Dunk - Refusing to play?

[Working class pride]

If you are in your 20's and someone offers you a job earning much more money and also located in Kensington/Chelsea/ Fulham then with respect to any other town in the country, the 20 odd year old would be daft to turn it down.

 

[Mutts Nuts]

If you are in your 20's and someone offers you a job earning much more money and also located in Kensington/Chelsea/ Fulham then with respect to any other town in the country, the 20 odd year old would be daft to turn it down.

But if you have signed a legally binding contract with your employer with very generous terms and conditions then you may have to stay put, the club need to stop selling players if they are genuinely interested in promotion.
Should we be in the top 2 in December ( extremely unlikely I know) are we going to sell key players top scorer in January just because it`s good business and the lads been offered a huge pay rise to join a rival club

 

[Sheebo]

This thread is a disgrace. A thread of completely unfounded speculation has slowly turned one mans rumour into a fact. A young players reputation is being dragged through the mud because people are posting bullshit without knowing anything. Dunk has never come across as arrogant or 'too big for the club' and suddenly a lot of people are telling him he can '**** off' or 'rot in the reserves' because of a rumour.

If the article is based on this thread then yes it is a total disgrace... But there's usually no smoke without fire. If it's true then Dunk really can do one - I think the club would have contacted NSC and asked for the removal of the thread if it wasn't true though? They do monitor NSC closely....

 

[Working class pride]

But if you have signed a legally binding contract with your employer with very generous terms and conditions then you may have to stay put, the club need to stop selling players if they are genuinely interested in promotion.
Should we be in the top 2 in December ( extremely unlikely I know) are we going to sell key players top scorer in January just because it`s good business and the lads been offered a huge pay rise to join a rival club

A contract is civil not criminal law. It is not "illegal" to breach a contract, the remedy is damages or enforcement of the contract if that's possible (which it isnt here obviously). If the club want to sue him, they can. I agree the club needs to stop selling players, especially the home grown talent. Bournemouth got to and are playing in the Premier League with two centre backs who we said were not good enough. Also noteworthy that they and Dunk were produced without a multi million pound training building. However from the individuals point of view, then I really dont blame any 20 odd year old for wanting to get more money and live in Fulham.

 

[Hampster Gull]

But if you have signed a legally binding contract with your employer with very generous terms and conditions then you may have to stay put, the club need to stop selling players if they are genuinely interested in promotion.
Should we be in the top 2 in December ( extremely unlikely I know) are we going to sell key players top scorer in January just because it`s good business and the lads been offered a huge pay rise to join a rival club

Agree with the sentiment but unfortunately we are now in times where the player power is so strong they can force a sale, wven if the club dont want to.

 

[JBizzle]

This thread is a disgrace. A thread of completely unfounded speculation has slowly turned one mans rumour into a fact. A young players reputation is being dragged through the mud because people are posting bullshit without knowing anything. Dunk has never come across as arrogant or 'too big for the club' and suddenly a lot of people are telling him he can '**** off' or 'rot in the reserves' because of a rumour.

Couldn't agree more. This whole thread has been nonsense. If Dunk had thrown his toys out of the pram he'd be nowhere near the squad, let alone on the bench. Everything surrounding Dunk is rumour and conjecture. Let's just see where we stand on 1st September.

 

[TSB]

Here is a story about him refusing to play against Southend: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2015/08/2...linked-lewis-dunk-for-missing-cup-clash-wit/?

They're about two weeks with that 'exclusive'.

And for all those saying this thread is nonsense: really?

 

[BigGully]

The club didn't know what the verdict would be before hand, If I remember correctly his form had dropped around that time too,but the club did every thing they could for boy.
Good god how did the club know how things would pan out a few years later to his valuation .

What did the club do exactly

They honoured his contract because they were legally obliged to do so, it turned out that he was wrongly accused of a crime he didn't commit, its hardly sentiment that they carried on paying him and allowed him to continue to train, I am not aware of any contribution from the club with his legal fee's that fell to Dunk's family.

If the club had no idea of Dunk's potential (yet to be fulfilled, granted) then thats some comment on the posse of coaching and support staff that are meant to do exactly that, why then would clubs demand multi million pound fee's based on the clubs input into his development and progress if it is just a matter of luck and unknowns.

The club did what the club had to do and will be significantly rewarded if he leaves, seems a reasonable transaction for all parties, financially and morally.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

If he refuses to play, why is he on the bench?

My guess ... A big money transfer is in the offing - they are protecting him from potential injury which would scupper it... Also. they want to see how the new defenders "bed in" (pretty well it seems)
Just my thoughts..

 

[portslade seagull]

If he goes it only leaves us with 3 CD if Rea also goes out on loan although Rosenior can play there but that would be somewhat makeshift .... so we would still need to replace him

 

[Papa Lazarou]

If he goes it only leaves us with 3 CD if Rea also goes out on loan although Rosenior can play there but that would be somewhat makeshift .... so we would still need to replace him

Yes, we would

 

[stss30]

If he goes it only leaves us with 3 CD if Rea also goes out on loan although Rosenior can play there but that would be somewhat makeshift .... so we would still need to replace him

I think the logic is- get Rea some competitive game time on a 3 month short term loan, put a 28day recall clause in the contract and if two of our three centre backs get injured we can recall him.

 

[perseus]

After being dominated in the air against Matt Smith and by Blackburn and with Ipswich coming up, it looks like we need a new centre half!

 

[BensGrandad]

Ipswich are far better and more dangerous on the ground than in the air. So I am hopeful that we will cope but we already have Dunk, not the best in the air but capable plus Goldson so to bring in why do we need another?

 

[portslade seagull]

To replace Dunk I would guess

 

[BensGrandad]

To replace Dunk I would guess

If he goes but the club have offered him an improved contract. The telling time will be if he doesnt play against Walsall.

 

[Hugo Rune]

If he goes but the club have offered him an improved contract. The telling time will be if he doesnt play against Walsall.

He won't play against Walsall as it will cup tie him. The telling time will actually be 6pm, Tuesday 1st Sept when he'll either be a Brighton player or he won't. At some point either Fulham will give up the chase or get their man, however, I can see a PL team matching any fee agreed with Fulham and stealing him from under their noses.

 

[BensGrandad]

My point oif 'telling time Tuesday' is if he figured in our plans he would be picked if it was our intention to accept an offer fom whoever he will not.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Seems to me that if the intention is to sell him, they shouldn't be wasting a bench place on him.

 

[portslade seagull]

Seems to me that if the intention is to sell him, they shouldn't be wasting a bench place on him.

Agree with this