R.Bear Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Rumours going around today that he is as good as gone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Rumours where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quizme Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Rumours going around today that he is as good as gone... Which rumours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 If he's going to go, can we just get it done and out of the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I would hope that if there is any truth to the above rumours then our chairman would hold out for 25m rather than the stated 20m. We could have asked for 20m plus Faurlin but apparently he out for the rest of the season injured. 25m it is then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 QPR WONT be able to afford the 20m we will be looking forI wouldn't be so sure about that. Either the amount we want or whether they could afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Hmmm. Hughes is interviewed for job. Hughes takes job having received assurances about money available. Briefing starts that Bent is a target for Hughes. It seems pretty certain he has the cash to buy Bent if we want to sell him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Why are people so sure that Hughes will be after Bent? He's never managed him before, I'd be more concerned about him nipping in with a bid for Stephen Ireland, a player who I think will be more valuable to us over the remaining months of this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Why are people so sure that Hughes will be after Bent? It's just what the papers are saying, e.g. Guardian QPR on verge of appointing Mark Hughes as manager • Bids expected for Darren Bent and Wayne BridgeMirror QPR's ambitious owner Tony Fernandes landed his number one managerial target with the promise that the club has got big targets. And Hughes, 48, will be afforded an astonishing war chest this month, with Darren Bent and Didier Drogba at the top of the west London side's wish list as they look to sign a proven big-name striker.Express MARK HUGHES has told QPR he needs £30million to pull them clear of relegation and chase an ambitious list of targets headed by Darren Bent and Didier Drogba. Telegraph It is also likely Rangers are planning at least one bold move in the market — and bids for the likes of Darren Bent and Jermain Defoe have been discussed. Someone has been briefing the press and I guess there must be some substance to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Why are people so sure that Hughes will be after Bent? He's never managed him before, I'd be more concerned about him nipping in with a bid for Stephen Ireland, a player who I think will be more valuable to us over the remaining months of this season. We would be stupid not to try and get rid of Ireland. Two or Three games still doesn’t make up for eighteen months of mediocrity at £50K+ a week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The papers are just throwing Bent's name out there. He was going to Liverpool last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Why are people so sure that Hughes will be after Bent? He's never managed him before, I'd be more concerned about him nipping in with a bid for Stephen Ireland, a player who I think will be more valuable to us over the remaining months of this season. We would be stupid not to try and get rid of Ireland. Two or Three games still doesn’t make up for eighteen months of mediocrity at £50K+ a week Agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The papers are just throwing Bent's name out there. He was going to Liverpool last week. Exactly... there is a huge anti Villa bias in the media which has been around for years which got worse after Saint Martin left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 So all the papers just happened to invent the same story using the same names at the same time? Remarkable coincidence...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 As much as I am hopeful of a return to form Ireland. I think he is wasted here whilst McLeish is here. Either he wont get back to form or if he does he will never see the ball enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 So all the papers just happened to invent the same story using the same names at the same time? Remarkable coincidence...! Or it's an easy space filler. Generates hits, gets fans talking without any real substance like most transfer rumours. I'm just ignoring it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I would expect a bid for Bent. QPR cant score goals, QPR have a shitload of wedge, Villa are a selling club, Bent has spent most of his career in London, we have just signed Keane, McLeish cant get the best out of Bent, Lerner is a word removed A bid for Bent would seem logical if you were Mark Hughes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Think Briny could be right on this one. It would seem a little coincidental for all those papers to come up with the same story if it didnt have any substanance to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The papers are just throwing Bent's name out there. He was going to Liverpool last week. Exactly... there is a huge anti Villa bias in the media which has been around for years which got worse after Saint Martin left. I can just imagine it now, all these editors can think of is doing down Villa. Lets be honest Villa are a non-story. The club over the last few years has shown it self to be a selling club, so if we are selling Bent, it would be ‘typical’ and not out of character. I would suggest that perhaps Bent’s representatives have been expressing their clients itchy feet, and the papers are simply reflecting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodytom Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I would expect a bid for Bent. QPR cant score goals, QPR have a shitload of wedge, Villa are a selling club, Bent has spent most of his career in London, we have just signed Keane, McLeish cant get the best out of Bent, Lerner is a word removed A bid for Bent would seem logical if you were Mark Hughes I look at it differently.... Villa need to reduce the wage bill. Darren Bents doing very little to justify his huge wage and price tag. He can't adapt his game to fit the style of the most important man at the club. He cant seem to play with Gabby who on this seasons form, is better. QPR are no doubt daft enough to pay 20m plus. We seem to play better without him. Selling Bent would seem logical if you were Randy Lerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts