I can’t comprehend what Rodwell to give ill-conside
Just when it seemed he couldn’t become any more popular, Jack Rodwell gave a moving interview to a national newspaper. He told the Daily Mail: “I feel great. It’s the fittest I’ve ever been.”
You have to feel sympathy. I’m being serious. If he genuinely is super fit and can’t even make the bench at Sunderland, that only leaves one possibility. He isn’t very good at football. Our pity is further elicited because the interview also demonstrated a pathological delusion, which can’t be a pleasant condition to live with.
We refer to: “There was a period under Sam (Allardyce) when I was playing regularly and playing well.”
He was referring to the six whole starts (none of which were in victories) he made in Allardyce’s 32 games in charge; one of which was the dead-rubber final game of 2015-16 at Watford. The playing well part you can decide for yourselves.
He also reckons: “I do believe I’m a Premier League player and I do believe I’m an England international when I’m fit and on form.
“I still think it’s well within my reach, especially at centre back. I just need a good run where I can really express myself and people say, ‘Wow, Jack’s back’.”
He might get his wish. If he plays against Birmingham City next week, “Wow, Jack’s back” is the very least he can expect as a reaction from Sunderland fans.
Some of the more unreasonably demanding even think he should have broken out of a trot at some point since 2014.
Other quotes in the article certainly caught the eye.
Such as: “Why would I just walk away and be left jobless? The transfer window has two weeks to run and I’m prepared to do anything to play.
Any decision will be based on the chance to play football, not money.”
He won’t be playing that football for Sunderland because no evidence has been offered that he is better than even fellow midfielders Honeyman, Gibson, Cattermole, Gooch, McGeady, McManaman, McNair, Williams, Ndong, Ethan Robson ... or the similarly unwanted Khazri or Lens.
Still, the Mail managed to conclude: “There is a feeling that his first-team exile is as much a financial decision as a footballing one.”
They did not elaborate upon just who harbours this “feeling” is, or whether they have actually watched him in the last four years.
Unfeeling cynics, damn their eyes, have therefore suggested that Rodders is only still at SAFC because no other club is insane enough to pay him anywhere near the £70,000 a week he currently “earns”.
Not so, says Jack. In fact the mere suggestion seems to offend him and he tacitly suggests a solution.
He said: “I want to write off this negative period and go again with some positive momentum.
“For me, it’s not about money. It’s about playing. If that means moving on to help the club in a situation that suited all parties, I would need no convincing. I’m a footballer, I want a football club.” But ... “Why would I just walk away and be left jobless? The transfer window has two weeks to run and I’m prepared to do anything to play. Any decision will be based on the chance to play football: not money.”
Presumably then he’s off to another club where he will be guaranteed first team football, but for a fraction of the salary.
Er, not quite. He seems to imagine that he could end up like a joinery apprentice at C
He also appears a li fused. Either he thinks bad that he could be “le if he leaves Sunderland thinks he should be “an international”. Which
In 2014, a club chie agreed to his contract w incredibly, inserting a clause.
Despite Rodwell’s c one blames him for sig
This doesn’t mean t one connected with SA es he would now do an other than tear it up.
He doesn’t have to a This brings forth the in ble: “Would you walk a £70,000 a week?”
Only a simpleton co the question is relevan Rodwell isn’t a simplet
The question becom dumber when you ask skint person.