Harvey Elliott (signed on loan)

[Dave]

Unai Emery: “With Harvey (Elliott), it’s not changing. Our idea is that we spoke to him clearly. He’s a fantastic guy. On Sunday, he was on the bench, and if we needed some help from him, he was ready to do it. He is in the squad tomorrow. But the situation is not changing for him.”

There we go then.

[Sexual Ealing]

Do we think that's a smokescreen for him taking over from Emi Martinez?

[cdbearsfan]

Still feel pretty sorry for him. Could easily throw a massive strop and not even bother but sounds like he is still training his arse off, working for the appearance that never comes.

[PaulWinch again]

Still feel pretty sorry for him. Could easily throw a massive strop and not even bother but sounds like he is still training his arse off, working for the appearance that never comes.

Yes it’s really rough on him.

[Somniloquism]

So with Guessand going / gone, and McGinn injured, anyone wonder if he might be coming back into the picture or just replaced by Bailey.

[Toronto Villa]

It would be a shame for the player to lose an entire year of his career. He might be taking it professionally but he has to be fuming inside. And I can see why Liverpool wouldn’t take him back either. Elliott is a good player stuck in limbo. It would be great by the deadline if a resolution can be found. Even if our deal is cancelled and goes to MLS as was being rumoured.

[garyellis]

It would be a shame for the player to lose an entire year of his career. He might be taking it professionally but he has to be fuming inside. And I can see why Liverpool wouldn’t take him back either. Elliott is a good player stuck in limbo. It would be great by the deadline if a resolution can be found. Even if our deal is cancelled and goes to MLS as was being rumoured.

Or for an agreed consideration Liverpool remove the buy clause. I think he would be used more than 4 times if that was the case given the current injury crisis.

[Mellin]

We should save one of his games for Man City away and have him score the winner for the title. That'll make it worthwhile.

[Smithy]

It would be a shame for the player to lose an entire year of his career. He might be taking it professionally but he has to be fuming inside. And I can see why Liverpool wouldn’t take him back either. Elliott is a good player stuck in limbo. It would be great by the deadline if a resolution can be found. Even if our deal is cancelled and goes to MLS as was being rumoured.

Or for an agreed consideration Liverpool remove the buy clause. I think he would be used more than 4 times if that was the case given the current injury crisis.

I will be very surprised if some sort of deal can't be reached by the end of the window.  He's clearly not going to play for us if there's a chance it triggers the £35m purchase.   We're clearly not going to give £35m to Liverpool at the end of the season.

If I was Liverpool, and they really have no use for him in their squad for the second half of the season, then I'd happily take a couple of million as a "loan fee" and tear up the obligation to buy (I'm assuming we didn't pay a loan fee for the season given it was assumed we'd be buying him).  Then he could play for us, and get back in the shop window if they still want to sell him in the summer.

If he's sat at bodymoor on the 2nd Feb, and the deal hasn't changed at all, then I think that's a failure on our part and Liverpool's - but the biggest loser will be Harvey himself, who seems to have done very little wrong beyond not convincing Unai to spend £35m on him.

[Dante Lavelli]

Do Liverpool have an obligation to look after the welfare of their player or did they wipe their hand of him when he signed on loan?  Villa haven't covered themselves in any glory but, right now, Liverpool are allowing him to fail and impacting the value of their asset.

Strikes me, it suits all parties to adjust the ten game clause.

[Flamingo Lane]

Can't see Liverpool being willing to do anything that might help us stay above them in a CL place.

[andyh]

Do Liverpool have an obligation to look after the welfare of their player or did they wipe their hand of him when he signed on loan?  Villa haven't covered themselves in any glory but, right now, Liverpool are allowing him to fail and impacting the value of their asset.

Strikes me, it suits all parties to adjust the ten game clause.

We haven’t locked him a dungeon FFS.
He isn’t playing, he doesn’t suit our style or plan and we don’t want to be obligated to buy him.
It’s shit for him, maybe, but I doubt he’s having some sort of breakdown because of it.
Liverpool could just as easy take him back.

It is what it is.

[Dave]

Do Liverpool have an obligation to look after the welfare of their player or did they wipe their hand of him when he signed on loan?  Villa haven't covered themselves in any glory but, right now, Liverpool are allowing him to fail and impacting the value of their asset.

Strikes me, it suits all parties to adjust the ten game clause.

What if he plays well for us, seeing us finish fifth and Liverpool sixth at the end of the season?

I can't imagine them seeing that as suiting them all that much.

[Dante Lavelli]

Can't see Liverpool being willing to do anything that might help us stay above them in a CL place.

It could be a bluff, but doesn’t sound like Emery would suddenly start playing him every week.  Currently he can’t play him at all.

[LeeB]

Liverpool bringing him on as sub in the glorified friendly that is the community shield has fucked this season for him, had they not done that he could be playing elsewhere.