Manchester City make emergency goalkeeper request

[Reids-Belly]

City should be allowed to sign a keeper as they have no goalkeeping backup. Emergency loans have happened a lot in the past, deal with it.

I see what you're saying but who held a gun to their head and forced them to loan out Joe Hart for the season?? Had they not done that then they wouldn't have these problems

 

[WhiteStripe]

City should be allowed to sign a keeper as they have no goalkeeping backup. Emergency loans have happened a lot in the past, deal with it.

I have no issue as long as they are not allowed to sign a quality keeper and then use him as first choice when a phantom injury appears. They have youth keepers also, which we have done in the past.

 

[Kendall]

I see what you're saying but who held a gun to their head and forced them to loan out Joe Hart for the season?? Had they not done that then they wouldn't have these problems

Nobody did, but it's just an unfortunate circumstance and Premier League rules forbid recalling season long loans, so their hands are tied.

It's the rules. If Gomes got injured, I reckon we'd probably be able to do the same.

 

[Jimmypearce7]

Times reporting they have been given permission.

 

[3Dnata]

I'd let them. So long as it can only be Jimmy Walker for 10 million quid.

 

[dontcallme]

When has this been allowed in the past? I'm not saying that it hasn't but I can't remember any cases of this happening.

 

[DC_Boy]

City should be allowed to sign a keeper as they have no goalkeeping backup. Emergency loans have happened a lot in the past, deal with it.

I am dealing with it - i'm flaming mad and think it's an absolute disgrace

 

[mil1lion]

It's gonna be tough for a new keeper to join City and settle in straight away. I like the fact that Hart can't return from his loan, as he'll settle in better than any other keeper. But it's a high pressure situation for a keeper to join them for 3 vital games of the season. I still see this situation as a disadvantage for City.

 

[VegasII]

I'd let them. So long as it can only be Jimmy Walker for 10 million quid.

Ho ho - I was going to post something about letting them have Jimmy Walker. ha ha

They'll probably sign Dudek or someone.

 

[nferno]

we should get a petition going with the villa fans and make sure this does not happen. so who's gonna start it off? :lol:

 

[41john]

I think they should be allowed to sign a keeper but with strict criteria :

1) From an english league team.
2) The player is to remain on the bench and only to be used in result of an injury.

 

[dontcallme]

When has this been allowed in the past? I'm not saying that it hasn't but I can't remember any cases of this happening.

Anyone?

 

[al_pacino]

Anyone?

i think Chelsea signed Hedman a couple of years ago.

 

[KentuckyYid]

IMO they shouldn't be allowed. They had pre season and the winter transfer window to make sure they adequate cover for the entire season. It should be up to them to look into their reserves/youth teams.

If the FA allow the request it's unfair on the other teams competing for CL who have all had injury problems but just made do with what they had available to stay in competition for CL.

 

[sharky127]

It will be very harsh (and very FA like) if they are allowed to sign a back up keeper.

They made the decision to loan out Hart for the season with no option to recall him. They must have known that should Given get injured that they would have no decent back up, why didn't they sign another, decent keeper in January?

Also, they must have a reserve team/youth team, or do they play 'rush keepers'? Why can't one of these sit on the bench?

 

[haxman]

City fans on blue-moon are discussing which world class keepers they can get now. :roll:

 

[dvdhopeful]

'Backup keeper' is the key part, but whose to say what a backup is? If a backup is worse than a 23yr old Faeroe Islander with no PL experience, surely then a youth lad is fine hence no reason to bring anyone else in. What this basically amounts to is 'Our number one got injured, our backup is shite, can we sign someone else please?', in which case the answer should be, fuck off, 'deal with it'.

Whoever City bring in, will be better than what they have (23yr Faeroe Islander), so basically they are allowed to buy in a player, outside the transfer window, and improve their side. What happened to Given was unfortunate, but thats what you have managers for, they aren't out there to cock about with their scarves, but to ensure things like this don't happen.

'Deal with it' Man City.

 

[C-oops]

This is a fucking joke. Tho you know full well it's going to be allowed. Maybe Liverpool can Vernon David villa as cover for torres seeing as though he's injured.

 

[werty]

Thing is, the back-up isn't the Faroe Islands guy. Their back-up is Stuart Taylor, who happens to be injured as well. So the other guy is 3rd choice and the only other senior keeper. They're within their rights to get one. If Gomes got injured then we'd be allowed to too because our back-up(Cudicini) is injured at the moment.

Realistically, they aren't going to get anybody great and as as long as they can't bring back Hart then they're going to be much worse off than they were at the weekend.

 

[DC_Boy]

they have no right at all to get in someone better than their number 2 and number 3 keeper

if the prem allow this - it's sooooo obvious that city will take the proverbial and come up with some international keeper