[Jonstone]

Should one premiership side be allowed to loan a player to another side?

The last game between Man Utd and everton showed how this can be a problem with Tim Howard unable to play for everton.

This means that one side can field a better side against every other team in the premiership than the one they got the loan player from.

This seems like an unfair advantage for the team loaning the player, especially if that player is such an important part of the other team

Of course. I think managers would rather have the player's services at their disposal for the entire season bar those two or three matches where their team plays the team which loaned them the player. Than not have those services at all.

And of course, it's only natural that the player cannot be allowed to be fielded against his original team, because he is after all their player at the end of the day.

Quite simple really. A loaned player is a favour from another club to cover for one of your positions which lack cover/adequate ability, which surely is more important than not being able to play for those few matches against his own team.

No?

[Jonstone]

Originally Posted by larzhin

Quite simple really. A loaned player is a favour from another club to cover for one of your positions which lack cover/adequate ability, which surely is more important than not being able to play for those few matches against his own team.

No?

The question is not whether it is fair for the team gaining the loan player, but more about whether it is fair for every other team in the premiership that they have to play against a stronger team than the team lending the player

[KevD]

What if Phil Neville was not a permanant signing but only on loan from Man U. There would have been questions, rightly or wrongly, as to what happened.

Or If Ben Foster was allowed to play in the FA Cup semi against Man U and dropped a last minute howler like he did a couple of weeks later, same again.

Its just to make fair for ALL teams maybe at the expense of the team loaning the player, but Everton knew when signing him on loan that Howard would not be eligble to play,

[Steven]

And Moyes chose to play the inexperienced youngster as opposed to the experienced old hands (comparatively) on standby. That is also another factor to consider

[johnscarlet]

The rules have only recently been changed to allow players to be loaned to other Prem clubs . IMHO Loaning to clubs in other leagues is ok , but same leagues is wrong . For the same reasons that West Ham are being punished . 3rd parties being able to influence games

[jason g]

chelsea at one time had 3 players to other clubs.
i also remember when chelsea bought a russian who went to play for someone straight away on loan.
complete joke.
the guy played for portsmouth at some point i remember.

[Marc]

part of the reason the new loan rules came in was because clubs like man utd, arsenal, chelsea or liverpool couldn't loan their players out because some of their reserves are too good for lower league football, and they would be wasting their time sending them there. Sending them to other premier league teams at least means they learn to play against quality opposition. Despite being in a relegated side, Ben Foster will have got valuable experience this season which will help him become United's number 1. Playing against Leeds and Southend would have been an exercise in futility.