"Loophole" set to be closed.

http://www.london24.com/sport/champ..._palace_manager_s_watford_criticism_1_2225405

Lots of reference to Watford's "exploitation" of the situation and that Holloway had the last laugh etc.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...eague-set-to-close-loan-loophole-8647540.html
http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/article/360/8759953/-
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/loan-system-set-to-be-tightened-up-8647604.html

Watford ARE public enemy number 1.

 

Crikey. Could you be any more dramatic? There's nothing new there really.

 

Who cares if we aren't popular media darlings. I'd rather be in our current position than back 12 months ago under Baz

 

I wish I could cut-and-paste as well as those journos. But surely Watford aren't public enemy number 1, Moog is. Or Bas. I can never remember which is which.

 

I predict next to come will be a statement from a gloating Holloway, comment from Martin Samuel, the West Ham blogger and a few numpties from other clubs coming onto the forum basically saying ha ha you've got what you deserved what are you going to do now.

 

Hasn't the "loophole" been set to be closed since about January? Holloway said way before the AGM that the loophole had already been condemned, and some people seem to think it was closed part-way through the season to start next season.

 

Do these journalists actually get paid for that. All three are exactly, word for word, the same

 

This has come up on BBC as well: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22800755

Basically saying very little that hasn't already been said and condemning us as the scourge of modern football.

I for one am in favour of them closing the 'loophole'. Will stop Napoli B bringing in loads of dirty Neopolitans into the league, I mean how are our honest lads from Fruili supposed to get a look in?!

 

So we know nothing new or is this the official result ?

 

I wont apologise for getting annoyed by constantly reading this type of slanted, anti-Watford crap. Why are we seen as the bad guys when Watford have played within the rules? We've exploited nothing, it's the Football League that should be getting pelters if the footballing family think it's unfair. We are operating within the same rules and regulations as everyone else.

I don't see too much bad press over West Ham and the taxpayer paying for their new ground. I don't see too much about the corruption within FIFA. These are things within the game which I consider disgraceful, not a club that conducts itself within the rules.

 

Nothing new. It's simply that the 'loophole' is the story of the FL meeting. Nothing else really newsworthy likely to come out of it unless the vote of no confidence in chairman Greg Clarke is passed.

 

Enough of these threads.

The media don't like us, I get it.

The loophole is being closed. It's already been well documented.

We've seen it all before. No more please.

 

Oh no! It's not like we can't just buy the players now can we...

I just want the Pozzos to sort out our situation quickly, so that we can put to rest all this 'Watford r going down coz they ave no players' malarky

 

All of these stories are basically the same article almost word for word but nothing new same as with the BBC story. Just re-telling the same old story and quotes - lazy journalism. Let's wait for the vote

 

I don't understand where this confidence in the vote being passed is coming from. The only manager in the FL I can recall being vocal about the issue was Holloway, and he's no longer in it. Indeed, comments made in passing by managers of some other clubs indicated they were rather taken with the idea.

Can we really be so sure that clubs in League 1 and League 2 won't think this is actually a good system that can benefit them? I'm not sure how anyone can confidently predict overwhelming support. I'm sure that not all of the turkeys are going to vote for Christmas. If I was a chairman in League 2, there is no way I would vote against this; I'd be working hard to establish links with a foreign side or two in order to benefit the club.

 

No need to fret. I would see that there will be some curtailment of the foreign player loan rule, but we will simply work around it. Signing players permanently with a 50% kick back to Udinese or granada if we sell them in the future (and vice versa regarding watford players). There is no way that the league clubs will wish to restrict loan signings generally. Possible, we are restricted to 5 loan players on the pitch, 2 from any one club. It just means that the structures of players transfers between the three clubs will have to altered. Perhaps Granada will buy more players with a view to loaning them to Watford. You can imagine that the season just gone by was experimental to a certain extent and the Pozzos will work within the rules that are put before them.

By the end of next season, this will be a non issue, Cyrstal Palace will be reeling from a record low points total, Holloway will be desperately searching for a credible job in league football, and we will be debating if Cassetti has one more year left in him for a stab at the Premiership.

 

How do journos with zero abilty find employment? There must be a loophole....

 

This isn't actually voted on until tomorrow, and even though the rule is expected to be changed, it's not certain yet.

 

All speculation. The meeting will highlight the Pro's and Con's and a decision will be made. It's headline news because of the AGM. The Press goading the Managers Association in a bias outcome. The Pozzo's will be ready with whatever the outcome is, I hope.

 

It needs a 51% vote among Championship teams and also and among ALL the league clubs to change things. That means 13 Championship teams out of the remaining 23 will need to vote for change. Do you reckon they will?

I'm wondering how the Napoli thing will sway the vote. Will clubs think "I won't vote for it because with luck Napoli will buy us and we'll be able to do the same thing." Or will they thing "Blimey, another club could do the same as Watford so we'd better stop it now."

Also, do I assume that it's next year's league clubs who will be voting, rather than this year's ie Palace won't be there?

 

Its easy for us to internally transfer over the players from last year so I don't think its really a bid deal either way.

 

This whole "loophole" thing is such a load of old b*llocks. There is no "loophole", there's simply a set of rules on international loans that we've worked within, we haven't "exploited" any f**king "loophole".

 

Really? I see it the opposite way around. I think the Championship vote will be tight as many chairmen will see opportunities to create similar links in coming seasons. But League 1 and 2 chairmen will know that the reality is no foreign club is going to want to make such a link with them. The lure of the Premier League money is the key so bar the Sheffield Uniteds and Pompeys of that level who is going to have that as a realistic aim? So in all likelihood the lower clubs will simply see what we've done as proof of the ever widening gap between the Premier League and parachute payments clubs and the rest and vote it down accordingly. There are absolutely no benefits for the rest of the league - in fact if anything it'll limit even further the number of transfers between Championship clubs and those in League 1 and 2.

 

Whatever happens it will not affect us in the slightest as already been quoted,any players the pozzo's want here they will just transfer them to us as perm signings,even if for only 1 year.There is nothing than can do,will be free signings,don't no why everyone is getting so upset about it.

 

It is a loophole. The rules do not state international loans are fine. They limit loans and in a completely different book of FIFA rules on a random pages a rule says international loans are temporary transfers.

The FL rule overlooks this FIFA techincality, so we exploited a loophole. Why are people so offended by it being called a loophole? Loopholes are exploited in all parts of life.

 

That's a somewhat shortsighted statement.

Barcelona might have no interest in Stevenage, but that doesn't mean there aren't clubs with less sparkling reputations elsewhere in the world that wouldn't see the benefit in overseas development. Beleck essentially went to Stevenage from Udinese. While he might not have pulled up any trees there, and was already in the country, Udinese still saw the benefit in him going there.

Guaranteed game time playing for a side that you don't compete with is a very appealing thing. Obviously there needs to be a confidence in playing the "right" play at the club in question (after all, no one wants their youth players going to a team that simply kicks lumps out of the opposition), but to say L1 and L2 clubs have no chance of forging a foreign link is baffling. Just look at the crowds in the L1 and L2 play off finals; as the Pozzos noted, Italian playoffs don't attract anything like those numbers, even in Serie B.

There are many decent clubs with good infrastructure and training facilities in the lower divisions, and they could definitely forge links if they approached the right clubs.

 

I do not think Watford are using a loophole in the system, this is why it's not correct to use this term. I do not believe it was the Pozzo's intent to buy an English club just to exploit a loophole. They wanted to buy a club and develop it with the intention of getting into the Premier League.

They had a situation where the deal to buy the club concluded late and they had very little time in which to get players in place before the season started. They looked at their options and asked the question can they loan as many foreign players as they liked.....and found the answer was yes. Why is that seen as a loophole? Just because other clubs didn't realise this, it's not really our problem.

It's up to other clubs to know the rules or for the Football League to correctly set up the regulations in the first place. It's not like it was a new rule.

Watford simply asked a question, found they could do it but have been vilified because of it. I do not understand why the focus has been to constantly criticise the club.

Club's should have said fair play, we didn't know you could do this, we'll see if we can utilise this for ourselves, instead of crying unfair, ludicrous and cheat.

 

I disagree. We'll have loads of Belecks to spread around the lower leagues. I can only imagine the jealous glances towards the Stevenage subs bench from other clubs, knowing that a titan of a striker was sitting there just waiting to tear up their league whenever he saw fit. I'd be shocked if other clubs at that level wouldn't want a bit of Beleck.

 

It doesn't matter why they bought us and whether they had good intentions, they could be curing cancer with international loans and it's still a loophole.
They looked at the options due to the restrictions and found a loophole, we then used the loophole.

 

I'm not being derogatory to the lower league clubs so please don't take it that way. But the standard at that level is pretty poor and income pretty minimal. I know this from watching it. You can point to Wembley crowd numbers but that doesn't represent the day-to-day for any club. Any foreign club investing in a typical L1 or L2 club would be signing up to a financial loss leader so the other benefits would have to be damn good to make it worthwhile. Take for example location. It has been reported more than once that we were attractive in one sense because of our proximity to London. How many L1 and L2 clubs can offer that? Who are these lower league clubs with good infrastructure and training facilities? A surprising amount still train in parks or at their stadium. The reality is aside from a minority at that level the Accrington Stanleys, Torquays and Cheltenhams of this world will know this is a phenomenon which will pass them by.

 

Close the thing, it makes no difference to us. The loans were to get around Baz's mess, next year the signings will be permanent.

Does anyone outside Leicester, Crystal Palace and the media actually believe we had Udinese's reserve players? We came third in the league FFS. One of those "reserves" was Championship Player of the season.

 

I hear the Pozzo's have flown in for crisis talks

Without the loophole in place, there is a very good chance they could withdraw from English football

 

interstin m8 wots ur sorce?
who r va pozzos plz

 

That's a reflection on the players available, more than anything. There have been teams that try to play in the lower leagues, and there will be again.

Lowered quality is also a statement that's true of pretty much any lower league around Europe. It's not like the lower leagues in Spain, Germany and France are stroking it around like Barcelona while we kick lumps out of each other. If anything, our lower leagues are of a higher quality than most.

Of course it doesn't.

It does show potential, however, and the fact is that our lower league clubs are significantly better supported and contested than many other non-top divisions around Europe.

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Club A (a subsiduary of Pub A ) has Youth B under contract. They're going to pay his wages regardless of where he spends his season. Outside of a plane ticket (which the foreign club could pay), I'm not sure where their losses come from. Factor in the loaning club paying a percentage of the wages and the player ends up costing less than it would cost to keep him at the club while also getting competitive matches (and potentially attacting a scout from a Champ or Prem team).

Fact is you don't have to actually buy the lower division club, or indeed invest any money at all. The Pozzos wanted a Premier League club, not a nursery club. If you just want to get young player competitive game time while potentially putting them in a shop window, the monetary investment required is close to zero (although it's worth noting you also can't influence events at a club you don't own, which has obvious downsides).

If we assume your model is accurate (i.e. Champ clubs get foreign loans, no one else does), we end up seeing trickle-down player economics. If the higher division clubs end up pulling in players from overseas, then it frees up that club's own players to go on loan to lower divisions. Those players still need development time, and if they don't get it at their own clubs, they'll be available for lower leagues.

Fact is, we send our players out on loan to lower division sides, and quite frequently so. Bearing that in mind, to state that loaning players to English lower league teams somehow makes no sense to a foreign club doesn't seem wholly correct. If it makes sense for us it makes sense for a lot of other clubs too, unless you contend our outgoing loan practice isn't beneficial for our young players (which you might, for all I know! ).