Clint back training with the first team today...

[mccscratch]

Greg Selzer, who, with apologies to Grant Wahl and Brian Straus, is the foremost expert on American footballers abroad, says that Fulham asked Dempsey not to train with the first team.  Not the other way around.  Jol's backing away from the "refuse to play" language makes this plausible.  He also intimated that Fulham has been shooing away potential bids, which has irritated Clint to some degree. 

Selzer has impeccable credibility over here and I can't remember him being wrong about something like this. 

For what it's worth.

Greg has also been tirelessly trying to confirm this report as well. When he has something we will know one way or the other... Problem is nobody is speaking from either side.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

To me, he no longer wanted to be part of the club. 

That's rubbish, sorry. He wants/wanted to move to a bigger club who can guarantee him european football or Champions League.

It's every players dream (I can't really see why, but that's a different matter) so they obviously try and get there.

It was more of a case of him wanting to use his great form of last season to seal a transfer and not him not wanting to be part of this club anymore. 

As he once said...'I am a loyal dude'.


Loyalty yes, but the ambition to improve too. That's why he's such a good player in my opinion.

There are certain things on message boards that amuse me.  One that I have found amusing on here lately is some of the same posters that have long complained about Dempsey publicly saying he wanted to leave Fulham for Champions League Football are quite alright with Dembele's statement that he is using Fulham as a stepping stone.  A six and two three's as far as statements go in my mind with the only difference being the player that made the statement.  As one erudite poster recently noted, sometimes haters are goanna hate.

I don't think Dempsey said that he "wanted to leave Fulham for Champions League Football" but that he would like to play Champions League football. There is nothing wrong with that answer to a question about his future and I cannot recall posters complaining at that. So the situation over statements is similar to that with Dembele.

The difference is that Dembele hasa said that he is happy to stay and played on Saturday whereas Dempsey has said he wants to leave and didn't play on Saturday.

Is that clear now?

You have made thirty posts on this forum.  Perhaps there is a reason why you can't recall the statements I am referring to.

We seem to be getting a bit desperate so resorting to low blows. I used to post mainly (as a polite member) on Cottage Corner. If there was going to be much abuse I rather suspect that it would show up there. People were a bit annoyed but it quickly blew over. Maybe it has been a long-running issue on FOF.

Anyway that was a neat way of avoiding the real points that:

a) in his defence, I don't think Dempsey originally said he wanted to leave
b) the difference between them is that Dembele has said that he is happy to stay and played on Saturday whereas Dempsey has said he wants to leave and didn't play on Saturday.

[ToodlesMcToot]

This means he's probably realized his mistakes.

Good news...

and the club theirs

And they were?

1. Going public with it.....at all. Fulham have such a good reputation for keeping transfer dealings private and just getting on with their business. They could've kept all of this to themselves and just dealt with Demps and whichever clubs were/are interested.

2. Damaging the public reputation of a player that they want to keep and doing it for no good reason.

That's two that I know of. I'm sure there are more, just like I'm sure there are more on Clint's side of things than we don't know about.....be they minor or major.

by going public they've tried to encourage bids because we've had none and the player wants to leave. Clint damaged his own reputation.

All they needed to do was state that they've reached an impasse with the player and that he's now for sale. Instead, they chose to devalue him further by labeling him a malcontent. Unnecessary mistake.

We're still only going with the club's story here. So, he may have damaged his reputation and he may not have. The club certainly damaged his reputation. This benefits the club exactly how. Unnecessary mistake.

Dempsey is under contract to play for the club for another year. So any `impasse' is of Dempsey's making.

First sentence aside, you don't know what you're talking about.

....just to clarify, I don't either. But, then again, I'm not laying all blame at one party's feet.

[RidgeRider]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

[ToodlesMcToot]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Ding! Ding! I don't ever recall feeling like any Fulham manager (not that I've had knowledge of too many) had the kind of power within Fulham to act indepentently with regard to transfers/extensions/player negotiations.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

This means he's probably realized his mistakes.

Good news...

and the club theirs

And they were?

1. Going public with it.....at all. Fulham have such a good reputation for keeping transfer dealings private and just getting on with their business. They could've kept all of this to themselves and just dealt with Demps and whichever clubs were/are interested.

2. Damaging the public reputation of a player that they want to keep and doing it for no good reason.

That's two that I know of. I'm sure there are more, just like I'm sure there are more on Clint's side of things than we don't know about.....be they minor or major.

1. The club had not said anything from when Dempsey returned to last week but how were they supposed to not say anything in the pre-match press conference? Maybe they should have put make-up on Kacaniklic and sent him out in a Dempsey shirt?

2. The club explained Dempsey's absence. If there was any damage to Dempsey's reputation it was through his own actions. If it was substantially untrue then Dempsey would have responded by now. He used to be a regular tweeter, I believe.

1. I don't recall seeing anyone putting a gun to anyone's head. No need to throw out the kind of detail they threw out. How can one possibly assume that would make the situation better?
2. Yes. They explained his absence. And then they "qualified" their statements after the game. Do you know Demps personally? Or his agent? If not, how can you possibly know when or how he would respond. You are correct that he used to be a regular tweeter.

I would say that facing a press conference or putting a team out without Dempsey in it is pretty much `putting a gun' to the club's head. Imagine the fuss on message boards if Dempsey was not in the team or on the bench without an explanation.

What detail was given that wasn't necessary? Some of it even helped Dempsey's case like that he thought that an offer would come from Liverpool and that Liverpool have not yet made an offer.

If someone on this board makes a false statement about you how long are you going to leave it before you respond?

[mccscratch]

Greg Seltzer said...
"As I have said before, it was Fulham who told Dempsey he should not train with the first team with everything going on. The entire concept that he is on strike or refused to play to force a move is a UK tabloid concoction sparked by Jol the thespian"

I will again point out that Greg is simply not ever wrong about matters concerning US players... he has all the connections and contacts and gets scoops on everyone.

Steve Nicol Clint's former manager @ New England went through the entire mess with Clint before he moved as Everton and Charlton put bids in for him in August after the 06 WC and MLS rejected them all. Clint was livid and said, well I am leaving for nothing then you jack wagons but in January we came in for him and MLS sold him on the cheap. Steve said "never once did Clint miss training or matches. It is simply not in his character."

[ToodlesMcToot]

This means he's probably realized his mistakes.

Good news...

and the club theirs

And they were?

1. Going public with it.....at all. Fulham have such a good reputation for keeping transfer dealings private and just getting on with their business. They could've kept all of this to themselves and just dealt with Demps and whichever clubs were/are interested.

2. Damaging the public reputation of a player that they want to keep and doing it for no good reason.

That's two that I know of. I'm sure there are more, just like I'm sure there are more on Clint's side of things than we don't know about.....be they minor or major.

1. The club had not said anything from when Dempsey returned to last week but how were they supposed to not say anything in the pre-match press conference? Maybe they should have put make-up on Kacaniklic and sent him out in a Dempsey shirt?

2. The club explained Dempsey's absence. If there was any damage to Dempsey's reputation it was through his own actions. If it was substantially untrue then Dempsey would have responded by now. He used to be a regular tweeter, I believe.

1. I don't recall seeing anyone putting a gun to anyone's head. No need to throw out the kind of detail they threw out. How can one possibly assume that would make the situation better?
2. Yes. They explained his absence. And then they "qualified" their statements after the game. Do you know Demps personally? Or his agent? If not, how can you possibly know when or how he would respond. You are correct that he used to be a regular tweeter.

I would say that facing a press conference or putting a team out without Dempsey in it is pretty much `putting a gun' to the club's head. Imagine the fuss on message boards if Dempsey was not in the team or on the bench without an explanation.

What detail was given that wasn't necessary? Some of it even helped Dempsey's case like that he thought that an offer would come from Liverpool and that Liverpool have not yet made an offer.

If someone on this board makes a false statement about you how long are you going to leave it before you respond?

Like I said, they didn't need to say everything they said. Jol characterized Dempsey's not playing along the lines of a strike in the pre-match interviews. After the match he backed away from that and went so far as to defend Dempsey. So, I'd say the pre-match characterization was unnecessary and could easily have been avoided. Jol is very much used to "talking around" things and easily could've in that case.

Yes. If someone typed a falsehood about me on this board, I'd likely respond/correct the error immediately. But let's face the sad reality, millions of pounds aren't riding on what I say or don't say in public. Not the same with Clint.

Also, you'll recall if you've read enough on this board, Clint did tweet that the truth would come out in due course.

[NogoodBoyo]

Mr. Fulham's reply to one of my rambling rose posts above was:

"that's rubbish, sorry."

Nogood "ouch, bludgeoned to near death by a blunt keyboard, isit" Boyo

P.S.  So, I guess I'll end it all here in sin and misery with the BarryP coup de grass:
Nogood "no you won't, Boyo cos you lost your bleddy cut'n'pasting from the other Dempsey thread and you can't be bothered to go back to find it, can you, isit" Boyo

[MasterHaynes]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Nothing like the Scharwzer situation , Mark was happy at Fulham Arsenal made an unsolicited Bid of £2m, we said no he handed in a transfer request we still said no. Mark made no comments to press or tweets, his agent made no comments or tweets and neither did any member of his family. Mark did not do a Radio interview at the end of the previous season telling everyone he wanted to play CL football and joked about joining Liverpool.  
At every turn this is very different to the Mark situation

[ToodlesMcToot]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Nothing like the Scharwzer situation , Mark was happy at Fulham Arsenal made an unsolicited Bid of £2m, we said no he handed in a transfer request we still said no. Mark made no comments to press or tweets, his agent made no comments or tweets and neither did any member of his family. Mark did not do a Radio interview at the end of the previous season telling everyone he wanted to play CL football and joked about joining Liverpool.  
At every turn this is very different to the Mark situation

And the club never said that he did things that he didn't do. So, yep, different.

[Senior Supporter]

I don't agree that Fulham did not need make the revelations that came out last Friday and, lets make no mistake, the video with Sarah Brookes was not an "interview", it was a rehearsed statement.

The club could not go into the first match with some feeble explanation for Clint's absence so, in view of their justified frustration, they decided to give an explanation of the situation. Jol did not say that Clint had refused to play, that was Sarah, but did say that he no longer wanted to play for the club, and revealed that Clint had come back from the States saying he was going to Liverpool. It was, I think, the right thing to leave him out of the squad whilst we awaited the Liverpool offer that never came.

I see no reason to doubt Jol's honesty, and can understand his frustration at the absurd situation. To try and force some movement one way or the other was absolutely the right thing to do, as was the offering of an olive branch to Clint if he was prepared to accept it.

Personally I think it is the behavior of Liverpool that stinks.  

[LordNelson]

 It's in the eye of the beholder. Also, McBride pretty much put the kaibosh on the Dempsey refusing to play malarkey.

[TonyGilroy]

It's in the eye of the beholder. Also, McBride pretty much put the kaibosh on the Dempsey refusing to play malarkey.

You can believe who you like but Jol would know.

McBride would know what Dempsey told him.

[MasterHaynes]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Nothing like the Scharwzer situation , Mark was happy at Fulham Arsenal made an unsolicited Bid of £2m, we said no he handed in a transfer request we still said no. Mark made no comments to press or tweets, his agent made no comments or tweets and neither did any member of his family. Mark did not do a Radio interview at the end of the previous season telling everyone he wanted to play CL football and joked about joining Liverpool.  
At every turn this is very different to the Mark situation

And the club never said that he did things that he didn't do. So, yep, different.

Of course stupid me Fulham, Sarah Brookes and Jol are all complete liars and the only one telling the truth is Dempsey...Oh wait he hasn't said anything to dispute their assertions just alluded that he may have a different viewpoint, well I never would have expected him to agree with being slated.
Jol is doing what any good manager would do and has continued holding out an Olive branch each time he has said anything about the situation as he knows it is unlikely that Clint will get his move, but as yet nothing from the Dempsey camp to intimate he maybe open to a reconciliation, he is still playing hard ball and holding out for a move.

[mccscratch]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Nothing like the Scharwzer situation , Mark was happy at Fulham Arsenal made an unsolicited Bid of £2m, we said no he handed in a transfer request we still said no. Mark made no comments to press or tweets, his agent made no comments or tweets and neither did any member of his family. Mark did not do a Radio interview at the end of the previous season telling everyone he wanted to play CL football and joked about joining Liverpool.  
At every turn this is very different to the Mark situation

And the club never said that he did things that he didn't do. So, yep, different.

Of course stupid me Fulham, Sarah Brookes and Jol are all complete liars and the only one telling the truth is Dempsey...Oh wait he hasn't said anything to dispute their assertions just alluded that he may have a different viewpoint, well I never would have expected him to agree with being slated.
Jol is doing what any good manager would do and has continued holding out an Olive branch each time he has said anything about the situation as he knows it is unlikely that Clint will get his move, but as yet nothing from the Dempsey camp to intimate he maybe open to a reconciliation, he is still playing hard ball and holding out for a move.

Why do you consistently avoid the statement that Jol made the very next day after the match where he backtracked from Sarah's comments and said that refusing to play was inaccurate...

It is like you can't swallow your pride...

[BarryP]

To me, he no longer wanted to be part of the club.  

That's rubbish, sorry. He wants/wanted to move to a bigger club who can guarantee him european football or Champions League.

It's every players dream (I can't really see why, but that's a different matter) so they obviously try and get there.

It was more of a case of him wanting to use his great form of last season to seal a transfer and not him not wanting to be part of this club anymore.  

As he once said...'I am a loyal dude'.


Loyalty yes, but the ambition to improve too. That's why he's such a good player in my opinion.

There are certain things on message boards that amuse me.  One that I have found amusing on here lately is some of the same posters that have long complained about Dempsey publicly saying he wanted to leave Fulham for Champions League Football are quite alright with Dembele's statement that he is using Fulham as a stepping stone.  A six and two three's as far as statements go in my mind with the only difference being the player that made the statement.  As one erudite poster recently noted, sometimes haters are goanna hate.

I don't think Dempsey said that he "wanted to leave Fulham for Champions League Football" but that he would like to play Champions League football. There is nothing wrong with that answer to a question about his future and I cannot recall posters complaining at that. So the situation over statements is similar to that with Dembele.

The difference is that Dembele hasa said that he is happy to stay and played on Saturday whereas Dempsey has said he wants to leave and didn't play on Saturday.

Is that clear now?

You have made thirty posts on this forum.  Perhaps there is a reason why you can't recall the statements I am referring to.

We seem to be getting a bit desperate so resorting to low blows. I used to post mainly (as a polite member) on Cottage Corner. If there was going to be much abuse I rather suspect that it would show up there. People were a bit annoyed but it quickly blew over. Maybe it has been a long-running issue on FOF.

Anyway that was a neat way of avoiding the real points that:

a) in his defence, I don't think Dempsey originally said he wanted to leave
b) the difference between them is that Dembele has said that he is happy to stay and played on Saturday whereas Dempsey has said he wants to leave and didn't play on Saturday.

First, no low blow was intended I was simply pointing out that your point went on a tangent well away from my original comment.  My comment was that many of the posters who have previously criticized Dempsey as being a malcontent for repeatedly stating it was his goal to play Champion's League Football seem to have ho qualms with Dembele for stating that he is using the club as a stepping stone.  I find a bit of ironic humor in the disjunctive thought process.

As for addressing points and not avoiding them, your point b only has merit if the club played no part in sitting Dempsey aside from first team training.  

1. Do you know that the club did not play a part in excluding Dempsey from first team training?  
2. Did the club ever say they did not play a part in excluding Dempsey from first team training?
3. Are you adhering to an opinion that the club did not play any part in Dempsey not being included in first team action.

Which of the three is it?

As for why would the club do that?  Dempsey's contract is an asset to the club.  If he is injured and cannot be traded the club loses out on a payday just as much as Dempsey.  

As for why would Dempsey not comment on the situation press?  Perhaps he is the one trying not to burn his bridges. Perhaps there are misconduct ramifications in his contract if he does.  The only thing that is certain is that assuming Dempsey's silence means the club statement is wholly correct and wholly informative is just an assumption and nothing more.

As for me, I'll leave the speculation to the press and I will take a wait and see approach.  If Dempsey does rejoin the first team after the window closes we are likely not to hear much more about this one way or the other any.  If he does not I am sure we will all get an ear full which some will dispute and others embrace.

[TonyGilroy]

I refuse to play.

I don't feel mentally ready to play.

I'd prefer not to play.

I'll do as I'm told but I don't think, given the situation, that I'll play well.

I don't think I'm quite match fit.

These are all possible, different, yet amount to the same thing whilst allowing for different perceptions.

Given that Jol IS playing Dembele the situation with Dempsey HAS to be different.

[ToodlesMcToot]

Firstly, lets keep the tone of things respectful and not let it degenerate. Ok?

Lots of good points made and good discussion.

This point has probably already been made but I have read through most of this thread and most everyone's comments and while we all know we don't know everything this does feel like the Mark Schwarzer situation all over again. Different manager but same CEO and Owner. Makes me wonder if Alistair or MAF is the real engineer of the whole situation from a Fulham perspective and Jol is only the mouthpiece in the media without full knowledge of the detailed discussions and master plan by the other two.

Nothing like the Scharwzer situation , Mark was happy at Fulham Arsenal made an unsolicited Bid of £2m, we said no he handed in a transfer request we still said no. Mark made no comments to press or tweets, his agent made no comments or tweets and neither did any member of his family. Mark did not do a Radio interview at the end of the previous season telling everyone he wanted to play CL football and joked about joining Liverpool.  
At every turn this is very different to the Mark situation

And the club never said that he did things that he didn't do. So, yep, different.

Of course stupid me Fulham, Sarah Brookes and Jol are all complete liars and the only one telling the truth is Dempsey...Oh wait he hasn't said anything to dispute their assertions just alluded that he may have a different viewpoint, well I never would have expected him to agree with being slated.
Jol is doing what any good manager would do and has continued holding out an Olive branch each time he has said anything about the situation as he knows it is unlikely that Clint will get his move, but as yet nothing from the Dempsey camp to intimate he maybe open to a reconciliation, he is still playing hard ball and holding out for a move.

That Sarah Brookes interview was well rehersed and every single word picked to put Fulham in the best light and Clint in the worst. No one said Clint was on strike, but the combination of the two Fulham employees speaking in that interview definitely and intentionally painted that picture.

You and I know what's gone on in the public. 3 interviews given by the club, more specifically Jol. Beyond Jol's responses, we know nothing. We certainly don't know the entirety of the truth. Doubtful we ever will.

You can characterize your view as "stupid" if you like. I never thought that.

[BarryP]

I refuse to play.

I don't feel mentally ready to play.

I'd prefer not to play.

I'll do as I'm told but I don't think, given the situation, that I'll play well.

I don't think I'm quite match fit.

These are all possible, different, yet amount to the same thing whilst allowing for different perceptions.

Given that Jol IS playing Dembele the situation with Dempsey HAS to be different.

I agree with you 100% Tony.  The difference could be that Dempsey has truly been a prat but the difference could also be that the club decided they wanted to sell Dempsey and keep Dembele.  The difference could be some combination of Dempsey and club reasons. Possible explanations lie on both sides but we don't know what the answers really are.  People want to believe they know and perhaps all of the facts have come out but per usual in situations like this conflicting stories are beginning to surface.