Do we like loans?

The loan system seems to be used more and more in English football these days, with the majority of signings in the last transfer window being temporary ones. Players like Chris Smalling (Fulham to Man Utd to Fulham) are even being bought and then loaned back to the clubs who sold them. There must be something in loan deals to make them more popular but as football fans, do we like them and can we see why clubs are using them so often?

If you look at the club you support and the size of the squad, you may see promising young players, have tracked their progress and realise that they will never get a look in for the first team at the moment. That's when the loan system is a big positive, because young players do not spend their time sitting on the sidelines and cleaning boots but go down the divisions and gain valuable experience. Examples include David Beckham, who went out on loan at Preston and the move undoubtedly helped him to set Manchester United and later the whole world, alight. However because it is being used so regularly now more players are being loaned out and even if they are going from big sides they may not get a guaranteed spot in the starting 11 in a Championship or League 1 club. Lots of players who look to have promising futures seem to spend their lives on loan and their career fades away, Scott Sinclair and Michael Mancienne from Chelsea look like prime examples although time is still on their side. Also if young players are sold and then loaned back to the club that sells them, that could have a detrimental affect on the dressing room.

Another reason clubs use the loan system is to save money. But a loan is a short-term solution to what can be a long term problem because although the club pays no transfer fee, they still have to pay a proportion or all of its wages to a club that can have a much bigger wage bill, so the player's wages are higher. Also there may be clauses in the contract that can bite the club on the bum, just look at Dindane at Portsmouth where it took a hastily arranged deal for him to get to play in the FA Cup final. For the outgoing club loans can come back to haunt them, a classic example is Manchester City and Joe Hart, who could not have him back from Birmingham after Shay Given got injured.

City of course got Marton Fulop in on an emergency loan which seems like a bit of a farce because they already had a fit keeper in Gunnar Nielsen. A lot of thoughts have been voiced on the decision by the league to allow Fulop's loan, such as what would Sunderland do if Craig Gordon got injured in their last game at Wolves on Sunday, but the Black Cats must have agreed to it. Another suggestion was that Fulop's loan was allowed to stand but Nielsen should start if fit and ready because Taylor and the youth team keeper were injured, but this is Man City we're talking about, they could buy 10 back ups in every position and the loan them out.

While the emergency loan is quite rare, what has happened in recent seasons is that big clubs have got big players on short-term contracts to make a quick impact. For example Henrik Larsson going to Man Utd and this season Eidur Gudjohnsen at Spurs. Sometimes the gamble does not pay off though. What did Ricardo Quaresma do for Chelsea?

It looks like while small clubs struggle financially and big clubs spend big on foreign talent more and more players will be loaned out, some getting a game and others not.

JT