What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

Will boost the squad numbers lets hope they settle in quickly.

Glad to see the striker come in but just don't get bringing in a centre half after letting two go this week

People who say theyve never heard of these 2, and they are bad signings, (not on this feed mind) need to think, had they heard of cass before his 1st spell. At Sheff U when he made his debut, I thought he was a youth player id never heard of! Give em Stevenage and Chesterfield (if they are eligible) then judge

Yes there are some unbelievable posts elsewhere whinging about the number of loanees. Some people claiming they'd rather be in mid table with less loanees-of course they would!!! How ludicrous can they get? No, don't answer that one.

Would of liked 2 of seen a winger come in on loan

Judge players after a string of consecutive games, not after one day, or one or two games. Any new signing needs time to bed in and is worth that time and patience, no matter who they are.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

Ive heard that defender we just got is one of the best prospects around. Im guessing Zoom is gonna be pushed forward to a wingers role.

The McCrystal situation is an odd one. Ronnie says he's been sent to Scunthorpe to get match fit which suggests that he was not fit for selection for the 1st team and therefore would not be in line for selection which begs the question why wasn't he loaned out earlier to a League 2 side?

I Presume having Mark at Scunthorpe frees up funds hence the loan of a defender from West Brom.

One thing I don't like is loans within the same league. If a player goes out on loan he should be allowed to concentrate on performing 100% for the team he is loaned to. I always suspect that loans between teams in the same division cannot guarantee this. I think the rules should be tightened to prevent this happening except in exceptional circumstances (emergency goalkeeper loans) and only with express approval of the league management authority.

I think they will prove to be good signings, i can only see Donervan Daniels staying untill jan tho, as when taylor is back i think RM will go for taylor an gibson in cb, which will leave donervan on bench

Isn't the lad a Centre back?
I heard it was because Ash is struggling with an injury.

I also heard that a number of championship clubs are scouting him.

McChrystal is out of favour and that he is looking for a move in January.

ye he the cb, ash is suspended this weekend so he will play then, and he got a slight injury which he been playing through, so think we will rest him for the cup game vs chesterfield, but after that aslong as taylor and gibson both fit i can see them both back in starting 11 and donavan being sent back in jan, as he prob to good to sit on our bench and i cant see rm dropping either taylor or gibson

Ash and Gibbo are very good together at the back this season and unless Gibson was recallled and not allowed back, that understanding between the two is very valuable and I feel must be utilsed as often as possible.

I doubt Ronnie would split them apart when fit, unless he got a really amazing loan or freebie and the PFA list isn't listing any players, that I personally can see, would be any potential sure fire out of contract signings, except Eddie Nolan.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

Quote:

Hoots Mon
Yes there are some unbelievable posts elsewhere whinging about the number of loanees. Some people claiming they'd rather be in mid table with less loanees-of course they would!!! How ludicrous can they get? No, don't answer that one.

Count me amongst those complaining.

I don't blame Moore in the slightest - he has a short term contract and he has to do what he has to do to win. If he thinks we will have more of a chance to win then he is right to sign them.

From a competitive point of view - not sure what effect it will have on the team dynamics. Loan players are here to get games and impress - certainly the month players, I'm sure its better for them to look good and the team to lose than vice versa. But that's for Moore to determine the pros and cons and if he thinks the pros outweigh the cons then he's right to sign them.

But the league needs to sort this out. Its stupid.

If teams are fielding 50% Premier league youth players then I'm not sure what the point of the League is. If its just a glorified development league for big teams to give players a chance then they shouldn't be charging £20. You can probably watch Liverpool U19s or whatever for a fraction of that. I'm not interested in putting my £20 in to pay the wages of Wolves, Boro, WBA, Bolton players.

You look back at the glory days and you remember Aldo, Nevin,Morrissey, Nixon, Thomas, Nolan, Malkin, Brennann, Coyne etc etc. All Tranmere players who were favourites for a number of years. We win the league this season and what do you look back on - half the team aren't Tranmere players, the other half will probs play for us for 1/2 seasons. Whatever. We borrowed better players than the other teams borrowed. Who cares ???

There needs to be an absolute maximum of 2 loan players at any one time. There also needs to be more protection for clubs who should be able to offer more option contracts (ie sign a player with an option to extend for another couple of seasons) so that there's some continuity - you find a decent player and you get to keep him for a few seasons instead of he @#$%& off after a year if he's any good.

Supporting a team is about supporting your players - your club heroes, take that away and there's very little left. Goody was the last surviving club hero and he's been replaced by a loanee, there's Zoom but he'll probably @#$%& off at the end of the season.

Sure people are getting excited as we are winning games but we wont be top of the league every season. And if we are trundling along in mid table with a team full of borrowed players and 1 season players who will be recycled at the end of the season then there's very little point to it all.

