Soar Fox Posted 31 January 2016 Posted 31 January 2016 I thought he has looked good recently when he's played.
STUHILL Posted 31 January 2016 Posted 31 January 2016 Would keep him. I think he offers a lot of experience and quality around the place. I understand he wants some game time but he could end up with a winners medal too if he holds on 15 games!
Thracian Posted 31 January 2016 Posted 31 January 2016 I don't care where he goes. What on earth possessed us to pay so much for the bloke. Yes, he's shown himself to be a good professional and yes, he seems the sort of easy-paced organiser who'd do well in the sunshine of the continent. But here in the cut and thrust of The Premiership I'm singularly unimpressed. For an expensive footballer to spend half a season here and be remembered for one pass is pretty pathetic and that's with no mention of the two or three similar passes that went woefully astray. People talk about using/signing players who suit our set-up yet Inler's about as far away from being such a footballer as I can think of. He belongs in Italy, in Spain or anywhere there's the sunshine to suit his strolling style. What the praise for his talents is based on by anyone on Foxestalk I've no idea because he's not shone once in a game or even a part game. He fittened himself up which was to his credit and, more recently, he's performed okay. But that's all. He's offered nothing to set himself apart like Kasper, Huth, Fuchs, Kante, Mahrez and Shinji for example. That quorum of regulars might not have been brilliant all of the time but all have offered something that mattered some of the time and quite enough for the rest of the time, while at least three have been exceptional. Inler has never been exceptional and rarely approached an average rating of 6/7 in his few appearances. We should bring his loan-out fee down, cut our losses and give the bloke a break. It isn't his fault the team has played so well and limited his chances but the team's left is the one we aspire to as a minimum and I see no evidence that he'slikely to command a place either now or as part of any further improvement.
TMELcfc Posted 31 January 2016 Posted 31 January 2016 I don't care where he goes. What on earth possessed us to pay so much for the bloke. Yes, he's shown himself to be a good professional and yes, he seems the sort of easy-paced organiser who'd do well in the sunshine of the continent. But here in the cut and thrust of The Premiership I'm singularly unimpressed. For an expensive footballer to spend half a season here and be remembered for one pass is pretty pathetic and that's with no mention of the two or three similar passes that went woefully astray. People talk about using/signing players who suit our set-up yet Inler's about as far away from being such a footballer as I can think of. He belongs in Italy, in Spain or anywhere there's the sunshine to suit his strolling style. What the praise for his talents is based on by anyone on Foxestalk I've no idea because he's not shone once in a game or even a part game. He fittened himself up which was to his credit and, more recently, he's performed okay. But that's all. He's offered nothing to set himself apart like Kasper, Huth, Fuchs, Kante, Mahrez and Shinji for example. That quorum of regulars might not have been brilliant all of the time but all have offered something that mattered some of the time and quite enough for the rest of the time, while at least three have been exceptional. Inler has never been exceptional and rarely approached an average rating of 6/7 in his few appearances. We should bring his loan-out fee down, cut our losses and give the bloke a break. It isn't his fault the team has played so well and limited his chances but the team's left is the one we aspire to as a minimum and I see no evidence that he'slikely to command a place either now or as part of any further improvement. Mate, some signings work, some don't... Not sure who you are looking to blame, him or the owners? The clubs owners feel a marquee signing is needed each year to lift our profile. While he is a big name, is hasn't worked so far... But it's one signing, they've done pretty well on all the others, bearing in mind all the top dollars other prem clubs continuously waste money on... In fact just down the road in the Championship there's a bunch of morons who's owners got them a transfer ban and another who spend big every year and fail...
Thracian Posted 31 January 2016 Posted 31 January 2016 Mate, some signings work, some don't... Not sure who you are looking to blame, him or the owners? The clubs owners feel a marquee signing is needed each year to lift our profile. While he is a big name, is hasn't worked so far... But it's one signing, they've done pretty well on all the others, bearing in mind all the top dollars other prem clubs continuously waste money on... In fact just down the road in the Championship there's a bunch of morons who's owners got them a transfer ban and another who spend big every year and fail... He was never a marquee signing to me...and nothing happened to change that view. As for blame it's irrelevent. I can't understand the outlay. It seems like a glaring mistake. But sometimes it's just the way it works and there is no obvious reason other than the one i mentioned about the intensity of Premiership football. As for other clubs I really don't give a toss about what they've done. I'd always want us to set our own standards, thanks.
