ponsaelius Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 If this gets rejected, Nielsen's confidence will be shot to pieces due to Mancini showing he has no faith in him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Want them to get a keeper in of some worth just to keep the chances of Liverpool out of the Top 4 relatively high. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Gunnar is 23 not some bairn I am sure he understands the situation & after being dumped by Blackburn is more than likely counting his lucky stars that he got a contract for a few years with Man City. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Getting an emergency keeper in shouldn't be necessary. They've got a keeper - play him. You play the cards you're dealt. I'd imagine Spurs and Villa will have plenty to say if they're allowed to sign another keeper at this point in the season with 4th place up for grabs. I know it's happened in the past but when these 3 are going for the Champions League then there will be hell on it the PL allow it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guinness_fiend Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 If Manchester City don't have a spare keeper, it's their own fault. Every team should have a potential rush keeper. Wasn't Rooney pretty good when he subbed in a while back for United? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They haven't really requested this, have they? Please tell me they haven't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 After the shit offer they gave us for Given, they can fuck right off if they come in for one of our keepers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliMag Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got a keeper - play him. You play the cards you're dealt. Absolutely this. Can't believe Citeh has the nerve to make the request in the first place or that the FA hasn;t already sent back a "NO" in response. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got a keeper - play him. You play the cards you're dealt. Absolutely this. Can't believe Citeh has the nerve to make the request in the first place or that the FA hasn;t already sent back a "NO" in response. Why would it be? They have 1 keeper, they need an additional for the bench (even tho the additional will blatantly be better than Nielsen) Every other team who have requested emergency loans for keepers seem to have got the loan, why shouldn't City? People are just saying No because it's City. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliMag Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got a keeper - play him. You play the cards you're dealt. Absolutely this. Can't believe Citeh has the nerve to make the request in the first place or that the FA hasn;t already sent back a "NO" in response. Why would it be? They have 1 keeper, they need an additional for the bench (even tho the additional will blatantly be better than Nielsen) Every other team who have requested emergency loans for keepers seem to have got the loan, why shouldn't City? People are just saying No because it's City. First, I am sure City have keepers in the youth/reserve/academy ranks... so they have more keepers. Second, this is a team that spent 100 million pounds on players in the past 18 months (and bought Given)... they could have bought other keepers as well. It was a gamble on their part... kind of like making three subs at the half or not putting a keeper on your bench (like Bolton did against us a few years ago) - it was a gamble for them and they lost. They didn't prioritise 'keepers so tough sh!t. And for the record I don't have anything against City. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got a keeper - play him. You play the cards you're dealt. Absolutely this. Can't believe Citeh has the nerve to make the request in the first place or that the FA hasn;t already sent back a "NO" in response. Why would it be? They have 1 keeper, they need an additional for the bench (even tho the additional will blatantly be better than Nielsen) Every other team who have requested emergency loans for keepers seem to have got the loan, why shouldn't City? People are just saying No because it's City. They have David Gonzalez as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 I could see the loan fee being more than what they paid for Given. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/26/the-fiver-marton-fulop PREMIER LEAGUE RULES: SOMEWHAT UNCLEAR Manchester City want for very little. They have Sheikh Mansour and his £15bn fortune. They have a 40-man squad, littered with some of the world's best players and Roque Santa Cruz. They have an Italian manager with a natty scarf and a couple of Serie A titles under his Armani belt. The peel on their half-time oranges comes off in one satisfying piece so that no pith collects under the players' nails and the loo roll at Eastlands is the quilted stuff with moisturiser. But it's just not enough. For City's first-choice goalkeeper (Shay Given) dislocated his shoulder at the weekend, their second choice (Joe Hart) is out on loan at Birmingham and their third choice (Stuart Taylor) is nursing a knee injury. Not entirely confident about their fourth choice (Gunnar Nielsen), they want Sunderland's third choice (Marton Fulop), who earlier in the season was their first choice. City, who also have a fifth choice (27-year-old former Colombia international David Gonzalez) out with groin- (and quite probably ability-) knack, have made an official request to the Premier League for special dispensation for a late-season loan. But the Premier League's rules on loan deals, or "temporary transfers" as the men in suits refer to them, are fuzzier than a hippy the day after summer solstice. Loan deals outside the transfer windows are allowed at the Premier League's "absolute discretion", though there is no reference at all to "emergency loans" anywhere in the Premier League's transfer rules or the various appendices. How they choose to exercise their "absolute discretion" is, like the Fiver's post-5pm thinking, somewhat unclear. City have one senior goalkeeper - Nielsen - fit and available plus a bevvy of youth team and academy keepers, one of whom, 16-year-old Loris Karius, signed for an "exorbitant amount of money" according to his former club Stuttgart, has been turning out for the reserves. With City facing three so-crucial-we-might-just-explode-with-the-tension Premier League fixtures, home games against Aston Villa and Tottenham followed by a trip to West Ham, they will claim that's a situation dire enough to persuade the Premier League to make an allowance. The Premier League should probably tell them to take a hike. Which almost certainly means that it won't. There should be hell on if they make special concessions for Man City. I shouldn't wonder that Sheikh Mansour will provide a sufficient sweetener to the EPL bosses to make things go his way. Money is runing this game, fucking sickening this is - absolutely fucking sickening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geordienorway Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Gunnar is 23 not some bairn I am sure he understands the situation & after being dumped by Blackburn is more than likely counting his lucky stars that he got a contract for a few years with Man City. OT, but where are you from spence? Scandinavia? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 How the fuck did Stuart Taylor get injured? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got another first team goalkeeper, he came on for their first team on Saturday. Absolutely no reason to allow them to sign another. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They've got another first team goalkeeper, he came on for their first team on Saturday. Absolutely no reason to allow them to sign another. They've got two, I don't think Gonzáles is injured. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Who the fuck is that Gonzalez fella, he doesn't even have a squad number according to WIKI! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Gunnar is 23 not some bairn I am sure he understands the situation & after being dumped by Blackburn is more than likely counting his lucky stars that he got a contract for a few years with Man City. OT, but where are you from spence? Scandinavia? Wallsend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Who the fuck is that Gonzalez fella, he doesn't even have a squad number according to WIKI! Has played for Columbia though, so he must exist! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 Who the f*** is that Gonzalez fella, he doesn't even have a squad number according to WIKI! Has played for Columbia though, so he must exist! Holy shit i just realised that they have this guy, 27 Years old Capped by Colombia and played 200+ first team games, how fucking bad is he that they had to bring that kid from Faroe Island on last Saturday but not him? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 The MEN website says Gonzalez has a groin injury. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They have a 40-man squad, littered with some of the world's best players and Roque Santa Cruz. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 If Adebayore, Tevez and Bellamy were all crocked and they only had Santa Cruz available be ause they decided to loan Benjani to Sunderland they wouldn't be allowed to loan in a striker, so why should an exception be made just because it's a keeper? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leazes.ender Posted April 26, 2010 Share Posted April 26, 2010 They should be allowed to sign a keeper under the following rules: 1. Independent medical advice confirms they keepers on their books are injured 2. Above to covers all keepers eligible at close of transfer window 3. If only 1 fit keeper then they can sign on from another Premiership club to sit on the bench to act as cover. 4. That keeper can only be one of similar standing, eg another principle bench warmer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now