By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 22:23 - Feb 26 by Northernr
Sorry to get all logistical and pedantic, but you can't.
At our level now loans are half or full season, you can recall in January but not before or after.
You also have to name a 25 man squad at the end of each window, and you can't add to that out of the windows, other than emergency goalkeepers etc.
So, sorry, Remy will not be available for the play-offs.
I suppose then the "etc" after goalkeepers doesn't include any midfield player no longer registered with any Club we may feel we need in our current ehhh "emergency".
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 07:36 - Feb 27 with 1238 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 05:06 - Feb 27 by QPROslo
I suppose then the "etc" after goalkeepers doesn't include any midfield player no longer registered with any Club we may feel we need in our current ehhh "emergency".
It's a good question, I think goalkeepers get special dispensation because it's a specialist position whereas midfield you could, for instance, always stick a Ronnie Edwards in there in a way you can't in goal.
Personally think it would be a lot more fun if the 'play it as it lays' rule applied to the goalkeepers as well.
1
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 09:28 - Feb 27 with 1097 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 07:36 - Feb 27 by Northernr
It's a good question, I think goalkeepers get special dispensation because it's a specialist position whereas midfield you could, for instance, always stick a Ronnie Edwards in there in a way you can't in goal.
Personally think it would be a lot more fun if the 'play it as it lays' rule applied to the goalkeepers as well.
With Jimmy Dunne's Gaelic football past as our stand in keeper we would never concede from a corner or set piece ball into the box again
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 22:23 - Feb 26 by Northernr
Sorry to get all logistical and pedantic, but you can't.
At our level now loans are half or full season, you can recall in January but not before or after.
You also have to name a 25 man squad at the end of each window, and you can't add to that out of the windows, other than emergency goalkeepers etc.
So, sorry, Remy will not be available for the play-offs.
Agree with all that but a question. If you haven't named a complete 25 man squad, is it allowed to pick up out of contract players with no club, outside of the window?
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 09:55 - Feb 27 by francisbowles
Agree with all that but a question. If you haven't named a complete 25 man squad, is it allowed to pick up out of contract players with no club, outside of the window?
I wait to be corrected but yes I think you can sign an out of contract player outside the window as long as you haven't named a full 25-man squad or they're under 21.
1
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 10:04 - Feb 27 with 1022 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 22:23 - Feb 26 by Northernr
Sorry to get all logistical and pedantic, but you can't.
At our level now loans are half or full season, you can recall in January but not before or after.
You also have to name a 25 man squad at the end of each window, and you can't add to that out of the windows, other than emergency goalkeepers etc.
So, sorry, Remy will not be available for the play-offs.
You could definitely recall Celar, Clive.
There was an article from Germany saying they asked us if they could send him back (no goals and the new manager doesn’t fancy him at all - 25 mins in 2026 or something). We said “no” because we’re hoping a few goals out there will increase his value (presumably from zero to something). I imagine the other reason is we don’t want to pay his full salary.
Fortuna would gladly let us recall him though.
1
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 11:22 - Feb 27 with 890 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 11:14 - Feb 27 by Hunterhoop
You could definitely recall Celar, Clive.
There was an article from Germany saying they asked us if they could send him back (no goals and the new manager doesn’t fancy him at all - 25 mins in 2026 or something). We said “no” because we’re hoping a few goals out there will increase his value (presumably from zero to something). I imagine the other reason is we don’t want to pay his full salary.
Fortuna would gladly let us recall him though.
Yeh that was in January, you could have recalled him then absolutely, you can't now. Well, you could, but you can't play him.
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 12:31 - Feb 27 with 737 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 12:31 - Feb 27 by KensalT
This is the second January running where a club that has taken one of our players on loan has wanted to send them back and we refused.
Last season it was Taylor Richards and this season it's Celar.
It's not a good look.
Clubs might get wary of taking our players in future if we keep sending out duds then refuse to take them back.
I know it's a tough business and there's no sentiment, but it's a bad look for us.
Surely a loan signing is the ultimate definition of a risk?
Parent club don't want them at the moment, so whats wrong with them?
Even an expirienced Championship player like Sam Field could only get a loan to a decent club, why? Because of either, injury record or high wage demands.
The loan is a way to de risk some of this, which is why clubs go for them. Was it Tottenham before that we were trying to get a relationship with ~ the time of Tom Carroll?
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 13:13 - Feb 27 with 626 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 12:31 - Feb 27 by KensalT
This is the second January running where a club that has taken one of our players on loan has wanted to send them back and we refused.
Last season it was Taylor Richards and this season it's Celar.
It's not a good look.
Clubs might get wary of taking our players in future if we keep sending out duds then refuse to take them back.
I know it's a tough business and there's no sentiment, but it's a bad look for us.
I totally got it with Richards, I wouldn't have wanted that guy within 1,000 miles of Heston either.
With Celar, like I say, we're committed financially there and his contract is not short. I guess, like Hunter says, they're paying a chunk of his wage which we like, but our chances of getting him off the books in the summer aren'#t enhanced by him rotting there are they?
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 13:37 - Feb 27 with 542 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 12:31 - Feb 27 by KensalT
This is the second January running where a club that has taken one of our players on loan has wanted to send them back and we refused.
Last season it was Taylor Richards and this season it's Celar.
It's not a good look.
Clubs might get wary of taking our players in future if we keep sending out duds then refuse to take them back.
I know it's a tough business and there's no sentiment, but it's a bad look for us.
I disagree. It shows that the club has some teeth after all. Besides, if we can't take back the ones who are doing well why should we take back the ones who aren't?
It's football and business, not a charity. For every bad loan like Richards there's a good one like Eze. Clubs will always show an interest, it's down to them to their homework.
1
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:10 - Feb 27 with 460 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 13:13 - Feb 27 by Northernr
I totally got it with Richards, I wouldn't have wanted that guy within 1,000 miles of Heston either.
With Celar, like I say, we're committed financially there and his contract is not short. I guess, like Hunter says, they're paying a chunk of his wage which we like, but our chances of getting him off the books in the summer aren'#t enhanced by him rotting there are they?
There are good reasons why we didn't want either Richards or Celar back. But if we keep sending out duds other clubs will be wary of us at a time when we are trying to develop a crop of youngsters signed for the DS who will benefit from getting good loans.
What I am saying is that we might be shooting ourselves in the foot in the way we are conducting our business.
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:20 - Feb 27 with 435 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 13:37 - Feb 27 by Benny_the_Ball
I disagree. It shows that the club has some teeth after all. Besides, if we can't take back the ones who are doing well why should we take back the ones who aren't?
It's football and business, not a charity. For every bad loan like Richards there's a good one like Eze. Clubs will always show an interest, it's down to them to their homework.
I take your point about it being a tough business.
I made the same point myself.
But we are in a position where we are committed to developing young players who at some point will probably need good loans.
It's in our interests to build relationships with clubs to help place our players in good loans in the future.
Stiffing other clubs just because we can might prove counter productive to us in the long run.
In a recent WLS podcast David McIntyre said Daniel Bennie was all set for a loan move but we pulled out at the last minute because of injuries. OK, I get that, but could that decision have been made sooner in the window so that everyone is clear what our plans are?
And don't forget we also stiffed Schalke in the summer by pulling out of the Pape Meisse Ba deal very late in the day.
Playing hardball is fine, as you say we aren't running a charity. But messing clubs around is not good for our reputation, especially at a time when we want to develop and trade players.
1
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:21 - Feb 27 with 434 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 13:13 - Feb 27 by Northernr
I totally got it with Richards, I wouldn't have wanted that guy within 1,000 miles of Heston either.
With Celar, like I say, we're committed financially there and his contract is not short. I guess, like Hunter says, they're paying a chunk of his wage which we like, but our chances of getting him off the books in the summer aren'#t enhanced by him rotting there are they?
No. But how would recalling him after a failed loan and playing him here play on the social media front? PR, Clive! Always think of the PR when thinking of the decisions.
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:27 - Feb 27 with 414 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:20 - Feb 27 by KensalT
I take your point about it being a tough business.
I made the same point myself.
But we are in a position where we are committed to developing young players who at some point will probably need good loans.
It's in our interests to build relationships with clubs to help place our players in good loans in the future.
Stiffing other clubs just because we can might prove counter productive to us in the long run.
In a recent WLS podcast David McIntyre said Daniel Bennie was all set for a loan move but we pulled out at the last minute because of injuries. OK, I get that, but could that decision have been made sooner in the window so that everyone is clear what our plans are?
And don't forget we also stiffed Schalke in the summer by pulling out of the Pape Meisse Ba deal very late in the day.
Playing hardball is fine, as you say we aren't running a charity. But messing clubs around is not good for our reputation, especially at a time when we want to develop and trade players.
Fine line between playing hard ball and winging it.
2
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:41 - Feb 27 with 386 views
Clutching at straws I know., but Celar might do better in the 4-4-2 we've been playing. Especially alongside Kone. Just a few goals and we would've been in a better position to sell or loan in the summer.
0
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 16:18 - Feb 27 with 246 views
Should we recall Celar, Field, or Lloyd? on 14:41 - Feb 27 by KensalT
Subsequent revelations about how much we really got for Armstrong, Dykes, etc certainly suggest we aren't the tough negotiators we like to appear.
Maybe young Christian's AI prompts overlooked a few key sections when summarising Daniel Levy for Dummies.
Was this a surprise? I thought it was made clear that the money coming in was the highest values based on loads of clauses, which were unlikely to be met.
In the same way that we see smaller costs for players coming in.
Its all spin from the club to make it look better. I don't think QPR are alone in this.
Not sure Levy is an example of the pinnacle for a CEO/DoF
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
