Ulver Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I never said he was an impact sub. Surely he could've been used in a 4-4-2 formation ? Its not like our other formations were working with great success all season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted July 23, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) The problem is we simply were not strong enough in midfield to play with 2 central midfielders. Edited July 23, 2013 by Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I'll be happy to see him off the wage bill. He was a panic buy and cost us a lot of money in transfer fee and wages. Quality finisher though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonoridge91 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I'll be happy to see him off the wage bill. He was a panic buy and cost us a lot of money in transfer fee and wages. Quality finisher though! A panic buy who kept us up. Was money well spent, who's to say if we didn't sign him that we'd even be in the Premiership now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philosopher Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I don't think we should have signed him in the first place! For 4 transfer windows before we actually signed him people were banging on about DB being the missing link how we needed a finisher and so on. So when we finally got him there was delerium on here. Personally I was like wow we just spent 24m on a player let the good times roll! I wasn't really that impressed with us signing DB, rather it was the fact we had just spent so much money on one player, it felt like we were ready to compete with the big boys! In reality we all knew it was too much money to spend for DB! My argument against signing him was always he is limited (I always thought he wasn't the right kind of player for us)! People are saying he saved us, I don't buy that for one minute! Our results in the second half of the season coincided with all our first choice players returning to fitness. We would have stayed up period! We struggled in the first half of the season due to a terrible injury crisis plus Houillier changing too much too soon, as our playing style reverted a little back to the counter attacking style of MON only with more possession and a patience when our opponents had plenty of players behind the ball. Bent was / is terrible business for Villa. So was Mcleish. I don't like to attack Randy or the board (they definitely want whats best for Villa), but they have made 3 massive errors in judgement. One hiring McLeish, two spending 18-24m on DB, and three swapping Milner with Ireland. We should have made sure we kept Milner and if nothing could be done to keep him then never should have compromised ourselve by including Ireland in the transfer. I said at the time, Ireland was never the right man to replace Milner and that we would miss his drive and energy. But Ireland was the fans choice, I am sure Randy knew exactly how much most fans wanted him here, I wanted him too, just not as a replacement for Jimmy. I think MON was probably undermined here on two counts (not wanting Ireland as Jimmy's replacement and then not getting the proceeds from the sale to spend), not surprised they did this to MON when you consider how he blew so much money on average players, but here in lies the problem, a problem we still have! We done have anyone in Randy's ear at boardroom level with a proper understanding of actual football. Lots of good business men but not so much football knowledge (this is why I am surprised we never got a director of football, but then this may have been a blessing as we have a fantastic manager with lots of freedom to do his thing). Bent is a good player but not suited to Villa, in fact he just isn't a modern footballer, and in the premier league this is an issue. Its no good nowadays to have a player in the middle to just be the terrier, and work hard closing down, putting themself about, they need technique and passing abilty too. Defenders that can only defend don't play for top teams, Even John Terry has a good long range pass and composure in possession, not to mention the fact his a great organiser. Top level football is no longer a place for one trick ponies! The reason Benteke was so great for us is because he has so many qualities. If team push up Benteke's pace will see him in behind, if team drop deep Benteke will win every header and with his touch normally find a teammate, if they get tight he will out muscle defenders if they give him space he will be the platform for every attack, you cannot win. Only a defender as good in the air and quick on the deck can hope to contain him. The quicker we sell him the better as our losses will only increase! Anyhow rant over! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) I'll be happy to see him off the wage bill. He was a panic buy and cost us a lot of money in transfer fee and wages. Quality finisher though!A panic buy who kept us up. Was money well spent, who's to say if we didn't sign him that we'd even be in the Premiership now. Absolutely. Panic buy is effing ridiculous - sorry, but it really is. He fitted the mould of the plans the then manager had for the team, he's scored goals at a good ratio, at least up until last season and he hasn't whinged, at least not publicly. Typical ill informed opinion for me, a bandwagon response Edited July 23, 2013 by bannedfromHandV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I'll be happy to see him off the wage bill. He was a panic buy and cost us a lot of money in transfer fee and wages. Quality finisher though!A panic buy who kept us up. Was money well spent, who's to say if we didn't sign him that we'd even be in the Premiership now. Absolutely. Panic buy is effing ridiculous - sorry, but it really is. He fitted the mould of the plans the then manager had for the team, he's scored goals at a good ratio, at least up until last season and he hasn't whinged, at least not publicly. Typical ill informed opinion for me, a bandwagon response What would be your definition of a panic buy if it's not spending twenty four million pounds on Darren Bent half way through a season that looked like it was going pear shaped?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Does anyone think if we can offload Bent and Ireland we'll buy a new player? Maybe central midfielder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaForever1970 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Shocker, more bothered about money than playing football. He better not ever moan about training elsewhere now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Something has definitely happened between player and manager and we just might live to regret getting rid. I disagree. ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££60+k a WEEK! That's all that needs to happen. £3million+ a year for a limited player who doesn't do enough for the team, when we are losing money. It's not rocket science Would you say Shearer was limited because he was a goal scorer and not a link player? I see this argument being vomited out time and time again concerning Bent. However, how can a player do enough for a team when he hasn't been played enough or given a chance to to form a partnership with Benteke. This argument also works on the premise that Benteke is going to play every game for us this season. He isn't, due to either injury or fatigue and again we may need to change tactics depending upon the opposition as our present system will now be well known to other Premiership teams. I still don't think either the manager or the majority of fans should be hell bent (sorry) in getting rid of one of the best goal scorers we've had since he has still much to offer and when he does leave he will prove that elsewhere and indeed against us. Edited July 24, 2013 by Morpheus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folski Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Something has definitely happened between player and manager and we just might live to regret getting rid. I disagree. ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££60+k a WEEK! That's all that needs to happen. £3million+ a year for a limited player who doesn't do enough for the team, when we are losing money. It's not rocket science Would you say Shearer was limited because he was a goal scorer and not a link player? I see this argument being vomited out time and time again concerning Bent. However, how can a player do enough for a team when he hasn't been played enough or given a chance to to form a partnership with Benteke. This argument also works on the premise that Benteke is going to play every game for us this season. He isn't, due to either injury or fatigue and again we may need to change tactics depending upon the opposition as our present system will now be well known to other Premiership teams. I still don't think either the manager or the majority of fans should be hell bent (sorry) in getting rid of one of the best goal scorers we've had since he has still much to offer and when he does leave he will prove that elsewhere and indeed against us. How many times did Shearer create his own chances, or belt one in from 30 yards, Bent is very good at what he does, he's almost like a Solskjaer, (probably better in one on ones though) he has very good ability to finish off moves, a lot of which are more concerned with instinct than anything else, which you can't really learn. In the last 7 years he has been credited with 18 assists by Fantasy Premier League, who have a fairly generous definition of an assist. Compare that to some one like Crouch who would have been playing in a similar level for the 7 years has 41. Defoe who has 23, is a player very similar to Darren with a bit more zip and the odd cracker in his locker, that's why they didn't work well together at Spurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) sad to see bent go, a nice chap, no bitching and professional. I suspect his niggly injuries were just that, if he had the full support of his boss he would have played through, but like anyone else, if you feel your being shat on , why make the extra effort when it wont be noticed. thanks not only for your goals, but raising the profile of our club when it was going down the shitter. he will score goals where ever he goes so I expect he will hit 16 to 20 next season no matter who he plays for. Totally agree. Bent has scored the following amount of goals per season in the Premiership: 18,13, 6, 12, 24, 17, 9, 3 In there are three great seasons (one exceptional) and otherwise a lot of average. He is a bit overrated imo. He certainly doesn't do enough for the team and needs to go considering the stupid wages he is on. We could get three first team players on that wage. Did you think he was on 'stupid wages' when his goals kept us up? We probably could get