Darren Bent

[NowDoINotLikeThat]

Because Bent has a proven Premiership record at every other club hes been at his whole career including with us last season.

McLeish does not.

[markavfc40]

Yes we all want players to do their best 100% of the time regardless of circumstances, but that just doesn't happen.

Compare it to a workplace: if you get certain perks taken away, do you really think every person would continue to give 100% despite seeing no improvement in conditions or the prospect of better things to come?

I don't agree. I played football at a decent level and when any decent players left or were out injured we pulled together and worked harder to try and make up for that loss.

In a work environment you do the same as well. If someone leaves or is off work then those remaining work harder to make up for that loss.

Bent can either feel sorry for himself and yearn for the days of Ash and Downing who are long gone or he can knuckle down and try to do all he can to make up for their loss.

Fans can accept players being off form. What is unacceptable regardless of circumstance is not giving 100%.

[Shillzz]

It's an interesting view point WoodyTom, but I think McLeish has the ability to exercise far greater control over the destiny of the club.

Bent is just one player after all.

McLeish is responsible for all 11 players out on the pitch, how they play, who plays and where. If Bent is playing poorly then he needs to be dropped, but cannot be held accountable for our complete lack of ability.

[andym]

Also, as you point how how good 9 in 16 was last season - are you suggesting that Darren Bent hasnt made an arse of at least (at least) 3 clear cut chances to equal that record this season?

of course he has missed some chances, name me a striker who hasnt. i saw dzeko have at least 8 chances against sunderland and he missed them all, RVP missed a couple of good ones against fulham. Bents chance conversion is around 28%, which is at the top end of all premier league strikers (most are between 20% and 30%, apart from suarez who is at 7% )

difference is other teams make enough chances that it doesnt matter when their players miss some. Overall they are still going to get lots of goals. we have on average about 3 chances a game, which is not going to cut it over a season.

gabby and bent are on 5 and 6 goals respectively. with correct tactics bent should be on pace for 20 for a season and gabby comfortably for double figures. both players are good with defence splitting balls to run onto or low trajectory crosses where they can use movement to get ahead of the defence. they are not good with hoofs from defence or high hanging crosses because they are simply not big enough to win them against CBs. but which tactics do we use?

[omariqy]

Isn't he our top goalscorer this season?

[heystally!]

Ok, I dont agree, but I dont want to turn this into a money arguement.

However, I do have a question.

D. Bent and A. Mcliesh - two people not performing for numerous reasons.

Imo, (and you maybe different). Alex Mcliesh is trying his best. His best isnt good enough, but I believe hes doing his best. Darren Bent isnt doing his best, his best is good enough (we all know that) but he isnt giving his all.

Why are people a lot more patient with Darren bent?

You may say Darren Bents performance relys on Mcliesh's and Id agree, but surely its the same vice verser.

You may also say that the manager must take responsibility more than Bent. Id agree also.

But, is the difference in responsibility so great that it warrants the difference in patience shown to each person?

I think the reason Bent gets more of a free pass from supporters (myself included) doesn't just come down to effort but also quality and what they offer us.

Looking at two potential situations, that being Bent at Villa under a new manager, or McLeish at Villa with a new striker, which is going to offer us the best chance of success? For me it'd be Bent with a new manager.

McLeish hasn't had a good start to his Villa career. I don't think people would be as bothered if a) he hadn't come from Blues, or (more importantly) his negative tactics and approached hadn't got Blues relegated last season. If we'd hired Martinez for example, and he'd got 23 points from 20 games, more people would be asking to give him time. But McLeish did send Blues down through negative football, and I fear we could go the same way.

If we were to sack McLeish, I believe that Villa can either attract a better manager, or maybe an equally talented manager but one who is younger and looks to play more positive football.

Bent too has had a poor season. He has had niggling injuries the last month, but he could have done more for us if he'd put more effort in. I'm not forgiving him for that entirely.

But if we were to get rid of him, I don't believe we could replace him with a player who will be better for the club. I don't think McLeish could attract them, we evidently don't have the money to attract them, and I don't think the club has enough pull for players as it once did a few years ago.

So in my opinion, if we were to replace Bent, we couldn't get an equal or better. If we were to replace McLeish, I believe we could. And that's why I give Bent less of a hard time.

[markavfc40]

The tactics aren't going to change whilst McLeish is manager. As much as it grieves me to say it the manager will not be replaced in the medium term. Therefore I think what some are suggesting is that Bent will never be prolific under McLeish and given that if Bent isn't scoring he is doing **** all else it may be better if he goes and McLeish brings in players who better suit the way he likes to play.

I am not saying its Bents faults but yesterday we may as well have played with 10 men as Bent was anonymous.

