Sheffield Wednesday - Lunt 'Infuriates' Laws
UK time is: 11:12:57
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

Lunt 'Infuriates' Laws

Wednesday boss Brian Laws has been left fuming after out-of-favour midfielder Kenny Lunt rejected a loan move away from Hillsborough before the transfer deadline.

The former Crewe Alexandre man hasn't featured in Laws' first team plans this season, mainly playing for the reserves and with the Owls' academy players in friendly matches.

And a loan bid from an un-named club was made prior to last night's transfer deadline which was turned down from the Runcorn-born midfield man.

He told the Sheffield Star: 'Players make me laugh when they say they just want to play games and when they do get an opportunity to play games, they don't want to go.

'It really does infuriate me at times.'

Laws is looking for a way out for Lunt, who returned to former club Crewe last season on loan, so he can free up some wages to bring in loan players.

Win £1,000,000 every week with Man of the Match®

Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The Journalist

Writer: Nick Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Tuesday September 2 2008

Time: 9:54AM

Your Comments (oldest first)

Change to most recent first
Great. We knew he was just in it for the money and here it is. Just GET LOST, Lenny!
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 09:59:00

TERMINATE his contract now what a waste of space money money money thats all he sees swfc as
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 10:08:00

It typifies the modern day footballer when they'd rather sit on their backside, train with the kids, and pick up a handsome paycheck rather than actually play football
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 10:16:00

Lunt infuriates everyone. What an absolute Lunt he is
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 10:17:00

Well we can't have it all ways. We criticise Woody for not honouring his contract but we attack Kenny for doing precisely that. Yes he probably wants to wait until he becomes a free agent, which I'm guessing won't be long, but we gave him the contract and it's hardly fare to have a go at the bloke for standing by that contract.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 10:22:00

Nick, how tempted were you to replace your headline from Lunt to...C....ya know what i mean. haha
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 11:29:00

Not his fault. What if the club was someone like Bournemouth and he just didn't want to go. Forcing him to is called human trafficking.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 13:12:00

I say play him in the next game.
Skeggy Owl
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 13:40:00

totally agree skeggy - what an idiot he is.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 14:20:00

what you on about rob? lunts said he wants to play regular first team football, a LOAN offer comes in (hes still on contract with us) and he turns it down to stay in reserves. Completely different to our captain starting every game and demanding a transfer
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 15:24:00

What if it was United? They've got nothing in the middle of the park!
Radon Barrier
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 16:07:00

Wesp, it's exactly the same. Lunt has a contract to play for this club. He doesn't have to accept loan moves. Woody has a contract to play for this club but doesn't want to honour this contract as he can smell the ambition of Coventry (it makes you want to weep, it really does). If we as a club try to force Lunt out, we are not honouring the contract we signed and are no better than a player who thinks the grass is greener elsewhere. The emotional, and public, blackmail of the publication of this contract dispute is altogether wrong and as immoral as Ronaldo describing himself as a slave. I agree with everyone who states that Lunt would be better off at a club that wants him but no-one can knock the man for honouring his contract. Some people need to examine their own double standards on this one.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 17:33:00

thats not really my point he said he wants first team football, he is not going to get it at wednesday, he could have gone out on loan thats not dishonouring a contract, its just a loan hes stll our player. by going on loan it gives him first team football and a better chance of joining another club when he does become a free agent. how is that exactly the same?
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 19:03:00

It's exactly the same because whilst your argument holds water in purely footballing terms it falls down over the legality of contractual obligations. Lunt is not obliged to go out on loan if he chooses not to. As he would be receiving the same pay regardless of who he went on loan to, it cannot be a matter of money for the player. BL, who ordinarily I have a lot of time for, is completely out of order for publicly villifying a player who wishes to honour his contract and play for our club. It is nothing short of emotional blackmail to lay the blame for our inability to bring in new faces at Lunt's door. I understand that BL is as frustrated as the rest of us are by the thinness of our squad but the blame, may I suggest, lays with the ridiculous length of time Mr Heard is taking with the buy out. I think Man City have proved that if you want to buy a club you can do so quickly. The current board are keeping a tight rein on the finances as they clearly don't want to lay out any cash that might not be refunded. The sooner Mr Heard jumps in or out the better. Sorry got a little off point. If I were a cynical man, I might think that BL was trying to defer supporter disatisfaction away from Woody, a player he made captain and plays every week, onto Lunt, a player he clearly has no intension of playing. The fundamental point is that Lunt cannot be forced to go out on loan (to a noticeably nameless club) and we shouldn't point fingers at him for wanting to stay. Woody on the other hand, I can't remember when he signed his last contract but I suspect it has a couple of years to run, acted like a typical modern footballer by smelling the money (and, god help us, the ambition) of Coventry and decided to try and force the club into selling him (watch the january transfer window). I ask you honestly, which of these two players is acting honourably and is our club behaving well in this matter.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 20:21:00

First of Rob its Mr Sheard not Heard ! Secondly you are way out there to suggest that it is his fault that SWFC have a thin squad. Geoff Sheard does not even own the club yet, so do you think that the blame would possibly lay at someone elses feet say for example the previous board ? And you cannot compare the way Man City have been bought to the it is going for us. Because if anyone had been bothered to listen to whats been said on SSN, they would have heard that due diligence has been completed by the Abu Dhabi Group. And that it will be another month before all the paperwork is completed
Skeggy Owl
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 20:50:00

Quite right, Sheard not Heard, my appologies. My point was that the current board members are not going to shell out any cash if they're not going to be in control. And the Abu Dhabi group may not have finished the paperwork but City still threw £32m around on the strength of the takeover. Their far eastern owner wouldn't have given it to them as he's currently liquidising his assets in order to keep one step ahead of his national courts. Once again, sorry for the lapsed S.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 21:32:00

I dont think we ever had any money to spend anyway. What Im saying is, would we be spending if there was no takeover ?
Skeggy Owl
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 21:49:00

Good question, I don't know but we waved goodbye to a large number of players at the end of last season and only bought in one out of contract player and one loan player. Due to our injury crisis we've been allowed to bring in 1 loan defender. Now in previous years the board did stump up some cash (usually following the sale of a squad member) but this hasn't happened this year. No assets have been sold in order to provide finance for purchases. A stricter financial regimen appears to be in place meaning that BL has to move Kenny Lunt and Leon Clarke on before he can bring anybody in. Unfortunately there appear to be few takers, only loan deals available. This means BL and the fans are left feeling frustrated. I can't help but think that much of the blame lies in the protracted take over proceedings. Once upon a time someone would have pointed the finger at Wednesdayite (I'm not a member) but that myth has been blown away. So I'm left asking one question, how much longer?
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 22:11:00

I can see your point to an extent, but what I cany accept is these so called people in the know that supposedly have hard evidence that Geoff Sheard is talking out of his arse. All I ask of these people is for them to PROVE what they are saying is true, back it up with eveidense but they are unable to do this For gods sake one poster even went as far as to call him a CROOK and a FRAUD. Im sorry thats out of order and I hope he sues the ar5e off of this guy. Its already been proven that the company that this guy is supposed to work for have NEVER heard of him.
Skeggy Owl
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 22:22:00

I knew nothing of these accusations. I only voice my frustration and I don't think I'm alone. I wouldn't go so far as to call Mr Sheard a crook and a fraud. BUT I would say that his use of a letter from one bank to prove his financial backing when he is getting that backing from another bank does make one raise an eyebrow. Also I'm a little worried that the lure of the USA may be too much. Those are my doubts. What is a cast iron fact is that this take over feels like it's gone on forever.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 22:34:00

The main thing for me is that there are too many people assuming an awful lot and do not have any idea whats going on, none of us do.
Skeggy Owl
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 22:41:00

On that I'm in full agreement. My arguments aren't accusations. Just examining the current stuation.
Report Abuse
02/09/2008 22:46:00


Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Sheffield Wednesday Articles

Archived Sheffield Wednesday Articles

List All Vital Wednesday Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll
ScoopDragon Publishing Entire League Network of Sites

Vital Members League (view all)

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
5. Burnley 17 9 6 2 9 33
6. Birmingham 17 8 4 5 6 28
7. Reading 17 7 6 4 7 27
8. Sheff Wed 17 7 6 4 3 27
9. Cardiff 17 6 7 4 3 25
10. Ipswich 17 6 7 4 0 25
11. Brentford 17 7 3 7 -1 24

Sheffield Wednesday Fixtures (view all)

Breaking League News

Hull City 0-2 Derby - Black Friday for City
» Hull City : 28/11/2015 09:36:00
Diame & Clucas On Initial PFA Fans' November List
» Hull City : 28/11/2015 09:32:01
Jackson On Initial PFA Fans' November List
» Charlton : 28/11/2015 09:28:01
Sask's Thoughts On Josh Martin
» Birmingham : 28/11/2015 09:28:00
Marshall On Initial PFA Fans' November List
» Cardiff : 28/11/2015 09:26:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Outcome of Blackburn Vs Wednesday?
Suggested By:  Vital Wednesday
Rovers Win 18%
Draw 16%
Wednesday Win 66%