Loans

[saintkiptanui]

Do we have to pay the full wage of loans if we got some in?? If we do sell a few more we will be short, surely getting some decent nippers from the premiership is all we can do.

[Rasiak-9-]

I was actually talking to a Fulham supporting friend of mine on this very subject.

 

He said that if they're willing to let Omozusi go on loan to Norwich then most of the fans would be cool with us having Baird on a season-long loan. Sunderland also have a massive squad of good c/ship players that aren't up to Prem standard - so i'm sure we could find a few in there. We really need a couple of decent full-backs more than anything.

[Fowllyd]

Do we have to pay the full wage of loans if we got some in?? If we do sell a few more we will be short, surely getting some decent nippers from the premiership is all we can do.

 

What we pay will always depend on the loan agreement - in other words, it varies. If a club is keen to get a player out on loan they'll often agree to pay some of his wages. Not sure about getting in young players from Premiership clubs - with our much-vaunted emphasis on youth, I don't think there'd be any point in bringing in young loanees from elsewhere. It would surely make more sense for us to have a few old pros about the place who can give us that extra level of experience when it's needed, though I guess this would only work if we don't have to pay all of their wages.

[Saint_clark]

The only way we would get discounted wages on a loan is if it was written into the contract that they would be guaranteed a place in the squad of 16 when fit.

[saintkiptanui]

The only way we would get discounted wages on a loan is if it was written into the contract that they would be guaranteed a place in the squad of 16 when fit.

You know this as a fact do you?? Some people really do talk some sh*t.

[TopGun]

You know this as a fact do you?? Some people really do talk some sh*t.

 

If all players wore discounted Merrells, money would be saved, their feet would be in better condition and they would play more attractive football. Loans is a myth.

[stevegrant]

Do we have to pay the full wage of loans if we got some in?? If we do sell a few more we will be short, surely getting some decent nippers from the premiership is all we can do.

As has already been said, it depends on the agreement reached between the two clubs. I'm not aware of any deals where the "owner" club has actually been able to force the loaning club to play the player if he's available. That sounds like complete nonsense to me. It's entirely up to the manager if he wants to pick the player or not.

[Saint_clark]

You know this as a fact do you?? Some people really do talk some sh*t.

 

No, it is my opinion. I never stated it as fact.

A club either loans out a player to get them off the wage bill or give them match practice - they wouldn't say "take our player on loan and we'll pay half of his wages". The only reason they might do that is if said player was on a very high wage (£20,000 a week or more), and we wouldn't be able to afford half of that.

[Saint_clark]

As has already been said, it depends on the agreement reached between the two clubs. I'm not aware of any deals where the "owner" club has actually been able to force the loaning club to play the player if he's available. That sounds like complete nonsense to me. It's entirely up to the manager if he wants to pick the player or not.

 

I'm not saying it happens very often, if at all, I was getting more at the fact that (IMO) clubs very rarely pay the wages of a player they have loaned out.

[stevegrant]

I'm not saying it happens very often, if at all, I was getting more at the fact that (IMO) clubs very rarely pay the wages of a player they have loaned out.

It depends on a) the player, and b) the club they're loaning the player to.

 

Bournemouth don't have a penny to spend (9 players on their payroll, apparently), so every loan player they get in is paid by the owner club. They tend to get the loans from clubs who can afford a few hundred pounds a week in order for their youngster to get some first-team football lower down the football pyramid.

 

I would hazard a guess that Richard Wright, who must have been on at least £20k a week at West Ham, was at least paid in part by West Ham while he was on loan here last season. Or at least I'd bloody well hope he was, given our situation!