aston villa loans

Aston Villa loan players have been unlucky recently, but maybe they’re the answer now?

You would have thought that Randy Lerner, former chairman of a credit card company, would be an advocate of the loan system.  However, it seems that after the problems Villa encountered with Jermaine Jenas, and the failure of Simon Dawkins, loan deals are something to be avoided if at all possible at Villa Park.

In my opinion this approach is to the club’s detriment.  Villa need supplementary loans alongside youth acquisitions if Lambert is going to oversee a smooth transition of his ‘project‘. Many big clubs make use of loans when they are rebuilding their teams.  Liverpool for example with Moses. You can only buy so many players at one time, and loan deals offer worthwhile temporary solutions.  You can also hand players back if they don’t work out.

Why, then, buy a player you are not quite sure of on the basis that (i) they are cheap (ii) if they fail it doesn’t matter?  The players still have to be given a contract and wages and they prove difficult to sell unless they are a success.  Everton, for example, loaned Lukaku and Barry for the price Villa paid for Kozák.  Next season, if Martinez sells Baines as expected, Everton can supplement these players with other signings and maintain a high level of performance and league position.

Apparently Gareth Barry was offered to the club on loan this summer but Villa rejected the chance to take the player.  Sigh. Perhaps even more frustrating was the failure to bring in an attacking midfielder when one was desperately needed.  Tom Carroll was available until the very last minute but Villa didn’t try to loan him either.  Great little player.  Furthermore, earlier in the window, the likes of Lukas Piazon would have been a smart addition, if Lambert was, as claimed, waiting for the right player to become available.

Loaning players as a temporary solution is certainly better than leaving the squad short of players in crucial positions.

Villa should concentrate on quality not quantity in the next transfer windows.  Only add players that offer quality.  If no players are available, loan a quality player instead. UTV

 

Follow MOMS on twitter at @oldmansaid
Follow Shelley on twitter at @shelley_ozzy

 

Opt In Image
BECOME A FREE MOMS E-MEMBER
Exclusive extras, newsletter & supporter issues news

2 COMMENTS

  1. Tell us something we don’t already know!

    “Loaning players as a temporary solution is certainly better than leaving the squad short of players in crucial positions.

    Villa should concentrate on quality not quantity in the next transfer windows. Only add players that offer quality. If no players are available, loan a quality player instead. ”

    Well, duh!

    “Next season, if Martinez sells Baines as expected, Everton can supplement these players with other signings and maintain a high level of performance and league position.”

    Martinez can supplement these players can he? Some feat that would be considering they (Lukaku and Barry) are no longer at Everton! If he sells Baines, and it is an ‘if’ and not an ‘as expected’ (by the writer maybe?) he’ll be buying Barry and Lukaku will he? Not a replacement for the current England left back then?

  2. One question – with the exception of lukaku who wanted to go out on loan because he wants to play (a real footballer). If the player was as good as we want with the quality and experience we want – why would he be available on loan? surely a club would keep their best players (chelsea are still the exception) From what i’ve seen its usually the dross or young upcoming players that are available, and we’ve been buying the latter.

Comments are closed.