juanpabloangel18 Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 That genuinely makes me angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parisvilla Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 If it were a simple choice of selling either Gabby or Bent, it'd be Gabby every day. After all Gabby has done and continues to do for us? Provided the majority of our best moments under MON and has almost single handedly kept us away from relegation this season. Not to mention his loyalty etc. Incredibly poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Anyone saying we should sell gabby or bent should hand their shirt back to the club shop. I don't want to support a club along with utter mentalists. Collins fair enough but seriously sell our only two strikers and keep Heskey? My word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LambStockmix Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I personally don't mind what Villa do with Bent as we actually played some very good football when he was injured... some good football without Bent? passing it square and backwards in the middle of the pitch a bit more than we had in the few games before doesnt make good football. we still hardly created anything or looked like scoring. games we have played without Bent QPR 1-1 poor performance could only score with a soft penalty Liverpool 0-2 rubbish, never looked like scoring Arsenal 1-2 only scored with a gift from arsenal, only other effort on goal was gabbys header early on. stoke 0-0 dull, boring game, made their keeper work just once chelsea, the only game you could call good. 1-1 when he came on, finished 3-1 to us. Sure Bent is a more prolific scorer but other than that when he's not scoring it's like playing with 10 men. just like the gabby "has no football brain, is an athlete not a footballer" myth that we had a few seasons back, it seems we now have the Bent just stands there waiting for the ball myth. im not going to claim his hold up play is great, but it is adequate, and he clearly worked on it under houllier. get the ball to his feet and get some support quick and it is fine. smash the ball at his head while he has 2 cbs marking him and no support and hes never going to hold it up. he is not physically big and strong enough. We play counter attacking football for the most part which means we need attacking players that can run with the ball and create chances. Bent literally needs to get the ball in and around the 6 yard box to do anything with it.. That's not good for us. i have no idea what style of football we play, and it looks like the players have no idea either. we could do we getting bent the ball in the final third with some regularity, let alone the 6 yard box. the same goes for gabby. we spent most of monday punting aimless balls up to them, or having them watch as deep booming crosses sail over their heads. mind you, its not a surprise Mcleish is killing our strikers. last season blues scored just 37 league goals. their top scorer was craig gardner with 8. defenders accounted for another 8. phillips, jerome, zigic, o'connor, derbyshire, martins and mcfadden scored just 9 league goals combined. i know most of them are shit, but you should still be able to get more than 9 goals out of all of them. pretty clear mcleishs tactics were to play negative anti football and hope gardner could score a screamer or they could nick 1 from a set piece. he has no idea how to utilise decent attacking players. blues couldnt score enough due to him and went down because of it. we are having the same troubles in scoring. hopefully its not the same result This is a brilliant post and contains everything anyone with any doubts can't seem to understand. Also, why on earth are people starting to argue about who they would keep out of Gabby and Bent?? So unnecessary! Everyone needs to calm down. Unfortunately the board and current manager have created such paranoia around this club that people are starting to question which limbs we need to cut off when we don't even need to. Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 but there is no point in keeping Bent when we do not have the resources to make him an asset. Darren bent is best when he can get on the end of crosses - which we dont have the personnel to prove - or getting onto the end of through balls - which we dont have the personnel to provide. He also adds very little if anything to the team when we do not have the ball, so when we are playing badly, it is like having only 10 men as he doesnt track back or chase the ball. As it would take a huge amount of investment to bring in the players needed to make Bent into an asset again it makes far more sense to cash in on him and remove his wages from the wage drain and bring in players that can improve and change the ethos we have of crosses and through bals and will work harder in all areas of the pitch. I dont like that this is where the club is going but as we have gone from an attack minded free flowinf football team into a negative one then i'm afaraid here is no room for the likes of ben here at the moment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Well if we don't have the ammunition for him, let's **** buy some! Rather then get rid of one of our best players again. Also we have Alrbighton, Ireland, N'Zogbia and Gabby. All 4 should be pretty good for assists for Bent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 Well if we don't have the ammunition for him, let's **** buy some! Rather then get rid of one of our best players again. Also we have Alrbighton, Ireland, N'Zogbia and Gabby. All 4 should be pretty good for assists for Bent. You dont get it do you? We lost Downing and Young, 40 million in talent that provide some of the best crosses in the league. We know that we will not be able to buy new players without selling more or reducing the wage bill so