31 Aug 2016 12:51:08
Can I ask what is the thinking behind Sinclair moving to Watford only to go on loan to championship. He could have done that whilst remaining an LFC player. Seems odd for him personally, unless he has issue with the club or vice versa.

{Ed002's Note - Liverpool didn't want to keep him and he certainly didn't want to stay. He needs game time which Watford have discovered.}

1.) 31 Aug 2016
31 Aug 2016 13:18:32
He may be hunting money. I believe I'm right in saying that a player receives 5% of the transfer fee unless they hand in a transfer request, which would usually waive their claim to that fee.

5% of £4m is a pretty significant £200k. Literally just for moving.

This is all purely speculative though as I'm not certain the player gets 5%, and even if they do there is nothing to suggest that is the primary reason Sinclair left the club.

{Ed002's Note - He left the club for the reasons I gave - nothing to do with money. He wanted to play.}

2.) 31 Aug 2016
31 Aug 2016 13:45:15
He could have stayed and went on loan. Watford discovered he needed games? . Everyone knew he needed games.

{Ed001's Note - the club wanted rid, he wanted to go. I fail to see what is so difficult to grasp about this?}

3.) 31 Aug 2016
31 Aug 2016 14:08:04
You mean the club wanted rid after he rejected the new contract offer? Because if he had accepted that he could have just got on with his development and gone on loan sooner. Instead, he's set his own development back and will end up going on loan anyway. Compare him to Brannagan and many of his young teammates and it's hard to not get the whiff of a big-time Charlie off the lad.

{Ed002's Note - It wasn't just the contract.}

4.) 31 Aug 2016
31 Aug 2016 15:41:53
He's a quality footballer.