• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

One month loans


This is a modified caption
Mar 26, 2004
Seeing as we have by my reckoning three of them (Sawyer, Christophe, Federici, possibly HRK) whatever happens next with these guys is going to be important in our season. Obviously we're keen to get high quality players in for as long as possible where normally we might not be able to prise them away. I'm trying to think what must be the point of the loans from the loaning teams though.

I guess a typical one month loan was initially used to cover a certain position at the loaning club for a player not getting a game at his parent club. One player injured, one comes in for a month and then leaves when numbers are restored.

I would then guess the next use of this sort of loan was to get a player having a bit of a run of games when coming back from injury. If the team cna't afford to have a 90% fit player in for an important match then they can get fitness at an affiliated club.

The thing is, none of the players we have on loan (as far as I know) are coming back from long term injuries and I don't really think we've got them in simply to cover for injuries. Perhaps with McCormack, that was the whole reason for Christophe but you can't have no 'keeper on the bench then claim you need to cover for a 'keeping injury suggesting Federici is here because he is a better 'keeper than what we currently have. Hard to see what exactly HRK and Sawyer would be covering, too.

It seems to me that the clubs want them to get games but one month doesn't really suit this. If you want Federici to go out and get some experience in professional football, you don't send him out for 4 games. The same goes for Sawyer and the same again for Robson-Kanu.

I can only assume that the clubs, slightly worried by accusations of pay per play basis loans, have sent them out for a one month loan to see how many games they get and then decide whether they want to leave them out for the whole season. Am I way off the mark?