Jump to content

Sam Winnall


MackworthRamIsGod

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Asked if Wednesday can get him back, Bullen told BBC Radio Sheffield: "I’m not sure exactly what the agreement is with Derby. I’m not sure if both clubs have to agree.

"I know Derby had an issue when [Chris] Martin was down at Fulham last year - I don’t know if it’s a similar scenario.

"It’s one thing we’ll definitely have to look at. But again, I don’t know what the actual agreement was, that was done way before my time, so we’ll have to look at that - as a potential."

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2018/01/02/lee-bullen-says-sheffield-wednesday-will-definitely-look-into-re/?utm_medium=share service&utm_campaign=social media&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=HITCdeadlineday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Papahet said:

Looks like they are trying to get him back to Wednesday. 

Remind me how successful we were getting Chris Martin back from Fulham...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be thoroughly shocked, and frankly find it embarrassingly funny, if given the Martin fiasco we left ourselves open to having a loanee recalled the very next season.

So, I can't see him going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gritters said:

Would they still keep Butterfield?

Hopefully it's the same deal where all three parties have agree. We would surely decline to take him back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Srg said:

I'd be thoroughly shocked, and frankly find it embarrassingly funny, if given the Martin fiasco we left ourselves open to having a loanee recalled the very next season.

So, I can't see him going anywhere.

I don't think it's possible any more.

Recall rule's been taken out, I thought. Everyone has to want it, like when a player gets injured or isn't playing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

I don't think it's possible any more.

Recall rule's been taken out, I thought. Everyone has to want it, like when a player gets injured or isn't playing at all.

I don't think it was ever a rule - it's purely up to the agreement of the deal in the beginning. Just seems teams are getting more savvy to me, especially without the ability to use emergency loans anymore, it would leave you short if a player got recalled outside of a window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally haven't seen enough from him to make this a permanent signing, unless he was pretty cheap. Apparently he played well at Ipswich in terms of general play something he hasn't managed in the various times I've seen him play. He scores goals, but in general play he makes poor decisions and can't link play. That doesn't make you anymore than a sub in my mind.

In cheerier mood having just watched Butterfield's abject performance v Burton we got the better end of the deal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, curtains said:

Nugent scored 2 crackers against Millwall. 

Winnall 2 against Ipswich.

If we get promoted I wouldn’t keep Winnall and Nugent might be too old. 

There is no option of keeping or not keeping Winnall at the end of the season. He returns to his parent club with the thanks of Derby County and the fans. Well, some fans by the sound of it.,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Karma may bite our azz here lol.

Given Winnalls open desire to play more often, if they do a tap up/guarantee of starts, then why would Winnall not clamour to go back. This will come down to the conversation GR has with him about playing time going forward and guarantees of a perm bid plus what they tell him. 

Otherwise we may have a player on strike since Bullen is making it clear they want him back pronto. Realising their mistake is not a good thing for us, but we need to try to keep Winnall - he’s done everything we have hoped he’d do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...