just a thought if Mifsud has signed a loan deal and not a perm. one.But there again my mind could be in overdrive so here goes.If there was ongoing conflict between the player and the club(cov.) as was much reported and the club Cov. were determind to get rid, an absolute classical game may have been played by the player/agent to get his "pound of flesh" particularly in the light of "alleged negetivity" between the player and manager. If Mifsud, as it was reported, wanted a pay off from Coventry and the club declined it may have been in the players best interest to go out on loan for a reported 8k per week. Equally at this point it could have been beneficial for Coventry to let him go so as to ease up the wage bill. Thus, by going out on loan they don't get a tranfer fee and in June of this year he walks away for sweet f.a. and Coventry do not get 300k from Barnsley. He eventually signs for us and receives a signing on fee,say 300k. The losers here, has I see it, are Coventry. Food for thought and just doodling on the keyboard.