Our terrible loans this season

Dolf

Full Member
Joined
May 27, 2016
Messages
2,887
Location
Amsterdam
Take a look at the following stats:


Facundo Pellistri - Deportivo Alaves - Loaned out entire season.

- 21 matches in La Liga and 2 in the Copa del Rey totalling 750 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 33 minutes per game.
- 0 goals. 0 assists.
- Missed 2 matched due to injury. One of those was due to COVID.

Axel Tuanzebe - Napoli - Loaned out since January.

- 1 match in Serie A and 1 match in Coppa Italia totalling 130 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 65 minutes per game.
- 1 clean sheet (but he only played 10 minutes in that game).
- Missed 6 matches due to injury.

Amad Diallo - Rangers FC - Loaned out since January.

- 10 matches in the Premiership and 3 in the SFA cup totalling 500 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 38 minutes per game.
- 3 goals. 0 assists.
- Missed 2 matches due to injury.

Anthony Martial - Sevilla - Loaned out since January.

- 9 matches in La Liga and 3 in the Europa League totalling 673 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 56 minutes per game.
- 1 goal. 1 assists.
- Missed 3 matched due to injury.

Donny van de Beek - Everton - Loaned out since January.

- 7 matches in the Premier League totalling 483 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 69 minutes per game.
- 1 goal. 0 assists.
- Missed 8 matches due to injury.

Tahith Chong - Birmingham - Loaned out the entire season.

- 20 matches in the Championship totalling 1561 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 78 minutes per game.
- 1 goal. 3 assists.
- Missed 17 matches due to injury.


Brandon Williams - Norwich - Loaned out the entire season.
- 26 matches in the Premier League, 2 in the FA Cup and 1 in the EFL Cup totalling 2331 minutes playing time.
- That's an average of 80 minutes per game.
- 0 goals. 1 assist.
- Missed 0 matches due to injury.



Surely the point of a loan is to get more playing time? Of all these loans only Williams and maybe Chong have been useful.
Why haven't we recalled anyone when it was obvious the player wasn't going to get gametime?
Who picks the club to begin with?


Edit: Forgot Pereira but can't be bothered. Loaning him out to Flamengo was definitely a good move. Played 44 matches for them.
 

LawCharltonBest

Enjoys watching fox porn
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
14,888
Location
Salford
Made the point last summer about how bad our loans were.

Made the warning that sending Pellistri to Alaves again would end in disaster.

Said sending Amad to Rangers in the winter was a stupid move, to much stick from others on here. I was right again.

I shouldn't have more sense than the Manchester United decision makers, yet I do.
 

Lastwolf

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,729
Location
Brick Sofa
Garner had a fairly successful loan, you forgot him.

Loans are bit of a crap shoot, some times they work sometimes they are terrible, some of these were never gonna work though, not sure who thought Tuanzebe's loan was gonna work.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
I think Diallo would actually have got more mins at United than Rangers. Owell, at least the players coming back know their place.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
13,615
Although Garner stands out as a very successful loan project, the rest were pretty much disasters. It's been this way for a long time.

We're just not a well run football club, but that's merely stating the obvious.
 

Yagami

Good post resistant
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
13,472
Galbraith's was mixed.

Was a key player under the man who brought him in, and then about halfway through the season they got a new man who didn't fancy him at all. Annoying.
 

Lecland07

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2021
Messages
2,835
Seem to be missing that it is still on the players to perform. If Martial isn't good enough to nail down a position at Seville, that says more about him than the choice of loan. You can say similar for De Beek at Everton.

Williams - Good loan for him - he isn't good enough for Manchester United, but it was successful for his level.
Levitt - Considered one of the best players at Dundee this season
Garner - Great loan at Nottingham Forest
Chong - Good loan, but showing that he is just not good enough for Manchester United.

I wouldn't say the loans have been particularly bad. 4/7 of the younger players have had good loans.

Martial and De Beek should be doing better - that is entirely on them as they are experienced.
 

Kag

Full Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
18,875
Location
United Kingdom
Your point is rendered a little obsolete when you go out of your way to discount the one overwhelming successful loan move this season: Garner.

More loans are unsuccessful than successful. This is the case everywhere you go.

Most of these players won’t make it here and that is normal.
 

Smithy89

Full Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
3,218
Garner, Levitt, Mengi, Bernard and even Williams all had decent to good loans. Laird for me had a good first half of the season.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,467
Garner, Levitt, Chongy, Galbraith, Williams all did well on loan. Laird you could also make a case for. The first team loans obviously didn’t do well, and let’s be honest most of them are players we can’t shift so it’s hardly a surprise.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
Was the Amad loan that bad? Slow start but picked up towards the end.

I’m not sure what the criticism is here. The wrong clubs to go on loan to or that the players didn’t deliver?

Some loans are about identifying players that aren’t at our level and moving them on. This can be equally beneficial.
 

Von Mistelroum

Full Member
Joined
May 21, 2015
Messages
3,978
Anyone think Garner can do a job for us under EtH? On a more positive, but related note.
 

Blood Mage

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
5,822
Our loan manager is just as useless as most of the other employees at the club then? Quelle surprise. I suppose it's also a case of most of our fringe players just not being very good.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
6,783
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
I think once again, the club suffers from a complete lack of direction and therefore fail to understand what the various loans are trying to achieve.

For young players, we should be thinking 'is the point of this loan for them to gain experience or to put them in the shop window?"

Either way, of course you want them to play, but if you think about a player like Amad or Pellistri, for example, surely the point is that we want them to adjust to the pace and physicality of the English game. Therefore, whats the point on sending Pellistri to Alaves? How is he going to adjust to English football and English culture playing in Spain? We'd have been better off sending him to League One. You're not telling me a team like Sunderland or Wigan wouldn't have loved a player like Pellistri. Fantastic learning curve, even if technically it might be a bit below his level.

I can understand sending Amad to Rangers, but once it became apparent he wasn't going to play he should have come straight back.

Other players, like van der Beek....why send him to the middle of a relegation battle? Send him somewhere calmer were he can get some game-time and look good in a more sedate league/environment, boost his transfer value. With a loan, it shouldn't be about what money we can get short-term, it should be picking the best club to achieve a certain objective.
 

KM

I’m afraid I just blue myself
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
49,718
Why have you missed out Bernard, Garner and Levitt?
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,232
Location
@United_Hour
14 players been on decent level loans - do it properly or don't do it at all

Most of the bad loans were down to injury, not much you can do about that

Garner, Williams, Bernard, Levitt, Laird, Chong all had useful loans