Darren Bent

[Guest neesy111]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/newcastle-transfers-darren-bent-transfer-2048554

Manager Alan Pardew wants Aston Villa and England forward Bent to play just behind his No.9 Papiss Cisse, linking play and regularly chipping in with goals.

 

Of course he does.

 

Biggest load of shite I've read for a while that.

[lovejoy]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

[Gallowgate Toon]

An unnecessary signing to attempt.

[Pilko]

If Darren Bent is our sole addition on the striking front (which I'm sure he probably will be) then that £10 I stuck on us to get relegated is looking like a fantastic bet.

[TRon]

I don't think he'll pair him with cisse personally, I reckon it'll be one or the other and it wouldn't surprise me at all if bent outscored him.

 

You obviously missed the period of time that Ba and Cisse were both together at Newcastle then.

[Barnes23]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

 

First and foremost because I'm pretty sure Pardew will use him as a partner for Cisse rather than as a place on the bench instead of Ameobi. He's a very limited player (who we already have a superior version of in Cisse) who inhibits the teams he plays in and contributes nothing in terms of linking up play. Exactly what we don't need in terms of a striker/forward, and a signing which would signal a considerable lack of ambition, in terms of league position and playing style, considering Bent is a striker renowned for scoring goals in s*** teams but not being capable of performing for teams looking for something more ( e.g. his time at Tottenham,Villa under Lambert).

[Scotty66]

It's Simon Bird, why is anyone taking it remotely seriously?

 

Exactly this. We all know Pardew is capable of making this kind of s*** decision but he hasn't said anything relating to what is being inclined in that article.

 

Complete trolling/s*** stirring/bad journalism from one of the worst out there.

[taxfree]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/newcastle-transfers-darren-bent-transfer-2048554

Manager Alan Pardew wants Aston Villa and England forward Bent to play just behind his No.9 Papiss Cisse, linking play and regularly chipping in with goals.

 

Of course he does.

 

Amazing.

[TRon]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

 

First and foremost because I'm pretty sure Pardew will use him as a partner for Cisse rather than as a place on the bench instead of Ameobi. He's a very limited player (who we already have a superior version of in Cisse) who inhibits the teams he plays in and contributes nothing in terms of linking up play. Exactly what we don't need in terms of a striker/forward, and a signing which would signal a considerable lack of ambition, in terms of league position and playing style, considering Bent is a striker renowned for scoring goals in s*** teams but not being capable of performing for teams looking for something more ( e.g. his time at Tottenham,Villa under Lambert).

 

While I agree that he's not the right partner for Cisse, in his own right Bent is still one of the better strikers in the Premier. It wasn't too long ago he was commanding fees of £12-18m and he's still only 29. For the right price I wouldn't say no. While I'd prefer someone who would complement Cisse, if it's a choice between no one and Bent I'll take Bent, if only to give us another quality strike option.

[toontownman]

We will get Bent and Remy or a Remy-a-like.

 

Cisse has no competition and Bent has a point to prove. It will work out fine...... might hide until the window is closed.

[brummie]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how shit the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of piss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the fuck are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become shit at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

[Barnes23]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

 

First and foremost because I'm pretty sure Pardew will use him as a partner for Cisse rather than as a place on the bench instead of Ameobi. He's a very limited player (who we already have a superior version of in Cisse) who inhibits the teams he plays in and contributes nothing in terms of linking up play. Exactly what we don't need in terms of a striker/forward, and a signing which would signal a considerable lack of ambition, in terms of league position and playing style, considering Bent is a striker renowned for scoring goals in s*** teams but not being capable of performing for teams looking for something more ( e.g. his time at Tottenham,Villa under Lambert).

 

While I agree that he's not the right partner for Cisse, in his own right Bent is still one of the better strikers in the Premier. It wasn't too long ago he was commanding fees of £12-18m and he's still only 29. For the right price I wouldn't say no. While I'd prefer someone who would complement Cisse, if it's a choice between no one and Bent I'll take Bent, if only to give us another quality strike option.

 

He's good at what he does, but what he does isn't what we need. He would probably be an excellent signing for a newly promoted team. I can see where you're coming from re. wanting options up front, but for me Bent alongside Cisse represents a regression- our much stated problem of linking midfield and attack, for example, would be exacerbated imo.

[Barnes23]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how s*** the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last man, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of p*ss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the f*** are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become s*** at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

Great post.

 

The fact that Villa are keen to let him go, combined with the fact our rumoured rivals for his signature are Fulham and Hull, says a lot, especially in a summer where the clubs around us have stepped it up in terms of recruitment.

[toontownman]

Top post Brummie, but grim reading for the direction we are headed. It is no surprise though.

[TRon]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

 

First and foremost because I'm pretty sure Pardew will use him as a partner for Cisse rather than as a place on the bench instead of Ameobi. He's a very limited player (who we already have a superior version of in Cisse) who inhibits the teams he plays in and contributes nothing in terms of linking up play. Exactly what we don't need in terms of a striker/forward, and a signing which would signal a considerable lack of ambition, in terms of league position and playing style, considering Bent is a striker renowned for scoring goals in s*** teams but not being capable of performing for teams looking for something more ( e.g. his time at Tottenham,Villa under Lambert).

 

While I agree that he's not the right partner for Cisse, in his own right Bent is still one of the better strikers in the Premier. It wasn't too long ago he was commanding fees of £12-18m and he's still only 29. For the right price I wouldn't say no. While I'd prefer someone who would complement Cisse, if it's a choice between no one and Bent I'll take Bent, if only to give us another quality strike option.

