'Blackburns Priority was to tie Brittain down to a new contract' Priority ? yeah right its been such a priority ....

And therein lies the problem with being owned by chicken overlords.

How were Plymouth Argyle paying 15 grand a week to him ? Crazy if so no wonder they've struggled i thought he'd have had to take a big pay cut from his Leeds days to go there.

Exactly. But some on here want to argue the toss for the sake of it. You'd only get someone like Batth played in his own position or at a push somewhere else on the back line if desperate they don't play him on the wing and say hey he's squad player.

Somebody doing someone a Myles type favour ?

Was he humping someones wife ? That was the go to reason back in the day pre social media and the 'itk'ers' 😂

Or it could equally be interpreted as it was left up to him he wasn't told he'd be forced to play or anyone was expecting him to. I'll stand by my opinion i don't think at any point hes made a pointblank refusal to play which is the way some are portraying it and i'm amazed so many are using it as a stick to beat him with it's not an unusual situation at all. The most important thing to that lad now is his career not a blue and white shirt in a friendly, hard as that is to swallow for some fans. For all he we know he probably thinks why didn't you reward me with a new contract 6 months ago so why should i risk it all now for one half a game ? I think the choice of club probably plays a part in peoples reactions because on the face of it it's a massive sideways step. I reckon if a bigger profile outfit who expect to finish in the top few had come in most would be saying yeah fully understand it he's got a big move. Anyway at least it isn't Derby....yet !

'Decided' to me suggests there was a choice and refusal imo would be if he was told you're selected and we expect you to play. Either way i refuse to play the blame/hate the player game narrative that is being pushed from one stupid tweet and it was only that tweeter who brought up the refused comment. I fully understand the situation and couldn't care less about what would have been a 45 min kickabout for him at Accrington. Ismael also went on to say the club have to think about the financials which also implies he was never going to be forced to play it was always going to be up to him.

Cause and correlation ? 😉

Truly free agents if they are half decent and command a bit of interest can obviously justifiably ask for bigger wages because there isn't a fee involved but this as pointed out above is an awkward one for interested clubs. He's a 2 million quid young player with a bit of potential and theoretically his best years ahead but he isn't a lad non parachute clubs will jump straight in and commit to a 4 or 5 million overall cost if the tribunal is brutal. He needs a relegated Prem club or Wrexham or Brum style interested party. Think we all know he'll end up signing for Derby in a few weeks on not much more than here and play out of his skin for them.

The only thing weird is you getting yourself flustered over it and your obsession with running around calling everything you don't agree with a conspiracy theory. Or 'cause and correlation'. They have inquests to establish those facts it isn't a difference of opinion defence mechanism.

Which is exactly the same thing he was added to the squad to come in for one of the first choice centre defenders when one got injured, dropped or suspended, or even sold. Therefore he was clearly seen as back up to them when he first arrived. Trying to alter the wording doesn't make any difference to the actual reality.

Nope just you refusing to accept he didn't to try and get over the disappointment of him wanting to go. It's ok i understand, hate the player as the club want you to.

Nope. I used to say i don't want to go to school but my parents advised me otherwise, i never refused to go i just didn't feel like it but there would have been concequences. No difference here, he hasn't felt like playing and his boss as said ok just this once so he didn't actually get the chance to refuse did he because he wasn't told he had to play.

Only you would ask that just for the sake of it.

Why are people now trying to rewrite history in regards to Batth and going back several years through his previous recent clubs ? He came here as back up and to add experience which is probably what he was taken to Norwich for also and why he's now at Derby. He performed very well here and that's all that matters Sunderland is completely irrelevant we've had a few done well here who did nothing previously and vise versa and that's football at this level.

What's the best way to flush out potential bidders ? Use your press contacts to 'report' you are about to enter talks of a new extended contract when there's only 12 months or so left on their current deal. Just saying.

Someone from Rudy's dept no doubt tasked with tweeting club spin.

How poor must the offer to Nyambe have been for him to happily hang around contractless until Wigan offered him something. This will no doubt be along the same lines.

The guy failed a medical so no point in arguing he isn't coming we're losing the RWB so they need to get out there and find another. No point dilly dallying around waiting to scan the old injury again in a few months then he effs off to Scotland. It's over lets move on.

But such is our situation we cannot afford to lose him unless a good replacement is found first and that will cost wages even if not a fee.

There is no real logic because there is no real board of directors.

Big Dom might just be one to benefit if there is now a bit of panic behind the scenes he might get an offer he wasn't expecting. Like any gaffer worth his salt i'm sure Ismael is recommending his bosses now tie down who they can for the sake of dressing room moral. Gaffers have to either get senior players onside or get them out otherwise it'll never work. Consider this though if they do offer Hyam something and he also says no it's another great excuse to get another bigger earner out the door.

Then the policy of leaving serious contract renewals until barely 12 months or less left and trying to lowball will have to change. However with the financial restrictions, owner reluctance and court issues that you somehow chose to omit then it won't will it. Couple that with the fact so many have now left for nothing that is in itself having an impact because there is less to put back into the black hole. So this will keep happening and we will keep going around in circles as the change you describe isn't really change at all it's just re-arranging the people front of house and distracting from the core issue.

That's the rumour and they've always seemed happy to chuck big wages at short term contracts i think millions have gone down the pan that way. Yet they won't invest wages in young assets or good fees in proven potential. One policy for one thing at Ewood and one for another .