Bent will continue to be ineffective in a lot of games whilst McLeish is manager and that isn't going to change any time soon. For at least another 18 months in my opinion.

[Mantis]

The tactics aren't going to change whilst McLeish is manager. As much as it grieves me to say it the manager will not be replaced in the medium term. Therefore I think what some are suggesting is that Bent will never be prolific under McLeish and given that if Bent isn't scoring he is doing **** all else it may be better if he goes and McLeish brings in players who better suit the way he likes to play.

I am not saying its Bents faults but yesterday we may as well have played with 10 men as Bent was anonymous.

Bent will continue to be ineffective in a lot of games whilst McLeish is manager and that isn't going to change any time soon. For at least another 18 months in my opinion.

It wont be any better if Bent can bring his own players in. If anything it'll be worse, because when McLeish finally does leave we'll be left with some useless clogger.

[OnlyOne]

So we're all gonna sit by and allow Bent to leave who saved us from relegation last season for a manager who will most likely relegate us if he sells our best goal scorer.

[Stevo985]

[D. Bent and A. Mcliesh - two people not performing for numerous reasons.

Imo, (and you maybe different). Alex Mcliesh is trying his best. His best isnt good enough, but I believe hes doing his best. Darren Bent isnt doing his best, his best is good enough (we all know that) but he isnt giving his all.

Why are people a lot more patient with Darren bent?

Couldn't disagree more.

Darrent Bent is unable to do his best because of the system we play.

If you played Peter crouch as a lone striker and played every ball to him along the ground and in behind the defence he'd be shit. Like really shit. He wouldn't do a thing, let alone score a goal.

But that's not his fault. He is completely the wrong type of player to play that football.

Similarly, we're playing a system that is favourable to a big striker who can hold up the ball and bring others into play. That's not Darren bent.

I'm not saying Bent is giving 100% every single game. But I think he's trying as hard as any other player out there.

The point is he's being asked to play a role that he's not very good at.

It shouldn't be the player's job to suddenly learn how to play differently. Versatile players are a huge asset, but if you're not versatile, what can you do?

However, it IS the managers job to set out a team to play to their strengths. PLaying a system which is totally unsuited to probably your best player and most valuable asset is not in anyway playing to your team's strengths.

[Woodytom]

Also, as you point how how good 9 in 16 was last season - are you suggesting that Darren Bent hasnt made an arse of at least (at least) 3 clear cut chances to equal that record this season?

of course he has missed some chances, name me a striker who hasnt. i saw dzeko have at least 8 chances against sunderland and he missed them all, RVP missed a couple of good ones against fulham. Bents chance conversion is around 28%, which is at the top end of all premier league strikers (most are between 20% and 30%, apart from suarez who is at 7% )

difference is other teams make enough chances that it doesnt matter when their players miss some. Overall they are still going to get lots of goals. we have on average about 3 chances a game, which is not going to cut it over a season.

gabby and bent are on 5 and 6 goals respectively. with correct tactics bent should be on pace for 20 for a season and gabby comfortably for double figures. both players are good with defence splitting balls to run onto or low trajectory crosses where they can use movement to get ahead of the defence. they are not good with hoofs from defence or high hanging crosses because they are simply not big enough to win them against CBs. but which tactics do we use?

I appreciate what your saying but all im suggesting that hes currently (under Mcliesh's dire tactics) not that far off hes record last season which many believe to be very good.

Imo, a little more effort from himself, and better form in front of goal (as they have been abysmal misses) then he easily could have got 9 from 16 regardless of Mclieshs tactics.

[Woodytom]

[D. Bent and A. Mcliesh - two people not performing for numerous reasons.

Imo, (and you maybe different). Alex Mcliesh is trying his best. His best isnt good enough, but I believe hes doing his best. Darren Bent isnt doing his best, his best is good enough (we all know that) but he isnt giving his all.

Why are people a lot more patient with Darren bent?

Couldn't disagree more.

Darrent Bent is unable to do his best because of the system we play.

If you played Peter crouch as a lone striker and played every ball to him along the ground and in behind the defence he'd be shit. Like really shit. He wouldn't do a thing, let alone score a goal.

But that's not his fault. He is completely the wrong type of player to play that football.

Similarly, we're playing a system that is favourable to a big striker who can hold up the ball and bring others into play. That's not Darren bent.

I'm not saying Bent is giving 100% every single game. But I think he's trying as hard as any other player out there.

The point is he's being asked to play a role that he's not very good at.

It shouldn't be the player's job to suddenly learn how to play differently. Versatile players are a huge asset, but if you're not versatile, what can you do?

However, it IS the managers job to set out a team to play to their strengths. PLaying a system which is totally unsuited to probably your best player and most valuable asset is not in anyway playing to your team's strengths.

I dont disagree with any of that Steveo, I honestly dont. But I do think thats a very 1 sided view.

