Should Man City be allowed to sign another keeper? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Should Man City be allowed to sign another keeper?

Starr Avatar
suspended6y, 7m agoPosted 6 years, 7 months ago
Im not sure if they plan to buy a 1st choice keeper or back up to Gunnar

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/8644269.stm

Should they be allowed?
Starr Avatar
suspended6y, 7m agoPosted 6 years, 7 months ago
Options

All Comments

(144) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#2
Not a chance.
#3
no way
banned#4
no at all.
[mod]#5
Erm; yes
#6
No, although as an Arsenal fan I reckon we could order half a team on this sorta deal
#7
can lend them david james for a small fee lol
#8
If they've got two goalkeepers fit and registered to play in the Premier League (regardless of if they're 3rd, 4th or 5th choice) then no, they shouldn't.

If they've got no one else other than this Nielsen, then yes, they should.
#9
No way.
#10
andywedge
Erm; yes


Come on Andy one good reason why they should? (City fan above)

You open the flood gates everytime, there own fault for not wanting to pay the wages of there loan players.

Can we have a loan striker for Torres?
#11
They've got a German kid, Karius in the reserves, so no - he only needs to sit on the bench.


Anyway, they have a Faroe Islands international in Nielsen...... he should have had plenty of practice in shot-stopping :w00t:
banned#12
midlandscomics
If they've got two goalkeepers fit and registered to play in the Premier League (regardless of if they're 3rd, 4th or 5th choice) then no, they shouldn't.

If they've got no one else other than this Nielsen, then yes, they should.


+1 And as they only seem to have Nielson fit then they should be allowed
#13
No .....
#14
I can't see why. Don't they have reserve and youth teams with goalkeepers?
#15
I personally don't think any club should be allowed to transfer more players in whatever the circumstance.
[mod]#16
Adam2050
Come on Andy one good reason why they should? (City fan above)

You open the flood gates everytime, there own fault for not wanting to pay the wages of there loan players.

Can we have a loan striker for Torres?


OK, a keeper is a more specialised position and Nielsen (or whatever he's called) is frankly bobbins and all we have atm. Joe Hart is our player and I think we should be able to recall him. Brum want him on loan again next season and I think a good will gesture might increase his chances of going back there on loan next season. If thy did their heels in and refuse I think they have more chance of getting Pele next season. He is Citys player and only on loan afterall and the loan deal was not about money but about Hart getting regular first team action
#17
No chance - they have already lent out Joe Hart and Casper to other teams, if they couldn't afford to keep them at city, why shouldn't they suffer the consequences of their bad planning
#18
andywedge
OK, a keeper is a more specialised position and Nielsen (or whatever he's called) is frankly bobbins and all we have atm. Joe Hart is our player and I think we should be able to recall him. Brum want him on loan again next season and I think a good will gesture might increase his chances of going back there on loan next season. If thy did their heels in and refuse I think they have more chance of getting Pele next season. He is Citys player and only on loan afterall and the loan deal was not about money but about Hart getting regular first team action


RufusRabbit
No chance - they have already lent out Joe Hart and Casper to other teams, if they couldn't afford to keep them at city, why shouldn't they suffer the consequences of their bad planning


This ^^

You have two inexperienced keepers who can do the job. Still think it's ridiculous to say you need more. You are right with Brum wanting to keep the loan option open, but they want to finish there season on a high.

Could be a good reason why you loose out on 4th place. I'm sure the crazy city fans on here will blame it all the way on this.
#19
andywedge
OK, a keeper is a more specialised position and Nielsen (or whatever he's called) is frankly bobbins and all we have atm. Joe Hart is our player and I think we should be able to recall him. Brum want him on loan again next season and I think a good will gesture might increase his chances of going back there on loan next season. If thy did their heels in and refuse I think they have more chance of getting Pele next season. He is Citys player and only on loan afterall and the loan deal was not about money but about Hart getting regular first team action


Surely they should have put in a recall clause then rather than having to rely on the 'goodwill' above. What you need to remember is that a loan is supposed to be a mutually beneficial agreement whereas Hart is getting high level experience (benefitting City in the long run, either through playing there or his resale value being incresed) and Birmingham are getting a quality keeper (and have presumably paid a loan fee and or a proportion of his wages). With £250,000 prize money difference between positions then you see why Birmingham would want to keep him.
banned#20
Everyone who is saying they loaned them out because they can't afford them or agreeing with it knows nowt about football. Its all about getting experience for the players.

Man City had 3 keepers still at the club and 2 of those experienced in Given and Taylor so not exactly bad planning. How many other teams have more than 3 capable goalkeepers in their squad with 2 being experienced and have the quality to play in the premier league?
#21
If it meant we could have him next season then i will go and pick him up from the training ground and deliver him to you myself ......... ;-)
banned#22
I think they'd be better off buying some decent fans, if the ones on here are anything to go by!

