Man City Ask To Break Simple Rules

[EastStandBlue]

Just what is it with Premier League clubs having a very limited understanding of just how transfer windows work? If it isn't Portsmouth asking for permission to sell players just because they're skint, it's Man City begging to sign a 'keeper.

Due to some remarkable oversight, when Shay Given dislocated his shoulder diving to his left, Gunnar Nielsen became the first Faroan to play in the Premier League and the only fit, senior goalkeeper at the club.

Joe Hart is busy tearing up trees at Birmingham, unable to be recalled, and Stuart Taylor is still recovering from knee surgery following a particularly nasty injury sustained earlier on in the season. Whereas the Football League clubs are allowed to organise so-called "emergency loans" up until March, clubs in the Premier League are thought to be so well managed that a situation like this would never occur.

Regular clubs, those seemingly with executives possessing the ability to read, would go about their business knowing such a situation is resolved quite easily by promoting a youth goalkeeper to "bench warmer" in the hugely unlikely event that yet another goalkeeper picks up an injury. Few clubs would probably have a problem with City signing a temporary, senior stalwart to warm the bench while Nielsen dons the number one shirt, although I highly doubt this is the clubs intention.

With vital games coming up in their quest for fourth, not least the decisive game against Tottenham, City can ill afford to rely on a completely inexperienced goalkeeper... Especially taking into consideration the defensive short fallings the team have suffered despite an investment exceeding £50m.

 

[MrB]

Pains me to say it but I really want Spurs to beat Man City to that 4th place. In an ideal world it would be Villa but I think those home draws with Wolves and Sunderland have cost them dear.

Why should they be allowed?

City need permission from the Premier League to allow them to bring in another goalkeeper outside of the transfer window. The club have made an official request, backing up their claim with medical statements.

Set a precedent like this and Man Utd will be giving medical statements about Rooney and Owen's fitness to suddenly bring in a striker for the run in!!

I sincerely hope the Premier League tells them where to go but I suspect they won't. Money talks and right now Man City can shout loudest.

 

[Pubey]

exactly. they have 3 senior keepers. 2 are injured. I don't see why they need an emergency loan, just because they don't have faith in their back-up back-up keeper.

 

[chapperzUK]

Didn't Villa get an emergency loan when 3 of their keepers got injured. I remember them getting the pyjama keeper on loan.

 

[EastStandBlue]

Didn't Villa get an emergency loan when 3 of their keepers got injured. I remember them getting the pyjama keeper on loan.

I don't think that was with just two matches to play, and City still have a fit senior 'keeper available... It's just they don't rate him.

 

[chapperzUK]

I don't think that was with just two matches to play, and City still have a fit senior 'keeper available... It's just they don't rate him.

It was in December and they got him for a month. Gabor Kiraly was his name.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Shouldn't be allowed, they have a fit and able 'keeper in Nielsen.

Would be a different story if all the keepers were out through suspension or injury.

Tough **** City, get on with it.

 

[Davros]

that or they should have added a re-call clause to Harts loan, who is without a doubt the best keeper in the prem this term

 

[Clinton Baptiste]

A disgrace if they are allowed. They have a keeper, if theyre stupid enough to not have sufficient back up if Given gets injured then thats their fault. As has been said, would set a dangerous precedent and Spurs and the other contenders for 4th would be rightly furious if a keeper came in and put in performances that helped them seal 4th spot.

 

[Beefy]

I'm surprised that this is such a controversy. I thought that everyone knows that keepers are an exception - I remember FIFA confirming before the last World Cup that they'd allow teams to call up an emergency keeper if they piked up a couple of injuries.

What is the alternative? Teams hoarding four or five decent keepers doesn't do anyone any good. Those players won't get games, they can't play different positions like outfield players can and clearly it wouldn't be the likes of Man City who would suffer were there not loop-holes like this - it would be Clubs at our level who would have to get a lower standard of keeper as all the bigger Clubs keep goalkeepers on their books.

This isn't setting a precedent. It's maintaining an established precedent.

Regular clubs, those seemingly with executives possessing the ability to read, would go about their business knowing such a situation is resolved quite easily by promoting a youth goalkeeper to "bench warmer" in the hugely unlikely event that yet another goalkeeper picks up an injury..

No they wouldn't. They'd do exactly what City are doing. Which is exactly what Villa did a couple of years back. Which is exactly what several League Clubs have done in the past when they have picked up injuries to goalkeepers outside of the transfer window.

 

[BoyWonder2]

A disgrace if they are allowed. They have a keeper, if theyre stupid enough to not have sufficient back up if Given gets injured then thats their fault. As has been said, would set a dangerous precedent and Spurs and the other contenders for 4th would be rightly furious if a keeper came in and put in performances that helped them seal 4th spot.

I'd hardly call it a disgrace. Many Clubs have exploited this ruling as goalkeepers are always the exception to the rule.

