Peterborough keeper out for season/Emergency Loan Signed



Sounds like they’ll say and do owt in order to get an upgrade. Utterly shit as they’ve tried to circumvent the wage/squad cap and it’s backfired: they should not be given a loophole.
 
Its a way of under that f***ing shit rule that was voted in, can be manipulated. Spend the majority of your budget on better players. Then pay next to nothing in wages for a reserve keeper, so you keep your spending within budget, confident in the knowledge that in the event of an injury to your number 1, you just get an emergency loan.

f***ing stinks and if its allowed shows just how shit The EFL are
 
Wikipedia suggests not

On 8 March 2016, Tyler's return to former club Peterborough United was confirmed as a player-coach on a three-month loan deal with a view to a permanent move.[83] He made his first appearance since his return to the club in a 2–0 home defeat to Scunthorpe United on 23 April 2016.[84]

Tyler agreed a one-year permanent playing contract alongside his role as goalkeeping coach following the appointment of Grant McCann as Peterborough United manager on 16 May 2016.[85][86] His permanent contract officially began on 8 June 2016, following the expiration of his loan spell.[87] Tyler made five appearances for Peterborough in 2016–17,[88] and signed a two-year contract to become the club's full-time goalkeeping coach at the end of the season, after he was not offered a new playing contract.[89]
 
Reading between the lines...........

Posh's first choice keeper is goosed, their number 2 keeper is deemed not good enough, so Posh decide to emergency loan a keeper who looks like he could be better than their number 1 keeper.

How the fuck is that allowed please? :rolleyes:
 
Billy Batts said:
The keeper they're getting is better than the one that got injured ffs 😂😂
Click to expand...
It does sound that way to be fair. Maybe they will apply to the EFL for McGeady's free kick to be retaken?

Anyway, focus on ourselves and win games. It may yet leave a sour taste on morality grounds but seems out of our control
 
Billy Batts said:
The keeper they're getting is better than the one that got injured ffs 😂😂
Click to expand...
Absolutely pathetic isn't it. So if you lose any outfield first team player to injury you'll be disadvantaged because your back up naturally won't be as good. Lose a keeper though, and as long as you haven't spent money on an experienced, but not very good, back up, you can just go and get a better player for the crack. Like I say, if this 5 game "rule" or the "players under 23 don't count" thing are in the rules then the EFL should be able to point to them. It can't just be made up as they go along
 
PoshScotty said:
Wikipedia suggests not

On 8 March 2016, Tyler's return to former club Peterborough United was confirmed as a player-coach on a three-month loan deal with a view to a permanent move.[83] He made his first appearance since his return to the club in a 2–0 home defeat to Scunthorpe United on 23 April 2016.[84]

Tyler agreed a one-year permanent playing contract alongside his role as goalkeeping coach following the appointment of Grant McCann as Peterborough United manager on 16 May 2016.[85][86] His permanent contract officially began on 8 June 2016, following the expiration of his loan spell.[87] Tyler made five appearances for Peterborough in 2016–17,[88] and signed a two-year contract to become the club's full-time goalkeeping coach at the end of the season, after he was not offered a new playing contract.[89]
Click to expand...

Ok. Guess you're just abusing a shit rule.

For me it shouldn't happen like. Surely a emergency loan only becomes available when you're on the bare bones. Got to pro keepers signed into the squad. Use at least one of them first before claiming crisis. Poor reserve keeper must be thinking what's the bastard point.
 
PoshScotty said:
Tyler hasn't played for us in years he's a 44 year old coach.
Click to expand...
Mate, I know you lot are doing what’s right for you...but I couldn’t give a shite about Tyler or Blackmore. Neither are registered on your squad submission list so fair enough if it was just them.

But Gyollai, at 24 years old, is submitted. Even though he didn’t play at Wigan, you signed him this summer to be your number 2, which is basically to play unless anything happens to Pym and you registered him too.

This signing has annoyed me because it directly contradicts what we were told about when an emergency loan for a keeper would be allowed which a few months down the line has left us short up top.
 
Last edited:
I hope clubs lodge a complaint against this. It's a massive abuse of the rules that could affect clubs at the top and bottom of the league
 
prehab26 said:
Ok. Guess you're just abusing a shit rule.

For me it shouldn't happen like. Surely a emergency loan only becomes available when you're on the bare bones. Got to pro keepers signed into the squad. Use at least one of them first before claiming crisis. Poor reserve keeper must be thinking what's the bastard point.
Click to expand...
Aye its pathetic. Effectively if you are sensible and spend on an experienced (but likely not great) back up keeper then you're fucked if there's an injury. If instead you decide to spend your money elsewhere (like on strikers) then if you get an injury you can bring a keeper in who is better than the one you lose! It's an absolute piss take and the EFL need to be explaining why it's possible.

International sides need to name 3 first team keepers. Professional league sides should have to do the same, with emergency loans only if two of them are out at the same time. If they choose not to then they shouldn't get to benefit from it. Taking the f***ing piss
 
Turnip from the Tip said:
It doesn’t, there have always been considerations made for goalkeepers whether it’s not having to sub after treatment on the pitch or emergency loans. There’s too big a disadvantage. Assuming they have two keepers out of action though?
Click to expand...
No they've got one out of action. They've got a young lad (who is in their first team squad) and a 24 year old. Both available. The 24 year old might be shite but that's not our problem, they're the ones that signed him as their number 2
 
Turnip from the Tip said:
It doesn’t, there have always been considerations made for goalkeepers whether it’s not having to sub after treatment on the pitch or emergency loans. There’s too big a disadvantage. Assuming they have two keepers out of action though?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't be allowed to have a reserve keeper that you won't play if your number one gets injured. I've got no issue with bringing in an emergency loan keeper if your number 2 is the last remaining professional keeper on the books but only if that emergency loan is to cover the number 2 spot.
 
Loath as I am to be fair to Posh in these circumstances, number 2 keepers are such a ridiculous notion anyway. You don't (or shouldn't) rotate them so you basically just need any clown that you can find who will accept sitting on the bench week in, week out in the very unlikely occurrence of a keeper injury. They've always been a waste of money. The flaky emergency keeper laws just make it even more obvious.
 

Back
Top