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.

(quoted from Citeh thread, posted here to not go OT)

As a Spurs fan it annoys me, as it makes a mockery of all the hard work we've done since 2003. We totally restructured the club and rebuilt our entire squad. It has taken years as we did it all through money generated via the plc. This is essentially the board doing an excellent job with the money they get from the fans pockets. City have done nothing like this. We've had to work so hard to fight for a CL spot and if it wasn't got City we'd probably be top 4 regulars for a few years. It's totally disheartenting and kind of makes you wonder what the point is.

Unless Villa get a sugar daddy, their only hope is to look at a club like Spurs and see it is possible with hard work and a good strategy from the board. But with City buying their was to success with money simply given to them, what hope do the likes of Villa have?

.

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.

Bale world class my ass.

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

There is one positive - Tottenham haven't won either of the main 2 competitions for half a century!

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

Yet another Premier League game where Bale hasn't really turned up. Stuck in the back pocket of a player most people can't even pronounce, no less.

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

Spurs have yet to win outside of London this year I believe.

- Tempting fate I know.

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.

Joey55:

I'm not talking about the Inter or Werder Bremen matches. I specifically mentioned the match vs Twente.

Amusingly using your link for the Inter game it says "sold out" but it doesn't for the Twente one. Very telling.

Here's one of your fans confirming 10 blocks were available on general sale on the day of the game.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A74851428

The South Stand was sold out. How else do you explain the difference of over 1500 tickets between the attendances in the Twente and Inter games?

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.

The MOTD highlights were very spurs-centric and in reality the game was a lot more even than they showed. We also played some really nice stuff that obviously was inconsequential so not worth showing in the highlights.

Quite surprised more people haven't put Downing as their MOTM. I thought he was excellent today and has been in almost every game so far this season.

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

I guess it's down to the media attention they get.

So they market themselves better than us?

If you did that to Spurs for instance you would get about 12. something.

Very good point, say O'Neill becames Spurs boss tomorrow and said:

"Spurs are not a club on the same level as Aston Villa, let's be objective and honest.

"It's a club that according to me has belonged between seventh and 12th place in the Premier League.

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.

If you did that to Spurs for instance you would get about 12. something.

Very good point, say O'Neill becames Spurs boss tomorrow and said:

"Spurs are not a club on the same level as Aston Villa, let's be objective and honest.

"It's a club that according to me has belonged between seventh and 12th place in the Premier League.

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.

hows sandro looked in training so far glaston

What's happened that you ask?

Did we not get special dispensation for Dunne last year

Sky sports now saying that the deal was done to late and Spuds have asked for special dispensation. All bias aside i wouldnt allow it unless there are special circumstances. To set a precedent for things like this could open the floodgates. Could be argued that they started that the other year with Arshavin though

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

if the VDV deal goes through now there's something fishy going on - now way could the deal have been completed and the paperwork submitted in time....

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?

I saw on SSN last night that Woodgate is having a groin op to save his career ('Arry's words). If you sign a player that spent the first 16 months of his contract at Madrid injured you really shouldn't be surprised at things like this.

Will they bring in another CB to bolster the squad for this season?

Didn't they just sign Gallas?

Just as I said: Spurs 2 top flight league titles, no european cup and lot's of talk

That's it 2 league titles and no European Cup but they are HUGE

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'.

Of course it's down to you. When he joined us two years ago, the player signed a contract stating he would play for us for four years in exchange for a certain salary. We are only two years into that contract, so he has two more years to fulfill it. We want him to keep playing for us, so if you want him you'll have to pay whatever price we have set. Otherwise, he will stay with us. By all accounts he's a model professional, so I am not at all concerned about 'keeping an unhappy player.'

It's the height of arrogance for Man City to swoop in, attempt to unsettle our player, and then criticize us for keeping him against his will. He is contracted to us!

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.

He is always linked with Spurs so he might go there plus they have never really had a left winger in recent years

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

Terry and King is a disaster waiting to happen.

Well I suppose some have got what they wanted with King starting, but didn't he already have his 1 good game this year against Citeh? We're in trouble.

Or maybe his good game was against Arsenal