Do Gillingham use the loan system to there benefit ??? | Vital Football

Do Gillingham use the loan system to there benefit ???

F

fan_of_mulligan

Vital Youth Team
I don't think we use the loan system to our benefit, a example of this is sending Tom Hadler out on a one month loan deal to Tonbridge Angels and Mitchell Dickenson signing for Hastings United on a short term loan deal and I don't think Gillingham have a strategy to loaning out our own young players.

I am sure that there are several clubs in The Kent Non League Scene that would love to affiliate with Gillingham Football Club and why cannot we use the following system which I am going to mention below......

Age 16 - A Season Long Loan at a Ryman Division One South / Kent County League Side (Sittingbourne, Faversham Town or Whistable Town for example).

Age 17 - A Season Long Loan at a Ryman Premier Division Club. (Fokestone Invicta or Tonbridge Angels)

Age 18 - A Season Long Loan at a Conference South / Conference National Side. (Dartford, Margate, Maidstone United, Welling United, Dover Athletic)

Then maybe, at the age of 19 these players would be better prepared to play for Gillingham because they have had three season long loan spells at different levels of the game and played potentially over 100 games in three season's - there would be a few exceptions to the rule - like if a Matty Jarvis or Jack Payne broke into the first team at the age of 16 - 17, but we would at least have a system in place where the loan system would benefit Gillingham Football Club, benefit the clubs who are only too happy to take our young players on loan, and also benefit the players we are loaning out, because they are playing competitive first team football at a younger age and there is a potential pathway into Gillingham's First Team.

QPR have done this with there young players, Michael Harriman was on loan at Wycombe Wanderers and then on loan with Gillingham and obviously he is now playing for Wycombe Wanderers on a permanent basis now, but QPR do try push there players higher up the footballing ladder once they have proven themselves in a lower division, so why cannot Gillingham do that with there young players.

What does everyone else on here think about my suggestion ???

 
I think the term development suggests we should do just that, a 16 year old won't necessarily benefit from playing so many competitive games in such a short time. Using a shorter term loan system and working with our youth coaches in between loan spells seems the best way to go, other wise we become like the PL, just grab any player with any sign of potential and dump him a few years later.
 
For a start the player has to be wanted and able to play regularly at the level you are sending him to.Each case is different and needs to be treated as such.Players develop at different times and different positions also need different actions.I doubt the club would stand in the way of a young player who wasn't in the immediate plans of the manager going on loan.Cundle was a example of how it can really benefit our players.With young players a lot of it is trust clearly it is less likely that a player will speak up if asked to do something that he knows his manager would not want him to do.So there maybe a element of trust from both sides that is not quiet right.While many may have the ability it maybe that they lack the physical strength.Having watched a bit of non league football in the last few years and the ability should also not be underestimated. Often we seem to have also largely developed smaller players who lack the presence that a non league manager is likely to want.We should not lose sight of the fact the the loan is really meant to be a way of filling a need of the receiving club.Getting back better player should be treated as a bonus that can sometimes happen.But equally if you send out a player before he is ready it can damage his development.We are clearly moving in the right direction youth wise so if it is not broke don't try to fit it.
 
Michael Harriman is hardly a good example of the loan system working in favour of the club who loaned the player out.Michael was never up to Championship or Premier league standard so apart from the small wage saving QPR gained very little from the deal.
 
'their' not 'there', although a collective noun such as Gillingham should be in the singular; ie does Gillingham............... to its benefit. Gove for education secretary
 
Considering the geographical benefit of being on London`s doorstep i`m a bit disappointed with our "dips" into the loan market.

Should be more about Quality not Quantity.


 
I stand corrected Wayne. I have to you have clearly had a good education.Unfortunately I missed a lot of schooling due to ill health and then left school at 16 and started work at 17.For the record I have not been unemployed since,although I did go back and do some night school in my twenties. :14:

While I know make mistakes more so if I write stuff early in the morning. i offen do not check it properly as I sleep during the day.
I have to ask why do you go under that daft username ?
 
Chris, don't worry about your spelling or your grammar. It is true that there are three different spellings and different meanings; 'there', 'their', and 'they're'. I reckon you probably know the difference despite leaving school at 16.

However, this doesn't excuse you writing nonsense such as this:

" I have to you have clearly had a good education."

I'm sorry but that is meaningless and is literally nonsense. Just because you believe in nonsense doesn't mean we're going to understand it....
:67:
 
nitram77 - 5/7/2016 05:57

I think the term development suggests we should do just that, a 16 year old won't necessarily benefit from playing so many competitive games in such a short time. Using a shorter term loan system and working with our youth coaches in between loan spells seems the best way to go, other wise we become like the PL, just grab any player with any sign of potential and dump him a few years later.
Click to expand...

When looking at this are people considering the changes in the loan system that come in this season? I understand that loans can now only be season long from the Premier League to our level, which makes borrowing a player a massive risk.

I do not know if the same changes have cascaded lower down the leagues. I can't see a non league club wanting to commit to a season long loan of a 16 year old from a league one club if they are stuck with them even if they are not up to it.

And as for the latest changes in the interpretation of the offside law, they strike me as madness. Theoretically a free kick for offside can now be awarded in the attacking side's own half as a free kick can now be given against an offside player who is running back and will be awarded where he touches the ball, not where he was offside. Would be interesting if an offside player then cleared the ball off his own line. I'm hoping that the article about it in When Saturday Comes was a very very late April Fool.

Also, Wayne, I note the the misuse of the word 'there' goes back to the original poster. And I would refer to Gills as 'we' and a band or football team in the piural. There may only be one Madness, but there are 6 (of 7) blokes currently in Madness, which for me make Madness an entity I would always talk about in plural terms. I don't care if this makes me wrong, because it makes sense to me. Think about it (well imagine it) "At number one this week is Suggs." or "At number one this week are Madness." "Suggs is on tour". "Madness are on tour.".

:6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6:
:6: :6: :6: :6: :6:
:6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6:
:6: :6: :6: :6: :6:
:6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6: :6:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.