by Sun Tzu » 22 Aug 2010 20:32
by Wycombe Royal » 23 Aug 2010 09:24
Sun Tzu I'm conused.
How can a 28 day loan player not be recalled for 30 days ?
by sheshnu » 23 Aug 2010 10:46
The Regulations of the Football League Ltd 48.1.3 The Short term loan of a goalkeeper may be subject to a recall clause (including within the original 28 days) but this may only be implemented in exceptional circumstances with the consent of the Executive.
by Stranded » 23 Aug 2010 11:14
sheshnu I doubt this would apply here, butThe Regulations of the Football League Ltd 48.1.3 The Short term loan of a goalkeeper may be subject to a recall clause (including within the original 28 days) but this may only be implemented in exceptional circumstances with the consent of the Executive.
by brendywendy » 23 Aug 2010 11:23
by Kitson12 » 23 Aug 2010 12:03
by Hoop Blah » 23 Aug 2010 12:08
by Stranded » 23 Aug 2010 12:11
by brendywendy » 23 Aug 2010 12:14
Hoop Blah The backup wingers are nowhere near McAnuff's quality and if we lose him without replacing him with sufficient quality then it won't matter who we get in at centre back we'll be on a hiding to nothing.
by Terminal Boardom » 23 Aug 2010 12:16
by under the tin » 23 Aug 2010 12:35
brendywendyHoop Blah The backup wingers are nowhere near McAnuff's quality and if we lose him without replacing him with sufficient quality then it won't matter who we get in at centre back we'll be on a hiding to nothing.
disagree
with sigurdson on the wing, kebe opposite
and two strikers everybodys happy
by Hoop Blah » 23 Aug 2010 12:57
brendywendyHoop Blah The backup wingers are nowhere near McAnuff's quality and if we lose him without replacing him with sufficient quality then it won't matter who we get in at centre back we'll be on a hiding to nothing.
disagree
with sigurdson on the wing, kebe opposite
and two strikers everybodys happy
by Hoop Blah » 23 Aug 2010 12:59
Stranded Depends what McAnuff we are left with, should he stay. If it's the completely disinterested waster we saw on Saturday then we're be better off with the money and finding a replacement.
If we can get back the McAnuff we had in the back end of last year, then he needs to stay.
by Stranded » 23 Aug 2010 13:09
Hoop BlahStranded Depends what McAnuff we are left with, should he stay. If it's the completely disinterested waster we saw on Saturday then we're be better off with the money and finding a replacement.
If we can get back the McAnuff we had in the back end of last year, then he needs to stay.
Really? I thought he was by far our most effective attacking player on Saturday.
by CMRoyal » 23 Aug 2010 13:25
StrandedHoop BlahStranded Depends what McAnuff we are left with, should he stay. If it's the completely disinterested waster we saw on Saturday then we're be better off with the money and finding a replacement.
If we can get back the McAnuff we had in the back end of last year, then he needs to stay.
Really? I thought he was by far our most effective attacking player on Saturday.
Really? I thought it was one of his worst performances - joys of football huh that two people can have such polar positions on a player's performance.
by RobRoyal » 23 Aug 2010 14:12
CMRoyalStrandedHoop Blah
Really? I thought he was by far our most effective attacking player on Saturday.
Really? I thought it was one of his worst performances - joys of football huh that two people can have such polar positions on a player's performance.
Two, three, four...an infinite number of opinions. Mine is he was poor, but certainly not disinterested. He always battles hard enough, but remains annoyingly inconsistent on the ball. We needed him on Saturday - he was the one up against an average player. But he was completely off his game offensively.
by CMRoyal » 23 Aug 2010 14:55
RobRoyalCMRoyalStranded Really? I thought it was one of his worst performances - joys of football huh that two people can have such polar positions on a player's performance.
Two, three, four...an infinite number of opinions. Mine is he was poor, but certainly not disinterested. He always battles hard enough, but remains annoyingly inconsistent on the ball. We needed him on Saturday - he was the one up against an average player. But he was completely off his game offensively.
To be fair, he was coming back from a knock wasn't he?
by Top Flight » 23 Aug 2010 14:57
by Hoop Blah » 23 Aug 2010 15:18
by CMRoyal » 23 Aug 2010 15:20
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 82 guests