ClaretLoup wrote:The club need to think about the effect of having Drinkwater around the place on the other players.

So far he has rocked up not fit enough to start a game until the end of August. & then gets so legless he can't remember what he has done gets himself injured so he will probably be out for a couple of months at least.
For this he picks up his reputed salary of £100 k per week.

Given he will only be available for a couple of months at the most and he is not our player why waste time trying to rehabilitate this player so another club can benefit?

Don’t quote figures - Leisure will want a source ( or a payslip) as evidence.

The Lad is obviously a out and out pillock

New signing?

Mooy is looking like the preferred signing right now.

Rileybobs wrote:I’m in no way sticking up for Drinkwater here, but it seems to me that the reaction here is well OTT. Burnley fans don’t like big names and Drinkwater seems to be getting the same kind of treatment as Hart.

Pretty sure Joey Barton, Ian Wright etc were universally adored whilst at Burnley. I think Burnley fans are on the whole very fair, and judge someone on what they do for us - nothing more.

Hart being useless for us is the reason he is given short shrift by the majority of Burnley fans (however, let’s not turn this into another Hart thread!). Likewise, Drinkwater was lauded by pretty much everybody (I was delighted to sign him), but we can all only base our opinion on the lad on what he does on and off the pitch whilst with us. So far, not good.

I live in hope that Dyche throttles the bloke and makes him see his career is going down the swanny, and we get a tune out of him for the rest of the season. I highly doubt though, based on what we have seen and heard thus far, that Danny has the desire/motivation to knuckle down for us.

jedi_master wrote:Pretty sure Joey Barton, Ian Wright etc were universally adored whilst at Burnley. I think Burnley fans are on the whole very fair, and judge someone on what they do for us - nothing more.

Hart being useless for us is the reason he is given short shrift by the majority of Burnley fans (however, let’s not turn this into another Hart thread!). Likewise, Drinkwater was lauded by pretty much everybody (I was delighted to sign him), but we can all only base our opinion on the lad on what he does on and off the pitch whilst with us. So far, not good.

I live in hope that Dyche throttles the bloke and makes him see his career is going down the swanny, and we get a tune out of him for the rest of the season. I highly doubt though, based on what we have seen and heard thus far, that Danny has the desire/motivation to knuckle down for us.

The trouble here is that if you are earning £5m a year, and you are a prick, you don't need to care about your career

Get Well soon Danny!!!

“Play class and work hard and you can start playing for Burnley on 60k a week”
‘But I’m on 100k a week now doing f all’

“Play amazing and we might finish in Europa again”
‘I’ve won the Prem and played in Champions League’

“You might play for England”
‘Done it’

“You might get a great move and a nice bonus sign on”
‘Got bonus for a 35 mil deal’

“Get involved with a good set of lads here”
‘Had that at Leicester’

I just don’t think there is a lot there to motivate him now which might lead to his drinking ..... could even be argued that is why he was chasing some other blokes missus

Just wanting to actually push boundaries and get the “trophy” he shouldn’t/can’t get.

Obviously become a completely different person to the one Sean Dyche remembers from his Watford days, a lot wealthier and no longer sticking to water unless it is just a splash in his whisky.

Didn’t Dyche refer to DD as ‘Drinky’? If so, he clearly had some sort of insight into the players ‘tendencies’. And, given our alleged club spirit ‘all for one, one for all’, what will his team mates think of DD?

tim_noone wrote:Get Well soon Danny!!!

He might have a better chance if you keep him away from your cut price Bene

In the real world, if you start a new job (especially if you've been made redundant/demoted at your last job) you are on your best behaviour/extra willing to try & impress. The fact that DD has gone off the rails already is a very bad sign re his motivation/willingness to earn his corn.

It's SD's decision to make (and he'll be in the best position to make that decision & a good man to do so) but if I were managing a company/department and one of my new employees did something as daft as he's reportedly done (had too much too drink/got aggressive/got into a fight/made himself unfit for work) on his probation period; Id be wanting to terminate ASAP.
I guess it's a bit different in footy because you cant immediately go out and get a replacement when the window is shut so that might well come into SD's thinking. However, as a few have said, we cant waste too much time and effort playing at being saviours/a rehab clinic.

ClaretTony wrote:No idea what the deal is with Chelsea. We could be paying them s loan fee or part of his wages. Not sure bringing the club into disrepute would stick given he wasn’t representing the club at the time.

Is that the way it works though CT? Friend of mine stupidly got involved in an incident in 2000 when we played rovers and he very nearly lost his job. Only friends in high places saved his employment status and he wasn't representing his company at the time.

There appears to be a little bit of double standards here

Didn’t the article say he was pulled away and put in a taxi by a“Burnley teammate”?

Now admittedly I haven’t read every post in detail, but there doesn’t appear to be many asking for this player to be fined.

I’m not saying that Drinkwater hasn’t been a knob, shouldn’t have been out and should be trying to make an impression and get his career back in track.

wilks_bfc wrote:There appears to be a little bit of double standards here

Didn’t the article say he was pulled away and put in a taxi by a“Burnley teammate”?

Now admittedly I haven’t read every post in detail, but there doesn’t appear to be many asking for this player to be fined.

I’m not saying that Drinkwater hasn’t been a knob, shouldn’t have been out and should be trying to make an impression and get his career back in track.

Theres a difference between being on a night out on your down days, and maybe being a bit worse for wear, and being on a night out and getting into a fight, gets you injured, leaves you battered and bruised, gets you in all the national press and potentially could have ended your career.

Players are allowed a drink and a night out as long as they're back to full health when the next training days start.
No doubt the none international players got 2 or 3 days off, letting your hair down on day 1 and/or 2 of them days off wont be an issue if theres no signs of it come training Monday morning.

MACCA wrote:Theres a difference between being on a night out on your down days, and maybe being a bit worse for wear, and being on a night out and getting into a fight, gets you injured, leaves you battered and bruised, gets you in all the national press and potentially could have ended your career.

Players are allowed a drink and a night out as long as they're back to full health when the next training days start.
No doubt the none international players got 2 or 3 days off, letting your hair down on day 1 and/or 2 of them days off wont be an issue if theres no signs of it come training Monday morning.

Spot on, Macca.

Like any job, do what you like on your day off but if it's effecting you on your first shift back then expect there to be trouble

MACCA wrote:Theres a difference between being on a night out on your down days, and maybe being a bit worse for wear, and being on a night out and getting into a fight, gets you injured, leaves you battered and bruised, gets you in all the national press and potentially could have ended your career.

Players are allowed a drink and a night out as long as they're back to full health when the next training days start.
No doubt the none international players got 2 or 3 days off, letting your hair down on day 1 and/or 2 of them days off wont be an issue if theres no signs of it come training Monday morning.

But that’s what I’m saying.

The only reason that this has come to light is because Drinkwater got beat up.

If Drinkwater & “an other” had gone out for the night and then both had turned up to next training session and cracked on wed be non the wiser

If Drinkwater & “an other” had gone out for the night and “an other” was beaten up, would this thread have got as many posts calling for him to be fined?

Yes Drinkwater has the history, but we’ve had the players in the past that have had his history also but never had this kind of reaction to their behaviour

MACCA wrote:Theres a difference between being on a night out on your down days, and maybe being a bit worse for wear, and being on a night out and getting into a fight, gets you injured, leaves you battered and bruised, gets you in all the national press and potentially could have ended your career.

Not seen any suggestion the injury has been caused by a fight. I thought he'd been jumped on outside the club. Not suggesting that what he's done in the club is OK, but haven't read anywhere that the injuries have been brought about by a fight.

We wont see him play until December . Taken on with problems because of the pop still having problems because of the pop. Waste of time but would love to be proven wrong.

What I don't understand here is, if he got dragged out and put in a taxi how did he end up being jumped on on the pavement?

boatshed bill wrote:What I don't understand here is, if he got dragged out and put in a taxi how did he end up being jumped on on the pavement?

how I read it he was dragged off the pavement into a taxi...

From the very first day the guy was interviewed on Clarets player his body language gave out the impression he did not really want to be at Burnley.
File in the mistakes drawer and get shut.

As we are local to his home town drinking establishments, he probably jumped at the chance!

The Enclosure wrote:From the very first day the guy was interviewed on Clarets player his body language gave out the impression he did not really want to be at Burnley.

I too got that impression. I also detected that the manager regarded the signing as an unsatisfactory stop-gap situation.
Unless things change DD will only be with us until Jan. ( perhaps a much shorter time now).

Chelsea were clearly attempting to cut their losses by putting an unwanted player in the shop window, for a fire sale in the next transfer window.

We missed out on our targets and agreed to accept this arrangement from the end of August - because of the desperate need for midfield cover.