Win legitimately is the name. Loan players can help that, so it should be so. If you loan duds, you may suffer, but loan good players you don't necessarily.

People will look back at players like Weir, Kay, Wallace and Labadie and know that without those players coming on loan, they may never have come at all, because they wouldn't have gotten a liking for the club.

I know those players are obviously different standards, but none to me were mistakes to sign, especially Wallace.

Players now don't last at clubs a long time, except mainly in the big Premier league clubs, that have the success, clubs regularly outside of the top 4 and in lower leagues crave. Any club would give anything they could to be top 4 in that league, but the culture now, is for most clubs to have a turnaround time of 3 years, on nearly all players.

You get new guys who 2 years later, are bench warmers who leave at the end of that season.

I am not bothered by the number of Loans. Tranmere are flying with Gibson, Palmer and Cassidy integrated and if you use lesser players from your squad you will probably not succeed as much as you could do.

Tranmere cannot afford to buy Wallace and Thompson, then try to buy Cassidy, Gibson and Palmer too, even if those 3 had been allowed to be sold, so loaning them is the next best thing.

It could be called funding the coffers of bigger clubs, but Tranmere's coffers get funded by Vauxhalls, Camell Laird, Burscough, Colwyn Bay etc and those clubs fans wouldn't necessarily complain, if they had 3 pro youngsters from league clubs, instead of relying soley on potentially unfitter, slower players, with day jobs, because even promotion from something like Northern first to Northern Prem, could double or maybe even quadruple your net incomes per season, if your tickets are a pound dearer and fans 40-50 more per game.

I don't see a reason to limit loan culture, especially when some players have come and had a reason to return, if canned by other clubs; though anyone is entitled to think differently.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.

Not arguing against the loan from a competitive side. If it improves the team then Ronnie will do what he thinks is right.

From a supporters point of view in my opinion though football is a lot poorer for it along with the 2 year turnover of players.Take away your club heroes and there's very little else left and very little left and little point to the game.

Getting a bit disillusioned with it all.

-Our own fans boo our own players and slate the one guy who has done more for the club than they ever will (PJ)
-Half the players aren't ours and the other half probably wont be in a season or two

So if the players aren't ours and the 'minority' of fans who are muppets (and the last people anyone would want to associate with) is growing, what is our club ?

The problem would be though if loans were restricted, more potentially good players would get less of a chance to showcase talents not being able to be loaned and their parent clubs might not bother signing as many beyond youth setups and get rid.

Clubs want their potential youth proving they are worth a shot in the parent clubs firts team or at leats worht flogging for a good fee.

Beckham was not even preferred to Robbie Savage at Man U and if he hadn't had the chance to prove his worth at Preston, maybe he might have been able to show Ferguson enough, to warrent inclusion in the first team and he could have been junked.

Unthinkable I know.

Same thing with West Ham loaning Rio Ferdiand to Bournemouth, or Defoe who went and scored 10 in 10 and eventually 18 in 29, but without that perhaps he would have been released

The more people who get released who haven't been seen doing well on loan, the more are likely to be overlooked or seen as too risky and the more who will potentially lose their dream for good.

I know you're not advocating abolition of loans, but ot me the good outweighs the bad.

People have used a similar line of thinking regards foreign players, that foreigners restrict fresh omegrown talent coming through, but logically why would premier league clubs sign someone on £20,000+ a week and if they're contracted elsewhere, several millions of pounds, when you could get a new guy from the youth setup, who goes on to be gbig like Rooney, pay him upto £4,000 - £5,000 a week possibly and with bonuses shell out around £500,000 or less for 18-24 months, before bulking up his pay big time.

I respect your viewpoint about limited loans, as such restrictions happen in other sports, like having two foreigners in a cricket team, which used to be one, but some loans turn out be very good acquisitions in time, like Wallace was and players like Palmer, Gibson and Cassidy are top loans and without just one of those players, I think Tranmere would be potentially top 6 but not top.

Cassidy has said he'd sign A.S.A.P if he was canned. I hope Wolves let him go to be honest instad of keeping him, as I think Ronnie would move, like a cross between a cheetah and coiled spring to bag him.

However you can also argue that if Stockton was as good as Cassidy and Power was as good as Palmer, Ronnie wouldn't need those players, because your homegrowns would be cheaper, or at worst the same to pay week by week as the loans, but be less of an initial risk to use, because they could be better assessed prior to use.

I certainly think Tranmere would be worse affected, if loans were restricted to 2 a season, as teams like Sheffield United can afford bigger squads and to buy players you can only afford to loan, so it would be playing a bit more into their hands when you've got injuries.

Then I ate his Liver.......... with some baked beans and a can of coke.