VillaAndLoyal Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 This issue is completely bizarre in every sense of the word and I think Paul Lambert is handling it really, really badly. If they have had a massive bust-up, surely you would still put a proven goalscorer like Darren on the bench at least for the good of the club? Surely you would want him retaining match sharpness so he is more of an asset to sell in January? Like the journos have said and questioned him on, you don't go from (one minute) talking him up and making him captain and then the next minute putting him behind Jordan effing Bowery in the squad. It just doesn't make sense, in any conceivable way. Something has clearly happened and I honestly cannot see what Paul Lambert's thinking is by hiding the truth from people and carrying on this saga - which is what it has become. At the end of the day, of course the media are going to keep asking questions as it's a totally perplexing situation. PL should either bring him back into his plans and then listen to sensible offers in January or simply tell the fans: 'Yes we've had a disagreement and I would be willing to listen to offers for him'. Like others have said, by casting him completely aside, we're not going to get above £5 million for him when clubs know we are trying to offload him. I'm fully behind the Lambert project, and actually agreed with his decision to originally drop Bent. But this is getting ridiculous now and, as I said, his handling of the situation is terrible and very MON-esque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 PL should either bring him back into his plans and then listen to sensible offers in January or simply tell the fans: 'Yes we've had a disagreement and I would be willing to listen to offers for him'. Like others have said, by casting him completely aside, we're not going to get above £5 million for him when clubs know we are trying to offload him. I've never heard a manager say that, ever. Certainly not in the modern era. Care to give any examples? Besides, they don't need to do any of that via the media. These clubs and players have agents and scouts, they are all in contact with each other. They have their own channels of communication away from the prying eyes of the media. The only reason you want them to go public is so that you don't feel left out, it's of no benefit to the club or player whatsoever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 I've never heard a manager say that, ever. Certainly not in the modern era. Care to give any examples? Besides, they don't need to do any of that via the media. These clubs and players have agents and scouts, they are all in contact with each other. They have their own channels of communication away from the prying eyes of the media. The only reason you want them to go public is so that you don't feel left out, it's of no benefit to the club or player whatsoever. Is that not what more or less happened when he fell out with Harry at Spurs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 I can see us getting £15-20m for him in Jan Clubs always panic buy at this time and pay well over the top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBM Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 why is everyone still going on abou bent being sold in january when PL has stated that he wont be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Whereas keeping the matter 'private' is really benefiting the club dont_do_it_doug, isn't it? Plenty of managers come out from time-to-time and admit to having had disagreements with certain players. Heck, you only have to look at our last three managers to see that. But this isn't, as you state, to make me feel personally better. Far from it. This current situation is doing Villa no favours a.) on the football pitch, b.) in making Bent as attractive a proposition for prospective buyers as possible and c.) it is leaving a negative storm hanging over the club's head at a time when we need to be focused 100 per cent on winning football games. The longer this saga goes on, the more damage it will do to our club and the less money we will get for him. CI, if you think we will recoup up to £20 million for him when clubs fully realise we are trying to offload him then I think you are being massively (understatement of the century) optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 I can see us getting £15-20m for him in Jan Clubs always panic buy at this time and pay well over the top Like we did 24m fuaark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 £18m? Not sure we will be paying any of the £6m add ons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 He's played 47 games for us so maybe some of that extra £6m kicks in on 50 games ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBM Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 the club has done this before were they wouldnt play a player past a certain amount of games if theyre going to do this then they shouldnt put/agree to the clauses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Wonder if he'll play 2 more games ? 48, 49 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciggiesnbeer Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Based on Lamberts comments I doubt any extra payments is a consideration. Lambert just doesnt think Bent has been training well and he was not impressed with how he handled the Captaincy debacle now he has got it in his mind that Bent is not his kind of player. it is also pretty clear that when lambert decides you are out then you are OUT. I dont know the whole story but I place the blame for this stuff on both their shoulders. Bent should have kept his trap shut and Lambert should have handled this WAY better. Tossing someone off the bench is a very big slap which i dont think Bent deserves based on what i have seen of his performances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Is that not what more or less happened when he fell out with Harry at Spurs? Is this a positive? Whereas keeping the matter 'private' is really benefiting the club dont_do_it_doug, isn't it? Plenty of managers come out from time-to-time and admit to having had disagreements with certain players. Heck, you only have to look at our last three managers to see that. But this isn't, as you state, to make me feel personally better. Far from it. This current situation is doing Villa no favours a.) on the football pitch, b.) in making Bent as attractive a proposition for prospective buyers as possible and c.) it is leaving a negative storm hanging over the club's head at a time when we need to be focused 100 per cent on winning football games. The longer this saga goes on, the more damage it will do to our club and the less money we will get for him. CI, if you think we will recoup up to £20 million for him when clubs fully realise we are trying to offload him then I think you are being massively (understatement of the century) optimistic. I'm still not seeing how going public with this, whatever this is, will serve anyone any good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 IMHO the decision was made upstairs. Above lambert. No way would he have the authority to treat a £24m asset like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted November 28, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2012 IMHO the decision was made upstairs. Above lambert. No way would he have the authority to treat a £24m asset like this. What a complete load of toss. Yeah Randy and Faulkner got their heads together, saw we were in a relegation battle and told Lambert not to play the best goalscorer at the club? What planet are you on? I'm sure even Big John doesn't think Randy is that stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Have you not been paying attention last 3 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 I'm not saying it will necessarily 'do anyone good' but it might do less damage, for the reasons already mentioned, to the club than keeping this saga ongoing until January throughout a busy and crucial Christmas period. Why did you only quote part of my post? I take it you think Paul Lambert has handled this situation well then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 This sums it up quite nicely for me "Bent and Benteke can play together - they did against Southampton. We got beat 4-1" http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20521339 Bent isn't the kind of player we can afford to have in the team right now - no bust ups or disagreements and nothing else going on. Lambert is bang on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 All opinion of each person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Bent is going. Lambert needs the funds to buy some more players so he is freezing him out to make him want to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts