Jump to content

Darren Bent


juanpabloangel18

Recommended Posts

actually Trent your right, if Kozak had been a replacement then I guess we wouldn't have signed Holt. I kind of thought Kozak had been lined up as replacement and then when Benteke signed on Lambert just thought 'hell we need numbers.'

 

on the matter of Bent not rushing around the pitch being a work horse like Weimann, for one a striker is meant to score goals. Also Weimann as well as not scoring goals stopped being of any use in terms of cover up and down the pitch. He was just a headless chicken. I hope next season he finds the form he showed early on under Lambert as I still rate the guy, just frustrated by him. Same with much of the team that has been underperforming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually Trent your right, if Kozak had been a replacement then I guess we wouldn't have signed Holt. I kind of thought Kozak had been lined up as replacement and then when Benteke signed on Lambert just thought 'hell we need numbers.'

Holt was signed because Kozak broke his leg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually Trent your right, if Kozak had been a replacement then I guess we wouldn't have signed Holt. I kind of thought Kozak had been lined up as replacement and then when Benteke signed on Lambert just thought 'hell we need numbers.'

Holt was signed because Kozak broke his leg.

No. He was signed because Clark broke Kozak's leg....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually Trent your right, if Kozak had been a replacement then I guess we wouldn't have signed Holt. I kind of thought Kozak had been lined up as replacement and then when Benteke signed on Lambert just thought 'hell we need numbers.'

Holt was signed because Kozak broke his leg.
No. He was signed because Clark broke Kozak's leg....

This post should win an award for something. Maybe, most unnecessary and ridiculous swipe at a player?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a swipe. I'm just a stickler for accuracy. I quite like Clark, actually. Mostly because he's not Baker. :-)

And if that was the most unnecessary post you've seen on VT you're obviously not on here much!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

actually Trent your right, if Kozak had been a replacement then I guess we wouldn't have signed Holt. I kind of thought Kozak had been lined up as replacement and then when Benteke signed on Lambert just thought 'hell we need numbers.'

Holt was signed because Kozak broke his leg.
No. He was signed because Clark broke Kozak's leg....

This post should win an award for something. Maybe, most unnecessary and ridiculous swipe at a player?

 

Gave me a laugh. I dont think he meant it as a swipe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Bent. I can see the value of offloading him this summer but if that doesn't happen what's the harm of having him in the squad?

 

Because he's on the biggest salary and will contribute nothing on the pitch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Bent. I can see the value of offloading him this summer but if that doesn't happen what's the harm of having him in the squad?

Because he's on the biggest salary and will contribute nothing on the pitch?

Because he won't score goals? Admittedly he isn't what we need to lead the line but if we are chasing the game he is a decent option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Bent. I can see the value of offloading him this summer but if that doesn't happen what's the harm of having him in the squad?

 

Because he's on the biggest salary and will contribute nothing on the pitch?

But he did offer something under our other managers so the problem therein lies with Lambert not originally adapting the system for a poacher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Bent. I can see the value of offloading him this summer but if that doesn't happen what's the harm of having him in the squad?

Because he's on the biggest salary and will contribute nothing on the pitch?

But he did offer something under our other managers so the problem therein lies with Lambert not originally adapting the system for a poacher.

Didn't offer anything under McLeish. He was good for four months with two international calibre wingers supplying him. We now have Andi Weimann playing that role...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bent is passed it as a Premier League player IMO -

 

Over the past couple of years, the energy levels and pace of the game has increased and the role of a 'goal hanger' is no longer needed as all players, including the strikers have to put a shift in every match 'for the team'.

 

Bent's form under Lambert has dropped admittedly, but other strikers under the same stewardship improved.

 

Bent started out as first pick, even though we'd purchased Benteke but he failed to lead the line well and lost his spot to CB who had a cracking second half of the season. Even Weimann and Gabby played well during that period, leaving Bent justifiably 4th choice and eligable for shipping out (due to his form and big wages)

 

Bent had the opportunity to stick two fingers up at Lambert whilst out on loan at Fulham, but he barely made an impact, scoring 3 league goals in 23 appearences in a struggling Fulham team and even lost his spot to a rookie striker in Cauley Woodrow.

 

Bent is a 'luxury' player that doesn't offer that much luxury and we cannot afford or need.

 

I hope, if he stays for the season, he improves and serves us well in his final year of contract. However I just cannot see it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â