three first team players using Bent's wages but would those three players individually be good enough to also keep us up? We very nearly dropped through the trap door last season with £20,000 a week players even if you include Benteke and as we've already seen, even if those players have one good season those £20,000 a week wages soon rise to between £40,000-£60,000 per week which Bent is apparently on now. Edited July 24, 2013 by Morpheus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Maybe you should try that stat again with a goals to minutes played ratio. It's not like he really had a fair crack of the whip the last two seasons. Obviously. But there's also a reason Spurs got rid of him. And it's that he is not that good. We've moved on from Bent now. What makes you think we're now good enough to have 'moved on from Bent now?' Thats an incredibly arrogant statement to make considering if Benteke repeats his form of last season then he will probably be off to pastures new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Re-Folski. Would you say then that Shearer made the majority of his goals himself? While i agree with you that Shearer was the architect of some of his goals and i believe most players have that ability anyway depending upon the opportunity, for me Shearer was a goal poacher much in the same way that Bent is now. Our present manager wants to play in a way that doesn't suit Bent and thats fair enough but we'll very quickly learn this season whether the system the manager wants to play is possible under the club's current financial restraints? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Shocker, more bothered about money than playing football. He better not ever moan about training elsewhere now. Whats this about? Has Bent said something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Reports in the mirror that Fulham have lost interest and dropped out after finding bent was on £80000 a week at villa , newcastle are thought to still be interested but only on vastly reduced wages - although of course the mirror do get a lot wrong so i wouldn't take it as gospel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philosopher Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Morpheus its simple the game has moved on. I am not saying he can't do a job for us, but Benteke, Gabby, and Weimann are ahead of him and rightly so IMO. Bent doesn't want to sit on the bench and we can't afford him to either. So his time up here and he needs to move for himself and the club. You compare him to Shearer, yet shearer could crack them in from 25 yards, was a fantastic penalty taker, was strong with good hold up play, and a good workrate. Shearer has more to his game, as well as being a better finisher than Bent. Bent's a good finisher, but not the most clinical, his real talent is being in the right place at the right time to finish things off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folski Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Re-Folski. Would you say then that Shearer made the majority of his goals himself? While i agree with you that Shearer was the architect of some of his goals and i believe most players have that ability anyway depending upon the opportunity, for me Shearer was a goal poacher much in the same way that Bent is now. Our present manager wants to play in a way that doesn't suit Bent and thats fair enough but we'll very quickly learn this season whether the system the manager wants to play is possible under the club's current financial restraints? I wouldn't say he made the majority of them himself but I'd imagine he would have made a lot more than Darren in terms of percentages, plus I think he put in a much greater "shift" so to speak, I often remember defenders saying he was absolute filth on the pitch and really put himself about, which I wouldn't say you really get from Darren. Granted Shearer netted 45 of his goals from the penalty spot, but he also could belt in the odd free kick, another thing Darren doesn't do. Lastly, I think technically Shearer was a million miles ahead of Bent, some of the goals he scored were absolutely incredible, if Darren Bent was going to score a goal I'd put money on it that it was either a goal line scramble, a tap in or a one on one, but with Shearer he was capable of scoring anywhere and I don't think he was limited to being a poacher, but I see that as a more Van Nistelrooy word than anything else. I'd say Darren is more the poor man's (not at 80k a week mind) RVN rather than the poor man's Shearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 they could be frozen out because no one will take them as they've signed such a huge contract? Perhaps it's up to the footballer to do their due diligence before they sign such contracts. I think the due dilligence is taking one look at how much guaranteed income they are going to get over the next 4/5/6 years regardless of whether they ever kick a ball for the club and then getting your John Hancock scrawled on the contract as fast as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted July 24, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24, 2013 Shocker, more bothered about money than playing football. He better not ever moan about training elsewhere now. Thats unfair! Just because he does not kick up a stink does not mean he is happy to not play. It makes a pleasant change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts