Darren Bent

[privateer]

I think suggestions that he isn't being played due to recovering from injury or lacking sharpness are way wide of the mark. If that was the case, the easiest thing for Lambert would be to just say so. There is no disadvantage in doing so. Had he answered one of the reporter's questions with, "Well, Darren is not quite ready. He's been working his way back from injury and we aren't going to rush him back. He's close but not 100% yet and there's a risk with that", but he didn't.

Now, I'm aware the Norwich fans warned us he is cagey and talks a lot without saying much but there comes a point when talking a lot and not saying certain things when you do becomes very revealing. I think this is such a time. My reckoning is - as has been indicated above by others - that DB has intimated he wants to go and we won't play him again before he is sold.

It might not be acrimonious at all. It could be PL has sat down with him some time ago and said "This is where I'm going with this and you won't start much as I implement this plan. If you're not happy with that, I understand because you want to play and if you want to move on we'll sort that out".

Or it could be that PL got sick of being asked about him and has shown himself to be chippy, gauche and recalcitrant in the press interview. A sort of "the more you ask me, the less I'll tell you" kind of thing. Whatever, he had the opportunity to tamp down a lot of speculation had he chosen to but he chose to do otherwise - for whatever reason.

[Richard]

gabby who has scored 1 goal in 33 league games?

thats been working hasnt it?

the squad we have NOW is whats important , not who we may or may not get in the summer, as it stands we dont have midfielders to score 8 or 10 goals, infact at the moment of the players who are being picked we have only 1 player who looks to score 10 or more goals this season, so the focal point will be on one player, something which you suggest we shouldnt be doing?

so get rid of the player who most likely will hit the 18 goals and stick with the rest of the team who between them havent mustered 11 goals in 14 games ( bent scoring 2 of them), hmm?

while bent is still a villa player he should be in the first 18 at least unless injured based purely on footballing reasons, the stats show it.

i find it odd also that now we do have another forward scoring regular, he isnt team up with the other regular scorer, bent hasnt had a regular scoring partner since he has been here

Catch 22 I think. Sure we have the squad as it is but I think selling Bent will probably enable Paul Lambert to move more closer more quickly to a squad he wants which, I think, would be better suited and more flexible enough to attract goals from all over not just really on one man for our goals as would be the case with Bent (as much as I love the guy)

So keep Bent and in so doing mean we will always "have the squad we have now " till the day he leaves or packs up meaning we have a bigger job to do then, or let Bent go now and enable the squad changes to take place

I go for the latter.

[CI]

Please tell me he won't be sold to QPR

You couldn't make this shit up

[brummybloke]

Catch 22 I think. Sure we have the squad as it is but I think selling Bent will probably enable Paul Lambert to move more closer more quickly to a squad he wants which, I think, would be better suited and more flexible enough to attract goals from all over not just really on one man for our goals as would be the case with Bent (as much as I love the guy)

So keep Bent and in so doing mean we will always "have the squad we have now " till the day he leaves or packs up meaning we have a bigger job to do then, or let Bent go now and enable the squad changes to take place

I go for the latter.

i understand that but due to the position in the league we are in, can we afford to take the gamble on letting our best goal scorer go now?

if bent is to be sold then so be it but to not play him until he is sold and miss out on the goals per game ratio he brings and miss out on the (obviously no one will ever know as its impossible to predict) but potentially missed points due to his missed goals?

we have the 2nd worst goal difference in the league, we are not scoriing goals and we are conceding goals, while putting bent back in the team wont help us conceding goals it most likely will improve our scoring, so even using short termism to get us more points on the board it seems very foolish to not use him while he is still here.

cutting your nose off to spite your face is a saying which brings to mind in what is happening.

[darrenm]

I can't help but be reminded of another Villa mystery with this, the case of the phantom mole.

A few months back things were coming out of AVFC that shouldn't have been. Apparently the club knew to the existence of a mole, but couldn't be sure who it was.

Do I wanna go Hull City NO. Do I wanna go stoke NO do I wanna go sunderland YES so stop f****** around, Levy. Sunderland are not the problem in the slightest.

http://twitter.com/D...296785668411392 (15/01/11) @db11tt Have you by any chance just been followed by a load of Villa fans?

@dirk1978 yea

But Bent has told close friends he will not be forced out of Villa and has no intention of handing in a transfer request.

Not sure what any of this has to do with each other...

[Paul33]

Bent is not a Lambert sort of player ..... he simply doesn't do enough over ninety minutes so there is absolutely no way that he will stay here in January and I have to admit that he also isn't my sort of player either. I recognise that he will convert a lot of chances in close and that is ideal for some teams but it doesn't really offer us a whole lot and that's been proven many times over.

Give PL the money for his sale and I'm totally convinced he will spend it wisely and give us a far better squad than we currently have. Bent was massively over-priced and remains massively over-rated ..... there is real talent out there at a fraction of Bent's price and wages as Bentekkers has proved.

[Jarpie]

I can't help but be reminded of another Villa mystery with this, the case of the phantom mole.

A few months back things were coming out of AVFC that shouldn't have been. Apparently the club knew to the existence of a mole, but couldn't be sure who it was.

Not sure what any of this has to do with each other...

what things were coming out of Villa few months back?

[Richard]

i understand that but due to the position in the league we are in, can we afford to take the gamble on letting our best goal scorer go now?

if bent is to be sold then so be it but to not play him until he is sold and miss out on the goals per game ratio he brings and miss out on the (obviously no one will ever know as its impossible to predict) but potentially missed points due to his missed goals?

we have the 2nd worst goal difference in the league, we are not scoriing goals and we are conceding goals, while putting bent back in the team wont help us conceding goals it most likely will improve our scoring, so even using short termism to get us more points on the board it seems very foolish to not use him while he is still here.

cutting your nose off to spite your face is a saying which brings to mind in what is happening.

But how effective would DB be in a system Lambert was trying to change ? As I say if you keep Bent now you basically keep the system also, so when do you change it?

[brummybloke]

But how effective would DB be in a system Lambert was trying to change ? As I say if you keep Bent now you basically keep the system also, so when do you change it?

when bent is sold, if he is to be sold in january then i can only hope we have a player replacing him who will fit into this system which isnt working at the moment.

until we get the replacement player/s then we should use bent as without him we are not getting enough points or scoring enough goals

the defence is starting to look more stable, not helped by 3 new players in the back 4, the midfield is starting to look a bit better, again with new players being used but we still are not scoring, so something is clearly not working the way it is set up at the moment

now the young players have found their feat a bit more, we are not looking as bad, that is down to them getting used to the standards of the top league, not due to bent not playing.

so the defence and midfield are sorting themselves out but we still dont get goals? it seems obvious bent should be playing with benteke, gabby 1 goal in 33 league games? cant even say he is providing loads of assists, we are not scoring from anywhere apart from benteke and he isnt getting enough goals for us to win matches on a regular basis

[P3te]

i understand that but due to the position in the league we are in, can we afford to take the gamble on letting our best goal scorer go now?

if bent is to be sold then so be it but to not play him until he is sold and miss out on the goals per game ratio he brings and miss out on the (obviously no one will ever know as its impossible to predict) but potentially missed points due to his missed goals?

not playing bent is unlikely to result in missed goals tbh. if anything we're scoring more without him in the team than we would be with him in it, mainly because of the system we play. so do we change 10 players and their approach to accommodate 1, or do we continue as we have been, with an ever improving benteke who scores just as much as bent for villa?

[Richard]

I would like to repeat that for ages I had wanted Darren Bent at this club. Since the days we had Carew as I felt he and Carew would be unplayable and when we got him, considering at that stage I was disillusioned with the club and owner, I was utterly thrilled.

However, it is time for him to move on and I would just say all the best Darren for me there is no hard feelings I hope you do well at your new club, just not against us. Maybe things could have been different if we didn't have to sell your supply line to actually buy you! but that's the way it is at Villa. We are moving in a new direction and ultimately I think that will be better for us.

[VillaCas]

when bent is sold, if he is to be sold in january then i can only hope we have a player replacing him who will fit into this system which isnt working at the moment.

I don't beleive we will look for a direct replacement for Bent

The system is fine - it's the same system that very many CL sides employ. What we need a couple of options in the attacking midfield roles (the 3 in a 4231 formation. IMO that is where we will spend the money

Also it's a bit soon to be saying the system isn't working - Lambert took over a mess and with very little resources is beginning to turn things round.

