19 Jan 2015 10:20:43
I want to bring this up again.
Do you feel 'B' teams would be good for the English game? It would obviously benefit the top 5/6 teams in England wand would give them the neccesary experience.
It would be too bad for the lower teams though. Teams in the championship/league 1 would be affected way too negatively.
I'm just annoyed that Real and barca are allowed it. Benefits them so much.
Believable0
Unbelievable0
{Ed001's Note - personally I am not sure it does, very few of the players come through that way. Mostly they just end up moving on as replacements are bought in. I mean benefit Real Madrid and Barcelona.}
19 Jan 2015 16:35:22
selfishly I would love it but there's no way I could condone it with it's impact on lower league clubs. The culture around lower league clubs in England is completely different from anywhere else. The attendance numbers are perhaps the best indicator of that. If the lower leagues were struggling with filling leagues or the product was poor that would be one thing but it isn't.
Agree0
Disagree0
Fair enough, I'm just mad that oddgardd is going Madrid to get gametime (which is in there 'B' team), same as hailovic is barcas
Agree0
Disagree0
19 Jan 2015 07:04:20
Hey eds, can you shed any light to what actually happened with the Frank Lampard situation?
Apparently he didn't even sign with New York? Is that true? Wouldn't it be illegal signing with city if he didn't sign with New York in the first place ect.
Much appreciated.
Believable0
Unbelievable0
{Ed001's Note - he signed with City Football Group, the plan being to sign for Melbourne City until NYCFC was up and running. The A-League changed the salary cap rules, and Melbourne could no longer afford him and David Villa in the same side. As Villa was already signed for Melbourne, that left Lampard with nowhere to go, so he was registered with Man City on a short term deal. They just extended it until the end of the season.
There is no illegal or shady dealing on the behalf of City, it is the MLS obfuscating things because they do not want people knowing how many of their players are really not owned by the clubs. It is due to their centralised system of ownership, where the league holds the contracts not the teams. To get round that, teams are now finding other ways to make deals to get players that the MLS itself would not be able to get deals done with.
There have been a number of these odd deals happening there lately, with players announced as signing for a team, only for it later to emerge that they were only actually loaned there. One team recently announced the signing of a player that they had already signed a few months previously according to the MLS. It turned out they had misled the public and the player was only on loan from a European side.
I seem to remember the Canadian lad, Doneil Henry, that West Ham just signed, had a similar kind of story of unclear ownership.}
Thanks for clearing that up, it is all very confusing.
Dammit Frank!
Agree0
Disagree0
{Ed001's Note - sadly it is deliberate. The MLS need to look at this and work on their communication with the fans, before they lose them out of annoyance.}