DGNO1

According to the BBC Bentley has gone to SHA on loan http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/b/birmingham_city/9349874.stm Tottenham's David Bentley joins Birmingham on loan Birmingham have signed winger David Bentley on loan from Premier League rivals Tottenham. Spurs paid £15m for former Arsenal trainee Bentley when he signed from Blackburn in July 2008. But the 26-year-old has slipped out of favour at White Hart Lane and has made just three first-team appearances for the London club this season. More to follow.

Can't agree Joey. Hard work or not, if you outspend everyone, then it's still not 'fair'. Since 2003 Spurs have spent nearly £300m (nearly twice as much as us) and only Citeh and Chelsea have spent more in that same period. You can say it's not fair that they've had money handed to them and Spurs as a club have had to earn it, but then anyone can argue that it's not fair you're from London and generally speaking have a much higher chance of making money than clubs from other areas of the country. Football isn't fair. If they've spent £300m since 2003 how much have they got back from sales? And £300m in 7 years is a bit different then £250m in 2 seasons. Football has never been 'fair' but the current City unfair is just going to kill off the rest of us, as we are already discovering. it's one thing I 100% agree with the spurs fan about. What is the point.

Another goal for him yesterday, I'd swap him for Downing in the blink of an eye.

How is that a positive? Where we are right now is embaressing and it's very hard to laugh at them.

Turned up long enough to help them score a 2nd and kill us off and on his 'wrong' side.

Pretty sure they beat Stoke this season.

They've done a lot better in the CL then I expected or maybe that's 'hoped', when they got battered by Young boys in the qualifying game I thought they were well out of their depth but they've proved me very wrong.

They've sold out more times than us this year... They also have a smaller stadium though don't they. fair enough, i was just stating that arguing over spurs having 1500 seats empty is stupid when we have had nearly 2000 empty against Chelsea and small heath. anyway I hate spurs On one hand you have Tottenham with their best team in decades failing to sell out their first CL home group match (not even 33k) and on the other hand we got over 40k despite numerous of our fans being disillusioned at the moment. Puts things into perspective I wonder if the £100 for 5 games is helping our attendances, the cheapest ticket for the Spurs game against Twente was £44

Looks like we've driven Glaston off, no sign of him since Saturday.

Think they deserved the points, once Heskey went off we looked toothless, we should have taken advantage of their patched up CBs, I could run faster than Huddlestone but we never exploited that.

Thought MOTD showed the game I saw, we really didn't create that many chances.

So they market themselves better than us?

Very good point, say O'Neill becames Spurs boss tomorrow and said: Are you telling me spurs fans wouldn't go mad? There's a bit of a difference between comparing Spurs to Villa, and Villa to Liverpool. Not a whole lot. Villas history is much richer than Spurs. Villas european credentials are much higher than Spurs Villa have finished higher than Spurs most years in the Premiership Villa would be bigger globally than Spurs. At the moment Villa may not have as much money to spend as Spurs but I doubt Liverpool have as much money to spend as Villa at the moment. Why aren't we then? Why aren't we as big as Liverpool? is that what you're asking? Sorry I want to know why we aren't as big as Spurs globally. According to the post we are 'bigger and better' in every way but worldwide they have a bigger fan base then us and despite a smaller ground a bigger turnover then us.

Very good point, say O'Neill becames Spurs boss tomorrow and said: Are you telling me spurs fans wouldn't go mad? There's a bit of a difference between comparing Spurs to Villa, and Villa to Liverpool. Not a whole lot. Villas history is much richer than Spurs. Villas european credentials are much higher than Spurs Villa have finished higher than Spurs most years in the Premiership Villa would be bigger globally than Spurs. At the moment Villa may not have as much money to spend as Spurs but I doubt Liverpool have as much money to spend as Villa at the moment. Why aren't we then?

I don't know if I'm happy or not, think I'll have to wait and see how it goes.

What's happened that you ask?

According to an article in one of todays papers the precedent was set on the Ashley Cole/ Gallas transfer.

Why not? If it went through as a loan with an agreement to buy they could get it through.

Can't see Moyes coming here and really is he an up grade?

Didn't they just sign Gallas?

Seriously give it a rest, they've won 3 european cups, 8 fa cups and 4 league cups, they are a club with a rich history and at this moment sitting where we'd like to be. Really don't understand this 'my Dads bigger than your dad rubbish', makes us look 'small'.

Right, got you. I wasn't aware that by "attempt to unsettle our player" you meant "bid for him". Anyway, you completely missed the point. I was quoting somebody who said that it is our fault if we don't sign him for not meeting your price demands. I rebutted with the fact that the price demands are astronomical for Milner and you have effectively priced him out of a move. Personally, I really want him as I've rated him since his Newcastle days, but most City fans are of the impression that they could take him or leave him. We have players such as Ireland who can play in the centre and do a good job for us, so the need for Milner is negligible if we keep Ireland. He isn't this type of player that we will do anything to sign, as you can tell by the way that we've conducted business. If we wanted Milner desperately, we would have paid the £6m difference and signed him immediately. As I said, the reports of £24m is more than fair for Milner in my view and if Villa try to hold out for £30m I can't see us taking the deal. Let's say he does stay and you sell him next season for £12m. Is the £12m loss of revenue really worth it? And for what exactly? Depends if we get 4th or win a cup then £12m is peanuts, seeing as we have no idea right now what the season will bring I'd say £30m or no deal. We don't need the money.

The way Bale played at the end of the season do they need one?

Or maybe his good game was against Arsenal