Your absolutely right in saying Bent and the rest of the players rely on Mcliesh. Otherwise we wouldnt need a manager, But at the same time surely Mcliesh relies on the players too.

Now of course its the managers job to ensure Darren Bent gives 100%, 100% of the time, but surely at the same time Darren Bent is responsible for that too. I understand his frustration and why he may not be giving 100% along with the rest of the players, but if thats the position hes being asked to play then I feel it is his responsibility to do that with 100% effort. And I dont believe hes doing that. Now that is not necessarily something that hasnt already been covered a billion times on here, but it seems to me that were all ganging up on one man.......

The one man who, from where im standing (albeit whilst coming across completely out of his depth) is the one man at AVFC, who seems to be giving 100%, 100% of the time.

I suppose what I am saying here is, while I believe some criticism should be aimed at Alex Mcliesh, I dont feel it is being spread fairly across all the individuals who are responsible for the current form.

The abuse on here is outrageous, for a man whos probably just doing his best. Yet, there is very little criticism for the overpaid players who seem to pick & choose when they want to try and I dont think its right.

I think the manager deserves criticism for the form, I think the owner deserves criticism for financial mistakes. But I think the players deserve criticism for taking us for complete mugs.

[steve-67]

Apparently more big rumours that the Darren Bent to Liverpool deal is as good a done going around Anfield tonight according to some sources!! Interesting, because Liverpool are playing at the Etihad stadium and not Anfield. More crap methinks. Surely we'd be braindead to sell the best striker we've had in years?

[Dodgyknees]

[markavfc40]

Apparently more big rumours that the Darren Bent to Liverpool deal is as good a done going around Anfield tonight according to some sources!! Interesting, because Liverpool are playing at the Etihad stadium and not Anfield. More crap methinks. Surely we'd be braindead to sell the best striker we've had in years?

With Squarez out for 8 games and Carroll still looking well out of sorts then you wouldn't rule it out. I still don't see it though but there is no doubt that a bid of 17mill+ will see Randy rubbing his hands and Bent wanting out quicker than Downing.

[steve-67]

I agree Mark. I don't trust McLeish to spend the money wisely either, so I absolutely don't want Darren Bent to leave.

[Villarocker]

I love Benty but unfortunately Lerner has given up and will almost certainly cash in on yet another asset. Think about it for one minute. If money was tight and you couldn't really afford a car, would you go out and buy a 1.4 litre run around or a 2.5 litre Jag? Benty is a great player with quality around him but once we sold that supply line last summer Benty was always going to be a luxury we could ill afford.

I was gobsmacked when we signed him because I was genuinely excited at having finally signed a proven goal-poaching striker. But he only does what he says on the tin and we cannot afford to have a player who saves all is energy for when that ball is in the box. It is sad but that is what Lerner has reduced us to.

[Stevo985]

Woody, you seem to be getting "playing poorly" confused with "not trying"

Bent is trying. I don't see anything in his performances to suggest he's trying any less than the rest of the players.

He's not performing well because he can't. It's not through lack of effort.

If you put Leo Messi in goal he'd be shocking (probably) but doesn't mean he hasn't tried hard.

Similarly, McLeishmight be trying hard. In fact I do not doubt for a second that he isn't giving 100%

Unfortunately that 100% is shit. Just trying hard isn't enough to be given credit. He's not very good.

My Mom could give 100% in charge of Villa, but it wouldn't make her any good.

[VillanousOne]

Bent was signed to be the striker we needed to get the goals when Carew and Heskey bombed out, and he got us the goals we needed and he will continue to do so if Ireland continues to play well, Zog continues to improve and Gabby gets his mojo back.

If we sell another player after a season or less and not at a huge profit then what message are we sending out to the rest of the premiership?

Most can accept losing players to Chelsea, Manure, Man City and Arsenal there are few teams in this country let alone the world that have their money and resources, but if we give in to pretenders like Liverpool who are living of past glories and aging idiots like King Kenny then we just become bottom feeding pond life scraping by and hoping to avoid relegation.

If Bent gets sold for a big profit and we buy some decent players then maybe we can look forward, but if we end up with a load of rubbish loan signings and rejects then this club has lost the plot completely and i for one won't be part of this anymore.

[sharkyvilla]

People were saying the same thing about Gabby's attitude last year under Houllier. Change the manager and he's twice the player. Sadly McLeish hasn't managed to improve any other player other than Gabby, though to be fair he hasn't had the excellent wide players that Houllier had. I just don't see the financial sense of selling Bent unless it is another ridiculous Liverpool fee that's too good to turn down like the Downing one. We signed him because we were shitscared of getting relegated and selling him now would put us in real danger of getting relegated. If he leaves I'll stick my head up a cow's arse.