Looks like we're signing the lad...

[Minster Canary 0]

...Ryo Miyaichi from Arsenal on a season long loan.

Don''t often post on here but I can see its not yet been covered on here and thought I''d share what I''ve come across.

OTBC

[priceyrice 123]

Only source i could find for this rumour is the fake transfer rumour twitter account.

Would love it if true, showed some great moments at Bolton last season, not sure if he has a long term future at Arsenal, but i suspect a loan deal would be possible if we wanted it.

[priceyrice 123]

O i take that back, reports in Japan suggest this is happening.

[Yobocop 1,096]

Interesting one there Matt - i think I know your source, is it one you can share on here though?

[Ben 0]

Very quick player. Would be handy to have some pace like that when playing with Norwich on FIFA.

[Minster Canary 0]

Yeah on twitter, a British/Japanese sports writer who supports Norwich has provided links, if anyone is in the know it''s him.

Pretty sure he posts on here too, though that may be my late Saturday night head talking.

[Ben 0]

Yeah it''s Bethnal saying it on Twitter. He regularly posts on here.

[CanaryOne 0]

There is an article on the News Now Championship page about Miyachi and it says he has told Arsenal he does not want to go out on loan again this season .

[A Gay Schoolboy 0]

[url]http://www.sanspo.com/soccer/news/20120715/pre12071505040001-n1.html[/url]Here''s the article from the Japanese media.It basically says that he is likely to make a loan move to Norwich, some stuff about how Arsenal have signed Giroud and Podolski to bolster their forward line, meaning Miyaichi will have to look for a loan to play regular football, then stuff about him playing 14 times for Bolton last season, scoring 1 goal, and how according to <word I don''t know but I assume means something along the line of ''official/reputable sources> the transfer is likely to be announced tomorrow. Then there is some guff about Kagawa that I don''t care enough about to translate.My Japanese isn''t great so I''ve probably misunderstood some of it but thats the gist of it.I''ve no idea how reputable that source is, could be as much nonsense as English tabloids for all I know.

[Number 9 0]

I might be able to fill in the other bits, Bumble.

There is a section on Rice Dishes, a section on chicken dishes and the end bit is the Sushi range

[Redders Right Foot 22]

Tried looking at it on google chrome, when a page with a foreign language pops up, it will translate for you.

all I can say is, a computers translation is nearly unreadable. lol

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Give Peas a Chance "]Interesting one there Matt - i think I know your source, is it one you can share on here though?[/quote]

 

I think I have stumbled upon something MI6 !!

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="bumblefart"][url]http://www.sanspo.com/soccer/news/20120715/pre12071505040001-n1.html[/url]Here''s the article from the Japanese media.It basically says that he is likely to make a loan move to Norwich, some stuff about how Arsenal have signed Giroud and Podolski to bolster their forward line, meaning Miyaichi will have to look for a loan to play regular football, then stuff about him playing 14 times for Bolton last season, scoring 1 goal, and how according to <word I don''t know but I assume means something along the line of ''official/reputable sources> the transfer is likely to be announced tomorrow. Then there is some guff about Kagawa that I don''t care enough about to translate.My Japanese isn''t great so I''ve probably misunderstood some of it but thats the gist of it.I''ve no idea how reputable that source is, could be as much nonsense as English tabloids for all I know.[/quote]That''s pretty much it - the last paragraph says how Norwich''s first game is away at Fulham and Miyaichi will be looking to get himself into the starting line up and make a ''great leap forward in the new land'' - which sounds dramatic but is how Sankei (the name of this paper) rolls.This whole story has me a bit confused - Sankei knows its stuff when it comes to football, especially regarding the Japanese national team - however this story just seems to be echoing the @fakerumours tweet. Also, Arsenal are about to go on their Asian tour and it would seem strange for Miyaichi to leave Arsenal right before that.Basically, I would say I am 50/50 on this but that is mainly due to wanting Miyaichi to sign. Sankei are the only newspaper reporting this at the moment and, to me, it seems they have been tricked by Twitter. Having said that Japanese papers don''t generally get themselves too involved with transfer gossip and Japanese players tend to be very open with newspapers - if someone from Sankei asked Miyaichi he would just tell them. Another thing to add into the story is that Miyaichi wasn''t at Arsenal''s game last night in Southampton - as he was expected to be.I suppose it''s a case of wait and see - Monday is the day it will be announced according to this story so if nothings been heard by Tuesday forget about it.

[Indy_Bones 441]

I''d be extremely pleased if this turned out to be true.Pacy, skillful and with a good future ahead of him, he''s the ideal sort of player to provide cover and competition to Pilks and Bennett, and just like Wilshere did whilst on loan at Bolton - he often looked like their best player, but for some reason wasn''t consistently picked by Coyle.I''ll keep my fingers crossed on this one.

[Yellow Wal 314]

Let''s loan Miyaichi, this looks like a great idea ....not!

But I suppose it''s only fair. Last season we managed to help out their poor relations Spurs by doubling the value of THEIR full back to such a degree that we can now not afford to buy him. Last season Kyle Naughton appeared in 29 matches, became an integral part of the team where other players were able to learn and understand his game and now we find we have to find a replacement.

If only teams would stop loaning players from the top clubs (last season I believe Arsenal loaned out between 15 and 20 players), then the top clubs would not be able to have 50 or so players registered for them and then perhaps, only perhaps, some of the other Premiership clubs would be able to sign promising young players.

If the two tier Premiership is ever to stop the loans system, which was originally intended to help the smaller clubs, must be radically overhauled.

But again, we drastically increased the value of Bentley for Arsenal, a player that did not play one Premiership game for them, so perhaps it''s only fair to help them out again as we helped Spurs out last season.

[Yellow Wal 314]

"Indy_Bones"

I''d be extremely pleased if this turned out to be true. Pacy, skillful and with a good future ahead of him, he''s the ideal sort of player to provide cover and competition to Pilks and Bennett, and just like Wilshere did whilst on loan at Bolton - he often looked like their best player, but for some reason wasn''t consistently picked by Coyle.

And look what happened to Bolton when Wilshere and then Sturridge left them.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]I''d be extremely pleased if this turned out to be true.

Pacy, skillful and with a good future ahead of him, he''s the ideal sort of player to provide cover and competition to Pilks and Bennett, and just like Wilshere did whilst on loan at Bolton - he often looked like their best player, but for some reason wasn''t consistently picked by Coyle.

I''ll keep my fingers crossed on this one.
[/quote]

 

But its a damn loan Indy, Landsbury and Naughton.........we bring then on and other clubs seem to benefit.....thats never sat well with me.

[Yellow Wal 314]

Hell now I''m worried ...... am I agreeing with Wiz or is he agreeing with me?

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]And look what happened to Bolton when Wilshere and then Sturridge left them.[/quote]Yes, they didn''t bother properly replacing either player when they had chance and subsequently nosedived.A better manager would have understood the limitations of the loan system and worked to get sensible replacements accordingly. It''s simply bad management by Bolton, nothing more.[quote user="Wiz"]But its a damn loan Indy, Landsbury and Naughton.........we bring then on and other clubs seem to benefit.....thats never sat well with me.[/quote]I agree that loans aren''t ideal Wiz, but in reality this arguably serves our purpose better than it does Arsenal''s, as he''s unlikely to be knocking players like Walcott, Gervinho, Podolski or even Oxlade-Chamberlain out of the picture any time in the near future.And just like Bentley didn''t make the grade and was sold, Lansbury is out of contention and will probably be moved on shortly. If it wasn''t for lack of cover at Spurs, I''d expect them to listen to decent offers for Naughton as well.In our favour, we get the needed cover for our wingers and also add a talented young player to our side for relatively little money - the downside is that if they do perform, it makes a permanent deal less likely and more expensive, but in essence we''ve still benefitted from it.I think this is the side of the loan market that some fans miss in some ways, if the player performs - great, we''ve got the benefit from it. If they don''t perform, we''re not tied into a long and potentially expensive contract. The only negative impact is in regards to if we want to make a loan permanent - a fair tradeoff IMHO.

[Yellow Wal 314]

"the downside is that if they do perform, it makes a permanent deal less likely and more expensive"

And if they don''t perform they have lost nothing .... just us as we will have a poor player.

It''s a win, win situation for Arsenal and a lose, lose situation for us.

[Gingerpele 0]

It''s not a lose lose situation for us. We either get a decent player to help us out on the cheap for a year, allowing the majority of the budget for this season to be spent in other areas, regardless of wether or not we have a chance of signing them permanently or wether their form just helps them get into the first team at the parent club, or demand a larger transfer fee. Or we get a not great player, only here for a year losing a lot less money than signing a player on a three year contract for £2/3 million.

Loans have benefits for both parties, otherwise clubs with money (like us at the moment), would never use them.

[Hairy Canary 668]

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]"the downside is that if they do perform, it makes a permanent deal less likely and more expensive" And if they don''t perform they have lost nothing .... just us as we will have a poor player. It''s a win, win situation for Arsenal and a lose, lose situation for us.[/quote]

Not sure I completely agree with this. Last season we had a top full back on our books who played a major part in keeping us in this league. That sound like a good thing to me!!!

[Indy_Bones 441]

But you''re completely missing the point of the advantage we gain over the season for a player who does perform. It''s almost as though a good season is meaningless if we can''t afford to sign the loan player at the end of it, and this is faulty logic if you ask me.A player who performs badly is a losing situation regardless of whether or not it''s a loan or a permanent signing, the difference is that we haven''t committed long term to a loan and can send back a player who isn''t ''cutting the mustard'', whereas we''d be stuck with a player rotting in the reserves on a perm deal.Similarly, we gain if a loan player does perform, but have to be aware of the fact that we may still need to find a new replacement at a later date if a perm deal isn''t possible or viable due to this performance. Yes, the loaning club may have benefitted from this, but so what? We got what we needed from the player and without the risk that can be attached to a permanent deal (where we can''t afford to lose out).A good manager can get the best out of what the loan system offers, a bad manager exposes all it''s weaknesses and none of the benefits, and I''m more than willing to trust CH on this one.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

A couple of loans a season is fine and to be honst with the riches at stake if we can stay up this season so what if he goes back to Arsenal after a successful season. It will have been mutually beneficial and we may well be £70m better off for it.

Exactly the type of player I feel we need to add something different to our squad. We don''t currently have that sort of raw pace in the quad and if we can add it through a loan then (provided its a season long loan) I am all for it. Promising player added without eating into the budget too much. Lets hope its true.

[Yellow Wal 314]

One of the points that seems to be forgotten all the time is that successful teams do not make unnecessary changes season to season and build on continuity.

Kyle Naughton performed well for us last season and I would assume we would have wanted to have kept him. The players around him last season gained an understanding with him as the season progressed. That understanding is now lost, we now have to start again. A player who was an important cog in that team''s wheel, a player who contributed greatly to the overall performance is lost.

Everyone complains when we sell our better players and we, as supporters, never want to see them go. But we somehow accept that a similar player who we have nurtured, improved, increased the value of, allowed to be an important part of the team, is lost to us.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]One of the points that seems to be forgotten all the time is that successful teams do not make unnecessary changes season to season and build on continuity.

Kyle Naughton performed well for us last season and I would assume we would have wanted to have kept him. The players around him last season gained an understanding with him as the season progressed. That understanding is now lost, we now have to start again. A player who was an important cog in that team''s wheel, a player who contributed greatly to the overall performance is lost.

Everyone complains when we sell our better players and we, as supporters, never want to see them go. But we somehow accept that a similar player who we have nurtured, improved, increased the value of, allowed to be an important part of the team, is lost to us.[/quote]

 

Yes and I agree that is why too many loans is not a good thing - as we found to our cost previously. But using the loan system to supplement the squad with one or two quality players is a sensible approach. If Myaichi helps us stay up again then we will have a much bigger budget next season and will be able to buy a quiality replacement for him and eventually we won''t need to rely on the loan system but for now we do. We were better off for having loaned Naughton last season and hopefully if we loan this kid it will be a mutually beneficial arrangement for us, Arsenal and him. You never know he might love it at Carrow Road and decide he wants to leave Arsenal leaving us in the box seat.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]One of the points that seems to be forgotten all the time is that successful teams do not make unnecessary changes season to season and build on continuity. Kyle Naughton performed well for us last season and I would assume we would have wanted to have kept him. The players around him last season gained an understanding with him as the season progressed. That understanding is now lost, we now have to start again. A player who was an important cog in that team''s wheel, a player who contributed greatly to the overall performance is lost. Everyone complains when we sell our better players and we, as supporters, never want to see them go. But we somehow accept that a similar player who we have nurtured, improved, increased the value of, allowed to be an important part of the team, is lost to us.[/quote]

 

Huzzah! [IMG]http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Respect/respect-067.gif[/IMG]

[star_manic 0]

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]Let''s loan Miyaichi, this looks like a great idea ....not!

But I suppose it''s only fair. Last season we managed to help out their poor relations Spurs by doubling the value of THEIR full back to such a degree that we can now not afford to buy him. Last season Kyle Naughton appeared in 29 matches, became an integral part of the team where other players were able to learn and understand his game and now we find we have to find a replacement.

If only teams would stop loaning players from the top clubs (last season I believe Arsenal loaned out between 15 and 20 players), then the top clubs would not be able to have 50 or so players registered for them and then perhaps, only perhaps, some of the other Premiership clubs would be able to sign promising young players.

If the two tier Premiership is ever to stop the loans system, which was originally intended to help the smaller clubs, must be radically overhauled.

But again, we drastically increased the value of Bentley for Arsenal, a player that did not play one Premiership game for them, so perhaps it''s only fair to help them out again as we helped Spurs out last season.[/quote]......last season arsenal had 73 proffessional players registered to them, hence so many going on loan.

[Henry 0]

I have no problem with the fact we could lose a player after a season loan. That is the downside to the present loan system and always has been.

My main gripe with the whole system is top clubs stockpiling young talent and hindering their development. Clubs are limited on the amount of loans they can get in ... perhaps clubs should also be limited on the amount of players that can be Loaned out.

[Indy_Bones 441]

The problem here is that teams in the position we are in simply cannot afford to take too many financial gambles on players who might not perform.Last season, Naughton was great for us and I''m sure the vast majority of fans would like to have seen him here permanently instead of on loan. But then look at Ritchie De Laet, made a number of errors and was sent back to Man Utd. How many fans were glad he was on loan instead of on a longer term deal?On paper both were of a similar quality, both from big clubs and both with reasonably large price tags for us to consider - 1 would have been a great deal on a perm, the other not so much, and therein lies the gamble.Clubs like Spurs and Man Utd can afford to get this wrong and release players cheaply if they don''t work out - we can''t with our current finances. If however we can continue to improve and build, then going forwards we WILL be able to do this and take a few more ''punts'' than we can at the minute.Losing a loan player is no different in regards to impact on the overall team, than selling a permanent member of the squad would be, the only actual difference is the money we get for a sale, otherwise the actual impact on the team is exactly the same. Players would still need to re-adapt to a different player coming in, maybe even a new style of play, but this is all part of the manager''s role to organise this and mitigate disruption as much as possible.The loan system isn''t some big bad bear which goes round ripping chunks out of teams lower down the food chain, it''s a system that can be massively influential if used sensibly and correctly, and as long as your squad isn''t based around loanees and you get the right players in - it can be a godsend.