 

He's good at what he does, but what he does isn't what we need. He would probably be an excellent signing for a newly promoted team. I can see where you're coming from re. wanting options up front, but for me Bent alongside Cisse represents a regression- our much stated problem of linking midfield and attack, for example, would be exacerbated imo.

 

That's pretty much the same as I said - which is why I added that if it was a choice of Bent or no one I'd take Bent. Obviously I'd far prefer we sign the next Benteke instead but since that's not going to happen with the current management set up, we might as well have another decent striker as an option.

[TRon]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how shit the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of piss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the fuck are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become shit at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

How much did the kid from Belgium cost out of interest?

 

 

[Disco]

Would be interested to see contrasting posts on Cisse / Bent from posters given they're fairly similar.

 

Nominate Jack Flash's database.

[Barnes23]

Anyone turning their nose up at bent wants their head testing imo.

 

Would rather we didn't sign anyone.

 

Why's that?

 

First and foremost because I'm pretty sure Pardew will use him as a partner for Cisse rather than as a place on the bench instead of Ameobi. He's a very limited player (who we already have a superior version of in Cisse) who inhibits the teams he plays in and contributes nothing in terms of linking up play. Exactly what we don't need in terms of a striker/forward, and a signing which would signal a considerable lack of ambition, in terms of league position and playing style, considering Bent is a striker renowned for scoring goals in s*** teams but not being capable of performing for teams looking for something more ( e.g. his time at Tottenham,Villa under Lambert).

 

While I agree that he's not the right partner for Cisse, in his own right Bent is still one of the better strikers in the Premier. It wasn't too long ago he was commanding fees of £12-18m and he's still only 29. For the right price I wouldn't say no. While I'd prefer someone who would complement Cisse, if it's a choice between no one and Bent I'll take Bent, if only to give us another quality strike option.

 

He's good at what he does, but what he does isn't what we need. He would probably be an excellent signing for a newly promoted team. I can see where you're coming from re. wanting options up front, but for me Bent alongside Cisse represents a regression- our much stated problem of linking midfield and attack, for example, would be exacerbated imo.

 

That's pretty much the same as I said - which is why I added that if it was a choice of Bent or no one I'd take Bent. Obviously I'd far prefer we sign the next Benteke instead but since that's not going to happen with the current management set up, we might as well have another decent striker as an option.

 

Yeah - it's my belief that he'll be alongside Cisse in our eleven every week which makes me flat out against the signing. I'd agree with you if I thought he would be seen by Pardew as an option rather than a permanent fixture on our team sheet.

 

Goals up front, tackles in midfield, moments of magic - interest in Darren Bent is another symptom of Pardew's Prozone-addled brain.

[Mick]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how s*** the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of p*ss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the f*** are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become s*** at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

Bent is perfect for Pardew, we'll look for him every time we get the ball and we'll spend 4 days working on our defence.  Bent will be a lazy but safe signing for a clueless manager as we'll be able to get goals and he'll not take up a great deal of our resources.

[Decky]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how s*** the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of p*ss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the f*** are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become s*** at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

Bent is perfect for Pardew, we'll look for him every time we get the ball and we'll spend 4 days working on our defence.  Bent will be a lazy but safe signing for a clueless manager as we'll be able to get goals and he'll not take up a great deal of our resources.

 

Until he gets injured.

[merlin]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how s*** the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of p*ss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the f*** are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become s*** at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

Bent is perfect for Pardew, we'll look for him every time we get the ball and we'll spend 4 days working on our defence.  Bent will be a lazy but safe signing for a clueless manager as we'll be able to get goals and he'll not take up a great deal of our resources.

 

We will continue to lag behind the rest of the Top 10 PL sides as along as Pardew is manager.

You got this one spot on, Mick - as did Decky with his comment about Bent's injury record.

 

I bet Lambert is rubbing his hands at the prospect of Pardew's - er, sorry - Kinnear's phone call..

[Cajun]

The Bent argument is pretty straight forward.

 

He's an excellent finisher, and that doesn't really change no matter how shit the team he is playing in. The problem is that that is ALL he does. If you are going to play Bent, you have to shape your whole front six around him, because otherwise, he might as well not bother turning up

 

He won't do anything else, he won't drop back and fetch the ball, he won't hold it up, he won't lead the line, he won't do any of that, but if you want a striker who will play off the last defender, and apply the finishing touch, he's your man.

 

The problem is that football has changed an awful lot the last few years, and players like Bent are very much out of fashion. That's why Lambert didn't use him. He's not an idiot. When we were struggling for points, he dropped a player we'd paid 18m for and replaced him with a kid we'd bought from Belgium for far less.

 

There was lots of piss take from the likes of that brainless turd Lawrenson about what the fuck are we doing yada yada yada, but it was quite clearly the right decision, and the sign of a manager who was progressive rather than regressive.

 

Darren Bent's problem now is that most, if not all, of the top flight sides have moved on, and will not play a brand of football which will suit him.

 

He hasn't become shit at what he does. The problem is that hardly anyone wants a player who does what he does any more.

 

How much did the kid from Belgium cost out of interest?

 

 

 

£8m iirc.

[Varadi]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/newcastle-transfers-darren-bent-transfer-2048554

Manager Alan Pardew wants Aston Villa and England forward Bent to play just behind his No.9 Papiss Cisse, linking play and regularly chipping in with goals.

 

Of course he does.

 

Biggest load of shite I've read for a while that.

 

That is a worry mind. Although remember Pardew successfully converted HBA into a right winger so maybe he can make Bent into a number 10...

[Leazes1986]

Bent would be even less suited than Cisse at playing the number 10 role, absolutely no chance in gods earth.

[Dinho lad]

dat link-up play.