Harry Winks

[CL Fox]

1 hour ago, JimJams said:

I've heard through contacts at the club that Winks would have been well up for staying over had he been asked nicely.  However it turns out that Ruud, after having had a skinful in the Keith Weller Lounge, apparently grabbed young Harry and proceeded to say "Oi, Wanks, you're sleeping over you cxnt".  Initially taken aback Winky let out a nervous giggle and said "Sorry sir, what?" to which Van Nastyroy viciously cupped the midfield dynamo by the balls, squeezing them and looking directly into the now wincing lads tearful eyes "I've got you the penthouse sweet ya dirty bitch" before spinning him round and slapping his ass.

 

Now call me a Winks apologist, but I'm not sure that's reasonable.

 

Ruud?  He was positively vulgar!

Surprised he got served in the Keith weller

[NewquayFox]

He is here until January then, he had better get his arse in gear and fight for Skipps place in the starting X1… 

[Kierzz]

1 hour ago, NewquayFox said:

He is here until January then, he had better get his arse in gear and fight for Skipps place in the starting X1… 

James will take that spot

[volpeazzurro]

5 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

You don't know the circumstances so have no idea whether it was unreasonable.

 

Just because you've worked long hours and shifts does that mean everyone else should if their emplyer requests it?

 

I’m sure that if there’d been genuine personal or medical reasons it would never have been an issue and we’d have never heard about it.

[volpeazzurro]

5 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

The scenario you describe is quite reasonable, but it also assumes lots of norms. We don’t know, nor can know, if there were complications during or after the birth, not uncommon, so in such situations will always default to forgiveness rather than accusations.

If those things were apparent I’m sure we’d never even heard of it. All players are susceptible to personal and family situations and such things are usually dealt with in house. When things like this leak there’s usually a reason.

[Jon the Hat]

10 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

I’ve had children too, worked long hours, shifts, sometimes quite often away from home. He chose to live where he did and to be asked to stay over once in a blue moon for the huge wages he’s on isn’t unreasonable either! It’s about give and take. He just wanted everything his own way. Selfish git and hardly part of a team ethic.

I travel quite a lot for work, including 10 day trips to Europe a couple of times a year, and that puts pressure on family life.  I know many people, (I am sure you do too) who chose not to take a role which demands that, so they could be at home with their family.  If you agree one thing and your employer starts demanding another it can be disruptive, and margins are tiny at this elite level of sport between brilliant and just off the pace.

 

I always remember the Leeds / Bowyer and Woodgate assault trial.  During that trial Bowyer played out of his skin, and Woodgate was a shadow of his former self.  Stress and pressure affects people differently.

[Ian Nacho]

Can someone convince him that Trabzonspor play on the Seven Sisters Road. 

[FosseSpark]

Employers should be empathetic to people's personal circumstances and be as flexible as possible. 

However, if you are in a relegation battle / extremely busy period / new business pitch (delete as appropriate) and you need someone in work on time and fully switched on, then i think it was wholly appropriate to select someone else from the team  to fulfil that role if they can more wholly commit to the work than someone else.

 

It's unfortunate as Winks' personal circumstances seem to have clashed with his work requirements, and it's not a very modern POV to hold that against someone. But football isn't normal employment and is grotequely remunerated,, so Winks has to live with it if managers won't pick him because he wants to travel 5 hrs a day and it's deemed this distracts him from being able to perform.

 

The fact its still an issue 6 mths later points to a bigger problem underlying issues with commitment to training / the club. 

[MonarchFox]

22 minutes ago, FosseSpark said:

Employers should be empathetic to people's personal circumstances and be as flexible as possible. 

However, if you are in a relegation battle / extremely busy period / new business pitch (delete as appropriate) and you need someone in work on time and fully switched on, then i think it was wholly appropriate to select someone else from the team  to fulfil that role if they can more wholly commit to the work than someone else.

 

It's unfortunate as Winks' personal circumstances seem to have clashed with his work requirements, and it's not a very modern POV to hold that against someone. But football isn't normal employment and is grotequely remunerated,, so Winks has to live with it if managers won't pick him because he wants to travel 5 hrs a day and it's deemed this distracts him from being able to perform.

 

The fact its still an issue 6 mths later points to a bigger problem underlying issues with commitment to training / the club. 

Or he's just not as good as he thinks he is.  I'm wondering if Dewsbury Hall made him look a lot better than we think or when he plays the passes he says aren't there due to players around him not seeing it.

 

So we are both stuck with each other.  It's a risky game for him as when his contract expires I doubt he will be inundated with offers

[AKCJ]

47 minutes ago, FosseSpark said:

Employers should be empathetic to people's personal circumstances and be as flexible as possible. 

However, if you are in a relegation battle / extremely busy period / new business pitch (delete as appropriate) and you need someone in work on time and fully switched on, then i think it was wholly appropriate to select someone else from the team  to fulfil that role if they can more wholly commit to the work than someone else.

 

It's unfortunate as Winks' personal circumstances seem to have clashed with his work requirements, and it's not a very modern POV to hold that against someone. But football isn't normal employment and is grotequely remunerated,, so Winks has to live with it if managers won't pick him because he wants to travel 5 hrs a day and it's deemed this distracts him from being able to perform.

 

The fact its still an issue 6 mths later points to a bigger problem underlying issues with commitment to training / the club. 

Harry Winks is being paid the best part of £4m a year to be a Leicester City player yet hasn't deemed it necessary to immerse himself with Leicester and Leicestershire. I don't really understand why people think it's acceptable for a player on that sort of money to half arse it?

 

We should be telling people when they sign that we want players to come here and feel a part of the city. There are plenty of fantastic places to live here. Full of life, great scenery, great education, great space and it's a safe environment to raise a family. The club should be requiring ever player that comes here to be a part of that.

 

Too many players come here that live in Manchester, London or, even worse, ****ing Nottingham. If Leicester isn't good enough for these people then I don't want them here.

[fkas]

On 02/09/2025 at 16:15, volpeazzurro said:

I’ve had children too, worked long hours, shifts, sometimes quite often away from home. He chose to live where he did and to be asked to stay over once in a blue moon for the huge wages he’s on isn’t unreasonable either! It’s about give and take. He just wanted everything his own way. Selfish git and hardly part of a team ethic.

If things are tough at home you won't be in a good mood. Seen it plenty of times with staff that were good at what they do but were struggling under the mental strain. Happens. 

[BKLFox]

Can we all just agree that we don’t know what advice the deputy PM had on selling her house and we don’t know what’s happened/ happening with Winks personal life and the behind scenes chats & therefore if he comes on the pitch we all support him until we do know?

[MGLCFC]

If and when he's selected again, I hope he's shows the desire to perform to the best of his ability, then I think as supporters, we should show encouragement towards him. It's likely to be a difficult period in our history financially, so if we can all stick together and have a mentality that is strong on the pitch and in the stands, hopefully this will help the club and team move forward.

[MrsJohnMurphy]

39 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Harry Winks is being paid the best part of £4m a year to be a Leicester City player yet hasn't deemed it necessary to immerse himself with Leicester and Leicestershire. I don't really understand why people think it's acceptable for a player on that sort of money to half arse it?

 

We should be telling people when they sign that we want players to come here and feel a part of the city. There are plenty of fantastic places to live here. Full of life, great scenery, great education, great space and it's a safe environment to raise a family. The club should be requiring ever player that comes here to be a part of that.

 

Too many players come here that live in Manchester, London or, even worse, ****ing Nottingham. If Leicester isn't good enough for these people then I don't want them here.

I love Leicester but if I had a footballers money I certainly wouldn't live here

[Dahnsouff]

52 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Harry Winks is being paid the best part of £4m a year to be a Leicester City player yet hasn't deemed it necessary to immerse himself with Leicester and Leicestershire. I don't really understand why people think it's acceptable for a player on that sort of money to half arse it?

 

We should be telling people when they sign that we want players to come here and feel a part of the city. There are plenty of fantastic places to live here. Full of life, great scenery, great education, great space and it's a safe environment to raise a family. The club should be requiring ever player that comes here to be a part of that.

 

Too many players come here that live in Manchester, London or, even worse, ****ing Nottingham. If Leicester isn't good enough for these people then I don't want them here.

No amount of money should mean someone is inherently expected to discard their current life.  (There is a reason player power, not club power, is on the rise - not agreeing with that either)
But this is just faux fan outrage, sorry. It has zero sense in reality, perhaps when football clubs had more localised focus rather than brand focus, but not now.

[Mike Oxlong]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

Harry Winks is being paid the best part of £4m a year to be a Leicester City player yet hasn't deemed it necessary to immerse himself with Leicester and Leicestershire. I don't really understand why people think it's acceptable for a player on that sort of money to half arse it?

 

We should be telling people when they sign that we want players to come here and feel a part of the city. There are plenty of fantastic places to live here. Full of life, great scenery, great education, great space and it's a safe environment to raise a family. The club should be requiring ever player that comes here to be a part of that.

 

Too many players come here that live in Manchester, London or, even worse, ****ing Nottingham. If Leicester isn't good enough for these people then I don't want them here.

I don’t care about his decision where to live but I do care about how he performs on the pitch

[FosseSpark]

44 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Can we all just agree that we don’t know what advice the deputy PM had on selling her house and we don’t know what’s happened/ happening with Winks personal life and the behind scenes chats & therefore if he comes on the pitch we all support him until we do know?

if he comes on the pitch is doing quite a lot of work in this sentence. the fact he isn't or has been told not to is the reason everyone's having the conversation

 

[honeybradger]

46 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Can we all just agree that we don’t know what advice the deputy PM had on selling her house and we don’t know what’s happened/ happening with Winks personal life and the behind scenes chats & therefore if he comes on the pitch we all support him until we do know?

This whole travelling to work fiasco is just distracting from the main issue with Winks which is that his performances on the pitch over the last year for us havent been good enough.

 

From him strolling back whilst the opposition are countering to him pulling out of tackles it's been clear that he's not applying himself on the pitch for a while now.

[ClaphamFox]

7 minutes ago, FosseSpark said:

if he comes on the pitch is doing quite a lot of work in this sentence. the fact he isn't or has been told not to is the reason everyone's having the conversation

 

He's played in three of our four league games, so he's not exactly been frozen out.

[AKCJ]

36 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

No amount of money should mean someone is inherently expected to discard their current life.  (There is a reason player power, not club power, is on the rise - not agreeing with that either)
But this is just faux fan outrage, sorry. It has zero sense in reality, perhaps when football clubs had more localised focus rather than brand focus, but not now.

 

Why isn't the club requesting that players buy into Leicester when they sign? Why is there a such a lackadaisical approach to it all? The club clearly isn't asking players to move here yet kicks up a fuss when obvious issues surface later down the line (Winks refusing to stay here on the eve of a game, Vestergaard bringing his dog into training etc).

 

It sort of feels like LCFC doesn't care about the City/County anymore. It doesn't feel as though we have people working at the club who want to show off what we have. You get the impression that the players we've been signing are only really here for the money and that has taken away from the family like feel we used to have.

[AKCJ]

1 hour ago, MrsJohnMurphy said:

I love Leicester but if I had a footballers money I certainly wouldn't live here

That's fine, I'm just saying that if it was up to me I wouldn't sign a player with your attitude.

[MrsJohnMurphy]

29 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

That's fine, I'm just saying that if it was up to me I wouldn't sign a player with your attitude.

Pearson didn't seem to mind, Winks wouldn't have been an issue for him, he wouldn't have created the issue in the first place

 

Would Market Harborough be ok?.......Ashby De La Zouch?

[jammie82uk]

1 hour ago, MrsJohnMurphy said:

I love Leicester but if I had a footballers money I certainly wouldn't live here

But would you live a 4 hour round trip everyday away? 

[Dahnsouff]

35 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

 

Why isn't the club requesting that players buy into Leicester when they sign? Why is there a such a lackadaisical approach to it all? The club clearly isn't asking players to move here yet kicks up a fuss when obvious issues surface later down the line (Winks refusing to stay here on the eve of a game, Vestergaard bringing his dog into training etc).

 

It sort of feels like LCFC doesn't care about the City/County anymore. It doesn't feel as though we have people working at the club who want to show off what we have. You get the impression that the players we've been signing are only really here for the money and that has taken away from the family like feel we used to have.

I fear your last statement is the reality, only here for the beer mentality. Suppose you would ask that if you have no reason to come to the area outside of football, why come here as we are but one of many? 

London or more fashionable locations certainly have a head start in this area, and it's not really for those incoming to improve the allure. 

As fans it's easy 

[Bordersfox]

42 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

That's fine, I'm just saying that if it was up to me I wouldn't sign a player with your attitude.

Then we'd sign nobody.  Or nobody good.   

 

Come on, even your bog standard office fodder expects flexibility and partial home working now meaning often they dont live that close to the office. 

 

There is just not a chance millionaire footballers would allow themselves to be dictated to over where the live. This is Roy of the Rovers fantasy stuff.  A lovely idea but we all know utterly impossible to enact.