Lambert Out?

[dave.woodhall]

Mat Kendrick last night tweeted that there's no truth in Bent not being played because he's near a number of appearances that triggers another hefty payment to Sunderland.

And General Krulak said the same thing about Curtis Davies, even when it was crystal clear what the game in town was.

If an answer doesn't fit your theory then it has to be a lie?

[Risso]

Mat Kendrick last night tweeted that there's no truth in Bent not being played because he's near a number of appearances that triggers another hefty payment to Sunderland.

And General Krulak said the same thing about Curtis Davies, even when it was crystal clear what the game in town was.

If an answer doesn't fit your theory then it has to be a lie?

Oh do go away.

[dave.woodhall]

Mat Kendrick last night tweeted that there's no truth in Bent not being played because he's near a number of appearances that triggers another hefty payment to Sunderland.

And General Krulak said the same thing about Curtis Davies, even when it was crystal clear what the game in town was.

If an answer doesn't fit your theory then it has to be a lie?

Oh do go away.

Another reasoned response, I see.

[Risso]

Every time anybody remotely questions the club, you're in there like their little appointed watchdog, trying to stamp out any dissent.  Why is that?

[dave.woodhall]

Every time anybody remotely questions the club, you're in there like their little appointed watchdog, trying to stamp out any dissent.  Why is that?

Sometimes, when something I might disagree with is said, I like to state my opinion. Most of the time I don't bother. In this case two seperate people on two seperate occasions have said that claims are false. Without any evidence whatsoever your immediate default position is to imply they're not telling the truth and as ever to insult anyone who doesn't agree with you.   

[amfy]

Well, the "best Villa set up" has delivered an absolutely abysmal start, hardly any goals and a bottom three presence, so it clearly isn't working.   Bent and Benteke have only played a few minutes together, so it's hard to argue that it's been given time to work in any case.
[/quote]

That start includes time when he was playing. When he was playing this message board was full of how he was a disinterested luxury (not saying this was your opinion - I am not one for stalking posters for their posting history on subjects) but now he's not playing everyone seems to think he would be our saviour. In my opinion performances have been better in the last few weeks, but we have come up against better teams in this latest spell. We have still scored goals against one of them, and it is simply untrue to say we're not scoring with Darren Bent out of the side - I think we have scored at a similar level all season, but created more chances and had a better shape recently.

I would have no objections to him being given another chance, and seeing how a partnership with Benteke may work, but I think there is a problem with that set up in the supply line because our midfield need strengthening. I think Gabs & Weimman bring the ball through better.

I certainly think he should be on at least the bench if fit beause he clearly provides a useful option, but I'm not of the opinion that the goals would start flying in if we started with him, and have no problem with Lambert deciding not to start him.

[Percy McCarthy]

There's a bit more evidence of the Davies clause, in that his agent (rather stupidly IMO) revealed it to the press.

[eastie]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

Sadly though I feel lambert has probably already made his mind up on bent in the same way he has with warnock and Hutton and I fear bent will be gone in January for a lot less than we paid for him.

[dave.woodhall]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

I would guess that not playing him would see his value drop by a lot more than any clause in his contract might cost us.

[N'ZMAV]

Bent is off, it's pretty clear. Also, isn't he one of our big earners? therefore, doesn't that comply with our goal of lowering the wagebill? There's no point keeping a player on £60,000+ a week around if he's not going to be played.

Personally, I believe that Darren should play, along side Benteke. Bent is a much greater goal threat than Agbonlahor, who goes for games without looking like scoring.

[N'ZMAV]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

I would guess that not playing him would see his value drop by a lot more than any clause in his contract might cost us.

Very true. We're never going to make a profit on him.

[dave.woodhall]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

I would guess that not playing him would see his value drop by a lot more than any clause in his contract might cost us.

Very true. We're never going to make a profit on him.

But we might, if he was playing and scoring goals.

[eastie]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

I would guess that not playing him would see his value drop by a lot more than any clause in his contract might cost us.

Exactly, the talk of a contract clause has been rubbished , that is not the reason bent is not playing - but clearly lambert doesnt fancy him for whatever reason.

[QBVILLA]

Paul Lambert was my first choice as manager before McLeish. That said I can't see how we are benefitting from having Bent sitting in the stands. Without checking i'd say he's got to have one of the best goals to games ratios of any Villa striker in the last 20 years. For a side languishing 18th in the division I think he should be out on the pitch whenever possible.

[eastie]

People say we want bent off the wage bill but while he is here is is still being paid so lets make use of him or at least have that option on the bench - we need goals !

Not using him is hardly going to help us sell him if that's what lambert wants to do- his valuation will plummet while he sits in the stands.

I would guess that not playing him would see his value drop by a lot more than any clause in his contract might cost us.

Very true. We're never going to make a profit on him.

But we might, if he was playing and scoring goals.

If he was playing and scoring goals I would hope there would be no reason to sell him.