Darren Bent

[Dr_Pangloss]

I think it's safe to assume that we've paid some of those add ons but not the full £24m. Either why it's banal debate.

[Woodytom]

very strange? the published transfer fee was £18 million rising to £24 IF various conditions were met in his time at the club

so you are saying all of those conditions have been met and we have paid up the full £24 million?

can you please show the proof that firstly what the conditions were , secondly that he has met those conditions and thirdly that we have paid £24 million in total for bent?

if not i guess you will have to go back to the actual fact we paid £18 million

Ok, I would imagine that we have indeed paid more than 18m, but no I am not saying we have defo paid 24m. I don't have proof, and I wont be getting any.

However, I am still none the wiser to your point? What are you saying? That Darren Bent is worth 18m quid? That I should only expect him to score goals (and do nothing else) because he was 18m and not 24m?

Sorry, any player costing 10m upwards should offer/deliver a lot more than he has.

[TrentVilla]

Sorry, any player costing 10m upwards should offer/deliver a lot more than he has.

I would agree with you but then I'm not particularly critical of Bent for that because it isn't his fault we paid what we paid.

We paid over the top for a player of his ability, limited ability because of our desperation and seemingly because Lerner wanted a marquee signing or something along those lines.

I can't really be critical of Bent because he has been exactly the player we thought we were getting, it isn't his fault we sold the players best equipped to provide the supply line he needed.

So I'm not really sure what we should expect/expected more from Bent, we got what we bought just not what we paid for.

I would still have preferred that Lambert had found a way to get the best out of Bent but at this moment in time I trust him so I will wait and see how it turns out.

So while I agree with your general point, or the theory behind it, I don't think it can always apply because of the nature of the transfer market and desperate clubs. If there were any real sense Bent wouldn't be worth much over £10m as we will probably find if we try and sell him.

[Woodytom]

I would agree with you but then I'm not particularly critical of Bent for that because it isn't his fault we paid what we paid.

We paid over the top for a player of his ability, limited ability because of our desperation and seemingly because Lerner wanted a marquee signing or something along those lines.

I can't really be critical of Bent because he has been exactly the player we thought we were getting, it isn't his fault we sold the players best equipped to provide the supply line he needed.

So I'm not really sure what we should expect/expected more from Bent, we got what we bought just not what we paid for.

I would still have preferred that Lambert had found a way to get the best out of Bent but at this moment in time I trust him so I will wait and see how it turns out.

So while I agree with your general point, or the theory behind it, I don't think it can always apply because of the nature of the transfer market and desperate clubs. If there were any real sense Bent wouldn't be worth much over £10m as we will probably find if we try and sell him.

All very fair points.

I think its also important to acknowledge that the transfer itself might well have been worthwhile, given Bents goals in the first season playing a big part in keeping us up. However, you cant predict what would have happened had we not bought him. We may have gone down, we may have stayed up and finished higher/lower.

That said, your hoping for that fee the player kicks on. This simply hasn't happened due to a whole host of reasons - manager/players sold/Bent himself.

Quite where we might be if wed have gone 10m for Bent instead of 3m for Heskey?? - But then again, hindsight tells me that a certain MON wouldnt have been able to maintain a squad capable of competing at that level for a prolonged amount of time.

[terrytini]

Well I think we can all agree he is just a goalscorer and does little else, and cost about 20 million.

The only question is whether for 10 million and his wages if he goes we end up a better Team than with him staying.

And that is just guesswork, for which we have to assume PL is better placed to guess right than us.

My guess is we would be a far better Team with him gone and the money invested by PL - but I am more than happy to back the Managers better informed guess.

[TrentVilla]

Well I think we can all agree he is just a goalscorer and does little else, and cost about 20 million.

The only question is whether for 10 million and his wages if he goes we end up a better Team than with him staying.

And that is just guesswork, for which we have to assume PL is better placed to guess right than us.

My guess is we would be a far better Team with him gone and the money invested by PL - but I am more than happy to back the Managers better informed guess.

That is about where I am at.

[abdomlahor]

Don't know if anyone saw, but when Bent came off against Norwich, he went down the tunnel for treatment and came back out and sat near Lambert. There was a clip of him and Lambert sharing a joke and laughing about something together.

Didn't look like two people who supposedly don't get on.

[Denis_B]

Bent when we bought him was the right player at the right time in the right team. Since then the manager and team have changed.

I am sure if Lambert still had Young and Downing then Bent would have played every game.However to find replacements would be a lot of money

just to accomodate him. By changing systems he has got more out of the players he has and therefore Bent does not fit.

I would rather he goes and we move on and develop. It doesn't mean he is a bad player, far from it , just he now is m

not the right player in the right team at this time.

[Pilchard]

Bent when we bought him was the right player at the right time in the right team. Since then the manager and team have changed.

Which makes the appointment of McLeish even more odd as I said at the time. Why spend £20m on a striker and then put a manager in charge with the complete opposite in footballing philosophy to getting the best out of him?

Just another example of why that appointment was wrong and why whoever is advising Randy and Paul don't know what they are are doing

[TrentVilla]

Just another example of why that appointment was wrong and why Randy and Paul don't know what they are are doing

Fixed for you mate.

[R.I.C.O.]

No one advised them about McShit, they went off their own bad judgment and the fact he probably wouldnt moan after having his two best players sold for him. I expect they got advice on Lambert though.

[VillaCas]

Well I think we can all agree he is just a goalscorer and does little else, and cost about 20 million.

The only question is whether for 10 million and his wages if he goes we end up a better Team than with him staying.

And that is just guesswork, for which we have to assume PL is better placed to guess right than us.

My guess is we would be a far better Team with him gone and the money invested by PL - but I am more than happy to back the Managers better informed guess.

Great post - Sorry, but I just can't imagine us getting a result like today's with Bent in the team

[VillaForever1970]

Today is a perfect example why Bent was out of the side, he would have scored the same goal as Andy but he wouldn't have had the same work ethic.

[brummybloke]

Today is a perfect example why Bent was out of the side, he would have scored the same goal as Andy but he wouldn't have had the same work ethic.

but he may also have scored the one weiman lofted onto the back netting?

it doesnt matter, bent is injured and cant play anyway and lambert has changed the team now to have 2 clever forwards playing up front, something bent also is.

it was more the system rather than the players, 2 forwards who are clever up front can always look like scoring, gabby ( no disrespect to the lad) is thick as shit football wise

by having the 2 up front who constantly move it creates more chances, bent doesnt just stand still all game waiting on the goal line to steal a goal, he uses his energy when its needed

to day was a great day, i notice my work colleague ( scouse fan) has now phoned in sick

probably sick as a parrot

happy days

[VillaCas]

it doesnt matter, bent is injured and cant play anyway and lambert has changed the team now to have 2 clever forwards playing up front, something bent also is.

Would the commentator have commented on how Bent had put in a massive shift for the team as he did when Weimann came off? I seriously doubt it

[brummybloke]

Would the commentator have commented on how Bent had put in a massive shift for the team as he did when Weimann came off? I seriously doubt it

maybe not but your speaking completely hypothetically

the commentator could have said " 3 great goals for bent as villa win 5-0"

but he didnt, because he is injured and didnt play.

[AvfcRigo82]

Don't know if anyone saw, but when Bent came off against Norwich, he went down the tunnel for treatment and came back out and sat near Lambert. There was a clip of him and Lambert sharing a joke and laughing about something together.

Didn't look like two people who supposedly don't get on.

I wouldn't mind seeing this clip but again it wouldn't suprise me if true either.

Even PL has publicly quoted that there is no rift with anyone.

Like I say everyone knows what's going on here.

.

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

I don't know why and I'm going against all logic but for some reason I think it's not the last of him we've seen of him in a Villa shirt and wouldn't surprise me if he finishes the season alongside Benteke.

[VillaCas]

Who is going to replace Bent's goals? Benteke .

[AVFCforever1991]