Personally, it just sounds like the manager is feathering his nest with a ready made "blame someone else" when his team finishes 6th.
#23
guv
I think they'd be better off buying some decent fans, if the ones on here are anything to go by!

Personally, it just sounds like the manager is feathering his nest with a ready made "blame someone else" when his team finishes 6th.


Learning off Fergie fast, though to be fair he would of gotten his way.
#24
andywedge
OK, a keeper is a more specialised position and Nielsen (or whatever he's called) is frankly bobbins and all we have atm. Joe Hart is our player and I think we should be able to recall him. Brum want him on loan again next season and I think a good will gesture might increase his chances of going back there on loan next season. If thy did their heels in and refuse I think they have more chance of getting Pele next season. He is Citys player and only on loan afterall and the loan deal was not about money but about Hart getting regular first team action


Just because their reserve keepers are poor, doesn't mean City should be allowed to have special dispensation.
#25
Come off it, if this club is wanting to be as big as they think they are, then they should have keepers from reserves, youth squad, soccer school etc etc etc, they should have more than 4.

They will have to put a defender in the nets, if hit by another injury. They will be wanting to sign another striker soon, because the ones they have cannot score enough.
#26
If the blues have any sense and can do it they should return Hart asap to butter them up for keeping him for next season too.

Can't believe they never put an instant return if required clause into the loan tbh.
[mod]#27
Absolutely no way. It is their own poor planning. Keep 3 quality keepers like Manchester United and you wont have these problems and the need to go begging to the FA.
[mod]#28
greg_68
If they can the blues will return Hart asap to butter them up for keeping him for next season too.

Can't believe they never put an instant return if required clause into the loan tbh.


Is it not a rule imposed by the FA? I ask because I dont know. Not because I know and think you are wrong.
[mod]#29
monkey.nut
[COLOR="Red"]Surely they should have put in a recall clause [/COLOR]then rather than having to rely on the 'goodwill' above. What you need to remember is that a loan is supposed to be a mutually beneficial agreement whereas Hart is getting high level experience (benefitting City in the long run, either through playing there or his resale value being incresed) and Birmingham are getting a quality keeper (and have presumably paid a loan fee and or a proportion of his wages). With £250,000 prize money difference between positions then you see why Birmingham would want to keep him.


Totally
suspended#30
Brum should let Hart go back as goodwill so they can have him next season as well.

I don't think City should be allowed to sign a keeper, they have a full international and a back up so that should be enough if they cant get Hart back.

Now if one of those were to get injured then i could understand the FA allowing them to sign a back up keeper for the last few games.

I wonder when the FA will announce the outcome
#31
they shouldnt be allowed simple as that, why loan a keeper yet not have cover for things like this, they took the risk no deal with it, or let them but only after the spurs vs city game lol
suspended#32
Dub1
they shouldnt be allowed simple as that, why loan a keeper yet not have cover for things like this, they took the risk no deal with it, or let them but only after the spurs vs city game lol


Its not only Given who is injured but also Taylor, thats where the problem is.

If it was 1 or the other then they'd still have cover but this was worst case scenario, still dont think they should be allowed as they have to fit keepers
#33
I am sure there has been similar occurrence in the past couple of years with the FA ruling, I would assume this will go the same way. I think they will let them as both the first and second choice keepers are injured. (but blues will beat them to it by sending Hart back)
#34
Ipswich Town earlier this season were denied an emergency loan when 1st and 2nd choice keepers were injured and Portsmouth recalled the loanee they already had. They should just recall Hart if Brum get the huff about it i am sure there there many other clubs willing to loan him next season assuming City don't end up selling him anyway of course.
banned#35
yes please .. and stop moaning you lot ..
#36
dog_cop
yes please .. and stop moaning you lot ..


Your a city fan?
#37
Of course we should, we're rich and the rich can do what they want!

When will you people learn :roll:
banned#38
Adam2050
Your a city fan?


of course .. :p.. so as I am the law .. yes we can sign a goal keeper .. so a big ner ne ner ner to you lot :-D
#39
dog_cop
of course .. :p.. so as I am the law .. yes we can sign a goal keeper .. so a big ner ne ner ner to you lot :-D


How did I not know this, that's two city fans with brain cells on this forum, city fans arn't all completely stark craving bonkers.:w00t:
banned#40
Adam2050
How did I not know this, that's two city fans with brain cells on this forum, city fans arn't all completely stark craving bonkers.:w00t:


I try my best .. I can see everyone's point and I am sure the FA will look at it in a sympathetic light.. but ffs this could be the best finish we have had for a zillion years in the prem.. so give us a bit of a break :-D

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!