[Albion] James Beadle

[Freddo]

How does it set alarm bells ringing? The club wouldn’t expect him to walk straight into the first XI, especially when he joins late and has no pre-season with the club he’s gone too.

It’s part of the experience they are looking players to get. It isn’t just about game time. It’s about testing a players attitude and resolve, how do they cope with being out of a team, how well do they perform in training and force their way into a managers thinking. Do they continue to work hard once they’ve been selected and started playing.

A loan move where a player is selected for 46 straight games without a problem is far less of a test than one’s where players have to work to deal with things not going perfectly. If a player never goes through a challenging period while out on loan how do you know how they will react.

I’ll say it again the club didn’t get it wrong, it turned out to be a bad move because of an injury. That is totally out of everyone’s control. He was available for selection for 7 games, he played 3, all immediately before his recall which means he’d probably shown a real ability to cope with a tough 4 or 5 months, the first real test of that type of his career.

Even if a player doesn’t get much game time that doesn’t necessarily mean the club got it wrong. It could be down to how the player performs in training and in matches, it’s up to the player to prove themselves. Simply being on loan from Brighton shouldn’t mean they are an automatic choice and the club wouldn’t expect them to be. The club will want a loaner to work hard and make themselves one of the first names on the team sheet like Ben White did at Leeds but not every loan move will be pretty much prefect as far as the player is concerned like that one was.

This interview from Brentford’s (possibly the club closest to us in terms of how they are run) website about their loan players talks about not just players getting game time but getting tested and coping with adversity and being out of their comfort zone. Exactly what Rushworth would have gone through last season with Hull.

How Brentford define and find the perfect loan

A key part of Brentford’s method in developing players is utilising the loan market in the right way, to give valuable experience to young players in the EFL and beyond; loan manager David Langridge, technical director Lee Dykes, head coach Thomas Frank and Brentford defender Fin Stevens discuss...

www.brentfordfc.com

I agree that players going through a tough loan spell can end up benefitting them (just look at Ayari), but I also agree with @GT49er that it was a bad choice of loan destination for Rushworth. Not because he didn't waltz straight into the team, but because Hull had spent over £1m* on another goalkeeper in the previous January transfer window. £1m to me feels quite a lot for a Championship club to spend on a 2nd choice goalkeeper, so in my opinion it was an unnecessary risk loaning Rushworth to them. I think we should be finding clubs for our loan players with obvious gaps in their team where our loan player has a high % chance of getting a good run in the team. Many of our Championship loans last year didn't meet this criteria.

* fee was undisclosed so I'm going off transfermarkt

 

[GT49er]

I agree that players going through a tough loan spell can end up benefitting them (just look at Ayari), but I also agree with @GT49er that it was a bad choice of loan destination for Rushworth. Not because he didn't waltz straight into the team, but because Hull had spent over £1m* on another goalkeeper in the previous January transfer window. £1m to me feels quite a lot for a Championship club to spend on a 2nd choice goalkeeper, so in my opinion it was an unnecessary risk loaning Rushworth to them. I think we should be finding clubs for our loan players with obvious gaps in their team where our loan player has a high % chance of getting a good run in the team. Many of our Championship loans last year didn't meet this criteria.

* fee was undisclosed so I'm going off transfermarkt

Generally agree, except for the last sentence - I think the other loans did meet the criteria, but unfortunately some of our loanees didn't shine as we'd hoped.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

I agree that players going through a tough loan spell can end up benefitting them (just look at Ayari), but I also agree with @GT49er that it was a bad choice of loan destination for Rushworth. Not because he didn't waltz straight into the team, but because Hull had spent over £1m* on another goalkeeper in the previous January transfer window. £1m to me feels quite a lot for a Championship club to spend on a 2nd choice goalkeeper, so in my opinion it was an unnecessary risk loaning Rushworth to them. I think we should be finding clubs for our loan players with obvious gaps in their team where our loan player has a high % chance of getting a good run in the team. Many of our Championship loans last year didn't meet this criteria.

* fee was undisclosed so I'm going off transfermarkt

I agree that sending him to a club that had signed another keeper in the window may not have been the best move it is impossible to say how it would have gone because he got injured so early into his loan spell there.

There were reports that Rushworth was going to make his debut against Sunderland but the ankle injury occurred the day before the game so it didn’t happen.

Swansea City: Why Hull City's Carl Rushworth may rue missing out on Swans return - BBC Sport

Swansea City: Why Hull City's Carl Rushworth may rue missing out on Swans return

www.bbc.com

The fact that he came straight back from injury and played 3 games without another spell on the bench suggests he’d definitely done enough to establish himself at Hull and it was the injury alone that cost him game time, if he’d remained fit it looked like he was going to be given a chance to play within a few weeks of joining.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

How does it set alarm bells ringing? The club wouldn’t expect him to walk straight into the first XI, especially when he joins late and has no pre-season with the club he’s gone too.

It’s part of the experience they are looking players to get. It isn’t just about game time. It’s about testing a players attitude and resolve, how do they cope with being out of a team, how well do they perform in training and force their way into a managers thinking. Do they continue to work hard once they’ve been selected and started playing.

A loan move where a player is selected for 46 straight games without a problem is far less of a test than one’s where players have to work to deal with things not going perfectly. If a player never goes through a challenging period while out on loan how do you know how they will react.

I’ll say it again the club didn’t get it wrong, it turned out to be a bad move because of an injury. That is totally out of everyone’s control. He was available for selection for 7 games, he played 3, all immediately before his recall which means he’d probably shown a real ability to cope with a tough 4 or 5 months, the first real test of that type of his career.

Even if a player doesn’t get much game time that doesn’t necessarily mean the club got it wrong. It could be down to how the player performs in training and in matches, it’s up to the player to prove themselves. Simply being on loan from Brighton shouldn’t mean they are an automatic choice and the club wouldn’t expect them to be. The club will want a loaner to work hard and make themselves one of the first names on the team sheet like Ben White did at Leeds but not every loan move will be pretty much prefect as far as the player is concerned like that one was.

This interview from Brentford’s (possibly the club closest to us in terms of how they are run) website about their loan players talks about not just players getting game time but getting tested and coping with adversity and being out of their comfort zone. Exactly what Rushworth would have gone through last season with Hull.

How Brentford define and find the perfect loan

A key part of Brentford’s method in developing players is utilising the loan market in the right way, to give valuable experience to young players in the EFL and beyond; loan manager David Langridge, technical director Lee Dykes, head coach Thomas Frank and Brentford defender Fin Stevens discuss...

www.brentfordfc.com

I can't agree with you on this.

They could learn resolve while on the bench here. What we need when we send players out is minutes. They need to learn men's football. This is especially true of a keeper.

I think Sanchez is a good example. We sent him right down the leagues as a young player, we could have likely placed him higher, but we wanted him to play, which he did. And despite the level he was at, there was no problem adapting to PL football when his chance arose.

Another point is that if a manager has two equal players for the same position and one is on loan, he's likely to play the player the club actually owns, for the obvious reason that you may as well develop your own players rather than someone else's. So when we loan out a keeper, we need to be making sure the club we're loaning to really needs a keeper and it needs to be at a level where even a player with no experience is going to be clearly better than what they already have