HoustonFox Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 He was never a marquee signing to me...and nothing happened to change that view.As for blame it's irrelevent. I can't understand the outlay. It seems like a glaring mistake. But sometimes it's just the way it works and there is no obvious reason other than the one i mentioned about the intensity of Premiership football.As for other clubs I really don't give a toss about what they've done.I'd always want us to set our own standards, thanks. I think you are being harsh with saying "glaring mistake". How much was he? 5M? In this market, that's not too bad and he's performed when he's played. Let's give Kante and Drinkwater (and to a lesser extent Kingy) some credit. They have been massively exceeding expectations and kept an experience international out of the team. Who knows, if we do make the Champions League, he may be a revelation as it becomes a different type of game against European competition.
ozleicester Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 We have a team 3 points clear at the top of the most competitive league in the world. Inler is struggling to get a run in that side, but to write the guy off would appear to just be foolish, the few times he has played he has looked quality, he is an international captain and he has appeared a total professional on and off the park. If we are going to be a side playing in Europe, we need two players per position and to have one of them be comfortable and capable against the best in the world is a bonus.
Reg Vardy Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Always makes me smile when Inler and a while ago Fuchs ability was called into question. Two players, two Captains of their respective countries,vastly experienced, and on here you get people who played for Aylestone Under 16's saying they can't play!!!! That my friends is Foxestalk !,
Thracian Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 We have a team 3 points clear at the top of the most competitive league in the world. Inler is struggling to get a run in that side, but to write the guy off would appear to just be foolish, the few times he has played he has looked quality, he is an international captain and he has appeared a total professional on and off the park. If we are going to be a side playing in Europe, we need two players per position and to have one of them be comfortable and capable against the best in the world is a bonus. He has never looked "quality". He's just lifted himself above "ordinary" for brief periods. His professionalism has never been in question apart from his apparent lack of witness when he arrived. It's on the field his shortcomings have been apparent, whether he's captain of Switzerland (a very small footballing nation) or anyone else. Kante and Drinkwater are setting the standard for our midfielders and I see no point in us accepting any less if we're really to make our mark as the top club you talk about. As for writing him off, it's not likely to be an issue because no-one seems to want him at the money he's on - which says it all really. Doubtless we'll keep trying to involve him because of the money he's cost but he'd rank about fifth in our list of midfielders right now assuming Amartey's as good as he looks of the videos.
Reg Vardy Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 At the start Fuchs couldn't get any game time......love the line above Switzeland a very small football nation(??) Like on that basis Bale and Giggs are crap too.....point I am making he is obviously a world class footballer with real leadership qualities....we just haven't seen it yet.....if he did get a run, I am certain he would deliver.....can't argue with his non selection currently mind.....
The Guvnor Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Always makes me smile when Inler and a while ago Fuchs ability was called into question. Two players, two Captains of their respective countries,vastly experienced, and on here you get people who played for Aylestone Under 16's saying they can't play!!!! That my friends is Foxestalk !, Can't recall that. I personally have been completely underwhelmed by Inler and you have to assume because of his lack of first team appearances so is the manager and coaching staff, and I very much doubt that their claim to fame was playing for Aylestone under 16's.
tyfox Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Ssn just reported hamburg want inler on loan but city have put a 3mil euro loan fee on him
Bayfox Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Ssn just reported hamburg want inler on loan but city have put a 3mil euro loan fee on him Just heard this from the lads I go with, 3 million euros to loan a player for 6 months is just madness.
MC Prussian Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Just heard this from the lads I go with, 3 million euros to loan a player for 6 months is just madness. Actually, if you look at the time available for competitive matches, it's just four months.
Bayfox Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Actually, if you look at the time available for competitive matches, it's just four months. That's even worse. I mean unless they feel he is gonna walk straight into the team and have some massive impact.
