Has Pritchard said why he left



MadMackem10 said:
Depends what you define as poor. As widely reported he was offered an extra year on the same money.
Did birmingham offer a better than us? Absolutely. Was our offer massively unfair? Given his injury problems since and recent performances according to birmingham fans I would say no
Click to expand...
Almost 31 and mostly used as a sub so if anyone offered more than a year on decent money he should have jumped at it but it didn't make sense for us to do so.
 
Not in public.

But to a small gathering of Sunderland fans at an event, yes. No one on here however who can confirm it who was there.

Speakman told him and Baath 2 days after the Luton play off defeat they were to find new clubs as they were not in contention for the following season (both into last year of their contract).

Pritchard isn't one to hold back and called Speakman out for what he thinks of him - and said a lot of the other players think the same. Blokes a massive bell end on an ego trip treating the club as 'his'.

The players knew we needed a striker in the January of that season, and Mowbray told Speakman - Pritchards opinion was we would have been promoted if an 'experienced player who could hold the ball up and score a few goals had been signed. He then said "shows you where the club wants to be".

I found him a nice, genuine bloke. Wants to play football. Had a shit time at Huddersfield with injuries and the manager chucked him under the bus during an interview, which soured the relationship with the fans. Loved it here. Bought into it. Said the football (at the time) was class and had a lot of respect for Lee Johnson.

For me - no surprise the run we've went on since he left - missing that bit of guile and quality in the centre which opens the pitch up.
 
I think it was along the lines of;
Pritchard wanted a 2 year deal
We initially told him he wasn’t being offered a deal at all
He then started playing really well and fans were expecting him to be offered a new deal
We begrudgingly offered him a 12 month extension on the same terms he was on (league 1 wage plus promotion increase presumably)
He obviously rejected it
Birmingham came to the table with a 2 year deal and a pay rise.
No brainer for him to move on and don’t blame him one bit
 
MadMackem10 said:
Depends what you define as poor. As widely reported he was offered an extra year on the same money.
Did birmingham offer a better than us? Absolutely. Was our offer massively unfair? Given his injury problems since and recent performances according to birmingham fans I would say no
Click to expand...

Isn't it the point that we were active trying to move him on and not interested in renewing, until our struggles and him being played more often and doing well. then we offered him a one year deal and seemingly started to move the goal posts rather than what we actually offered him when he had longer deals tied up?

What he has or hasn't done at Brum for me is largely irrelevant, because he was a good player mostly for us and he's another player we seemed to be in a rush to move on yet haven't adequately replaced.
 
Kenna said:
Bit obvious why he left.

Wants a new deal
Club doesn't want to offer him one due to age and want to sell
Fans demand he gets new deal
Club pretend to listen and publically offer him a poor deal
Prichard gets offended, as planned
Club make a big deal out of it and sell him
Click to expand...
Pleased to see this is getting an appropriate level of 'like'. This was obvious while it was happening but half the board seemed to throw a fiege and the above was a controversial perspective
 
Nosworthycorner said:
For me - no surprise the run we've went on since he left - missing that bit of guile and quality in the centre which opens the pitch up.
Click to expand...
We were 2-1-1 in the first four games after he left so he wasn't an immediate miss. Then we went 1-1-6 over the next eight and in that span we were missing O'Nien, Ballard, Clarke, Roberts and Rusyn for a combined 20 games. Having Pritchard would have been great to make up for the absences but they couldn't be foreseen when he was let go.
 
PaulG said:
We were 2-1-1 in the first four games after he left so he wasn't an immediate miss. Then we went 1-1-6 over the next eight and in that span we were missing O'Nien, Ballard, Clarke, Roberts and Rusyn for a combined 20 games. Having Pritchard would have been great to make up for the absences but they couldn't be foreseen when he was let go.
Click to expand...
If you go with football eyes over data it was clear as day Pritch was one of our best attacking players, often the difference when we needed a goal cos he was one of the few in the team that could play a ball into the final third.

The only reason people were optimistic about Hemir was that Pritchard kept putting it on his head in preseason, then they played like 10 minutes together 😞
 
Vore said:
If you go with football eyes over data it was clear as day Pritch was one of our best attacking players, often the difference when we needed a goal cos he was one of the few in the team that could play a ball into the final third.
Click to expand...
Data and football eyes say the same thing in this case. In hindsight, it would have been useful to have him for the balance of the season. Offering him another year was defensible as he could still provide leadership and be an impact sub. Paying him more wasn't because, as noted, he was mostly a sub. Committing to him for the 2025/26 season and beyond makes less sense and he can't be faulted for taking a multi-year deal. And he was clearly on a different page to Beale, which was likely a factor as well.
 

Back
Top