Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

2024/25 Armando Broja

Exactly. It's not Chelsea's job to do us any favours taking him back and putting his wages back on their books just because it's what would be most convinient for us. We shouldn't have signed an injured player who we knew would miss half a season in the first place. Yet another cracking bit of business.
Exactly … if the loan deal had no structure for long term injury its not there fault hes out now . The injury happened playing for us so its on us and the seemingly now stupid deal that was made at the time albeit in desperation !
 
Exactly … if the loan deal had no structure for long term injury its not there fault hes out now . The injury happened playing for us so its on us and the seemingly now stupid deal that was made at the time albeit in desperation !
Not so sure if it was desperation; Broja has been on Thelwell's radar for the last 2+ years if I recall. A player he obviously rates and always wanted to bring in like Danjuma and Beto, but it was just a dumb deal and now we're stuck with another injured forward unless we cover all of Chelsea's costs and send him back (if it's even possible).
 
Not so sure if it was desperation; Broja has been on Thelwell's radar for the last 2+ years if I recall. A player he obviously rates and always wanted to bring in like Danjuma and Beto, but it was just a dumb deal and now we're stuck with another injured forward unless we cover all of Chelsea's costs and send him back (if it's even possible).
Was a massive gamble that backfired. Simple as that !
 
Exactly … if the loan deal had no structure for long term injury its not there fault hes out now . The injury happened playing for us so its on us and the seemingly now stupid deal that was made at the time albeit in desperation !
On the plus side of things, we may only be stuck paying him till the end of the season. Imagine if he stayed injury free and had a good run through the rest of the season. Sod`s law would be we`d sign him up for 4 or 5 years and then he`d pick up that injury that would make him a passenger until his contract runs out.
 
Exactly … if the loan deal had no structure for long term injury its not there fault hes out now . The injury happened playing for us so its on us and the seemingly now stupid deal that was made at the time albeit in desperation !
Just read, we may just pay Chelsea to send him back ? The same outlet though states we are linked to multiple players - some are just fantasy IMO ....
 

Exactly. It's not Chelsea's job to do us any favours taking him back and putting his wages back on their books just because it's what would be most convinient for us. We shouldn't have signed an injured player who we knew would miss half a season in the first place. Yet another cracking bit of business.
I think the best chance of that happening is if we agree to swap him with another player they want off their books, and covering the cost of any difference.

That way there cost is nil, and they get a squad player out their squad, potentially freeing up a registration place for a new signing
 
I think the best chance of that happening is if we agree to swap him with another player they want off their books, and covering the cost of any difference.

That way there cost is nil, and they get a squad player out their squad, potentially freeing up a registration place for a new signing
Yeah maybe. Would seem strange for Chelsea to take back an injured player they can't use and loan out an uninjured one they can use. I can't see anything happening on the Broja front, but we'll have to see.
 
I always thought that any player while on loan that got a long term injury was always auto send bk to their own club, off course with the other club known he was coming back. Pointless if we keep him,as he may only make it back for the final games, if that etc. Didnt actually realise both clubs were supposeto agree to it about players going back
 

I always thought that any player while on loan that got a long term injury was always auto send bk to their own club, off course with the other club known he was coming back. Pointless if we keep him,as he may only make it back for the final games, if that etc. Didnt actually realise both clubs were supposeto agree to it about players going back
Each loan deal has it's own stipulations and agreements.

Seems that in this case Chelsea were covering his wages until he made his first appearance, but on condition we can't terminate the loan without Chelsea agreeing to it. To send him back, Chelsea will no doubt want compensating as it'll mean an injured player they can't use going back on to their wage bill, which obviously does them no favours at all.
 
I always thought that any player while on loan that got a long term injury was always auto send bk to their own club, off course with the other club known he was coming back. Pointless if we keep him,as he may only make it back for the final games, if that etc. Didnt actually realise both clubs were supposeto agree to it about players going back
I think they have the option to, if they wish to manage his injury and recovery.
But I'm not 100% sure on this, I read something years ago regarding this so might be outdated by now.
 
I always thought that any player while on loan that got a long term injury was always auto send bk to their own club, off course with the other club known he was coming back. Pointless if we keep him,as he may only make it back for the final games, if that etc. Didnt actually realise both clubs were supposeto agree to it about players going back
We were on the other side when we managed to offload Deli to Turkey for a while. I think they wanted to send him back but had to keep him for the end of the loan.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top