Popular Post villan_007 Posted August 16, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 16, 2013 Season long loan. So Villa still paying his wages then? Do you want a cup of tea or anything whilst you site there and relax and ill do the reading for you? 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.I.C.O. Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Mat Kendrick @MatKendrick4m Martin Jol on Darren Bent: "He's composed and clinical in front of goal. Even if he's not scoring he's involved in some good link-up play." heheheh He's in for a rude awakening then! I can't remember any time Bent was involved in link-up play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agbonla-score Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Mat Kendrick @MatKendrick4m Martin Jol on Darren Bent: "He's composed and clinical in front of goal. Even if he's not scoring he's involved in some good link-up play." heheheh Jol thinks he has signed Benteke! ha ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted August 16, 2013 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2013 Season long loan. So Villa still paying his wages then? Absolutely not, I can confirm we aren't. Fulham are picking up his wages in full and paying for having him on loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Season long loan. So Villa still paying his wages then? doubt it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Thank God this saga is finally over for now. Hopefully it also means we have some extra money in the kitty for PL to speculate with. Fingers crossed everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voinjama Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 (edited) I am at work and didn't really have time to read the article, so if it said Fulham paying his wages then my bad. To be honest I shouldn't be on here because I'm at work. I just duck in and out when the boss is not around. I'm also glad this saga is over now, but if he did leave, I would rather it was permanently and so the club can get a fee. Edited August 16, 2013 by Voinjama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Loaning a proven striker to one of our nearest rivals, that is always a really nice idea. An injury-free Bent will score lots of goals, but I guess he might get some niggles now that he will suddenly play a lot after playing very little. We potentially just gave Fulham 15+ goals in the league, we should have sold him cheaper to a club like Palace or Hull. Stupid decision in every regard. If Benteke gets injured, then what? Gabby, Weimann and Helenius is not 30 goals between them. Benteke can get 15 - 25 goals on his own, he has to stay injury-free - but when we play him every single week we risk a lot in my opinion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 nearest rivals? Fulham are not one of our rivals unless battle for 11th is a big thing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Loaning a proven striker to one of our nearest rivals, that is always a really nice idea. An injury-free Bent will score lots of goals, but I guess he might get some niggles now that he will suddenly play a lot after playing very little. We potentially just gave Fulham 15+ goals in the league, we should have sold him cheaper to a club like Palace or Hull. Stupid decision in every regard. If Benteke gets injured, then what? Gabby, Weimann and Helenius is not 30 goals between them. Benteke can get 15 - 25 goals on his own, he has to stay injury-free - but when we play him every single week we risk a lot in my opinion. I'd sooner see him go to a club like Fulhum, who probably won't be battling relegation than a club like Hull, who could send us down if we choose to repeat our form of last year. We're all pretty convinced that we'll finish comfortably mid table, and we may well do, but there are no guarantees in football, so I think this makes more sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 (edited) Fulham aren't our rivals... Edited August 16, 2013 by AVFCforever1991 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supervillan78 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Fulham finished just 2pts ahead of us last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 (edited) I am at work and didn't really have time to read the article, so if it said Fulham paying his wages then my bad. To be honest I shouldn't be on here because I'm at work. I just duck in and out when the boss is not around. I'm also glad this saga is over now, but if he did leave, I would rather it was permanently and so the club can get a fee. Voinjama - this is your boss posting. I have just caught you out skiving red handed on VT so I am sending you out on loan to a job in Fulham. Please collect your P45 At last I can now have the PC back all to myself so I can .follow VT all day (great to be the boss) Good luck with your medical at Fulham Voinjama your reference is in the post Edited August 16, 2013 by villa-revolution 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Fulham aren't our rivals? I am very interested in hearing the reasoning behind that sentiment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted August 16, 2013 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2013 Loaning a proven striker to one of our nearest rivals, that is always a really nice idea. An injury-free Bent will score lots of goals, but I guess he might get some niggles now that he will suddenly play a lot after playing very little. We potentially just gave Fulham 15+ goals in the league, we should have sold him cheaper to a club like Palace or Hull. Stupid decision in every regard. If Benteke gets injured, then what? Gabby, Weimann and Helenius is not 30 goals between them. Benteke can get 15 - 25 goals on his own, he has to stay injury-free - but when we play him every single week we risk a lot in my opinion. We haven't had an injury free Bent scoring lots of goals for a couple of years though and given that he is 28 or 29 you would have to think that it might be that way for him again this season. Who knows. We haven't though given Fulham anything, we've loaned them a player and received a fee for doing so a fee which more than pays for a least one of the players we've already signed or which could pay for another arrival. You say we should have sold him cheap to a club like Palace or Hull as if we are the ones that can decide to do that, to sell a player you need a club willing to buy a player. Seemingly no club has wanted to buy Bent, Newcastle were interested but never made an offer, Hull weren't interested and were never going to be given the relationship between Bruce and Bent from their time at Sunderland and Palace wanted him on loan. So you are saying we should have taken an option that wasn't actually available. I would also point out that it is interesting that no club, even an established PL club like Fulham wanted to buy him, perhaps they have a few too many question marks over him after the last couple of seasons. The only other available option was to keep him and pay him a huge amount of money to sit on the bench which just isn't an option with our need to reduce the wage bill. I personally would rather we use the money from the loan and the wages saved to sign players capable of having more impact than Bent managed last season and I suspect Lambert thinks the same. I agree with your point in terms of lack of cover up front and have for some time being saying I don't think an AM will be the next target if indeed Lambert is able to sign another player, I think he will go for another striker. As for Bent, I hope he does have a good season so we can sell him next summer to Fulham or another club. By putting him in the shop window rather than on our bench we might just get more money for him when we do sell him. So not a stupid move in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Loaning a proven striker to one of our nearest rivals, that is always a really nice idea. An injury-free Bent will score lots of goals, but I guess he might get some niggles now that he will suddenly play a lot after playing very little. We potentially just gave Fulham 15+ goals in the league, we should have sold him cheaper to a club like Palace or Hull. Stupid decision in every regard. If Benteke gets injured, then what? Gabby, Weimann and Helenius is not 30 goals between them. Benteke can get 15 - 25 goals on his own, he has to stay injury-free - but when we play him every single week we risk a lot in my opinion. if benteke got injured and bent was still here, bent still wouldn't be playing. you're speaking about this as if there was a chance of him getting into the team again also, he can't play for fulham against us, so if he becomes an integral part of their team, scoring goals for fun, they'll be significantly weakened against us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macca1888 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Loaning a proven striker to one of our nearest rivals, that is always a really nice idea. An injury-free Bent will score lots of goals, but I guess he might get some niggles now that he will suddenly play a lot after playing very little. We potentially just gave Fulham 15+ goals in the league, we should have sold him cheaper to a club like Palace or Hull. Stupid decision in every regard. If Benteke gets injured, then what? Gabby, Weimann and Helenius is not 30 goals between them. Benteke can get 15 - 25 goals on his own, he has to stay injury-free - but when we play him every single week we risk a lot in my opinion. I'll back Lambert's judgement of the situation on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window? It can also strengthen us, as it will be easier for them to beat the teams lower down the table - Hopefully we wont be close to relegation this year but can't be too sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KennyPowers Posted August 16, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 16, 2013 Bizarre. Are they going to play a front three of Berbatov, Bent and Taarabt? That's going to set some kind of record as the laziest attack in football history. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts