Jump to content

Christian Benteke


Kwan

Recommended Posts

Think we are all getting sidetracked here. He wants to leave, he has asked to leave, he probably will leave. All this about him being 'boxed into a corner' and being ill advised etc - its all a nonsense. He wants to play for a club, that will pay him more, have more chance of winning things, and is probably in London.

 

The best way forward is to forget about him - Weve  had a lot worse forward line ups than Weinman and Gabby - plus anyone else lambo brings in with proceeds of the sale.

 

I will be honest I think our problems will be more at the other end of the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Moxey's article was brilliant. It's his opinion though. Not sure how it is going to make Villa look stupid if it turns out to be wrong.

I agree with his opinion 100% though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i actually think he is not far wrong with that article, it is basically in retaliation to the articles being drip fed by Spurs to say they won't meet Villa's asking price. So we've used a local journo to make it clear that Randy isn't one for games, or this negotiation tactics. We've set our price now it's up to any club to meet it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think for one second that we will see Benteke play for another competitive match for Villa. Even if he hasn't signed for someone before the first game kicks off, Lambert won't want to select him because his mind won't be on the job as the transfer window will still be open. We have seen our star players sold continuously since Lerner took charge of the club and I cannot see him not wanting rid of Benteke.

 

I am not suggesting that Lerner just wants the money, just that he doesn't want to pay wages to anyone who doesn't want to be here and who can be sold at the right price. If anyone offers anything in the region of £20m+ I can see Lerner telling Lambert to take the money and use it to get a replacement in who does want to play for us. But, having said that, I guess it all depends on Lambert's stance. It might be a problem if Lerner wants to get rid at £20m but Lambert refuses to give in to a lower than requested bid.

 

My only hope is that this saga doesn't end up ruining yet another Villa season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

 

The way the game is at present the players are always going to have the upper hand in transfer dealings.

 

I don't believe in keeping players if they want to leave. What sort of commitment are we going to get from Benteke next season if we humiliate him very publicly in the way Moxley is setting us up to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

 

The way the game is at present the players are always going to have the upper hand in transfer dealings.

 

I don't believe in keeping players if they want to leave. What sort of commitment are we going to get from Benteke next season if we humiliate him very publicly in the way Moxley is setting us up to?

The manager wanted to keep him. Lerner did right by his manager. Maybe if Lerner had have sold Barry, MON would have left a season earlier...

 

But let's not get back into that debate again :P

Edited by PieFacE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

The way the game is at present the players are always going to have the upper hand in transfer dealings.

I don't believe in keeping players if they want to leave. What sort of commitment are we going to get from Benteke next season if we humiliate him very publicly in the way Moxley is setting us up to?

You believe Benteke's value will drop if we play hardball then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think we are all getting sidetracked here. He wants to leave, he has asked to leave, he probably will leave. All this about him being 'boxed into a corner' and being ill advised etc - its all a nonsense. He wants to play for a club, that will pay him more, have more chance of winning things, and is probably in London.

 

The best way forward is to forget about him - Weve  had a lot worse forward line ups than Weinman and Gabby - plus anyone else lambo brings in with proceeds of the sale.

 

I will be honest I think our problems will be more at the other end of the pitch.

How is "being ill advised" a nonsense? Do you believe that his agent and mentor is giving him the correct advice? Throwing away a potentially huge signing on fee by putting in a transfer request, building a reputation as a greedy disloyal player,putting yourself under a huge media spotlight when you are at least a couple of seasons away from being the finished article. It doesn't seem like good advice to me.

 

Anelka was "badly advised," and is now at the eleventh different club in a patchy and money grabbing career. "Le Sulk" should have been a superstar, he had everything except the right advice and a respect for carrying out his own responsibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

Yes it was good business. We didn't want to under-value a star at a time when we were knocking on the door of the Champions League. We got another (good) season out of a top player because we wouldn't bend over backwards for Liverpool AND we still got £12m for a player with a year left on his contract a year later. If that's what people need to criticise Lerner with then he must be doing something right because that's clutching at straws in my view.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

Yes it was good business. We didn't want to under-value a star at a time when we were knocking on the door of the Champions League. We got another (good) season out of a top player because we wouldn't bend over backwards for Liverpool AND we still got £12m for a player with a year left on his contract a year later. If that's what people need to criticise Lerner with then he must be doing something right because that's clutching at straws in my view.

 

The Barry- L'pool saga also contributed to the top prices we received for Young, Milner and Downing imo. Randy drew a line in the sand and other clubs took notice of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

 

 

I don't think that's fair. You have to pay the wages of your squad anyway and Barry was important for us that season. Lerner was also splashing the cash back then trying to build for a champions league push. It was a calculated decision as far as I can see. 

 

The financial problems have been real but I don't think keeping Barry had anything to do with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

Yes it was good business. We didn't want to under-value a star at a time when we were knocking on the door of the Champions League. We got another (good) season out of a top player because we wouldn't bend over backwards for Liverpool AND we still got £12m for a player with a year left on his contract a year later. If that's what people need to criticise Lerner with then he must be doing something right because that's clutching at straws in my view.

 

 

Totally agree, at the end of the day here and now Benteke is worth 25million plus, all this what he may be worth next year is irrelevant. As for Barry, we stood our ground, the same tactics were used then as what are being used today is why Moxley is using the example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Think we are all getting sidetracked here. He wants to leave, he has asked to leave, he probably will leave. All this about him being 'boxed into a corner' and being ill advised etc - its all a nonsense. He wants to play for a club, that will pay him more, have more chance of winning things, and is probably in London.

 

The best way forward is to forget about him - Weve  had a lot worse forward line ups than Weinman and Gabby - plus anyone else lambo brings in with proceeds of the sale.

 

I will be honest I think our problems will be more at the other end of the pitch.

How is "being ill advised" a nonsense? Do you believe that his agent and mentor is giving him the correct advice? Throwing away a potentially huge signing on fee by putting in a transfer request, building a reputation as a greedy disloyal player,putting yourself under a huge media spotlight when you are at least a couple of seasons away from being the finished article. It doesn't seem like good advice to me.

 

Anelka was "badly advised," and is now at the eleventh different club in a patchy and money grabbing career. "Le Sulk" should have been a superstar, he had everything except the right advice and a respect for carrying out his own responsibilities.

 

 

 

OK - I don't think Bentekke is adverse to leaving villa - in anycase.

 

If Bentekke was committed to us and wanted to sign a new contract with us - but his agent persuaded him not to - and push for a move to spurs - then that would ill advised. Bentekke wants away - that would probably be the case who ever His  agent is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does he actually know the price is 25M or is that speculation on his part?

 

 

Doug mentioned 25m yesterday.

 

I also know that he was back at VP after his university gig. I have a feeling the club are drip feeding the price, which possibly means they have received no bids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit odd that Moxley cites the Barry affair as an example of Lerner's tough and effective approach to transfers. We stood out for £18m from Liverpool and they didn't pay (although tbf that was as much to do with the Liverpool board losing faith in Benitez.as with our tough negotiating).

 

Next season we had to sell Barry for £6m less on top of having paid him  a year's wages. Was that good business? I always cite it as an example of how poor Lerner's financial judgement is!

 

£6m less than the 18 we wanted.

But only £3m less than we were going to get for him.

 

I see this often, people citing the Barry transfer as bad business because we lost £6m in fees for keeping him for a year, but it's really only £3m that we lost.

(I'm not saying they're necessarily wrong, or that's what you were trying to say, I'm just saying the £6m figure is misleading.)

 

 

But, I don't think your point is different to Moxley's point. Whether you think it's good business or not, it's still evidence that lerner is willing to hold out for what he's asking for, which is the point Moxley was making. He'll hold out for £25m whether it's good business or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â