Is Javier Garrido signing really a loan?

[flecky76 0]

I thought we ascertained back in the halcyon days when we signed foreign ''loanees'' David Strihavka and Arturo Lupoli, that there is in fact no such thing?

It was told to us, by Doomy admittedly, that only signings within a country are actual loans as we know it. To ''loan'' from one country to another, you actually sign up the whole contract.

Therefore I''m guessing we have actually signed him on a years contract outright, which would explain why we have a further years option on him?

[City penguin 0]

Correct there is no loans between nations. They are fixed term signings then with return clauses already stipulated in them. So with an option to extend the "Loan" we will have a return clause on a return clause so to speak.

[Redders Right Foot 22]

can''t see it being an actual signing, there''s a lot more money involved in signing someone compared to a loan. (agents fees, higher club fees, players fees.)

I''ve not heard of the foreign loans that you talk about, but I''m assuming that the option to extend is what allows us to make it a loan.

[Jacko 0]

In practice Garrido is effectively a permanent player for the next year. A loan effectively has to be a permanent transfer when the two clubs are not based within England. So there will be an agreement in the deal that he reverts to being a permanent Lazio player again at the end of the year. So he wont count towards our permitted number of loan players we are allowed to sign or the number allowed in the matchday squad.

[Gingerpele 0]

And presumably they won''t be able to recall him, since it''s not a loan?

[Yobocop 1,105]

Strihavka was a permanent signing wasn''t he?

[Jacko 0]

I guess the earliest they could "re sign" him would be in the January transfer window on a permanent basis.