effectively we cannot bring in more highly talented players because we cannot afford to. With than in mind having s striker on our books that is only of any real use when playing with talented players (which we dont hav as we see above) then what is the point in keeping him other than to stop him playing against us? We would be better served getting the transfer money in wages off the books and bringing in more hard working players to supplement our think squad and sure up our defence and midfield. I'm not saying this is what i want, i'm saying that with the factors that we have this makes the most sense and is the most likely course to bring the club more stability on the pitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Bent will be fine, we just need to play 2 wingers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 in case you havent noticed we have 2 wingers in nzogbia and albrighton, however in our last 3 games nearly every cross put in to by these 2 players havent landed inside the penalty area never mind been close enough to a villa player for them to be able to get on the end of it to have a socring chance. These players cannot provide ammunition of the quality required to make carrying a striker like bent when we are playing so badly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Well if we don't have the ammunition for him, let's **** buy some! Rather then get rid of one of our best players again. Also we have Alrbighton, Ireland, N'Zogbia and Gabby. All 4 should be pretty good for assists for Bent. You dont get it do you? We lost Downing and Young, 40 million in talent that provide some of the best crosses in the league. We know that we will not be able to buy new players without selling more or reducing the wage bill so effectively we cannot bring in more highly talented players because we cannot afford to. With than in mind having s striker on our books that is only of any real use when playing with talented players (which we dont hav as we see above) then what is the point in keeping him other than to stop him playing against us? We would be better served getting the transfer money in wages off the books and bringing in more hard working players to supplement our think squad and sure up our defence and midfield. I'm not saying this is what i want, i'm saying that with the factors that we have this makes the most sense and is the most likely course to bring the club more stability on the pitch He is no use to us yet he is still our top goalscorer? We have some good attacking players - the four I just mentioned. They can provide him with the assists but it is our negative football. Why don't we try playing him up top with Gabby with two wingers. Oh wait we did and scored 3 against Norwich with Bent getting 2. We probably need another Winger or AM to supply him but thats it. Once Heskey and a few others are off the wage bill then surely we have room to purchase a player of such ilk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Regardless of how good he is (or what the manager wants to do with him) he's on £70k a week and will inevitably be moved on at some stage. Sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_The_Villan Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Add that to the fact he can get a similar amount elsewhere at a better club and the rumours that he and Gabby dont get on then he may be engineering this move himself and there is little that can be done. Bent and Gabby dont get on? Wheres this come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irreverentad Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Add that to the fact he can get a similar amount elsewhere at a better club and the rumours that he and Gabby dont get on then he may be engineering this move himself and there is little that can be done. Bent and Gabby dont get on? Wheres this come from? Gabby's brother has been saying it for a long time on Twitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 if it came down to a choice over who stays - has to be gabby all day i'm afraid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Why are we talking about Bent and crossing like they go together like peas and carrots? Since when has Darren Bent been any good in the air? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 when you consider that 42% of his career goals have come from headers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Add that to the fact he can get a similar amount elsewhere at a better club and the rumours that he and Gabby dont get on then he may be engineering this move himself and there is little that can be done. Bent and Gabby dont get on? Wheres this come from? to be fair, I've said it before. Looks pretty obvious on the pitch to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 yeah the number of times that gabby has put in a great cross to the near post for no one to be there he has no problem showing his annoyance and as his strike partner the near post is exactly where Bent should be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_The_Villan Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 To be honest ive thought Bent has looked unhappy all season. If it was a choice between letting him or Gabby go then it would have to be Bent. Gabby is a Villa boy, Bent aint. And i would also say he has more in his locker overall than Bent has Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIVillan Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 To be honest ive thought Bent has looked unhappy all season. If it was a choice between letting him or Gabby go then it would have to be Bent. Gabby is a Villa boy, Bent aint. And i would also say he has more in his locker overall than Bent has Also that Bent would leave us in a heartbeat anyway so selling Gabby first would be senseless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts