he was wearing our shirt and I still think it now. The man has only one redeeming feature; he put Bendtner on his arse.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • I didn’t say I didn’t hate him. I said that I don’t believe playing football for money automatically makes you a cunt.

      Also, the exact quote is “We all play football to gain money”.

      If you want to hate Adebayor and call him a cunt, then do so because of his vindictive stamp on RvP a few seasons ago, or his apparent belief/sucking up to City fans when he said that Arsenal don’t have true fans cause lots of gooners are from Asia (or something similiar, I don’t remember exactly).

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. The whole situation is a mess concerning loan players. It’s a romantic view that all players would be professional in a game against their parent club but there will always be that doubt if a striker misses an ‘easy’ opportunity or a defender/goalkeeper gets himself sent off for a professional foul giving away a penalty.

    Clubs like Man Shitty loaning out players and still paying out 70% of their wages is not a loss if the player is never going to be playing against them but is free for selection against everyone else. S***s are not direct rivals of Man Shitty but can help them towards their goal of winning the Premiership or a Cup. Is the loan of Adebarndoor giving Man Shitty an unfair advantage? What is there to stop them stockpiling talent (hate to use that term in the same sentance as Adebarndoor) and loaning them out to most of the teams in the Premiership apart from their obvious competition? I realise it’s a ridiculous notion but it is open to abuse.

    Looking at the other side of the coin a loan is valuable tool for a young player to gain experience at a club playing regularly where it might not be possible otherwise. Cover for players that may have long term injury, a player to put himself in the shop window or short term solution to problem (e.g too late to purchase a player).

    There is no workable solution to this, I have to agree with Wenger all loan player should be available for selection against their parent clubs and any team taking on a loan player should remunerate the player in full and not be subsidised by the parent club in any way or be given incentives or ‘sweeteners’ offered by the parent club to loan club or vice versa. For financial fair play to work effectively the parent club has to be more careful in signing players. If the parent club cannot loan a player then they will be counted towards the quota of players if loan club cannot afford the wages of the player they cannot loan the player. This will be harsh on clubs looking for that ‘special’ talent to push them for promotion or a European place but they will have to learn to live within their means.

    Also does it seem strange that a cunt is doing tricks for a cock and getting paid for said service? Isn’t there a term for that?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. My opinion is the players must not be allowed on loan in the same league as the parent club. A portion of all loan fees received by the parent club must be shared by the teams in the league accepting the loanee. This will ensure that the parent clubs are penalised reasonably for the excess players or for the ‘training facility’ of the hosting league. The wealth of the club should not give the club undue advantage. The profitable trading (needs to be monitored) of the club should have an impact on final position in the league.

    There should be a limit of 5 loan players from any parent club.

    10% of league points (12 points) should be available pro rata to clubs that show a net profit on investment and similarly deducted pro rata from clubs that make a loss. The deduction of points from clubs going into receivership should be revised and only profit / loss be considered.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0