Dodgyknees Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Poor but is always the case, when Baker/Clark have a 'mare' our left backs suffer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir_gary_cahill Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Poor but is always the case, when Baker/Clark have a 'mare' our left backs suffer. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benireduk Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Like most of our players today he was poor. If he's not going to stay I'd have Bennett starting. Why groom other teams players to the detriment of our own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir_gary_cahill Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Like most of our players today he was poor. If he's not going to stay I'd have Bennett starting. Why groom other teams players to the detriment of our own? Agreed as well, I can't see Bertrand staying permanently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Like most of our players today he was poor. If he's not going to stay I'd have Bennett starting. Why groom other teams players to the detriment of our own? Overall Bertrand is better is better than Bennett\Luna - with regards to him staying -Id be keen at a price - but wouldn't be busting the bank for him ....no more than £4m imo 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakid007 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Jose talking bout Bertrand trying to up price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Like most of our players today he was poor. If he's not going to stay I'd have Bennett starting. Why groom other teams players to the detriment of our own? To make our team better and avoid relegation. A team with Luna/Bennett playing 38 games, with Baker and also Bacuna at the back will always ship in lots of goals. Our main ambition seems to be to avoid relegation each season, so getting help from better teams is OK by me. Sure a team like Everton or Tottenham, trying to break the top four, wouldn't always benefit from having players on loan (like Lukaku going back next season), but sometimes you just accept that it's the only way to make your team better. I am not entirely convinced of Bertrand, it's not like he is destined to play for Chelsea in the next few years - but it goes without saying that he is lightyears ahead of what we already have at this club and I want us to buy him in the summer. How we go from shutting out Chelsea to let in four goals at home to Stoke is a question I'll never be able to answer. Lambert's teams ship in a lot of goals, it's now over 175 goals in 106 games in the Premier League, we clearly have a lot of problems no matter who's playing at the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigCarew Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Should never have started yesterday in front of Bennett after the Chelsea game. Thought he was dross yesterday and seemed to lack technical ability which Bennett has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Should never have started yesterday in front of Bennett after the Chelsea game. Thought he was dross yesterday and seemed to lack technical ability which Bennett has. Yes he should have. You don't drop a player becuase he couldn't play against his parent club. He has been playing well. However you now drop him for the United game, and bring Bennett in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Wasn`t that comment from before the Chelsea match? And to be honest it seems like rubbish, I don`t think he has a future there at all, and I am pretty sure if Shaw is going somewhere, its gonna be Chelsea considering he is a fan. Why the f would he go to liverpool or manchester united then? For what it`s worth, he has not played at a level that is good enough for Chelsea when they are pushing for the league+cl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Good article in Brum Mail saying he would consider a permanent switch here and was happy when we dicked Chelsea Can read it on the website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'm a bit torn on this. He's obviously miles better than Luna and Bennett and I want him to keep the position for the rest of the season. But he isn't worth splashing a fortune on - you can see there is a reason he isn't cutting it at Chelsea and if he would need a massive salary to make him stay, I'm not so keen. We do however need a left back of better quality than Bennett and Luna from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted March 26, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'm a bit torn on this. He's obviously miles better than Luna and Bennett and I want him to keep the position for the rest of the season. But he isn't worth splashing a fortune on - you can see there is a reason he isn't cutting it at Chelsea and if he would need a massive salary to make him stay, I'm not so keen. We do however need a left back of better quality than Bennett and Luna from somewhere. Problem is that you just know were not going to get that betteruality from somewhere. Therefore I hope Bertrand stays. I think he, like Bacuna and the rest of our players, had a bad attitude on Sunday. Hopefully they've been brought back down to earth now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'm a bit torn on this. He's obviously miles better than Luna and Bennett and I want him to keep the position for the rest of the season. But he isn't worth splashing a fortune on - you can see there is a reason he isn't cutting it at Chelsea and if he would need a massive salary to make him stay, I'm not so keen. We do however need a left back of better quality than Bennett and Luna from somewhere. He is reportedly on 35k, hardly "massive" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 If my life depended on if and someone asked me yes or no will Bertrand join us in the summer I'd guess at no and be pretty confident of not dying. What I'm saying is that I've got a feeling we won't be able to sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villastine Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) send him back and take Ashely Cole on loan next season!!!!! Edited March 26, 2014 by Villastine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AValon Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 To be fair, they were all pretty abysmal against the 'mighty' Stoke. Having said that, when the team are switched to stealth mode, he is a quality asset, Will he stay, I hope so and I think he could bring out the player in Joe Bennett.....but not at any outrageous price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigCarew Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Should never have started yesterday in front of Bennett after the Chelsea game. Thought he was dross yesterday and seemed to lack technical ability which Bennett has. Yes he should have. You don't drop a player becuase he couldn't play against his parent club. He has been playing well. However you now drop him for the United game, and bring Bennett in. Rubbish. A player who helps stop one of the best players in the world on form (Hazard) does not get dropped the week after, no matter who he replaced. I'd like to see it as the same principle of if say Albrighton scored 2 goals I wouldn't want Weimann / Gabby (if they were suspended for example) to jump straight back in the team, regardless of how they played before this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted March 27, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 27, 2014 Rubbish. A player who helps stop one of the best players in the world on form (Hazard) does not get dropped the week after, no matter who he replaced. I'd like to see it as the same principle of if say Albrighton scored 2 goals I wouldn't want Weimann / Gabby (if they were suspended for example) to jump straight back in the team, regardless of how they played before this. I'm inclined to agree with this. If you ask players to work hard and wait for their chance, then when they finally get it (due to injury/suspension/whatever) and they perform better than the person they replaced, then why shouldn't they keep their place? The player who missed out now needs to wait and work for his chance. That is competition for places. That is being picked on form, not on favouritism. That allows for natural squad rotation due to injury/form. That builds the entire squad up to a better level. That is how it should work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigCarew Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 Rubbish. A player who helps stop one of the best players in the world on form (Hazard) does not get dropped the week after, no matter who he replaced. I'd like to see it as the same principle of if say Albrighton scored 2 goals I wouldn't want Weimann / Gabby (if they were suspended for example) to jump straight back in the team, regardless of how they played before this. I'm inclined to agree with this. If you ask players to work hard and wait for their chance, then when they finally get it (due to injury/suspension/whatever) and they perform better than the person they replaced, then why shouldn't they keep their place? The player who missed out now needs to wait and work for his chance. That is competition for places. That is being picked on form, not on favouritism. That allows for natural squad rotation due to injury/form. That builds the entire squad up to a better level. That is how it should work. It is also the most logical. No point having a 'squad' otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts