TIME TO RETHINK UNFAIR LOANS
THE rules are the rules – and I would never criticise a club for playing by the rules.
So, why am I going to air a strong view about the topic of loan players? I'll tell you why. Because I think it’s completely wrong that players are loaned to sides in the same competition.
Let’s just glance at Chelsea. They now have Ruben Loftus-Cheek at Palace, they have Tammy Abraham at Swansea.
I’m quite sure those lads won’t play against their parent club, making their loan club weaker in that game than in others.
For that reason alone, although there are other reasons, I see a playing field that is distorted with the current system.
Yes, our young players need first team football, 100 per cent. But they should get it by thinking about where they sign in the first place, not by being owned by the big boys and being loaned to others at the same level.
Chelsea sold Nathan Ake to Bournemouth this summer. Fair enough. It’s a commercial justification for his Premier League loan last year.
I guess his success as a loanee last year contributed to that sale, but Ake helped stop Liverpool last year as a Chelsea player in a Bournemouth shirt. Is that really right?
Should the champions play a direct part in stopping a rival’s bid?
Young players need football, for sure. Loans between clubs at the same level should not happen. That’s my view.
If a player is not good enough for Chelsea but good enough for Palace or Swansea, then sell him by all means. But let’s not allow the big clubs to own all the players and decide on other clubs’ selections.