Darren Bent

[rutski]

Unfortunately I no longer trust a word that comes out of the club these days so I'll take that with a pinch of salt. I imagine this is what it must feel like if your Mrs is cheating on you! lol

didnt you know KRS???

[old man villa fan]

@ John - I dont think any formation or team line-up played against a piss poor Wigan side provides a sound basis for any tactical decisions to be honest. The only thing I can see with that is being camped in our own half with the occasional counter attack. Until we get some strength and quality in midfield we need to play 4 or 5 across the middle of the park giving us some bite in midfield and an outlet to break down the wings to supply Bent or Gabby.

Well, I haven't exactly seen other formations against equally piss poor opposition having been an outstanding success, far from it.  In fact we have been out played in the midfield in most of our games this season and that includes the average and poor sides.

[PeterWithesShin]

I'm curious as to whether the dippers would have another 25-30million to chuck at an attacking player anyway. £75million on Carroll, Henderson and Judas must have given their coffers a bit of a battering.

[Clampy]

I don't think the club will sell him this month, what would be the point?  It would'nt make sense financially because we would'nt be getting any more for him now than we would if we decided to sell him in the summer. It'kll be his last season with us though, i think we can all agree on that.

[JUAN PABLO]

25m and adam and kuyt and shelvy at the least

[KRS]

I would like us to try something new and radical and play without the wide players, having a sitting midfield player (Clark), 2 in the middle (Petrov and Bannan/N'Zogbia) and an advanced player (Ireland).  This does not mean we do not use the wide areas but move into them rather than have players already in them.  I think this would get the best out of Gabby and Bent playing together as twin strikers and allowing them to move all across the front line and interchange.

That pretty much amounts to a diamond in midfield, which we played against Wigan and worked quite well.  As I'd see it, the bottom of the diamond would be Petrov, Clark or Herd, the middle two would be from Bannan, Albrighton or Delph and the top of the diamond would be Ireland or N'Zogbia.  The way it seemed to work was Gabby had a bit of freedom to use the width, with Bent staying central.  Bannan played that day and did very well, IMO.

I've said before that CNZ may be better more central for us, so if super Marc can adjust to it then it may be a winning formation for us.  And it also allows Clark to move back to CB.

Presuming everyone is fit:-

                   Given
Hutton - Clark - Dunne - Warnock
                  Petrov
      Albrighton - Bannan
                N'Zogbia
             Bent - Gabby

Not needing Clark in midfield also allows us to switch the back around a bit, as he could play LB with Carlos in the centre if he doesn't take Hutton's RB slot.  Could keep them on their toes back there at least!

Sorry but that midlfield would get walked over by any decent team and the defence would have to HOOF to get any kind of release from the pressure. Ooh...

You clearly do not understand the formation and why you set up this way.

The deep lying midfield player is there to take the ball from the defence or goalkeeper to build play from the back or to drop into the central defence if one of the central defenders brings the ball out.

The exact reason for playing this system is so that you do not 'Hoof' it in your terms. 

I understand the theory behind the formation very well thanks OMVF. The problem is the players dont seem capable of consistently bringing the ball out and building from the back...we're talking about the same bunch of players who have struggled to string more than a few passes together without losing it so far this season. Dont get me wrong as I would love us to be playing more attractive passing football, but the proof is in the pudding when the ball falls at the feet of Collins or Cuellar.

[KRS]

Unfortunately I no longer trust a word that comes out of the club these days so I'll take that with a pinch of salt. I imagine this is what it must feel like if your Mrs is cheating on you! lol

didnt you know KRS???

...the bitch! lol

[Billy Walker]

I can vouch for Karl. He knew McLeish was coming in well before it happened.
And now I fear Paulie and I are going to be violently ill.

Villa, you really are making loving you difficult lately.

It's not Villa I'm falling out of love with, it's the people running the club.  This reminds me of the bit in the Lion,The Witch and The Wardrobe where the Witch gets mighty Aslan and sacrifices him on the stone altar.  It seems to me that Randy sees it has his duty to get his money back above all else...and if that means gambling on Villa's top flight survival then so be it.  No wonder he's staying away. 

[old man villa fan]

I must say that there have been some strange and blinkered comments both for and against selling Bent.  As for the logic, I think there is very little in some of the comments.

Much as I like Gabby and the rare excitement when he is playing well, I have thought about the comments that we played far better at Chelsea with him up front on his own.  Yes, he did give Terry and Luiz the runaround for a fair part of the game but when it comes down to the important things that win games like creating chances and scoring goals was he involved.

Ireland's goal was essentially Ireland playing through N'Zogbia who made a terrific run to the byeline before setting up Ireland.  Gabby started to drift out of the game in the 2nd half when we dropped deeper and looked frustrated both with his own performance and lack of service/support (familiar?).  Gabby then had a one on one with the goalkeeper and failed to score (could have cost us the match).  For Petrov's goal Gabby was not involved at all and likewise for Bent's goal.  With Bent's goal it showed the difference between him and Gabby.  Bent does not always score these one-on-ones but you would back him more than you would Gabby.

So, other than providing an out for the defenders by running the channels and chasing lost causes, did Gabby influence the game other than perhaps giving the others confidence by following his example in effort.  Also, the question has to be asked, is Gabby intelligent enough and skillfull enough to play up front other than on his own.

As others have quite rightly said, to win games you have to score goals and we do not have midfield players and defenders that can score enough goals.  We rely on our forwards to score goals, it has been like this for a number of years.

To yesterdays match and some things I noticed that I do not think have been mentioned (apologies if I have missed them):

1.  When the Swansea defenders had the ball all of our players except Bent dropped back which left Bent on his own having to cover all across the line and as he does not have Gabby's pace he looks as though he is not trying to close them down.

2.  When we attack down the wings, both N'Zogbia and Albrighton were starting from too deep.  Young and Downing were fast players and could afford to start from deeper positions but N'Zogbia and Albrighton do not have the same pace so have to start from more advanced positions.

3.  I cannot remember one time that N'Zogbia or Gabby or Albrighton when he came on reaching the byeline and pulling the ball back or square across the goals.

4.  A lot of the balls into the channels for Gabby were long balls into space rather than passes.

5.  Even with a front 4 of Bent, Gabby, N'Zogbia and Ireland, who on paper look a very attacking line up, we didn't look like an attacking team.

6.  What stood out the most though was the complete lack of a player in the middle that could dictate the tempo of the game.

None of the above points were a direct reflection on Bent's performance and I believe there is so much more wrong with our team before even getting down to discuss the positives or negatives of Darren Bent.  There are far more serious issues elsewhere, whether it be individual players performance levels, effort, tactics or formation.

Why do most supporters have a fixation with having to play 2 wide players which results in either 4-4-2, 4-5-1 or 4-2-3-1.  A some have said, 4-4-2 with N'Zogbia and Albrighton leaves us exposed in the centre of midfield and we therefore have to give up creativity in this area.  Also, it is a very flat and rigid system.  I have been thinking for some time that the cause of our problems may be down to the combined low level of performance of the 2 wide players.  N'Zogbia is only now starting to show some flashes of his ability and Albrighton likewise has had a poor end to last season and start to this.  Neither of these players will be a patch on Young or even Downing, who themselves struggled at time to overcome the loss of Milner's workrate in the middle of the park.

I would like us to try something new and radical and play without the wide players, having a sitting midfield player (Clark), 2 in the middle (Petrov and Bannan/N'Zogbia) and an advanced player (Ireland).  This does not mean we do not use the wide areas but move into them rather than have players already in them.  I think this would get the best out of Gabby and Bent playing together as twin strikers and allowing them to move all across the front line and interchange.

Reasonable post OMVF, the only point I would disagree about and would make the point have you ever played footy at a decent level is with reference to the Gabby miss, that situation or type of 1 on 1 is one of the hardest a player can convert from, he was straight in front of goal on his approach, Cech was out very fast and narrowed the space extremely well, problem for Gabby was he's so fast that nobody else attacking for Villa had the chance to catch him, very very difficult position to convert from, and just to expand on that, look at the Bent goal, Stephen Ireland breaks from virtually the same position as Gabby did, Ireland had the same chance Gabby did but he had the option to lay the ball of to Bent who was available to his right, he took that option not because he bottled out of that choice ( as many footy fans would suggest) but because instinctively he knew how difficult it was to convert from that position,  otherwise IMO the chances are you would have seen a repeat of the Gabby miss, and even though Bent had the ball laid of for him he still needed a deflection.

So with all due respect I think you a bit over critical of Gabby's miss, his chance of missing there and the pace the game was being played at was immense.

No, I have not played football at a reasonable level but have watched it for over 40 years and I recognise whether a player has composure or not, particulary in one-on-one situations.  Gabby broke from almost the halfway line and had time to move Cech into the position he wanted before shooting past him or going around him.

The point I was trying to make was that I would rather have Bent than Gabby in a one-on-one situation.

[old man villa fan]

I would like us to try something new and radical and play without the wide players, having a sitting midfield player (Clark), 2 in the middle (Petrov and Bannan/N'Zogbia) and an advanced player (Ireland).  This does not mean we do not use the wide areas but move into them rather than have players already in them.  I think this would get the best out of Gabby and Bent playing together as twin strikers and allowing them to move all across the front line and interchange.

That pretty much amounts to a diamond in midfield, which we played against Wigan and worked quite well.  As I'd see it, the bottom of the diamond would be Petrov, Clark or Herd, the middle two would be from Bannan, Albrighton or Delph and the top of the diamond would be Ireland or N'Zogbia.  The way it seemed to work was Gabby had a bit of freedom to use the width, with Bent staying central.  Bannan played that day and did very well, IMO.

I've said before that CNZ may be better more central for us, so if super Marc can adjust to it then it may be a winning formation for us.  And it also allows Clark to move back to CB.

Presuming everyone is fit:-

                   Given
Hutton - Clark - Dunne - Warnock
                  Petrov
      Albrighton - Bannan
                N'Zogbia
             Bent - Gabby

Not needing Clark in midfield also allows us to switch the back around a bit, as he could play LB with Carlos in the centre if he doesn't take Hutton's RB slot.  Could keep them on their toes back there at least!

Sorry but that midlfield would get walked over by any decent team and the defence would have to HOOF to get any kind of release from the pressure. Ooh...

You clearly do not understand the formation and why you set up this way.

The deep lying midfield player is there to take the ball from the defence or goalkeeper to build play from the back or to drop into the central defence if one of the central defenders brings the ball out.

The exact reason for playing this system is so that you do not 'Hoof' it in your terms. 

I understand the theory behind the formation very well thanks OMVF. The problem is the players dont seem capable of consistently bringing the ball out and building from the back...we're talking about the same bunch of players who have struggled to string more than a few passes together without losing it so far this season. Dont get me wrong as I would love us to be playing more attractive passing football, but the proof is in the pudding when the ball falls at the feet of Collins or Cuellar.

I give up, you win, as you obviously know it all.

[dicedlam]

How does the next part go.. ' Aston Villa refuse Daren Bent transfer request'

To be followed by  Faulkner ''We did all we could to keep him, but the player wanted out''


I dont think Randy has the stubbornness or arrogance to care anymore in telling Liverpool to do one

[KRS]

@ John - I dont think any formation or team line-up played against a piss poor Wigan side provides a sound basis for any tactical decisions to be honest. The only thing I can see with that is being camped in our own half with the occasional counter attack. Until we get some strength and quality in midfield we need to play 4 or 5 across the middle of the park giving us some bite in midfield and an outlet to break down the wings to supply Bent or Gabby.

Well, I haven't exactly seen other formations against equally piss poor opposition having been an outstanding success, far from it.  In fact we have been out played in the midfield in most of our games this season and that includes the average and poor sides.

...and thats exactly why we need to keep Bent and sign a couple of defenders and midfielders who are capable of passing, tackling and creating. At the end of the day, if they players arent upto the job then you're screwed whatever formation and tactics you play.

[KRS]

Reasonable post OMVF, the only point I would disagree about and would make the point have you ever played footy at a decent level is with reference to the Gabby miss, that situation or type of 1 on 1 is one of the hardest a player can convert from, he was straight in front of goal on his approach, Cech was out very fast and narrowed the space extremely well, problem for Gabby was he's so fast that nobody else attacking for Villa had the chance to catch him, very very difficult position to convert from, and just to expand on that, look at the Bent goal, Stephen Ireland breaks from virtually the same position as Gabby did, Ireland had the same chance Gabby did but he had the option to lay the ball of to Bent who was available to his right, he took that option not because he bottled out of that choice ( as many footy fans would suggest) but because instinctively he knew how difficult it was to convert from that position,  otherwise IMO the chances are you would have seen a repeat of the Gabby miss, and even though Bent had the ball laid of for him he still needed a deflection.

So with all due respect I think you a bit over critical of Gabby's miss, his chance of missing there and the pace the game was being played at was immense.

No, I have not played football at a reasonable level but have watched it for over 40 years and I recognise whether a player has composure or not, particulary in one-on-one situations.  Gabby broke from almost the halfway line and had time to move Cech into the position he wanted before shooting past him or going around him.

The point I was trying to make was that I would rather have Bent than Gabby in a one-on-one situation.

I agree with OMVF. Gabby has always struggled with 1on1 situations.

[Somniloquism]

No, I have not played football at a reasonable level but have watched it for over 40 years and I recognise whether a player has composure or not, particulary in one-on-one situations.  Gabby broke from almost the halfway line and had time to move Cech into the position he wanted before shooting past him or going around him.

The point I was trying to make was that I would rather have Bent than Gabby in a one-on-one situation.

Gabby might have broke from the halfway line but I'm sure he received the ball from the pass at about 5-10yds outside the box travelling at pace. Gabby then tried to move it to his stronger right foot knowing Cole was a pace behind him, unfortunately he managed to get it trapped under him a bit so could not get enough pace on the shot. Bent on the other hand could hit it first time with Cech scrambling to get it into position and no defender anywhere near ( and he almost missed it).

I do agree that you would expect Bent to score one on ones but I'm sure he has missed some for us as well.

[KevinGage]

Just because Gabby wasn't involved in the specific game altering goals at the Bridge, doesn't lessen his contribution to the win.

It's not a like for like comparison, but in cricket batsmen sometimes see off the the top gun bowler, who is all pumped up and getting the ball to whizz past the edge and then it's the 'lesser' bowlers who cash in on all the hardwork.

In short, if Gabby hadn't spent the bulk of the game getting Sideshow Bob and his racist friend to chase shadows, they might have dealt with any late surge from us far more comfortably.