Federico Macheda on loan?

[Ginola]

FWIW, I'm firmly of the belief that players shouldn't be allowed to be loaned to a club in the same division as well.

[TRon]

Don't want him.

 

Loans within the same division should be banned. If he's shit hot, he'll go back to Man Utd and be fully-ready for the rigours of the Premiership. Or we'll pay a king's ransom to keep hold of him.

 

Load of bull.

 

Aye, bet Bolton are feeling they got the right shitty end of the stick having Sturridge for a year. Likewise Sunderland with Welbeck.

 

/Have no problem with adding the option of Macheda to our strikeforce for the season.

 

Could you miss the point any more, do you think BottleDog?

 

I'm not sure Beren.

Do tell me again what is your point actually is, and why presumably you think that cases like Sturridge for Bolton don't make a mockery of it.

 

In this day and age, if Citeh/Man Utd/Liverpool can loan players within the division, who aren't allowed to face their parent club, they've essentially got agents at other clubs. So basically, the big clubs can use the smaller clubs within the division to take points off their rivals.

 

Also, the big clubs get to give their youngsters/newbies time to bed in to the Premiership without having any of the risk of dropping them points. They then get first-team ready footballers back. Clubs who don't have limited resources aren't afforded the same option! We need our youngsters because we can't afford two superstars in every position!

 

All this just serves to increase the gap between them and us, when we should be trying to bridge the gap - even if it is unrealistic. It should at least be our aim.

 

Furthermore, I haven't seen anything of Macheda (admittedly not a great deal) to suggest he's any better than what we have here. Also, I dislike Man Utd.

 

Also, I don't think a short-term loan is the answer to our problems. Is Macheda a replacement for Carroll in your opinion? Or is he akin to unproven entities we have enough of at the club?

 

Sunderland are suffering having had Welbeck yanked back from them, and wouldn't be surprised if Bolton struggle for a cutting edge up front soon (though Klasnic has had a decent start to the season). I want a long-term solution for Newcastle that is engineered with us as the number one priority. Not the development of the loaned player, or for the loaning club.

 

But the point is we are trying to buy a striker outright. We would only bring in a loan signing as a last resort I would think.

[Guest dazzanufc1892]

really really hope we stay well clear of this lad. real bad egg from what i hear. Although, if rumours are correct, he will be seeing a lot of mike and derek with the amount of time he enjoys at the roulette wheel.

 

perhaps this is where he bumped into them and talked himself into a move. not worth the hassle, get more from heskey than this bloke

[Tisd09]

Not seen that much of him but weren't people saying that Welbeck was dogshite when he signed on loan for the Mackems last season?

 

Surely he'd be better than nothing and may keep Loven away from the starting line up - must be seen as a positive?

 

Sammy Ameobi. There is no way to spin the signing of Macheda to anything positive.

 

No matter how much he smiles I just can't see Pardew picking Sammy over Loven, there was an option to play Haris or Sammy on Sunday but he went with Loven, I got a feeling if he brought Macheda in he was jump above Loven in the queue?

 

I agree I would much see Sammy or Haris given a chance before Macheda, and would have both in the team ahead of Loven.

[Guest bimpy474]

really really hope we stay well clear of this lad. real bad egg from what i hear. Although, if rumours are correct, he will be seeing a lot of mike and derek with the amount of time he enjoys at the roulette wheel.

 

perhaps this is where he bumped into them and talked himself into a move. not worth the hassle, get more from heskey than this bloke

 

 

Have you just taken crack 

[BottledDog]

Don't want him.

 

Loans within the same division should be banned. If he's shit hot, he'll go back to Man Utd and be fully-ready for the rigours of the Premiership. Or we'll pay a king's ransom to keep hold of him.

 

Load of bull.

 

Aye, bet Bolton are feeling they got the right shitty end of the stick having Sturridge for a year. Likewise Sunderland with Welbeck.

 

/Have no problem with adding the option of Macheda to our strikeforce for the season.

 

Could you miss the point any more, do you think BottleDog?

 

I'm not sure Beren.

Do tell me again what is your point actually is, and why presumably you think that cases like Sturridge for Bolton don't make a mockery of it.

 

In this day and age, if Citeh/Man Utd/Liverpool can loan players within the division, who aren't allowed to face their parent club, they've essentially got agents at other clubs. So basically, the big clubs can use the smaller clubs within the division to take points off their rivals.

 

Also, the big clubs get to give their youngsters/newbies time to bed in to the Premiership without having any of the risk of dropping them points. They then get first-team ready footballers back. Clubs who don't have limited resources aren't afforded the same option! We need our youngsters because we can't afford two superstars in every position!

 

All this just serves to increase the gap between them and us, when we should be trying to bridge the gap - even if it is unrealistic. It should at least be our aim.

 

Furthermore, I haven't seen anything of Macheda (admittedly not a great deal) to suggest he's any better than what we have here. Also, I dislike Man Utd.

 

Also, I don't think a short-term loan is the answer to our problems. Is Macheda a replacement for Carroll in your opinion? Or is he akin to unproven entities we have enough of at the club?

 

Sunderland are suffering having had Welbeck yanked back from them, and wouldn't be surprised if Bolton struggle for a cutting edge up front soon (though Klasnic has had a decent start to the season). I want a long-term solution for Newcastle that is engineered with us as the number one priority. Not the development of the loaned player, or for the loaning club.

 

Of course, I have no interest in helping the bigger clubs to get bigger, but that has to run alongside the fact that Bolton and Sunderland could have been in a fair bit of trouble without those loans so I disagree that they'd agree with you that they've suffered. More importantly indeed, newly promoted teams would be severely disadvantaged if you took their ability to loan players away, thus making the divide between the divisions even greater; something I'm sure you'd be against.

 

 

Out of interest, would you be just as sickened if we brought Sturridge in on loan (independently of whether we sign a permanent striker or not)?

 

 

[Beren]

Don't want him.

 

Loans within the same division should be banned. If he's shit hot, he'll go back to Man Utd and be fully-ready for the rigours of the Premiership. Or we'll pay a king's ransom to keep hold of him.

 

Load of bull.

 

Aye, bet Bolton are feeling they got the right shitty end of the stick having Sturridge for a year. Likewise Sunderland with Welbeck.

 

/Have no problem with adding the option of Macheda to our strikeforce for the season.

 

Could you miss the point any more, do you think BottleDog?

 

I'm not sure Beren.

Do tell me again what is your point actually is, and why presumably you think that cases like Sturridge for Bolton don't make a mockery of it.

 

In this day and age, if Citeh/Man Utd/Liverpool can loan players within the division, who aren't allowed to face their parent club, they've essentially got agents at other clubs. So basically, the big clubs can use the smaller clubs within the division to take points off their rivals.

 

Also, the big clubs get to give their youngsters/newbies time to bed in to the Premiership without having any of the risk of dropping them points. They then get first-team ready footballers back. Clubs who don't have limited resources aren't afforded the same option! We need our youngsters because we can't afford two superstars in every position!

 

All this just serves to increase the gap between them and us, when we should be trying to bridge the gap - even if it is unrealistic. It should at least be our aim.

 

Furthermore, I haven't seen anything of Macheda (admittedly not a great deal) to suggest he's any better than what we have here. Also, I dislike Man Utd.

 

Also, I don't think a short-term loan is the answer to our problems. Is Macheda a replacement for Carroll in your opinion? Or is he akin to unproven entities we have enough of at the club?

 

Sunderland are suffering having had Welbeck yanked back from them, and wouldn't be surprised if Bolton struggle for a cutting edge up front soon (though Klasnic has had a decent start to the season). I want a long-term solution for Newcastle that is engineered with us as the number one priority. Not the development of the loaned player, or for the loaning club.

 

Of course, I have no interest in helping the bigger clubs to get bigger, but that has to run alongside the fact that Bolton and Sunderland could have been in a fair bit of trouble without those loans so I disagree that they'd agree with you that they've suffered. More importantly indeed, newly promoted teams would be severely disadvantaged if you took their ability to loan players away, thus making the divide between the divisions even greater; something I'm sure you'd be against.

 

 

Out of interest, would you be just as sickened if we brought Sturridge in on loan (independently of whether we sign a permanent striker or not)?

 

 

Bolton and Sunderland definitely benefited, no question, but that was ancillary to the motive/outcome of the loan IMO.

 

You have a fair point re: newly promoted teams, so maybe concessions ought to be granted for them if they're struggling to get bodies in and they can't get them in from the lower divisions.

 

Re: Sturridge to Newcastle. As a permanent signing, yes. I wouldn't want a loan from within the division though as I think the rules should be amended.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

fuck this shit. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just fuck off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat cunt has sold up.

[BottledDog]

fuck this shit. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just fuck off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat cunt has sold up.

 

Ah well, see ya.

 

Seems a shame you'll be missing out on possibly one of the most promising/exciting squads we've had in a long while.

[LFEE]

FWIW, I'm firmly of the belief that players shouldn't be allowed to be loaned to a club in the same division as well.

 

I agree... In fact I don't think any loans should be allowed... Would make for a more balanced league pyramid and make young talent think more seriously about their career paths... The big clubs are just hoovering up and stockpiling then loaning out until required...

[Guest Chubby Jason]

f*** this s***. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just f*** off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat c*** has sold up.

 

Ah well, see ya.

 

Seems a shame you'll be missing out on possibly one of the most promising/exciting squads we've had in a long while.

Sorry mate, but Andy Carroll is capable of being one the best strikers in England. Having someone like that play for us is exciting and promising. Not shipping him out only to replace him with a much lesser player on fucking loan from Manchester United.

 

Seriously, even the most pessimistic of us could not have predicted that we replace Carroll with Federico fucking Macheda on a loan. Hopefully it's just rumors but I stick by that stance if this does happen and we don't bring in any other strikers.

[TRon]

f*** this s***. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just f*** off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat c*** has sold up.

 

Ah well, see ya.

 

Seems a shame you'll be missing out on possibly one of the most promising/exciting squads we've had in a long while.

Sorry mate, but Andy Carroll is capable of being one the best strikers in England. Having someone like that play for us is exciting and promising. Not shipping him out only to replace him with a much lesser player on fucking loan from Manchester United.

 

Seriously, even the most pessimistic of us could not have predicted that we replace Carroll with Federico fucking Macheda on a loan. Hopefully it's just rumors but I stick by that stance if this does happen and we don't bring in any other strikers.

 

Loads of Liverpool fans are already calling Carroll a waste of money, clumsy, lumbering etc.

[johnnypd]

we should only be loaning players if they are good enough for us. we should not be loaning development players who are far from the first team so that we can help another club by suffering shit performances from someone who isnt ready yet. Rossi was the perfect example of how not to do it. Macheda would also fit into this category. If we had a chance to loan Sturridge or Welbeck on the other hand, i'd take it. Why? Because they're better than what we have. From the looks of Macheda and his abortive development, i wouldn't say he is any better than what we have, and if we're playing unready kids i'd rather we let Sammy have game time, which would benefit us in the long term. He is probably already better as an impact player.

 

unacceptable move, but i don't think it'll happen.

[BottledDog]

f*** this s***. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just f*** off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat c*** has sold up.

 

Ah well, see ya.

 

Seems a shame you'll be missing out on possibly one of the most promising/exciting squads we've had in a long while.

Sorry mate, but Andy Carroll is capable of being one the best strikers in England. Having someone like that play for us is exciting and promising. Not shipping him out only to replace him with a much lesser player on fucking loan from Manchester United.

 

Seriously, even the most pessimistic of us could not have predicted that we replace Carroll with Federico fucking Macheda on a loan. Hopefully it's just rumors but I stick by that stance if this does happen and we don't bring in any other strikers.

 

Neil, time for a new sig quote.

 

 

/cheer up man, there is plenty to be proud off in the squad, whoever the striker is that comes in.

[James]

we should only be loaning players if they are good enough for us. we should not be loaning development players who are far from the first team so that we can help another club by suffering shit performances from someone who isnt ready yet. Rossi was the perfect example of how not to do it. Macheda would also fit into this category. If we had a chance to loan Sturridge or Welbeck on the other hand, i'd take it. Why? Because they're better than what we have. From the looks of Macheda and his abortive development, i wouldn't say he is any better than what we have, and if we're playing unready kids i'd rather we let Sammy have game time, which would benefit us in the long term. He is probably already better as an impact player.

