Controversy!

Erm, yeah, we’ll have Joe Hart back now, suggest Man City

Hart – coming or going? He doesn’t know.

Joe Hart

Ahh, the old give/borrow conundrum – everyone’s been there. Banks are particularly studied in the art of making a lend feel like a gift, as they woo you into accepting a bundle of cash, before suddenly turning on you a few months later, and demanding that you pay it back NOW. Those sweet sticky voices now curt and unforgiving.

Bloody banks.

Anyway, the news from today’s most era-defining daily newspapers (The Guardian, The Daily Mail) is that Man City have decided that, actually, they want Joe Hart back. Today if possible.

With Given now out for the rest of the campaign, and at least two of his possible replacements also howling on the treatment table, the word on the street is that the prospect of facing the run-in with either Gunner Neilsen – the Faroe Islander who looks like a lesser member of Kasabian – or a 16-year-old called Loris Karius, is hardly floating any Man City onions.

Hence, they will today be begging Premier League bosses to please, PLEASE, let them have Joe Hart back for the rest of the season. 

And, rather surprisingly, Birmingham’s vice president, Peter Pannu, doesn’t seem too bothered. He said this:

 ”I understand their concerns. I am very sympathetic to City and if I was Garry Cook I would already have been on the phone.”

Question is, at this stage of the season, is this fair? No doubt Spurs and Villa fans mightn’t think so.

Let us know your thoughts with a comment.


4 responses so far
  • pedmachine // April 27, 2010 at 8:52 am

    Well, Mr Spoiler…at the end of the day it is a loan. Do the master class of the banking fraternity not call in their loans when there is trouble ahead? Well the master class of football ownership should do precisely that. Joe can catapult City to the Champions League and himself to South Africa.

  • Dave // April 27, 2010 at 11:06 am

    The contract rules state he can’t be recalled.. Spurs went week with players out injured when we have perfect cover on loan… Why should city be aloud to bring players back when spurs not????

  • John Swaine // April 27, 2010 at 12:33 pm

    One rule for them, One rule for us.

    What a joke. How many times have we seen other teams smacked around with injuy crises? Even in the goalkeeper position.

    City HAVE a senior Goalkeeper – they just seem to think that the fact that he’s utter wank is reason enough to be allowed to sign another one.

    I didn’t see Hull being allowed to buy other players because the ones left in that role were crap.

    Worst comes to worse you’d play someone out of position. They don’t even need to do that because they still have a Senior Keeper on their books.

    Utter garbage.

  • Rizpah // April 27, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    The contracts of PL football players are governed by FA rules and the terms of individual contracts-in that order.

    If PL rules do not forbid the variation of loan agreements, then it is a matter for the parent club and the loan club to come to an arrangement. Nothing wrong in that if you subscribe to a free-market.

Leave a comment
  1. View comments in RSS feed