Aaron Mooy

[thisphantomfortress]

3 minutes ago, Embee said:

To be fair to you, there are an increasing amount of them. It's easy to get confused.

Nah I'll put my hand up and say my bad on this one haha.

[playmaker]

15 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Just checked the Mod forum and it was actually @Wonder_Boy I have hidden the above posts.

Got my retarded posters mixed up.

You have a habit of being wrong. Putting yourself at the top of your retarded poster list would be a start to making things right.

[thisphantomfortress]

23 minutes ago, playmaker said:

You have a habit of being wrong. Putting yourself at the top of your retarded poster list would be a start to making things right.

See ya in two days 

[kingofhearts]

36 minutes ago, playmaker said:

You have a habit of being wrong. Putting yourself at the top of your retarded poster list would be a start to making things right.

Bahahaha boy Oh boy wowee,  that's my boy playmaker  you don't take shit from no one,  I'm still with ya on Koren,  4 more seasons and he would've been our best player ever

[haz]

-Deleted Image-

Edited March 16, 2017 by haz

[playmaker]

55 minutes ago, kingofhearts said:

Bahahaha boy Oh boy wowee,  that's my boy playmaker  you don't take shit from no one,  I'm still with ya on Koren,  4 more seasons and he would've been our best player ever

Funny thing is, if JVS wasn't such a fkn idiot, we would have seen what magic Koren and Mooy could have strung together. That's my disappointment. Who in their right mind would play Melling, Mauk, or Retre over Koren. And JVS nearly did the same to Thomas. JVS had real issues with senior players and thank goodness he pissed off.

Anyway the past is the past and we will never know; our opinion differs and we should leave it as that.

[johnno cpfc]

I think i may be a little older and maybe wiser than you Mr Playmaker, i have watched many many years of football both here and in the U.K. and never never have i seen a loaned player play against his parent club whether in the FA cup or in any of the various leagues. It has been a very long standing rule in the FA that loaned players are ineligible to play against their parent club so it comes as no surprise to those of us with even a little knowledge of the rules in the UK. 

[Shahanga]

48 minutes ago, johnno cpfc said:

I think i may be a little older and maybe wiser than you Mr Playmaker, i have watched many many years of football both here and in the U.K. and never never have i seen a loaned player play against his parent club whether in the FA cup or in any of the various leagues. It has been a very long standing rule in the FA that loaned players are ineligible to play against their parent club so it comes as no surprise to those of us with even a little knowledge of the rules in the UK. 

@Johnno cpfc. , Newcastle loaned Lua Lua to Portsmouth back when the late great Sir Bobby was gaffer.  because Newcastle was owned by some numptys who were desperate for another quid, they agreed for extra $ that Lua Lua could play against them.  The shit really hit the fan when said mentioned highly motivated Lua Lua came off the bench and got the winner.

Update:

he actually scored the equaliser (for Newcastle a draw that felt like a loss)

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/lualua-loan-deal-backfires-on-newcastle-85058.html

after that they changed the rules apparently:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/17/premier-league-loan-system_n_5166632.html

 

Edited February 20, 2017 by Shahanga
update, with links.

[Shahanga]

3 hours ago, playmaker said:

our opinion differs and we should leave it as that.

Absolutely.  Now I've got a better one for you to focus on, some people have gone on and on how in their view CFG have "saved us" (whilst turning us into a bland foreign owned clone of a much bigger club), but with Mooy it looks like they are sitting on a tidy profit, with no obvious intention of putting that extra cash they stripped out of Heart back into Melbourne ("we" seem to have sold him for a peppercorn).  Want to focus on them being dodgy?  How about that one??

Edited February 20, 2017 by Shahanga
cleaned up

[playmaker]

16 minutes ago, johnno cpfc said:

It has been a very long standing rule in the FA that loaned players are ineligible to play against their parent club so it comes as no surprise to those of us with even a little knowledge of the rules in the UK. 

Sorry Johnno you are wrong. There is no rule the prohibits a player on a long term loan deal to play in the FA cup.

[jw1739]

I would like to suggest that anyone wishing to actually read the rules for this year's competition put fa-cup-rules-2016-2017.pdf into Google, download the document, and read it. Section 15(j) is the pertinent one. 

[malloy]

1 hour ago, playmaker said:

Sorry Johnno you are wrong. There is no rule the prohibits a player on a long term loan deal to play in the FA cup.

 

51 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I would like to suggest that anyone wishing to actually read the rules for this year's competition put fa-cup-rules-2016-2017.pdf into Google, download the document, and read it. Section 15(j) is the pertinent one. 

 

[kingofhearts]

So that aaron mooy guy hey, hes not too bad.

[thisphantomfortress]

10 hours ago, kingofhearts said:

So that aaron mooy guy hey, hes not too bad.

Kinda reminds me of a character from the 1993 cult classic Coneheads though

[Hellenic Hero]

Between Chris P, Playmaker and MCY Hero, it's almost impossible to read the forum nowadays.

[SF33]

On 20/02/2017 at 10:15 AM, Embee said:

I hope that one day loans are allowed between A-League teams in this country and that we loan someone to Central Coast, allow them to play against us and then get knocked out of the FFA Cup in the Semi-Final by that player in the 90th minute. I know exactly what the reaction regarding that on this forum would be. 
 

Probably. But I think it's a more reasonable response when you're playing an opponent that's in your league, not so much when they're a tier below. Personally, I would have thought there'd be some benefit in seeing what Mooy could do against his potential future teammates that offsets the possibility of City actually losing the game.

Maybe it's smart/gamesmanship, but I don't think it's a great look. Shades of Australia v Australia A in the cricket in the mid-90s, where Paul Reiffel was dominating for Aus A, so Australia promoted him for the final between the two teams and then made him 12th man. Or those local level reserve teams in (pick any sport you wish) that start stacking their teams with senior players to qualify them for reserves finals (once the senior teams are out of contention) to win one of those sacred reserves trophies.

Nothing illegal about it, but still just doesn't sit well with a lot of people. Having said that, it's Manchester City's call and it's hardly Trevor Chappell's underarm.

[n i k o]

In an ideal world if a player is loaned out he should be able to play for that club imo. But we live in a world far from ideal so understandable why Man City and the FA would stop this from happening. 

[playmaker]

1 hour ago, n i k o said:

In an ideal world if a player is loaned out he should be able to play for that club imo. But we live in a world far from ideal so understandable why Man City stop this from happening. 

Fixed.

Nothing to do with the FA Cup or their rules, all to do with Man City exercising an option in the loan contract that they could have equally not exercised and let Mooy play.

[playmaker]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/socceroos/roo-radar-aaron-mooys-numbers-compared-to-manchester-city-players/news-story/23585b8aab64c6cea553f100ef4899d1

Roo Radar: Aaron Mooy’s numbers compared to Manchester City players

February 21, 2017 9:14am

DAVID WEINER@davidweiner9

Source: FOX SPORTS

AARON Mooy fever has reached a new level thanks to Pep Guardiola’s very glowing public endorsement of the Socceroo last week.

While his Huddersfield Town held Manchester City to a 0-0 draw in their FA Cup clash on the weekend, forcing a replay, plenty of the club’s fans wondered ‘what if’ their Australian star had been allowed to play by his Premier League parent club.

There’s been plenty of talk over whether Mooy will graduate and become a squad member of the Premier League powerhouse, with Guardiola indicating a decision will be made at season’s end.

Overnight, Mooy responded to Guardiola’s glowing praise, telling Huddersfield’s official website:

“It’s obviously excellent and I’m very humbled and all that sort of stuff.

“It’s great to know he’s watching me and has his eye on how I’m doing, that’s great.”

Aaron Mooy of Huddersfield Town .Source: Supplied

Before the weekend tie, The Manchester Evening Newsran with a story about Mooy headlined “The midfielder who could save Pep Guardiola and Man City a fortune this summer”.

His teammate Philip Billing added to the sentiment.

“From what I’ve seen, he is such a good footballer,” said the Danish midfielder. “He’s probably the best loan player the club has had for a long time.

“He’s definitely got the quality to play in the Premier League.

“Watching him in training you learn. He’s so calm on the ball.

“I try to watch him play because you learn from players like that.”

Indeed, before the tie, much of the focus was on Mooy. In the local paper, The Huddersfield Examiner, Blake Welton wrote: “It is little wonder Guardiola looked into recalling Mooy from his Huddersfield Town loan during the January transfer window, having been impressed by displays that, though less refined, have a passing similarity to master technicians such as Xavi and Iniesta.

Aaron Mooy of Huddersfield Town.Source: Getty Images

“Both footballing legends played under Guardiola at Barcelona and there is no doubt Mooy will be given the opportunity to prove himself on Manchester City’s pre-season tour ahead of the 2017-18 season.”

For all the hype, how exactly does Mooy rate?

It’s impossible to track players in different leagues, but on pure, hard metrics, the former A-League star could have done no more in his current forum.

Using analytics from the statistics on websiteSquawka, Mooy’s key indicators are impressive when stacked up against his Mancunian competition.

Based on an algorithm that takes on all key indicators across offensive, defensive and possession based disciplines, Mooy’s output not just stacks up compared to Fernandinho, Fernando, Ilkay Gundogan and Yaya Toure, but his durability has seen him notch 29 appearances already this Championship season.

How Aaron Mooy stacks up with City's current midfielders.Source: Supplied

Top 10: Aaron Mooy's Championship rank.Source: Supplied

The Premier League's Top 10 midfielders, as a comparison.Source: Supplied

When broken down into some more specific examples, Mooy’s averages over 90 minutes, from a greater sample size, are comparable with those more fancied names, while his overall output has him placed in the Championship’s top 10 midfielders, statistically speaking.

There’s no question that further up the field, David Silva and Kevin De Bruyne are key pillars in City’s success.

But a little deeper, where Mooy has thrived under David Wagner in the second tier, City have room to add further depth and quality.

Gundogan and Fabian Delph have both struggled with injuries this season, although the former is a key Guardiola signing who will be a focal part of his plans when fit. Fernandinho has also been an important cog, but has been sent off three times, while Fernando is a sluggish alternative to his compatriot.

Obviously there is an enormous step-up between the tiers, but as fas as auditions go, the Australian’s data could hardly be more impressive to back up the buzz.

Edited February 21, 2017 by playmaker

[jw1739]

1 hour ago, playmaker said:

Fixed.

Nothing to do with the FA Cup or their rules, all to do with Man City exercising an option in the loan contract that they could have equally not exercised and let Mooy play.

Two things I'd really like to know. First, how you know the contents of Mooy's contract with Manchester City. Second, what section of the following (section (15(j) from the rules of this season's competition) do you not understand (and especially clause iv).

(j) Temporary (loan) Transfers (i) A player on a temporary (loan) transfer is ineligible to compete in the Challenge Cup Competition unless permission to do so is given by the lending Club in writing and a copy is received by The Association by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the date fixed for playing the Round. Any permissions must clearly state that the player has approval to play in The FA Challenge Cup Competition. A registered Trainee or a player who is registered on a Scholarship for work experience may play for another Club, subject to written permission being given by the Club that he is registered to and provided that such permission is received by The Association by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the date fixed for playing the Round.

(ii) For all rounds other than the Final, a player recalled to his original Club from temporary (loan) transfer, in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement, may only represent his original Club if any such recall has been received and accepted by 12 noon on the Friday prior to the date fixed for playing the round.

(iii) A player on temporary (loan) transfer is eligible to compete if transferred permanently by the lending Club to the loaning Club after the date and time for player qualification for a round but must have been eligible to play in the original tie.

(iv) The Association will not give permission for players on loan or work experience to play against the lending Club.

[n i k o]

Is he on a temporary loan? 

Edited February 21, 2017 by n i k o

[thisphantomfortress]

9 minutes ago, n i k o said:

Is he on a temporary loan? 

@playmaker has his contract there so he can tell us.

[japiedog]

almost finished my first box of popcorn......

this is getting better and better.....

 

[n i k o]

19 hours ago, playmaker said:

Sorry Johnno you are wrong. There is no rule the prohibits a player on a long term loan deal to play in the FA cup.

It looks as though under the ruling that the only exception is if the player is on a temporary lean deal, not a long term loan deal. Under the temporary loan deal the loaning club can put in writing to ask if the loaned player can take part. That seems to be the one and only exception. 

23 hours ago, thisphantomfortress said:

See ya in two days 

Good old fight behind the sheds huh

[jw1739]

4 minutes ago, n i k o said:

It looks as though under the ruling that the only exception is if the player is on a temporary lean deal, not a long term loan deal. Under the temporary loan deal the loaning club can put in writing to ask if the loaned player can take part. That seems to be the one and only exception. 

Good old fight behind the sheds huh

As far as I am concerned the wording of clause (iv) says no player on loan can play against his lending club - the duration of the loan is immaterial, it just can't happen. (iv) is unequivocal - he could not play against City, his lending club.

Another thing to note is that the rules for the FA Cup can and do vary slightly from season to season. And 15(j) is one of the sections that has varied from time to time.

[thisphantomfortress]

22 minutes ago, n i k o said:

 

Good old fight behind the sheds huh

I wish. Nah gave him a warning and ban but obviously didn't work or another mod overruled it. I specifically gave them the choice to do in the mod thread as I was being unreasonable and so was he with personal attacks

[playmaker]

I think the confusion is with the term "temporary loan transfer", let me clarify it for you.

The 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' relates to an injury replacement type scenario of maximum of 3 months but can be extended for the purpose of covering the loss of the injured player. That's why point iv is under that 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' subsection.

Players on season “long term loan agreements”, are not considered “loan” players for the purposes of the Rule, and are therefore eligible to play in the Competition.

If you are still not sure you can look it up yourself.

 

************************************

As for Mooy's contract, he made it quite clear on what the options are:

The Australia midfielder felt a wave of excitement sweep over him as he watched the draw for the fifth round seemingly offer him the chance to give City boss Pep Guardiola a first hand impression of the prowess which has earned him four player-of-the-month plaudits this season and a cascade of other accolades.

But within 24 hours, Mooy's hopes were dashed when City confirmed they would exercise their right to bar the loanee from lining up against them at the John Smith's Stadium.

"I actually saw the draw live on TV and it came down to the last four teams, which were Chelsea Man city, Huddersfield and a team I can't recall," he said.

"When we came out of the hat playing City I couldn't believe it.

"On the day of the draw I actually didn't know if I would be allowed to play or not and I was thinking to myself 'this will be a good game to play in'

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/02/13/exclusive-onlooker-mooy-comes-terms-fa-cup-exclusion

********************************

They ARE the rules and it is quite clear that CFG had the right to allow him to play.

 

Edited February 21, 2017 by playmaker

[Jovan]

The above is all good and well but quess what.

He won't be playing. End of story. If he wanted to doesn't matter.

[bt50]

 

10 minutes ago, playmaker said:

I think the confusion is with the term "temporary loan transfer", let me clarify it for you.

The 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' relates to an injury replacement type scenario of maximum of 3 months but can be extended for the purpose of covering the loss of the injured player. That's why point iv is under that 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' subsection.

Players on season “long term loan agreements”, are not considered “loan” players for the purposes of the Rule, and are therefore eligible to play in the Competition.

If you are still not sure you can look it up yourself.

 

************************************

As for Mooy's contract, he made it quite clear on what the options are:

The Australia midfielder felt a wave of excitement sweep over him as he watched the draw for the fifth round seemingly offer him the chance to give City boss Pep Guardiola a first hand impression of the prowess which has earned him four player-of-the-month plaudits this season and a cascade of other accolades.

But within 24 hours, Mooy's hopes were dashed when City confirmed they would exercise their right to bar the loanee from lining up against them at the John Smith's Stadium.

"I actually saw the draw live on TV and it came down to the last four teams, which were Chelsea Man city, Huddersfield and a team I can't recall," he said.

"When we came out of the hat playing City I couldn't believe it.

"On the day of the draw I actually didn't know if I would be allowed to play or not and I was thinking to myself 'this will be a good game to play in'

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/02/13/exclusive-onlooker-mooy-comes-terms-fa-cup-exclusion

********************************

They ARE the rules and it is quite clear that CFG had right to allow him to play.

 

FWIW I agree with you on your interpretation of the rules. I think City had the power to allow him to play.

I thoroughly disagree with your premise that they had any obligation to let him play though, for all the reason we've debated above.

Edited February 21, 2017 by bt50

[playmaker]

6 minutes ago, Jovan said:

The above is all good and well but quess what.

He won't be playing. End of story. If he wanted to doesn't matter.

 

5 minutes ago, bt50 said:

FWIW I agree with you on your interpretation of the rules. I think City had the power to allow him to play.

I thoroughly disagree with your premise that they had any obligation to let him play though, for all the reason we've debated above.

 

Fair enough, whether or not you agree or disagree on the premise of him playing is obviously open to debate, but there are some using their lack of knowledge or misinterpretation of the rules as a debating tool which I don't understand tbh, anyway, whatever

 

2 hours ago, thisphantomfortress said:

I wish. Nah gave him a warning and ban but obviously didn't work or another mod overruled it. I specifically gave them the choice to do in the mod thread as I was being unreasonable and so was he with personal attacks

 

 

[kingofhearts]

Playing with fire playmaker,  just walk away 

[haz]

@jw1739

Can we move all this stuff to a "Contract"  thread of some sort ?

[Mr MO]

7 minutes ago, haz said:

@jw1739

Can we move all this stuff to a "Contract"  thread of some sort ?

Or maybe we should start a thread called "Serious disagreements"

A thread for adult forum visitors, one where swearing and discrimination is allowed, even better we called it "Kent & Fack''

[malloy]

1 hour ago, playmaker said:

I think the confusion is with the term "temporary loan transfer", let me clarify it for you.

The 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' relates to an injury replacement type scenario of maximum of 3 months but can be extended for the purpose of covering the loss of the injured player. That's why point iv is under that 'Temporary (loan) Transfer' subsection.

Players on season “long term loan agreements”, are not considered “loan” players for the purposes of the Rule, and are therefore eligible to play in the Competition.

If you are still not sure you can look it up yourself.

 

************************************

As for Mooy's contract, he made it quite clear on what the options are:

The Australia midfielder felt a wave of excitement sweep over him as he watched the draw for the fifth round seemingly offer him the chance to give City boss Pep Guardiola a first hand impression of the prowess which has earned him four player-of-the-month plaudits this season and a cascade of other accolades.

But within 24 hours, Mooy's hopes were dashed when City confirmed they would exercise their right to bar the loanee from lining up against them at the John Smith's Stadium.

"I actually saw the draw live on TV and it came down to the last four teams, which were Chelsea Man city, Huddersfield and a team I can't recall," he said.

"When we came out of the hat playing City I couldn't believe it.

"On the day of the draw I actually didn't know if I would be allowed to play or not and I was thinking to myself 'this will be a good game to play in'

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/02/13/exclusive-onlooker-mooy-comes-terms-fa-cup-exclusion

********************************

They ARE the rules and it is quite clear that CFG had right to allow him to play.

 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-news-aaron-mooy-12612658

 

"But the simple fact is that Mooy is forbidden by the FA's own rules for the competition, and the player's ineligibility is nothing to do with City.

The FA's rules state “The association will not give permission for players on loan or work experience to play against the lending club”."

"Many fans pointed out that Sanchez Watt played against his club Arsenal in the FA Cup while on loan at Leeds in 2011, after the Gunners gave permission for him to do so.

But that was the last time anybody played against the club owning his registration - the FA changed the rules in the 2011-12 season."

 

FWIW no where does it say in the rules that players on "long term" loan deals are exempted from the rule being debated.

It should also be noted the rules say "Temporary (loan) Transfers" and not "temporary loan transfers". The distinction being that they are referring to all temporary transfers (aka loans) and not temporary injury replacement loan arrangements.

[Tesla]

I haven't even read any of this crap but I can tell you that I am 100% sure the situation is that it used to be a contract clause negotiated between the clubs but these days it's a rule in many competitions including the FA Cup. 

Just ask me next time for answers boys instead of debating for pages. 

[fensaddler]

Moreover, take it from a migrant British fan, this stuff about refusing loanees the right to play against their parent club in cup competitions is pretty much standard custom and practice and has been for years.  British fans are just used to it.

[jw1739]

28 minutes ago, malloy said:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-news-aaron-mooy-12612658

 

"But the simple fact is that Mooy is forbidden by the FA's own rules for the competition, and the player's ineligibility is nothing to do with City.

The FA's rules state “The association will not give permission for players on loan or work experience to play against the lending club”."

"Many fans pointed out that Sanchez Watt played against his club Arsenal in the FA Cup while on loan at Leeds in 2011, after the Gunners gave permission for him to do so.

But that was the last time anybody played against the club owning his registration - the FA changed the rules in the 2011-12 season."

 

FWIW no where does it say in the rules that players on "long term" loan deals are exempted from the rule being debated.

It should also be noted the rules say "Temporary (loan) Transfers" and not "temporary loan transfers". The distinction being that they are referring to all temporary transfers (aka loans) and not temporary injury replacement loan arrangements.

Thank you Malloy. It's what I've been saying all along.

Debate over.

[kingofhearts]

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

 

Debate over.

Hmm i'm not sure about that.

3 more pages of saying the same thing and we might get it.

[thisphantomfortress]

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

Thank you Malloy. It's what I've been saying all along.

Debate over.

And what I agreed with all along, I'm sensing a theme here.

[n i k o]

1 hour ago, Tesla said:

I haven't even read any of this crap but I can tell you that I am 100% sure the situation is that it used to be a contract clause negotiated between the clubs but these days it's a rule in many competitions including the FA Cup. 

Just ask me next time for answers boys instead of debating for pages. 

Appreciate the generosity Tesla. Fwiw everyone but one person had the right answer too however Id be happy to give you an unofficial green line for the hell of it.