Drinkwater going back to Chelsea

[boatshed bill]

You’re making my point for me. I don’t think anybody has claimed that Drinkwater hasn’t been a waste of space. How could anybody claim otherwise? Those criticising the signing using hindsight, those criticising his lack of game time and those making comments like ‘why didn’t we just send him back’ without any regard for the nature of a contract are showing a lack of thought or intelligence. It’s not my fault they’ve done this, I’m just pointing it out.

OK.

[burnleymik]

those criticising his lack of game time

Lack of thought for criticising his game time? Have you really read back through the thread?

So, what KSR suggested was correct, if you don't agree, then it must be a "lack of thought" or "intelligence"?

You are also assuming that sending him back could breach his contract, you have no way of knowing that, what those posters suggested could ultimately be possible, but Dyche may have been the one who chose not to send him back, so IMO that is a lack of thought on your part.

[Stayingup]

Posted similar on another thread but it’s weird that people are now questioning Dyche’s judgement on a player who has continually made headlines for the wrong reason. It was a gamble that didn’t pay off and I’m more than happy to side with a manager who has a lot of credit in the bank than a player who clearly hasn’t shown the attitude or application required to get his career back on track.

He hasnt continually made headlines for the wrong reasons. He did once. Dyche has said he DD appreciated what Burnley were doing for him. Therefore I would conclude that Burnley were not able to strike a satisfactory deal with his club and the players agent.

[Rileybobs]

Lack of thought for criticising his game time? Have you really read back through the thread?

So, what KSR suggested was correct, if you don't agree, then it must be a "lack of thought" or "intelligence"?

You are also assuming that sending him back could breach his contract, you have no way of knowing that, what those posters suggested could ultimately be possible, but Dyche may have been the one who chose not to send him back, so IMO that is a lack of thought on your part.

I see no reason why we, the loanee, would be within our rights to terminate our contract with Chelsea for Drinkwater sustaining an injury by being assaulted. Is it common for loans to be terminated by the loanee when a player picks up a short term injury?

I obviously don’t know for a fact so there is a certain amount of assumption, but there is a level of thought that has been used to arrive at this unlike comments such as ‘we should have just sent him back’.

[Rileybobs]

He hasnt continually made headlines for the wrong reasons. He did once. Dyche has said he DD appreciated what Burnley were doing for him. Therefore I would conclude that Burnley were not able to strike a satisfactory deal with his club and the players agent.

He made headlines for the wrong reasons before signing for us. He crashed his car whilst drink driving just 9 months ago for one.

I think there’s a decent chance that we couldn’t strike a satisfactory deal - and Dyche presumably knowing this a few weeks in advance would be further cause for him not to play Drinkwater ahead of players who have committed their future to the club.

I think it’s also equally possible that Dyche hasn’t liked what he’s seen and has chosen not to pursue extending the loan. He obviously wouldn’t come out and say this as it would be unfair to the player and Chelsea and would be extremely unprofessional.

[burnleymik]

I see no reason why we, the loanee, would be within our rights to terminate our contract with Chelsea for Drinkwater sustaining an injury by being assaulted. Is it common for loans to be terminated by the loanee when a player picks up a short term injury?

I obviously don’t know for a fact so there is a certain amount of assumption, but there is a level of thought that has been used to arrive at this unlike comments such as ‘we should have just sent him back’.

He was out drinking and ended up involved in a fracas. Regardless of fault that could easily be classed as bringing the club into disrepute. That said, no one here knows what is in the contract and you are claiming your assumptions are more valid than those people who suggested him being sent back, based upon speculation and nothing more. Then, you claim those people lack intelligence and thought based upon that?

That's quite the pedestal you put yourself on there.

[Rileybobs]

He was out drinking and ended up involved in a fracas. Regardless of fault that could easily be classed as bringing the club into disrepute. That said, no one here knows what is in the contract and you are claiming your assumptions are more valid than those people who suggested him being sent back, based upon speculation and nothing more. Then, you claim those people lack intelligence and thought based upon that?

That's quite the pedestal you put yourself on there.

Sorry, struggling to read your post from up here.

He was out drinking, like most players will do. And he got set upon. By all accounts he acted like a complete weapon and brought it on himself, but he didn’t to my knowledge break any laws and it would be very difficult to prove that he brought the club into disrepute.

And the reasons why my assumptions are more valid are because I can’t think of any loaning clubs terminating a deal for a player being injured. And also, because if Dyche could have sent Drinkwater back, and had no intention of giving him game time or extending his loan then surely he would have just done that.

[boatshed bill]

The bloke's a bell-end, but (like it or not) for 4 months he was our bell-end

[Rileybobs]

The bloke's a bell-end, but (like it or not) for 4 months he was our bell-end

Hey, I’m still here.

[Quickenthetempo]

Sorry, struggling to read your post from up here.

He was out drinking, like most players will do. And he got set upon. By all accounts he acted like a complete weapon and brought it on himself, but he didn’t to my knowledge break any laws and it would be very difficult to prove that he brought the club into disrepute.

And the reasons why my assumptions are more valid are because I can’t think of any loaning clubs terminating a deal for a player being injured. And also, because if Dyche could have sent Drinkwater back, and had no intention of giving him game time or extending his loan then surely he would have just done that.

You did see the video of him head butting the lad didn't you? I presume that would be breaking the law?

[tiger76]

Let's just thank our lucky stars we didn't commit to a season long loan,or worse still buy Drinkwater outright,that said we do need a replacement in midfield,we currently only have Cork,Hendrick and Westwood as viable cm's,and as Marney's injury should tell us we're tempting fate if we don't strengthen.

[boatshed bill]

You did see the video of him head butting the lad didn't you? I presume that would be breaking the law?

I think the lad would have to press charges or no action taken.

[jurek]

Hope Drinkwater going back to Chelsea means we'll bring someone
in who can start and give the midfield a bit of a boost.

[Quickenthetempo]

I think the lad would have to press charges or no action taken.

Yeah I realise that. He still broke the law, just didn't get punished for it.

[RVclaret]

Hope Drinkwater going back to Chelsea means we'll bring someone
in who can start and give the midfield a bit of a boost.

Don’t hold your breath.

Recruitment need another 5 transfer windows until they identify the right player.