CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Agree, albeit Lambert was told to get him off the wage bill Ireland next in firing line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted November 28, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2012 Have you not been paying attention last 3 years Oh sorry, could you please inform me of all the occasions where the board have stopped the manager from picking a player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Definitely don't buy the 50 game clause business. If that was the case he would have been sold in summer. Also, if he didn't get crocked at the end of last season, there is a good chance he would have passed 50. I really do think it is a case of Lambert not fancying Bent in the system he wants to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 I'm not saying it will necessarily 'do anyone good' but it might do less damage, for the reasons already mentioned, to the club than keeping this saga ongoing until January throughout a busy and crucial Christmas period. Why did you only quote part of my post? I take it you think Paul Lambert has handled this situation well then? All it will serve to do in my opinion is intensify the speculation. On reflection I do believe this issue needs to be resolved fairly soon but not necessarily in the way you suggest. In fact, definitely not in the way you suggest. To me it looks as though I've quoted the full post? It's difficult to know how well he has handled the situation without knowing what the situation is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 For me, there is no logical reason whatsoever as to why Jordan Bowery would be picked ahead of Darren Bent. None at all. So even though we don't know the full details about the reason for Bent's snub, I think I am safe in saying that Lambert has not dealt with this situation well at all. And it's a shame, because I backed his original decision to drop Darren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 For me, there is no logical reason whatsoever as to why Jordan Bowery would be picked ahead of Darren Bent. None at all. So even though we don't know the full details about the reason for Bent's snub, I think I am safe in saying that Lambert has not dealt with this situation well at all. And it's a shame, because I backed his original decision to drop Darren. In your opinion. Which differs from mine in quite a few respects it seems. There are many potential logical reasons for his exclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted November 28, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2012 Personally I think Bent has hinted to Lambert/Randy that he would like a move away, and because of that Lambert wont pick him. Lambert will only want players on the pitch who want to play for the club. He was very open about that after the whole Dempsy transfer bid. If that is true and Bent wants to move away then **** him and fair play to Lambert. Though, i'm not ITK or anything, it's just what I suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 £18m? Not sure we will be paying any of the £6m add ons According to this we paid £3m on securing premier league survival with a further big payment to come if Bent completes 50 games. Bent's exile can save Aston Villa a huge pay-out to former club Sunderland By NEIL MOXLEY PUBLISHED: 22:45, 28 November 2012 | UPDATED: 22:45, 28 November 2012 On the sidelines: Darren Bent hasn't played in the Premier League for Villa since late October Darren Bent’s continued absence from the Aston Villa side has been cast in a different light after it was revealed the club will have to pay another big chunk of his £24million transfer fee to Sunderland if he plays three more matches. Bent has been out of the first team for the past month, with manager Paul Lambert claiming the striker had problems with his ankle. But it appears he has been fit to play for the past three weeks. Intriguingly, Sunderland will receive another seven-figure instalment if Bent reaches 50 games for the club. He has played 47, and the stand-off points to a sale in January. Villa originally paid Sunderland £18m for the player and an additional £3m after they secured Premier League survival, when Bent chalked up 25 appearances in a claret and blue shirt. A Villa spokesman denied he is being left out for financial reasons, while Lambert brushed aside any suggestion of a rift after Tuesday night’s 1-0 victory over Reading. Lambert said: ‘There isn’t a problem. You can’t please people all the time.’ Bent’s former team-mate at Ipswich and Charlton, Matt Holland, said: ‘Sunderland may be due another chunk of money on him reaching 50 appearances, so it may be difficult to play him.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 As long as this is sorted as quickly as possible in January and Villa can bring in an adequate replacement that better fits into the side I can say I'm not too bothered...as long as Villa don't sell him to QPR. If Villa sell him there, it is the stupidest decision we could ever make, second only to hiring McLeish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciggiesnbeer Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Its funny the press were so in love with the story that Villa lost to reading and Bent didnt play that when it didnt come true they decided to write it anyway. clearings in the woods. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Care to expand dont_do_it_doug? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Care to expand dont_do_it_doug? They've mostly been mooted already in this thread. I wish I had some fantastical explanation of my own, but I don't. Like you I'm looking for a conclusion ASAP, but I'm not willing to pass any blame unless I'm given all the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernova26 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 It's possible he may have already signed a deal (like Ronaldo signing for Madrid when at Man U) with a new team hence Lambert leaving him out. I would also guess the team would be outside the Premier League. Something is definitely afoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 This issue is completely bizarre in every sense of the word and I think Paul Lambert is handling it really, really badly. PL should either bring him back into his plans and then listen to sensible offers in January or simply tell the fans: 'Yes we've had a disagreement and I would be willing to listen to offers for him'. Like others have said, by casting him completely aside, we're not going to get above £5 million for him when clubs know we are trying to offload him. I'm fully behind the Lambert project, and actually agreed with his decision to originally drop Bent. But this is getting ridiculous now and, as I said, his handling of the situation is terrible and very MON-esque. Why bring more attention to the situation and the club than you need to. Divert the whole lot away and that's what PL is doing. I dare say a deal has already been struck with a club for the services of Darren Bent and if it's a cash offer thats down then it would have been agreed sometime ago with the new club so I wouldn't worry about only getting pittance for him although it will proberly be marked as an undisclosed fee if it's not a loan. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Darren doesn't seem to be the type of player to stay quiet if he's being treated unfairly so maybe there is something in the rumour that he's already signed a deal with someone else or has been promised a move away in Jan? If that is the case, then you can understand the present situation I guess. But it's still another messy episode with a star player that we could do without. I can't see us getting much for him either. Liverpool would be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Darren doesn't seem to be the type of player to stay quiet if he's being treated unfairly so maybe there is something in the rumour that he's already signed a deal with someone else or has been promised a move away in Jan? If that is the case, then you can understand the present situation I guess. But it's still another messy episode with a star player that we could do without. I can't see us getting much for him either. Liverpool would be my guess. It's certainly a shame that it has panned out the way it has. Depends what you mean by "much". I would hope for £12-14m, which is around his true value in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 At least hes happy to leave to play. Unlike certain other cretins previously/currently at this football club that just collect their wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 I really hope he stays. Would be gutting seeing him banging in the goals for another team, which he's guaranteed to do. Especially if that team is QPR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 If he's sold to a relegation rival then the lunatics really have taken over the asylum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Why bring more attention to the situation and the club than you need to. Divert the whole lot away and that's what PL is doing. I dare say a deal has already been struck with a club for the services of Darren Bent and if it's a cash offer thats down then it would have been agreed sometime ago with the new club so I wouldn't worry about only getting pittance for him although it will proberly be marked as an undisclosed fee if it's not a loan. . I'm not sure at all Lambert is diverting the issue by his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts