Proudlock Contract Terminated By Club

By Nicholas Rigg
September 19 2005

Wednesday striker Adam Proudlock has had his contract terminated by the club. Boss Paul Sturrock said the decision was down to disciplinary reasons, and will take effect immediately. The decision puts an end to the two rollercoaster years the ex-Wolves man has spent at Hillsborough.

Owls striker Adam Proudlock has had his contract with the club terminated with immediate effect.

Boss Paul Sturrock told the official SWFC website that the decision was made on the back of a number of breaches of club rules, and that he had to make the decision for the good of the club, and Proudlock.

Sturrock said: ''It's dissapointing for everyone involved but there was a stand that needed to be made. We have rules and regulations which he has breached.''

Proudlock signed for the club from Wolves in September 2003 for a cost of £150,000. He previously had a successful loan spell at Hillsborough, but was unable to continue his form in to his permanent move. When Sturrock took the reigns at S6 Proudlock burst in to form before suffering a long lay-off. It was hoped that he may play a key part in the Owls squad this season, but has suffered further set backs in his quest for first team football.

The news comes as an extra blow to the club following the current injury crisis in the striker department. Last season's top scorer Steve Maclean is out until January, and Barry Corr and Drew Talbot are still recovering from injuries - and are yet to be tested at this level. It means that Sturrock must surely look in the loan market and sign someone in quick time to aid the squad.

Sturrock told swfc.co.uk that he was sad to see Proudlock leave, but insisted that discipline is a vital part of any football club.

He said: ''He has qualities and I'm sure he's going to come back and bite me on the bum. But discipline is a vital part of the football club, I have proved that today. I'm dissapointed I've had to do it and I don't like doing it. But we have another 25 players who are under the same disciplinary codes and it was important for them. There's not really anymore to be said.''