Jimzk5 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Nursey tweeted earlier that db has pulled out of buying a house in four oaks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillanousOne Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I get the feeling that Lambert feels he needs to stabilise the club and get a level of performance and consistency out of the team before he steps us up a gear. Look at it like a multilayered cake and Bent, Ireland and Zog when fit are the icing on top, you can't put the icing on when the middle of the cake is not cooked properly. But what perplexes me is not that Bent starts, but the fact he doesn't even get in the squad or off the bench, when we are struggling for goals. This makes me think the money for appearences thing could be true, or he has fallen out with Lambert. Nothing he has done on the pitch justifies him being treated like this. and i do believe he could play alongside Benteke. People seem to forget how little Weimann is involved when he plays as a wide fwd, now he still makes 2 or 3 chances - and i like him, but no-one can tell me Bent would do worse in that position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 6, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 6, 2012 It doesn't really matter what any of us think about Bent and Benteke playing together, it comes down to what Lambert thinks and he seemingly isn't keen on them as a pairing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 People seem to forget how little Weimann is involved when he plays as a wide fwd, now he still makes 2 or 3 chances - and i like him, but no-one can tell me Bent would do worse in that position? Weimann is not the final answer for that position but he does work very hard tracking back and covering - I can't see Bent doing that. I imagine that Lambert will find someone in the window who can fill that role No one will convince me that Bent would be better up front than Benteke and again no one will convince me that playing both would work. Bent is a good poacher but doesnt add enough elsewhere - I don't get the idea that he is some world beater Ipswich, Charlton and Sunderland and a failed spell at Spurs (where he was ridiculed by his own manager) tells it's own story Bent will be going in January - We'll see if sets the world on fire at his new club, but I doubt it http://the4thofficial.co.uk/2012/12/05/why-the-poacher-is-in-danger-of-becoming-extinct/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-the-poacher-is-in-danger-of-becoming-extinct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert has been told to address the disparity in wages How on earth do you keep harmony when you have player A on £80k a week and player B on £18k a week and they're doing the same job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert has been told to address the disparity in wages Come on then tell us how you know this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 6, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 6, 2012 Don't fee Come on then tell us how you know this? Don't bite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Come on then tell us how you know this? Fairly obvious to me. If you have any doubt take a look at the last set of accounts, or the one before or the one before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted December 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 6, 2012 Perhaps PL thinks we need to get another midfielder who can tighten it up a bit before we can afford to play a 4-4-2 formation with Bent and Benteke upfront. I can see the value in Bent playing around Benteke picking up from all the flick ons and passes etc that Benteke generates. ATM Benteke seems to playing on our rightside meaning whoevers playing over that side needs to be alert, he wins alot of the ball, IMO its not hurting the opposition as much as it should. I still think Bent and Benteke could work for us, just not as we are playing at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I dont think there is a hidden meaning or conspiracy at all. Paul Lambert is managing the club, managing the team He sees all the lads in training each day, he bought some of them and is going to want to play the ones he bought as those are players he believes can help us and so he is going to have a system for those players to play in. He just doesn't feel Bent can play in that system and doesn't fancy him. Simple as that Bent, for all that I really rate and like him, is a one dimensional footballer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Richard is spot on. I don't believe for one minute Lambert is getting pressure from above to sell him due to his wages or this theory that if he plays another X amount of games we need to paid Sunderland anywhere between 3 and 6 mill. As far as Lambert is concerned Bent doesn't fit in with the way he wants to play. Its as simple as that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan501 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert is a utter muppet he has made villas best asset in terms of value worth naff all now. Saw the article about wanting 18mil for bent get real he has played next to no games and aint worth half, a darren bent scoring would be worth 15mil tops makes me sick the rubbish that comes out of our club these days next thing theyl say the dunny monster is worth 10 mil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert is a utter muppet he has made villas best asset in terms of value worth naff all now. Saw the article about wanting 18mil for bent get real he has played next to no games and aint worth half, a darren bent scoring would be worth 15mil tops makes me sick the rubbish that comes out of our club these days next thing theyl say the dunny monster is worth 10 mil Mind finding me the quotes of Lambert or Faulkner saying this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 with a job of just just putting the ball in the net, a loan move to CHelsea until end of season wouldnt be so unlikely and potentially win-win. for us will get wages off books and put him in shop window for summer by an increasing fee if he scores there and giving them a forward before going for a Cavani or Falcao in the summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macca_UTV Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 His been turning up to training late, showing a lack of respect for the younger players in the team and is not training well.. Not going to say where i found this out but all true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert is a utter muppet he has made villas best asset in terms of value worth naff all now. Saw the article about wanting 18mil for bent get real he has played next to no games and aint worth half, a darren bent scoring would be worth 15mil tops makes me sick the rubbish that comes out of our club these days next thing theyl say the dunny monster is worth 10 mil It's not Lambert's job to protect the value of the club's 'assets' - he was appointed to put a squad together to win games. He's decided that the best way to do that is with the current line up which doesn't include him. He shouldn't change that just so he can increase his value. Besides based on Bent's last few appearances, he was not exactly enhancing his value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 with a job of just just putting the ball in the net, a loan move to CHelsea until end of season wouldnt be so unlikely and potentially win-win. for us will get wages off books and put him in shop window for summer by an increasing fee if he scores there and giving them a forward before going for a Cavani or Falcao in the summer I would consider Chelsea to be in the same boat as us - they have a striker who can put the ball in the net, but does bugger all else - and they're moving away from that style of play to use more complete attackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I would consider Chelsea to be in the same boat as us - they have a striker who can put the ball in the net, but does bugger all else - and they're moving away from that style of play to use more complete attackers. difference is they have Hazard, Oscar, Mata to provide chances and Torres jsut has no confidence, I think Bent has the confidence just not the service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 6, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 6, 2012 Lambert is a utter muppet he has made villas best asset in terms of value worth naff all now. Saw the article about wanting 18mil for bent get real he has played next to no games and aint worth half, a darren bent scoring would be worth 15mil tops makes me sick the rubbish that comes out of our club these days next thing theyl say the dunny monster is worth 10 mil Our best asset is our PL status above and beyond any player. If Lambert thinks our chances of staying in the PL are best served without Bent than with him, then regardless of what I think, that is his call and I at least admire the balls of the man to make that call. It is his neck and reputation on the line and unlike some other managers around he has the balls to make big decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ooh-Ah Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I dont think there is a hidden meaning or conspiracy at all. Paul Lambert is managing the club, managing the team He sees all the lads in training each day, he bought some of them and is going to want to play the ones he bought as those are players he believes can help us and so he is going to have a system for those players to play in. He just doesn't feel Bent can play in that system and doesn't fancy him. Simple as that Bent, for all that I really rate and like him, is a one dimensional footballer I agree with you to an extent Richard, I think it's fairly clear that Lambert doesn't fancy him or think he fits the system. As much as I personally like Darren Bent, that's fair enough. Lambert's the boss and Benteke is a serious talent. I just find it hard to believe that he really thinks Bent isn't even worthy of a place on the bench. We nearly got relegated last season, and this season we've started out even worse, so I honestly don't think any manager of a club in our position can justify completely freezing out a proven goalscorer like Darren Bent. No matter what system we employ, Darren Bent is good enough to at least make our bench. I think that's pretty obvious to everyone. I obviously have no idea what's going on behind closed doors but if I had to hazard a guess, I'd say Lambert initially dropped Bent for footballing reasons, which he has every right to do, and then was unhappy with the manner in which Bent reacted. Maybe he sulked a bit, maybe he didn't put the effort in at training. Lambert, eager to stamp his authority on a squad with history of indiscipline, put his foot down and said "Right, if you don't buy into this project, you don't play". Which he has every right to do. A lot of speculating there I know but to me that seems to be the most plausible sequence of events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts