That's the main point. According to the reports, there is no such clause and he'll report back to Madrid next season.
Nuri Sahin
- Thread starter SiYuan
- Start date
That's the main point. According to the reports, there is no such clause and he'll report back to Madrid next season.
What...
It's quite rare for a top player to be loaned to another top club, unless you're in Italy where all sorts of bizarre transfer stuff goes on.
That said, if we can get Sahin on loan, I'd be more than happy. Maybe in a year we could negotiate depending on how successful he's been.
That said, if we can get Sahin on loan, I'd be more than happy. Maybe in a year we could negotiate depending on how successful he's been.
If we are unable to find a CM we want to buy, or if Fergie has a target that will only become available next year, then a loan deal could make sense. "Better than nothing" is a good reason to sign someone if "nothing" is the alternative.
If there are better, more experienced players available for loan then great, but I don't know that there are, and Sahin isn't an unproven, injury prone teenager like you seem to be suggesting.
The fact that it benefits Madrid is completely irrelevant for me. If it benefits us, even if only short term, then I'd have no problem with it. I think there is no chance of it happening btw, but not because it'd be 'madness'.
I was racking my brain for any examples but all I could come up with was that Romelu(?) bloke who Barca loaned to Chelsea. Who contributed little or nothing to their campaign last season. I certainly can't think of any such loan deal which worked out well for both parties.
Romeu was sold with a buy-back option. Benayoun was loaned to Arsenal from Chelsea last season, hehe.
Ibrahimovic to Milan though.
Baptista to Arsenal from Real and Reyes to Real from Arsenal are two examples I can think of.
Romelu was a permanent transfer.
Romelu was a permanent transfer.
Ibrahimovic to Milan.
Adebayor to Spurs surely counts?
Fair enough if that is a sticking point.
How many examples are there of a player doing well on loan and then joining?
I just want United to strengthen the midfield areas and Sahin seems like a prudent option.
Yeah, I think the majority here want the same. But I don't want to have a Real Madrid player on loan knowing that he will probably go back to Real the next season and benefit them.
As long as he benefits us in the meantime, i don't see what difference it would make where he ends up after that. Bottom line we could do with a player who can cover what both Scholes and Carrick contribute. Sahin is that man.
He has done it for Dortmund, and can do it again for us. In a loan deal even for a season, the beauty would be we would not be dependent on him, as he would probably only be used to cover Scholes or Carrick occasionally. But if he were to return to the form he showed at Dortmund he could be a fantastic player for us, and once he had a taste of OT, he may want to stay, who knows?
For me there are far more positives than negatives to him coming here on loan. Some posters are talking as though he has been injury prone for years, he has had one injury blighted season, in an otherwise very impressive and successful start to his career.
Why? It's not like we play them a lot. Isn't it 10 years since we actually had a competitive game against them?
If it was a domestic club then I'd say no way, but Sahin would definitely benefit our team and seeing as SAF said winning the league back is his priority then I see no reason why we shouldn't loan him.
Unless 'pride' comes into it.
If he leaves of loan anyway, then why not to us rather than someone else? If leaves on loan, then someone else is doing the same something (as in kinda improving him) and benefiting from having him. We might as well make use of him for one year.
And madrid
Loan deals should be restricted to under 23/ under 21 year olds in my opinion. When teams like City start vacuuming up talent and the loaning it out it distorts the league. Adebayor was Spurs top scorer last season, but didn't play in the two matches against City. Imagine if City keep doing that? They could loan Ade out again to Spurs, loan Santa Cruz to, say, Norwich or somewhere, loan Adam Johnson to Liverpool and so forth - then they'd be playing weaker teams than the rest of the league.
It's not why the loan system was created.
It's not why the loan system was created.
Absolutely this. Shame there's no talk/pressure on the FA to look into this.
I remember the same criticism of us in the Tim Howard Everton loan case.
Make the loan players part of the "25 man list" of both clubs and it'll reduce the temptation to buy players as spoilers. But a blanket ban on loans for older players seems wrong. There's loads of reasons why players get loaned out including giving them a shop window prior to sale. Arguing that an Adebayor or a Sahin "should have known better" doesn't seem like a good enough reason to stop it.
Wasn't the criticism there that Everton seemed not to be playing Howard against us after we'd sold him?
That as well. A gentleman's agreement not to use him against us - despite him being sold to them mid-season.
I think there's a point to be made that that's a bit different than a loan deal.
It started as a loan deal. The point is that even older players sometimes need to be loaned out and a blanket ban on over 23s (he was 27) isn't really a desirable option. We were also criticised over the Ben Foster Watford loan, because he was playing well for them and couldn't play against us - though he was only 23/24 (Sahin age) when that ended.
As long as loans are allowed the system is open to criticism - Wenger was critical of it just last season. But if the criticism is that a club like City (or Real Madrid) could horde up players just to loan them out, then insisting even a loaned out player counts as part of the squad can minimise that danger.
Close to a season long loan with arse with no option to buy.
Don't think this will happen before Madrid snatches up Modric.
Galatasary are now claiming they are close to completing a deal.
What a waste it'd be.
loan?
he's never played in the country of his heritage so he might really like the experience.
Good of you to share those voices in your head. If they tell you to drop the baby out of the window, don't.
SAF not getting a midfielder again. Time to move on. Its Cleverley and Ando. Hope they stay fit.
I am afraid that by January we will be relying heavily on our nearly 40 year olds once more.
Fergies always talking about value and here's the chance to pick up a much needed CM at a cut price.
If we don't sign a CM I (along with alot of the caf) am just gonna commit suicide.
If we don't sign a CM I (along with alot of the caf) am just gonna commit suicide.
I just don't understand even if Ando and Cleverley remain fit we will still need cover for Carrick the one player we can't replace in our squad.
I just don't get SAF thinking on this anymore.
Has a price been mentioned?
All I'm hearing about is a 12 month loan deal with no option of making it permanent.
His plan is obviously different than people on web forums who think they know best.
But just as a backup for Carrick you think it would be worth it? I have little faith in Fletcher returning and Jones is no way good enough.
One injury to Carrick and who is going to play there?
If we don't sign anyone I can only assume Fergie has more faith in Fletcher and/or Jones making a contribution than you do.
Goes without saying, I have a lot more faith in his judgement than I do in yours.
Goes without saying, I have a lot more faith in his judgement than I do in yours.
I was just questioning his reason but if you want unquestioning loyalty its no wonder hearts and minds campaign isnt working out too great.
Well time will tell. We don't have anymore ex players to call out of retirement if we get into trouble this time around.
What if Sir Alex does not rate him?