The way Hull announced it its like his loan wasnt extended tho, they announced his loan was over then announced a few minutes later they had signed him
Icardi at PSG, Emre Can at Dortmund and Morata at Atletico are all joining permanently after their loan spells. Chelsea are actually getting more for Morata than they've paid for Werner so it's great business for them.
Man City have signed a Brazilian full back (Yan Couto) who was a star at last years U17 World cup.
Helder Costa is joining Leeds from Wolves for 15m, which makes their promotion even more critical.
It’s the way Leeds have done business for a while. They’ve got the same type of deal lined up for Augustin but that’s an option they may not actually take up due to his inability to stay fit and get used to Bielsa’s training methods.
Leeds probably need another 10 points from their last 7 to get promoted. They’ll then do their business as early as possible so have likely got a few lined up already.
I believe they are committed to paying 21m for Augustin. Leeds trying to get out of it by saying Covid has changed things.
A 20 year old National League defender is unlikely to break the bank!
Whether or not a 20 year old national league defender breaks the bank or not its still surprising they have signed 2 players for fees and not knowing what decision they will be in, also I read they beat a few other clubs to sign him
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
Premier League CEO said the transfer window will not open officially until July 26th. EFL usually follow them so how has this move been allowed to happen?
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
But did Barnsley cancel that registration by refusing to extend the loan beyond 30th June?
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
Not necessarily as he was contracted to Hull till the 30th of June via the original loan deal. Unless they have extended his initial loan he surely can't play.
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
Not necessarily as he was contracted to Hull till the 30th of June via the original loan deal. Unless they have extended his initial loan he surely can't play.
Aren't there 2 separate issues here
1) which is the only club can he play for until the summer window opens, and the answer is Hull 2) whether Barnsley allow him to play for Hull or not
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
Not necessarily as he was contracted to Hull till the 30th of June via the original loan deal. Unless they have extended his initial loan he surely can't play.
Aren't there 2 separate issues here
1) which is the only club can he play for until the summer window opens, and the answer is Hull 2) whether Barnsley allow him to play for Hull or not
If Barnsley have allowed Wilks loan to be extended with it hidden within the transfer fee thats been paid then thats surely fine
Be funny if he plays tonight and Hull win, their fans start celebrating a win and it turns out he was ineligible and they are now facing a points deduction lol
Come on EFL announce he was ineligible
I just don't understand how this permanent move was able to happen. It's reported that the transfer window doesn't open now until 4th August.
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
They had a buyout on the loan.
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
If that's the case, too many loop holes and it's wrong. The loan had finished, it should be they decide to take up the option by X date for it to turn permanent, not wait until it's finished and then decide to go for the buyout clause.
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
But it's not a new registration, and that's the key thing here. Mallik was registered to be a Hull player until the next transfer window starts, whether he's owned by Hull or Barnsley doesn't matter.
Not necessarily as he was contracted to Hull till the 30th of June via the original loan deal. Unless they have extended his initial loan he surely can't play.
Aren't there 2 separate issues here
1) which is the only club can he play for until the summer window opens, and the answer is Hull 2) whether Barnsley allow him to play for Hull or not
Granted he can only play for Hull this season. However if Barnsley do not agree to extend his loan deal past 30th June. He simply goes back to Barnsley.
However the grey area, if he has signed permanently without the initial loan deal being extended, that's separate paperwork to be issued to the EFL for approval. Therefore he can't play. His registration to Hull ends the 30th, then he re-registers but cannot play.
Although Barnsley could of extended the loan deal, the player has signed permantley and in theroy would have two registrations running concurrently, therefore no issue.
It was announced that Barnsley were not allowing an extension of the loan deal and as such, he was due to finish that loan on 30th June when all loans were to expire, hence the reason we needed extensions.
That date passed, which means the loan had finished. Otherwise, there would’ve been an announcement of his loan extending, but there wasn’t. Instead, Hull actually announced his loan had ended, and he now has signed permanently with Hull.
That is the part I don’t understand how it can be legal for him to have played. What they could’ve done was extend the loan until the end of the season and write in that loan agreement that he is to sign for them permanently come the end of the season. But they didn’t. The loan finished, he then signs permanently for them 2 days later. It is therefore a new registration.
Unless someone can explain to me how I am getting this so wrong, I don’t understand the loophole that they’ve used.
It was announced that Barnsley were not allowing an extension of the loan deal and as such, he was due to finish that loan on 30th June when all loans were to expire, hence the reason we needed extensions.
That date passed, which means the loan had finished. Otherwise, there would’ve been an announcement of his loan extending, but there wasn’t. Instead, Hull actually announced his loan had ended, and he now has signed permanently with Hull.
That is the part I don’t understand how it can be legal for him to have played. What they could’ve done was extend the loan until the end of the season and write in that loan agreement that he is to sign for them permanently come the end of the season. But they didn’t. The loan finished, he then signs permanently for them 2 days later. It is therefore a new registration.
Unless someone can explain to me how I am getting this so wrong, I don’t understand the loophole that they’ve used.
Fuck knows
*It's the EFL, so i am sure its quite easy to create loopholes and they will probably get away with it.
Baffled by the move of Leroy Sane to Bayern Munich. Not the move itself, but the timing as the season hasn't finished. Still several PL games to, FA Cup semi final to play AND City are still in the Champions League.
If City get a couple of injuries, they might need him. If City go all the way in the CL, he could have won it with them before leaving.
Baffled by the move of Leroy Sane to Bayern Munich. Not the move itself, but the timing as the season hasn't finished. Still several PL games to, FA Cup semi final to play AND City are still in the Champions League.
If City get a couple of injuries, they might need him. If City go all the way in the CL, he could have won it with them before leaving.
It’s a strange one. Must be something behind the scenes.
Comments
First they signed Mallik Wilkes
Now a Stockport player for an undisclosed fee
How can Hull have a loan that expired, then sign him permanently and play him?
If this is allowed, surely you would have loads of clubs quickly trying to sign players in order to either go up or stay up?
So whether there is a clause that says a loan can be turned into a permanent outside of a window as long as there is a buyout then maybe thats how they got around it
All loans might as well have a clause to make permanent, just to protect both clubs in the event of something like this.
I just don't understand how you can register a new permanent signing, be it a previous loan player or not, at this stage when no one else can register anyone.
1) which is the only club can he play for until the summer window opens, and the answer is Hull
2) whether Barnsley allow him to play for Hull or not
However the grey area, if he has signed permanently without the initial loan deal being extended, that's separate paperwork to be issued to the EFL for approval. Therefore he can't play. His registration to Hull ends the 30th, then he re-registers but cannot play.
Although Barnsley could of extended the loan deal, the player has signed permantley and in theroy would have two registrations running concurrently, therefore no issue.
That date passed, which means the loan had finished. Otherwise, there would’ve been an announcement of his loan extending, but there wasn’t. Instead, Hull actually announced his loan had ended, and he now has signed permanently with Hull.
Unless someone can explain to me how I am getting this so wrong, I don’t understand the loophole that they’ve used.
*It's the EFL, so i am sure its quite easy to create loopholes and they will probably get away with it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53278368
If City get a couple of injuries, they might need him. If City go all the way in the CL, he could have won it with them before leaving.
Man City are probably just fed up with the whole saga