Harvey Elliott (signed on loan)

[Somniloquism]

Could be we're trying to avoid paying the £35m in this calendar year - UEFA's PSR/SQR rules run 1 Jan-31Dec, so if we can flip it to next year then that might help the financials?

That's the conspiracy theory, but why would Elliott or Liverpool agree for him to take that five month chunk out of his career and agree to that being the plan? Rather than just signing for someone who wants him and and will play him.

Another potential Monchi fuckup with rules? The same as when we bought so many players last January, got rid of others on loan and sale and then realised we couldn't register all the new ones for Europe.

[eye digress]

That definitely looks like a trend to me, too.

[Drummond]

I think he'll be fine, will make some key contributions and we'll all be saying how Emery has worked wonders again.

[Dave]

Could be we're trying to avoid paying the £35m in this calendar year - UEFA's PSR/SQR rules run 1 Jan-31Dec, so if we can flip it to next year then that might help the financials?

That's the conspiracy theory, but why would Elliott or Liverpool agree for him to take that five month chunk out of his career and agree to that being the plan? Rather than just signing for someone who wants him and and will play him.

Another potential Monchi fuckup with rules? The same as when we bought so many players last January, got rid of others on loan and sale and then realised we couldn't register all the new ones for Europe.

It feels too amateurish for it to be true, but I definitely don't think it can be ruled out.

[OCD]

Got to think he'll come into the reckoning at some stage and should help second half of the season. Then he adds more options to what we already have.

[eye digress]

It feels too amateurish for it to be true, but I definitely don't think it can be ruled out.

It does, and yet over time, amateurism is becoming an increasingly plausible explanation for a number of transfer-related issues - in this case, the Malen registration mess and the Elliot situation. But there are other cases where our actions have, in a relative information vacuum, looked tinged at the time with the kind of genius that may turn out to be rooted in cluelessness. The protracted Luiz deal, for example, and the surprise Diaby exit – even though you couldn't really criticise the deals in themselves. Then there was the Ramsey exit, which never looked clever (though necessary).

[DB]

It feels too amateurish for it to be true, but I definitely don't think it can be ruled out.

It does, and yet over time, amateurism is becoming an increasingly plausible explanation for a number of transfer-related issues - in this case, the Malen registration mess and the Elliot situation. But there are other cases where our actions have, in a relative information vacuum, looked tinged at the time with the kind of genius that may turn out to be rooted in cluelessness. The protracted Luiz deal, for example, and the surprise Diaby exit – even though you couldn't really criticise the deals in themselves. Then there was the Ramsey exit, which never looked clever (though necessary).

…and therefore, part of the reason why Monchi left?

[Gareth]

I bought the tactical reasons as why he wasn’t featuring until this week, not getting on on Thursday or being in the squad yesterday I’m now fully onboard that we are talking to Liverpool to send him back in January and he was not a signing Unai wanted. 

I was happy when we signed him but also wary that he was a bit part player in a team that was on fire.

Not sure what the rules are if he went back as he played minutes for them and us this season, would that stop them sending him straight back out to say Fulham?

[eye digress]

…and therefore, part of the reason why Monchi left?

It's a very wild, very out there yet tantalising prospect.

It would shine a somewhat different light on that valedictory post-window tweet of Monchi arm in arm with his recruitment team, standing in front of a board with player names on (that [amateurishly?] can actually be deciphered). Portrayed at the time as "these soldiers have been in the trenches for you", was it actually more about "have we done enough to keep him his effing job?".

[LeeB]

He needs a new agent, for a player that's struggled for game time a move to a team lower down the table would've been the move. Get a full season shining at somewhere like Fulham and then you'd have the big boys back in for you.

[chrisw1]

I think there's every chance he would be shining for us if Buendia hadn't stayed and then hit such a fantastic patch of form.  That was unexpected when we signed him.

My guess is the club have simply decided that, as good as Elliot could be, we can spend the money better elsewhere.  Possibly a lesson learned from the Maatsen signing.

I think if it were just a bedding-in issue, he would be getting at least some minutes in games. 

[LeeB]

I think there's every chance he would be shining for us if Buendia hadn't stayed and then hit such a fantastic patch of form.  That was unexpected when we signed him.

My guess is the club have simply decided that, as good as Elliot could be, we can spend the money better elsewhere.  Possibly a lesson learned from the Maatsen signing.

I think if it were just a bedding-in issue, he would be getting at least some minutes in games. 

I agree Chris.

[john2710]

I don't believe Emery didn't want him, but it's clear now we don't need him. The £35m that was earmarked for him will be better value if it's spent on a striker.

[LeeB]

I don't believe Emery didn't want him, but it's clear now we don't need him. The £35m that was earmarked for him will be better value if it's spent on a striker.

A hybrid striker/reasonable right back cover for Matty would be ideal.