Its been going on for years. Jimmy Glass, the goalkeeper that kept Carlisle up, was actually an "emergency loan" signing.

If, when Jack was out injured for a couple of weeks, Mildenhall picked up an injury or a suspension we'd be doing our nut in with Tilson if he didn't go out and get a goalkeeper and left just Bentley.

City are doing nothing wrong in my eyes. They have 3 good goalkeepers at the Club, one they allowed out on loan to Birmingham, one is out with a knee injury and the other just picked up a shoulder injury. They had sufficient cover. I'd agrue the only thing they have done wrong is not putting a re-call option in Joe Hart's loan deal.

that or they should have added a re-call clause to Harts loan, who is without a doubt the best keeper in the prem this term

Best English goalkeeper possibly, but Reina has been much better than Hart. I'm not knocking Hart as he will prove to be a top, top goalkeeper in the future but to suggest he is better, or even having a better season that Riena is a bit bizarre.

 

[EastStandBlue]

I'm surprised that this is such a controversy. I thought that everyone knows that keepers are an exception - I remember FIFA confirming before the last World Cup that they'd allow teams to call up an emergency keeper if they piked up a couple of injuries.

What is the alternative? Teams hoarding four or five decent keepers doesn't do anyone any good. Those players won't get games, they can't play different positions like outfield players can and clearly it wouldn't be the likes of Man City who would suffer were there not loop-holes like this - it would be Clubs at our level who would have to get a lower standard of keeper as all the bigger Clubs keep goalkeepers on their books.

This isn't setting a precedent. It's maintaining an established precedent.

No they wouldn't. They'd do exactly what City are doing. Which is exactly what Villa did a couple of years back. Which is exactly what several League Clubs have done in the past when they have picked up injuries to goalkeepers outside of the transfer window.

I'm not doubting the precedent set with the Villa example... They had three senior goalkeepers injured at the time and their only other option was a teenager without a start to his name.

The problem here, for me at least, is that City have a perfectly viable goalkeeper in Nielsen, who is 24 and an International (albeit for the Faroe Islands), and they're overlooking him because of a lack of confidence in his ability. I wouldn't have a problem with them bringing another senior goalkeeper in on loan to play second fiddle to Nielsen, but this won't be the case and City will more than likely use this opportunity to bring in a tried and tested option.

It's set to be granted by all accounts, but I can't see who in their right mind would loan City a goalkeeper at this stage of the season. The only two EPL clubs with more than two senior goalkeepers are United (VDS, Kucszack, Foster) and Chelsea (Cech, Hilario, Turnbull)... And I can't see either of them assisting Money Bags in their search for Champions League football.

 

[Beefy]

The only reason that they've only got the lad from the Faroe's on the books is because Clubs know that they can get another option on loan if they need one. If this rule wasn't around City would have had another keeper on the books. That's why only two Premier League Clubs have more than two senior keepers according to you.

As for who they sign, the rumour seems to be one of the guys at Sunderland, but I wouldn't be surprised to see David James go up there for a few weeks. Seems to be the ideal fit, for me. Gets City a top keeper, gets a big earner off the wagebill, gets James a higher profile for a couple of weeks as he tries to nail down that World Cup spot and then he can come back for the Final at Wembley.

 

[EastStandBlue]

As for who they sign, the rumour seems to be one of the guys at Sunderland, but I wouldn't be surprised to see David James go up there for a few weeks. Seems to be the ideal fit, for me. Gets City a top keeper, gets a big earner off the wagebill, gets James a higher profile for a couple of weeks as he tries to nail down that World Cup spot and then he can come back for the Final at Wembley.

Probably a good shout, that... Especially if it meant Pompey gathering a nominal fee for his services. Thankfully for Portsmouth, they're in a position to hold City over a barrel and get something like £200-500k for his services.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Man City will be allowed to bring a keeper on loan.

 

[chapperzUK]

Man City will be allowed to bring a keeper on loan.

Thats a shame, hope they get 6th still.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Man City have now contacted Birmingham about recalling Hart.

 

[chapperzUK]

Man City have now contacted Birmingham about recalling Hart.

IF

a) Birmingham agree and
b) The Premierleague allow it to happen

then it could be good for Hart to show what he can do. Birmingham will want to sign him, but Man City will want to keep him.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

IF

a) Birmingham agree and
b) The Premierleague allow it to happen

then it could be good for Hart to show what he can do. Birmingham will want to sign him, but Man City will want to keep him.

Can't see Birmingham agreeing to it, he's been there player of the season by a country mile.

 

[chapperzUK]

Can't see Birmingham agreeing to it, he's been there player of the season by a country mile.

The Premierleague will agree as they want to suck up to the big clubs. Birmingham may agree if they could agree a deal to have Hart in the future. Their next games are Burnley home and Bolton away and they are 9th in the league at the moment.