Jack Clarke

[Airfixx]

Why does every article have to have a source? Back at the start of the summer there were no "sources" explicitly cited saying we wanted to sign Clarke but the story was everywhere. People at the club, including Levy himself, talk to journalists and keep them informed of what we are doing. Briefings like that are the bread and butter of the football world.

If Poch wanted Clarke in the squad, he would be in the squad. He chose to send him away. Reputable outlets like the Guardian and journalists like Daniel Hytner don't just make stuff up.

Without a source, quote of point of reference then an article can only be deemed to be speculative (at best) if one is to consider it's credibility... The media is full of speculation every single day (yes, even The Guardian); which is fine if one absorbs it for what it is, but I don't think that should be deemed a credible basis for criticism of the way the club is run (which is what was at play earlier in this thread - i.e "Levy's buying players without Poch's say so..." and "Levy's buying players for profit").

In the specific case of the above article, there is not even comments such as "a source at the club said" or "insiders have revealed" (which is fairly typical)...

If you're a journalist with credible info, wouldn't you at least seek to establish your credibility; even if you can't outright name your source?

 

[Bill Madrid]

Reputable outlets like the Guardian and journalists like Daniel Hytner don't just make stuff up.

Of course Hytner makes stuff up. Regularly. He then rewrites the exact same bullshit article five times which then get published under a different headline. See his increasingly desperate "Pochettino to United" pieces.

 

[Fattynomates]

Bring him home so he can get injured

 

[Clynelish]

Fifth time in a row that he doesn't even make the bench for a Championship match.

 

[StripiestPilot]

They have 6 loan players and can only name 5 in a matchday squad, as presumably the youngest of their loanees it's going to be tough for him to be involved.

 

[Notabadsquad]

Fifth time in a row that he doesn't even make the bench for a Championship match.

It's weird and you wonder if he is better served coming to us now.

Guess it must be very hard and in many respects a loan to a different Championship team may have been preferable. The beauty of hinsight of course.

He will get his chances so head down.

 

[Mandy]

If he's not even going to get on the bench at Leeds perhaps we should recall him and find another club for him to loan to. He's a talented lad so I'm sure there would be other clubs interested in him.

 

[stevee]

If he's not even going to get on the bench at Leeds perhaps we should recall him and find another club for him to loan to. He's a talented lad so I'm sure there would be other clubs interested in him.

Nailed it

 

[Larryfromthelane]

If he's not even going to get on the bench at Leeds perhaps we should recall him and find another club for him to loan to. He's a talented lad so I'm sure there would be other clubs interested in him.

If he is not going to make the bench at Leeds, why did we buy him?

 

[Clynelish]

It's weird and you wonder if he is better served coming to us now.

We can end the loan in January (not earlier). Need to find a team where he at least will get game time if his situation at Leeds won't change drastically in the next few months.

 

[Wellsey]

If he's not even going to get on the bench at Leeds perhaps we should recall him and find another club for him to loan to. He's a talented lad so I'm sure there would be other clubs interested in him.

Yep loan him to one of Leeds rivals!

 

[ILSpur]

If he's not even going to get on the bench at Leeds perhaps we should recall him and find another club for him to loan to. He's a talented lad so I'm sure there would be other clubs interested in him.

Agreed, but even if nothing else we could directly see his progress, get him used to the club and on our training system.

 

[Fattynomates]

If he is good enough surely he will get game time at Leeds?

 

[sammyspurs]

Surely he’s better off in our Carabou squad than doing nothing there

 

[ArmadilloSackRace]

Surely he’s better off in our Carabou squad than doing nothing there

We're not allowed to register a player until January. He's currently registered to Leeds.

Oh, and he's already played in the competition for Leeds anyway.

So in short, no.

 

[BangkokSpud]

Leeds are paying a salary for a player they can't use ... daft

 

[Fattynomates]

Leeds are paying a salary for a player they can't use ... daft

They should keep a tighter check on their finances or they might end up doing a Leeds!

 

[Flannerz]

.....Or just a bullshit source-less article.

This one is actually true though, other journalists have said it and I got told by someone that knows a few people that at the last minute Poch decided he didn't want Clarke this season.

 

[Airfixx]

This one is actually true though, other journalists have said it and I got told by someone that knows a few people that at the last minute Poch decided he didn't want Clarke this season.

That just implies he preferd he go on loan; not that he had no interest in signing him.

 

[ArmadilloSackRace]

The signing and loan back to Leeds were announced at the same time, so if Poch didn't want him at all then they'd surely have just not bothered to make the signing. The loan was part of the initial agreement with Leeds so must have been planned.

What we appear to have failed to recognise is that loaning him back wouldn't necessarily help his development, as he wasn't a regular for them last season anyway. It's not like Dele who was playing every game for MK already