Gerard Posted 1 February 2016 Author Posted 1 February 2016 I don't believe it personally. We paid €7m??? on a three year deal. That averages €1.17m per six months he's cost us, there's no way we want nearly half his transfer fee back for a six month loan unless we're really trying it on. I imagine we'll be receptive to a deal as we only have 15 games left this season and have King, Amartey & James as cover for Drinkwater & Kante.If Amartey has impressed in training we'll be keener than ever to let him go.
ktfox59 Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Just as a matter of interest. How do loans work out with regard to wages. For example, would a club he goes to on loan have to pay his wages. If so, why would we demand the fee as he is still our player. Just asking
Bayfox Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Just as a matter of interest. How do loans work out with regard to wages. For example, would a club he goes to on loan have to pay his wages. If so, why would we demand the fee as he is still our player. Just asking Normally the club taking the player would pay his wages, as for the reason we want a loan fee, well who knows, just because we can ask I guess. They can work in a number of ways, it maybe they are only willing to pay part of his wages, so we want some money up front. When sven was here, he admitted paying loan fees for players, but then the more they played, the fee went down, I guess that's an incentive to take a player and actually give him games. Could be for a number of reasons. But it does seem a lot.
artursteppe Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Just as a matter of interest. How do loans work out with regard to wages. For example, would a club he goes to on loan have to pay his wages. If so, why would we demand the fee as he is still our player. Just asking When a player is bought, the cost to the club is both the transfer fee and wages. For example a player bought for £9 million and put on a three year contract (after which he can leave), that equals a purchase cost of £3million per year. To loan a player to another club it would be expected to pay the player's salary and a proportion of the player's purchase cost. (In this example, for six months, about £1.5 million, or more if you can get it, or less if it were a young player that we wanted to get experience or game time).
Raw Dykes Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 When a player is bought, the cost to the club is both the transfer fee and wages. For example a player bought for £9 million and put on a three year contract (after which he can leave), that equals a purchase cost of £3million per year. To loan a player to another club it would be expected to pay the player's salary and a proportion of the player's purchase cost. (In this example, for six months, about £1.5 million, or more if you can get it, or less if it were a young player that we wanted to get experience or game time). Transfer fees do not include wages, if that's what you meant. Transfer fees do not have to be paid in annual amounts. Loans cost whatever the lending and borrowing club agree to. There might be no fee at all and only a small proportion of the wages paid by the borrowing club.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 From what I've seen if Hamburg want Inler on loan ill drive him there myself.. Realistically, I can't see him breaking through Kante, Drinky or Amartey to command a first team place. We should take the hit and let him go imo.
ktfox59 Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 When a player is bought, the cost to the club is both the transfer fee and wages. For example a player bought for £9 million and put on a three year contract (after which he can leave), that equals a purchase cost of £3million per year. To loan a player to another club it would be expected to pay the player's salary and a proportion of the player's purchase cost. (In this example, for six months, about £1.5 million, or more if you can get it, or less if it were a young player that we wanted to get experience or game time).many thanks artur. Appreciate your explaination
ktfox59 Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 Transfer fees do not include wages, if that's what you meant. Transfer fees do not have to be paid in annual amounts. Loans cost whatever the lending and borrowing club agree to. There might be no fee at all and only a small proportion of the wages paid by the borrowing club.thanks for that too. Seems very complex. No wonder it's a month long window and ALS to get players in and out
Raw Dykes Posted 1 February 2016 Posted 1 February 2016 thanks for that too. Seems very complex. No wonder it's a month long window and ALS to get players in and out That's ok. The amount paid for loans all depends on a number of factors, including the value of the player, how much the lending club want, how much interest there is in the player, and what the borrowing club are willing to offer. Young players with little 1st team experience can go on loan for absolutely nothing, as the lending club just want him to get games under his belt. Sometimes the lending club are desperate to get rid of a highly-paid player who other clubs aren't willing to buy. In this case, the borrowing club will offer to take on a portion of his wages, and the lending club will be happy just to get their wage bill down a bit.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.