I always understood that many/most loan deals are agreed on the understanding that the loanees are guaranteed game time.
Is that correct?
Printable View
I always understood that many/most loan deals are agreed on the understanding that the loanees are guaranteed game time.
Is that correct?
As I said in another thread its the only reason Barker is playing ahead of McGeouch and Slivka. Pretty concerned if Lennon actually think he adds more than either of those 2.
Shirley it’s a no - or on a case by case basis.
If it’s a yes then Pinau (and iirc JonnyLeith?) were hard done by
No not guaranteed.
I read an article before that said that there can be clauses inserted in the deals that means you have to pay more of the players wage if a loan player doesn't start a game
I cannot under any circumstances think that Neil Lennon would agree to anybody but him picking the players that will be playing at any given time. I think if the club had made an agreement like that he would no longer be our manager.
Think it could help in getting players in the future?
When Hibs lend players out for development, I expect them to get games to develop.
Stupid comment
For one, Barker is a completely different player compared to these 2
Also if you read Lennon's interviews he definitely understands how good McGeouch is and how important he is for us
I think he plays Barker mostly for tactical reasons as it allows us to have 2 natural wingers and stretch the opposition's defence
Players go on loan to get more games, but obviously there are no guarantees.
There is obviously though, the view of the parent club about which teams do and don't give what they may see as adequate game time...or future loans just won't happen between the clubs.
I long for the day when 'loan' players at Hibs are a rarity, and we can afford to sign the players we want on contract.
TBF we manage it pretty well at the moment, but the Fenlon days are still in my mind....
Barker plays because he’s a good player.
I'm sure Hibs try to seek assurances that our loanees will play.
I'm sure clubs that loan players to us do the same. But we'd be crazy to offer guarantees - just like it would be crazy to guarantee any player a starting place.
Some of the top English teams (City / Chelsea etc) loan lots of players out and they often put into the loan agreement that the player must feature in X amount of games of compensation will be due at the end of the loan as that player could be playing elsewhere and developing.
Regarding Barker - who knows..
For me he has been playing well and giving opposition something diff rent to worry about - especially him one side and Boyle the other.
What tends to happen is that since he’s still young and developing he can drift out of games. But I felt against Motherwell away he finished strong. Boyle has developed so much in last few seasons and I know Barker will also - he has talent and often goes past people like they aren’t there.
Saturday we had the issue of nearly too many attackers on the pitch getting in each other’s way and crowding the space as Stokes and Murray both played together.
They players are our future though. Teams like City have shed loads of players out on loan about 6 at NAC Breda last year and 1 or 2 will ever make it. Lennon is showing belief in a young talent we may get on permanent should it work out well and he develops into a player I think he can. He's inconsistent but games help that.