Jump to content

Darren Bent


juanpabloangel18

Recommended Posts

Villa have wrecked bents carear infact lambert can take the blame imo bent is worth no more than 2mil

I don't see now Lambert can take the blame when he didn't sign him. He was brought to a club that had finished 6th three seasons in a row so probably thought there was ambition to push on. It's Lerner who is to blame for that not happening. Edited by Vive_La_Villa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner dosnt pick the team lambert preferred bowery ovet bent that is unforgivable bent might not have played well but the fact he cost 24mil which we paid shows he must be half decent. Lerner sanctioned the move he aibt to blame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it is clearly Lambert's fault.

He should have continued playing Bent, when it was clear he couldn't score goals for us, he should have continued to hold Benteke back and keep him on the bench when it was clear he was the future and everything we were lacking a forward.

Lambert should have continued playing Bent and watched us get relegated.



What a joke of a statement.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner dosnt pick the team lambert preferred bowery ovet bent that is unforgivable bent might not have played well but the fact he cost 24mil which we paid shows he must be half decent. Lerner sanctioned the move he aibt to blame

 

So because Bent cost £24m he should have played, right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner dosnt pick the team lambert preferred bowery ovet bent that is unforgivable bent might not have played well but the fact he cost 24mil which we paid shows he must be half decent. Lerner sanctioned the move he aibt to blame

 

So because Bent cost £24m he should have played, right.

Because he cost £24m, he shouldn't have been put in the bomb squad?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

bent wrecked bents career 

 

I'd say Villa did

 

We spent a LOT of money on him, he scored goals and did his job keeping us up.

 

We then, in our infinite wisdom sold BOTH our wingers (for a combined 38m) that were supplying him and replaced them with one N'Zogbia, not so much a winger as an attacking wide player for approx 10m

 

Thus his goals dried up and people started expecting him to be a completely different type of player than the one we'd signed and that'd got him to the stage of being an 18m striker in the first place

 

Utterly ridiculous set of events

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

bent wrecked bents career 

 

I'd say Villa did

 

We spent a LOT of money on him, he scored goals and did his job keeping us up.

 

We then, in our infinite wisdom sold BOTH our wingers (for a combined 38m) that were supplying him and replaced them with one N'Zogbia, not so much a winger as an attacking wide player for approx 10m

 

Thus his goals dried up and people started expecting him to be a completely different type of player than the one we'd signed and that'd got him to the stage of being an 18m striker in the first place

 

Utterly ridiculous set of events

 

 

Given that Villa were happy for him to play for one of our relegation rivals last season and he spent most of the previous season on the bench or in the reserves I think it's fair to say he could have walked away from the club at any stage and continued his career elsewhere. It was his decision not to do that.

 

Same as Hutton and Given - if they sign up to huge contracts for 5 years the club are allowed to do whatever they wish with them and they can have no grounds for complaint IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

bent wrecked bents career 

 

I'd say Villa did

 

We spent a LOT of money on him, he scored goals and did his job keeping us up.

 

We then, in our infinite wisdom sold BOTH our wingers (for a combined 38m) that were supplying him and replaced them with one N'Zogbia, not so much a winger as an attacking wide player for approx 10m

 

Thus his goals dried up and people started expecting him to be a completely different type of player than the one we'd signed and that'd got him to the stage of being an 18m striker in the first place

 

Utterly ridiculous set of events

 

 

You mean a striker who cost us £18m and 65k a week, who has clearly lost the yard of pace and the sharpness that made him what he was shouldn't be expected to change his game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he was a waste of money. He was a top class goalscorer at this level. We just took away his supply. Even under McLeish his goal scoring record was good. I'd like to see him given a chance.

You don't think paying out north of £30m in fees and wages for Bent was a waste of money? :D

Is that you Martin? :)

I'll rephrase it. I don't think it's bents fault if his move here has resulted in money being wasted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he scores less than Gabby, Andi and Libor given 'the same' amount of starts i'll be AMAZED

 

He's miles ahead of all of them as a striker. Get to it Darren

 

like he outscored Kozak last season?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If he scores less than Gabby, Andi and Libor given 'the same' amount of starts i'll be AMAZED

 

He's miles ahead of all of them as a striker. Get to it Darren

 

like he outscored Kozak last season?

 

 

B-b-but his goals to minutes ratio must have been better? Right? Oh...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner dosnt pick the team lambert preferred bowery ovet bent that is unforgivable bent might not have played well but the fact he cost 24mil which we paid shows he must be half decent. Lerner sanctioned the move he aibt to blame

 

Sometimes people don't deserve chances, if Bent was doing naff all during training all week and Bowery was giving it everything then it's fully justified.

 

Not saying this is the case by the way as I don't know but something obviously happened with Bent as you don't go from being named Captain to being dropped altogether without some form of incident, or incidents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lerner dosnt pick the team lambert preferred bowery ovet bent that is unforgivable bent might not have played well but the fact he cost 24mil which we paid shows he must be half decent. Lerner sanctioned the move he aibt to blame

Sometimes people don't deserve chances, if Bent was doing naff all during training all week and Bowery was giving it everything then it's fully justified.

Not saying this is the case by the way as I don't know but something obviously happened with Bent as you don't go from being named Captain to being dropped altogether without some form of incident, or incidents

Fair point just disapointing we got no money yet bent dosnt play the club for me is just wrong and not sure if it will gey fixed lerner needs to sell first then we can see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â