The player arrived lacking the required fitness levels which ruled him out of first team action for at least two months and the manager made it clear in a very strong way that he would have to earn/fight for his place in the side.

The original deal was effectively Sept-Jan (around 17 games). Fitness levels have already reduced this by a further 2-3 games before first team consideration, plus the likelihood that he can’t play against his parent club.

Now this incident has crocked the player for (by my estimation) another 5 games and then he may or may not be capable of competing for a place in the team. So let’s say a couple more games - injuries permitting.

The upshot is therefore we have a player on our books that, if things go well, can now only contribute to about half a dozen games, has shown very limited enthusiasm for the arrangement, has alienated a large number of fans and appears to have a limited shelf-life as a professional footballer.

In my opinion the manager has to concentrate all of his efforts to the business of staying in the league and can’t afford to wet-nurse individuals who are not “owned” by the club.

Too high a price to pay for a handful of games. Get shot, send Drinkwater back to London and start planning now for a proper, young athletic midfield player, who is hungry to play for our club. No more stop-gap deals, just work harder on solving the problem that has haunted us now since Defour went down.

IWOODLOVETT wrote:I too got that impression. I also detected that the manager regarded the signing as an unsatisfactory stop-gap situation.
Unless things change DD will only be with us until Jan. ( perhaps a much shorter time now).

Chelsea were clearly attempting to cut their losses by putting an unwanted player in the shop window, for a fire sale in the next transfer window.

We missed out on our targets and agreed to accept this arrangement from the end of August - because of the desperate need for midfield cover.

The player arrived lacking the required fitness levels which ruled him out of first team action for at least two months and the manager made it clear in a very strong way that he would have to earn/fight for his place in the side.

The original deal was effectively Sept-Jan (around 17 games). Fitness levels have already reduced this by a further 2-3 games before first team consideration, plus the likelihood that he can’t play against his parent club.

Now this incident has crocked the player for (by my estimation) another 5 games and then he may or may not be capable of competing for a place in the team. So let’s say a couple more games - injuries permitting.

The upshot is therefore we have a player on our books that, if things go well, can now only contribute to about half a dozen games, has shown very limited enthusiasm for the arrangement, has alienated a large number of fans and appears to have a limited shelf-life as a professional footballer.

In my opinion the manager has to concentrate all of his efforts to the business of staying in the league and can’t afford to wet-nurse individuals who are not “owned” by the club.

Too high a price to pay for a handful of games. Get shot, send Drinkwater back to London and start planning now for a proper, young athletic midfield player, who is hungry to play for our club. No more stop-gap deals, just work harder on solving the problem that has haunted us now since Defour went down.

Not sure I agree with some of that and certainly not about him arriving lacking fitness ruling him out of first team action for at least two months. He's already played, albeit in the cup, and was on the bench over a week ago with the manager saying he was now fully fit and ready to challenge for a place. The deal wasn't Sep-Jan either - he signed early August (21 games, not 17), although that has now been reduced obviously because he hasn't played in the first four and can't play against Chelsea even if fit to add to any he might miss now because of this injury.

I really don’t see SD having an issue with what’s happened to DD and the club has had a week now to prepare a balanced statement/ decide on their position.

On the other hand after seeing DD in training for the last few weeks SD potentially has he option to cut short the loan if he doesn’t think the player will be of use.

I think Dyche will put the ball in his court.

He’s let himself and the club down, if he wants to knuckle down and make up for it then he’ll be given a chance, if not he’ll be on his way.

He must have been doing ok in training to make his way on to the bench.

Thanks for putting me right Tony, but I wasn’t including the Cup game which the club regards as a competition for fringe players, so let’s agree on a round 20 games. Also his fitness levels were not in line with the rest of the squad when he arrived and he hadn't been top level match sharp getting on for two years.

My point is that the situation that the player has now created makes the deal unpractical from a business point of view. A risk too far that the club should reverse if possible ( pending all the facts).

Maybe it gives us levvy to go to Chelsea and say we are happy for him to stay but given the length of time he is out, the only way we can do that is to keep him for the season.

Oh that would be a bonus if he ends up like Treacy did being unable to play the game as we expected.
Pretty sure at present Chelsea would let us have him forever.

gandhisflipflop wrote:Maybe it gives us levvy to go to Chelsea and say we are happy for him to stay but given the length of time he is out, the only way we can do that is to keep him for the season.

...and you pay all his wages...?

It certainly puts us in a much stronger position to renegotiate Rick, and if he is as devastated as he makes out, maybe he can prove it by taking a pay cut to sign for us.

gandhisflipflop wrote:It certainly puts us in a much stronger position to renegotiate Rick, and if he is as devastated as he makes out, maybe he can prove it by taking a pay cut to sign for us.

absolutely - I truly think there's an absolute gem of a footballer in him, but he needs to be guided by SD and he needs to take the chance.

Rick_Muller wrote:absolutely - I truly think there's an absolute gem of a footballer in him, but he needs to be guided by SD and he needs to take the chance.

I don't think he'll be here long enough for that to happen.

I could have played next to Kante, in that Leicester side, and looked good.
He’s done nothing else the rest of his career. Send him back and he’s Chelseas problem. The deal is only until Jan. anyway. Then we have another window to enjoy!

Blackrod wrote:Don’t quote figures - Leisure will want a source ( or a payslip) as evidence.

Yes I do. Anyone can make up a load of bo**ocks on here but without being able to back it up. If you don't actually know the figures don't quote them. Also, still awaiting your criteria for assessing fitness!

This loan deal has all the potential to make the ‘Bamford crybaby in the car’ one look like an unmitigated success...

I’m all for 2nd chances and all that but someone who has clearly not learned from other misdemeanours that could have put him behind bars does not deserve to wear the claret shirt.

Let the great man have a word and do as he sees fit but I will be surprised to see him play for us again. Also, not sure how I would feel if he replaced me in the team if I was Cork or Westwood given how they clearly love playing for us....and have no sense of billy big boots (which at the end of the day is what our success and club itself are based on).

start planning now for a proper, young athletic midfield player, who is hungry to play for our club. No more stop-gap deals, just work harder on solving the problem that has haunted us now since Defour went down.

Haven't we been looking for the past 3 transfer windows??
No player exists

Oh dear.

He was not fit to start games with us when arrived. He had a reasonable level of fitness considering he hadn’t played much. Confirmed by club.

There is no player in the PL turning out for the first team who is not on ‘thousands’ a week. You’d have to be a bit of a nugget to think otherwise.

Have the clairvoyants been on yet to tell us they knew the deal was going to end in tears, and/or that we shouldn't have signed him?

[quote="Hibsclaret"]This loan deal has all the potential to make the ‘Bamford crybaby in the car’ one look like an unmitigated success...

"Dyche is wrong about me..when I played the violin I had to finish..."

It's fair that Dyche isn't ultimately a huge fan of loans isn't it?

The problem we have here is that too many people want to comment on half a story sensationalised by the gutter press then makeup the bits they don't know. Sean will sort it out in the best way for the club.

fzr162 wrote:The problem we have here is that too many people want to comment on half a story sensationalised by the gutter press then makeup the bits they don't know. Sean will sort it out in the best way for the club.

Can't blame the press. He took a selfie.

one picture is not the whole story.

Have we sent him on his downward spiral way yet.....I hope so.

Hibsclaret wrote:This loan deal has all the potential to make the ‘Bamford crybaby in the car’ one look like an unmitigated success...

I’m all for 2nd chances and all that but someone who has clearly not learned from other misdemeanours that could have put him behind bars does not deserve to wear the claret shirt.

Let the great man have a word and do as he sees fit but I will be surprised to see him play for us again. Also, not sure how I would feel if he replaced me in the team if I was Cork or Westwood given how they clearly love playing for us....and have no sense of billy big boots (which at the end of the day is what our success and club itself are based on).

Much as it pains me to say that post is spot on.

cockneyclaret wrote:Haven't we been looking for the past 3 transfer windows??
No player exists

I thought we'd found exactly that player with our recent record bid only for his current club decidng not to sell.

beddie wrote:I thought we'd found exactly that player with our recent record bid only for his current club decidng not to sell.

If we found him he would be here.

cockneyclaret wrote:Haven't we been looking for the past 3 transfer windows??
No player exists

Probably because we don't look further afield than the Championship. We have millions of pounds in the bank and there is a whole world of central midfielders out there, many of whom would jump at the chance to come and play in the Premiership.

jrgbfc wrote:Probably because we don't look further afield than the Championship. We have millions of pounds in the bank and there is a whole world of central midfielders out there, many of whom would jump at the chance to come and play in the Premiership.

Is that the Scottish Premiership?