Rest assured we won't be having these conversations in January when we are looking up the table not in the relegation zone

[brummybloke]

not playing bent is unlikely to result in missed goals tbh. if anything we're scoring more without him in the team than we would be with him in it, mainly because of the system we play. so do we change 10 players and their approach to accommodate 1, or do we continue as we have been, with an ever improving benteke who scores just as much as bent for villa?

why would we need to change 10 players to accomadate 1?

swapping weiman or gabby for bent is all it would take

how many goals has gabby got? how many assists in this current formation?

bent has 2 league goals, gabby? 1 and gabby has played more than bent

if lambert wants players such as gabby and weiman to be attacking midfielders, why not uses some of the attacking midfielders we already have?

bent is not the be all and end all or the answer to all of thw worlds problems, he is however the player in our squad with the best goal scoring record and is proven,has done it for his entiore career and can be relied upon to score goals on a regular basis

even under the ginger ape he managed to score goals before he was injured.

while benteke has been very good, he has yet to show he can do it consistantly over a season at this level, so using one who has with one who hasnt but who both provide a significant goal threat would seem the common sense thing to do

and if benteke gets 5 yellows or a red card? or injured? who is going to score the goals we need to stay in the league? 1 goal gabby?

someone posted up the villa stats for when bent plays to when he doesnt and the goal ratio is significant, its a fact.. we score less goals without him playing, whether that be him scoring or another team mate scoring so saying we score more with him not in the team is just untrue.

it used to be we created shed loads of chances and we had no one to put them away as we had heskey , we have one of the best finishers who has played for a variety of managers using a variety of formations and tactics including internation matches and european matches, he has been a regular scorer in every team in each formation each manager chose, so why do you think if the rest of the team pulls thier socks up that he cant score regularly under lambert?

[P3te]

because bent does nothing but score. for him to score regularly we'd need to change everything from the midfield up. benteke wouldnt be as effective, and we'd create very little - as we did whenever bent has played this season. he's a fantastic goal scorer, but we don't have the players or the formation to get the best out of him

you're also conveniently forgetting that benteke has the game goals per game record as bent does, while also creating more for others

[brummybloke]

because bent does nothing but score. for him to score regularly we'd need to change everything from the midfield up. benteke wouldnt be as effective, and we'd create very little - as we did whenever bent has played this season. he's a fantastic goal scorer, but we don't have the players or the formation to get the best out of him

you're also conveniently forgetting that benteke has the game goals per game record as bent does, while also creating more for others

your conveniently forgetting we score less goals without bent than with him in this current formation

im sure holman played behind benteke in the last game? so infact NOTHING would have needed changing apart from 1 player for another, bent for holman

[VillaCas]

your conveniently forgetting we score less goals without bent than with him in this current formation

im sure holman played behind benteke in the last game? so infact NOTHING would have needed changing apart from 1 player for another, bent for holman

Bent for Holman??? Crazy

Bent won't play for us again so this is all academic

[markavfc40]

why would we need to change 10 players to accomadate 1?

swapping weiman or gabby for bent is all it would take

Seriosuly? you really think Bent can do what Weimann and Gabby are doing?

They are basically playing either side of Benteke but when we don't have the ball are dropping back into midfield. In fact Gabby is working that hard that on numerous occasions he has found himself at left back. They are both working there bollocks off, working the channels, closing down, tracking back. They aren't scoring a shit load of goals although if you include cup competitions the are doing OK. Gabby is still a great outlet when we are under pressure.

One things for sure Bent cannot do what either Gabby or Weimann are currently being asked to. He doesn't have it in him to play that role.

[Richard]

and neither, I would argue, could he do the role that Benteke is currently doing

[P3te]

Seriosuly? you really think Bent can do what Weimann and Gabby are doing?

bent doesn't run, pass, cross, track back or tackle. he scores. that's what he does. he's a goal machine. but it's impossible to score when we create less chances with him on the pitch. it's frustrating as hell, but we need 2 proper wingers if bent is going to properly work for us again. as it is, benteke is doing far, far more than bent would

[mikeyp102]

I know no one believes me but we did try and sell Bent last January. So this has been rumbling on for a while now. Why? I am not so sure.

Were we offering him to clubs? I'm not a non believer just wondering how we tried to sell...