RevidgeBlue

Agreed. I don't see how it can be. What happens in practice is the big Clubs have loan managers who monitor the progress of their loanees and recall them if they're not happy with their progress or lack of game time. People just said that about Morton because they couldn't believe how he'd been so shite and was still starting every week and/or how he was keeping Adam Wharton out of the side. And given how Wharton has excelled in whatever environment he's been in when playing those people were right I'd say. Morton also looked like he'd had enough of being here last time by about December imo. Hopefully just a random suggestion that's gained legs and got everyone aereated unnecessarily.

It's a game of opinions, a lot of managers here seemingly rated Jason Lowe and Corry Evans as well. When did he make those appearances for Liverpool? In the EFL Cup?

I'd rather rely on unleaded's info. Earth calling "International Rescue. Come in please." There was another chap as well who was always extremely positive and according to him everything was always hunky dory behind the scenes and everyone we signed was always a good signing in his eyes. Can't remember his username. Whereas unleaded used to tell us what was really going on and invariably painted a picture of complete chaos behind the scenes. Lol.

They didn't get a "hands off - he's ours" then. Fairly predictably.

He doesn't get any game time whatsoever at Liverpool according to Wikipedia and rightly so he's rubbish.

Reserve defender from Coventry, Tyler the crab Morton - this is all getting extremely depressing.

I actually thought he was making a joke about Tronstad.

Seconded.

We can't let Leonard go at the moment without probably two coming in that are an upgrade on him. So of course we probably will.

And which doesn't even matter anyway because they only have to give personal guarantees if they want to send any money over.

Tyler Morton - for the love of God, No.

Explained earlier. Someone said words to the effect that savvy owners wouldn't have to fund losses. I replied that was "optimistic" (meaning I think the Club would take a while to turn round due to the state the V's would no doubt leave it in and that any new owners would have to tolerate losses for a period no matter how clever they were)

Aunty, balls, uncle. You're talking about something completely different to the point I was trying to make.

At this point, no idea what you're on about. Original point: "Savvy owners wouldn't need to fund losses" To which I disagreed and to which you now seem to be agreeing with me. I'll leave it there.

Cheers. I think I might have been looking at FIFA regs which seemingly required 28 days notice before you get get the player back.

Not sure the actual ability or value for money of the player is the main point here, which is those 2 Clubs obviously fancy him and think he will improve their fortunes and are making an effort accordingly whereas us....... *Tumbleweed*

Surprised, when I've seen bits of him.on TV I thought he looked lethal.

I think he's a really good player. Do you not?

Again don't disagree - we've been a selling club and not the trading club we need to be obviously - but that wasn't the point I was making. At best there would still be quite a turn round period when not insubstantial losses would be incurred and need to be covered imo.

Meanwhile in the real world Middlesbrough have accepted bids of £5m from Luton and (ironically) WBA for Issiah Jones. And we are doing.......what?

I couldn't agree more with that analysis.

That wasn't the point under debate. The proposition I was replying to was that savvy owners (i.e. not Venky's) wouldn't have to fund losses. They would for quite a while imo.

Thanks. Do you know if players can be recalled instantly or if there is a minimum notice period?

We haven't got any Szmodics' or Wharton's left to sell. New owners would still have to find that £10m (at least) plus cover annual operating losses for a while

I think that's a fairly optimistic take.