 

unacceptable move, but i don't think it'll happen.

 

I would argue that if we played Rossi, he would have done well, had some loyalty with Newcastle and then the next summer signed for us instead, becoming the great player he is today.

[johnnypd]

we should only be loaning players if they are good enough for us. we should not be loaning development players who are far from the first team so that we can help another club by suffering shit performances from someone who isnt ready yet. Rossi was the perfect example of how not to do it. Macheda would also fit into this category. If we had a chance to loan Sturridge or Welbeck on the other hand, i'd take it. Why? Because they're better than what we have. From the looks of Macheda and his abortive development, i wouldn't say he is any better than what we have, and if we're playing unready kids i'd rather we let Sammy have game time, which would benefit us in the long term. He is probably already better as an impact player.

 

unacceptable move, but i don't think it'll happen.

 

I would argue that if we played Rossi, he would have done well, had some loyalty with Newcastle and then the next summer signed for us instead, becoming the great player he is today.

 

that is because you are a very odd person

[La Parka]

He's fucking dire. Not first team quality at all, helped relegate sampdoria!

[magorific]

f*** this s***. Seriously, if THIS is how we replace a player we sold for £35m then the club can just f*** off and I'll happily not bother with following football until the fat c*** has sold up.

 

 

Ah well, see ya.

 

Seems a shame you'll be missing out on possibly one of the most promising/exciting squads we've had in a long while.

 

Sorry mate, but Andy Carroll is capable of being one the best strikers in England. Having someone like that play for us is exciting and promising. Not shipping him out only to replace him with a much lesser player on f***ing loan from Manchester United.

 

Seriously, even the most pessimistic of us could not have predicted that we replace Carroll with Federico f***ing Macheda on a loan. Hopefully it's just rumors but I stick by that stance if this does happen and we don't bring in any other strikers.

 

Loads of Liverpool fans are already calling Carroll a waste of money, clumsy, lumbering etc.

 

So f***ing what? He was outstanding for us last season. Anyone with half a brain can see he isn't lumbering either (surprisingly decent pace for a big man).

The point is that the trust Ashley mob told us to wait to see how Carroll would be replaced in the summer.

Still waiting.

[La Parka]

Btw Carrol is wasted at pool, everything here was set up for him to thrive. Him leaving made his development suffer as no one at liverpool will play for him like nolan and barton did,

[TRon]

Btw Carrol is wasted at pool, everything here was set up for him to thrive. Him leaving made his development suffer as no one at liverpool will play for him like nolan and barton did,

 

That's because Liverpool are a football team and not set up to play hoofball.

[ianovthetoon]

Btw Carrol is wasted at pool, everything here was set up for him to thrive. Him leaving made his development suffer as no one at liverpool will play for him like nolan and barton did,

 

He was on the bench at the weekend. Cheeky loan bid would be funny!!

[Optimistic Nut]

Btw Carrol is wasted at pool, everything here was set up for him to thrive. Him leaving made his development suffer as no one at liverpool will play for him like nolan and barton did,

 

He was on the bench at the weekend. Cheeky loan bid would be funny!!

 

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if we get to the last few hours of the window, and David Craig reveals we've made a sensational £20m bid to bring Carroll back to Newcastle, safe in the knowledge it won't happen, but that, "we tried".

[oldtype]

This "instantly believe any rumor you don't like" thing had gotten out of hand.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

You don't need to play hoof ball to get the best out of Carroll but that's beside the point. He was great for us and could have been one of the best and finally a player we could be proud to have produced. It would be an insult to replace him with a sub-standard Man United reserve.

[TRon]

You don't need to play hoof ball to get the best out of Carroll but that's beside the point. He was great for us and could have been one of the best and finally a player we could be proud to have produced. It would be an insult to replace him with a sub-standard Man United reserve.

 

I was replying to the guy who said Nolan and Barton got the best out of him. If those two were involved in any team with Carroll it would end up being hoofball by design. Even at Liverpool they are saying that every time he plays they end up humping the ball long towards his head.