Dave Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 £2m, unbelievable. What a tight bastard of an owner we have, sickening. A lot of problems could be solved today if Twat face Ashley's helicopter and that chirpy faced Jim Whites 92 live chopper were to have head on collision. I might actually enjoy transfer deadline day then. Like. You both need help if that's the case. You thinking sabotage? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hobshobs Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 As much as I don't want him here it's pretty s*** from our board. He is clearly our top target and possibly only target yet they are not prepared to even try to bring him in. You don't get someone like Bent for £2m. Bent is pretty much viewed as Shola is by any football club that is run with any degree of professionalism. They are not wanted. Been little or no interest in Bent and Shola is available but again no interest. Why? Because they are both a complete waste of space. Everyone can see it except Alan Pardew and the cheap option hunters at NUFC. Dummett and Sammy played well at St. Mirren (yes the mighty St. Mirren). Keep it up says Alan Pardew and you could both be in line for Manchester City away. You honestly couldn't make this stuff up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 £2m, unbelievable. What a tight bastard of an owner we have, sickening. A lot of problems could be solved today if Twat face Ashley's helicopter and that chirpy faced Jim Whites 92 live chopper were to have head on collision. I might actually enjoy transfer deadline day then. Like. You both need help if that's the case. You thinking sabotage? I am now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. So we don't have a value set for players then? And the line in the Journal 'after it emerged the club were only willing to pay £2m', only applied to Cisse staying? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yeah, I think if Cisse looked like going we'd up Bents trousers faster than a ferret up a drainpipe. Now, after dangling him on a string for weeks, we met his representatives almost as a matter of courtesy rather than any real attempt to push through a deal. But fuck it, if they accept, bonus! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. So we don't have a value set for players then? And the line in the Journal 'after it emerged the club were only willing to pay £2m', only applied to Cisse staying? Do we need bent Now Cisse is staying? Would we need bent if Cisse left? Our situation effects our valuation on players, if it didnt we are doing something wrong, it shows inflexibility. Now had this been the other way round, being desperate and not showing flexibility in pricing then I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem understanding or accepting it as the club would be doing the wrong thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. So we don't have a value set for players then? And the line in the Journal 'after it emerged the club were only willing to pay £2m', only applied to Cisse staying? Do we need bent Now Cisse is staying? Would we need bent if Cisse left? Our situation effects our valuation on players, if it didnt we are doing something wrong, it shows inflexibility. Now had this been the other way round, being desperate and not showing flexibility in pricing then I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem understanding or accepting it as the club would be doing the wrong thing. So it's just a guess based on nothing, then? According to past chatter, Bent was coming to partner Cisse. We just forgetting that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LucasUnger Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I would take bent as a bonus as a presholaonbench bonus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. So we don't have a value set for players then? And the line in the Journal 'after it emerged the club were only willing to pay £2m', only applied to Cisse staying? Do we need bent Now Cisse is staying? Would we need bent if Cisse left? Our situation effects our valuation on players, if it didnt we are doing something wrong, it shows inflexibility. Now had this been the other way round, being desperate and not showing flexibility in pricing then I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem understanding or accepting it as the club would be doing the wrong thing. So it's just a guess based on nothing, then? According to past chatter, Bent was coming to partner Cisse. We just forgetting that? It's my opinion yes, which is reasoned and based on what has happened and what we are hearing. If you want to put your own forward based on the same information and call it fact please feel free to do so, but you'd rather pick holes at others from your ivory tower wouldn't you? Is alright for you to base your opinion on past chatter but not for me to base it on actual bids and things that have happened, ie Cisse staying. Fuck off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If we sign gomis and Remy I'lll be happy to have missed him but if we fail will be stupid As Toon's Taylor has said, it doesn't seem beyond the realms that Bent was our plan if Cisse went. We still like him, and might put in a nominal bid, but he is not a priority any more. If we were only going to spend £2mil on him, he was never even going to replace Cisse. Or if Cisse went was he then worth more? Yes, if Cisse was still refusing to play we'd be in at a higher fee, if Cisse was set to leave even higher again. So we don't have a value set for players then? And the line in the Journal 'after it emerged the club were only willing to pay £2m', only applied to Cisse staying? Do we need bent Now Cisse is staying? Would we need bent if Cisse left? Our situation effects our valuation on players, if it didnt we are doing something wrong, it shows inflexibility. Now had this been the other way round, being desperate and not showing flexibility in pricing then I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem understanding or accepting it as the club would be doing the wrong thing. So it's just a guess based on nothing, then? According to past chatter, Bent was coming to partner Cisse. We just forgetting that? It's my opinion yes, which is reasoned and based on what has happened and what we are hearing. If you want to put your own forward based on the same information and call it fact please feel free to do so, but you'd rather pick holes at others from your ivory tower wouldn't you? I will. We're pathetic. The Bent idea was obviously laughable from the offset and if Cisse had gone we'd still have not got Bent. Not that I ever wanted him. This club is being run on the wind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Why are you always so angry TT? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 As much as I don't want him here it's pretty s*** from our board. He is clearly our top target and possibly only target yet they are not prepared to even try to bring him in. You don't get someone like Bent for £2m. Bent is pretty much viewed as Shola is by any football club that is run with any degree of professionalism. They are not wanted. Been little or no interest in Bent and Shola is available but again no interest. Why? Because they are both a complete waste of space. Comparing Bent to Shola? Is this real? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Spectacularly false comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Why are you always so angry TT? Because the same people who assume jump on those for doing the same thing. It's fucking bullshit. Place is full of wankers ATM. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Quite clear that Kinnear is there mainly to undermine Pardew then, this is exactly what they did to Keegan when he identied his targets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobby_solano Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 a £2m bid is a bit of a piss take mind, i can see how villa would tell us to do one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Quite clear that Kinnear is there mainly to undermine Pardew then, this is exactly what they did to Keegan when he identied his targets. That's some assumption based on something that could be nothing. Nope, not allowed round here. Must now sarky laugh at you like you are a moron... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 TT is livid :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 a £2m bid is a bit of a piss take mind, i can see how villa would tell us to do one Erm... We haven't bid though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Darren Bent is now 29 years old, and didn't play any football for a whole year essentially. It's not like the guy is coming off of a decent season or anything! Their treatment of Bent last season shows they didn't think that much of him themselves. Definitely would have started off with a very low offer too. £2 million? Why not. As a few have said already, Lambert's actions have done Villa no favours, as far as moving on the player for anything resembling a half decent price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Why are you always so angry TT? Because the same people who assume jump on those for doing the same thing. It's f***ing bullshit. Place is full of w*****s ATM. I'm not meaning to jump on you, fwiw. I just think it's important to highlight the most probable situation when it comes to the running of the club. It really doesn't sound like we were ever going to spend more than £2m on Bent going on what we've been given. We could say we would have paid more if we go on nothing but pure conjecture. It's because it's always the same. I wouldn't have wanted us to pay over 5/6 for Bent, ideally 4. But £2m, man? You know how fucking stupid that makes us ALL look. When people talk about the shoddy practices of Newcastle United, they talk to us about it. We take the laughs, we take the grief and the ridicule. We're dragged down in this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Darren Bent is now 29 years old, and didn't play any football for a whole year essentially. It's not like the guy is coming off of a decent season or anything! Their treatment of Bent last season shows they didn't think that much of him themselves. Definitely would have started off with a very low offer too. £2 million? Why not. As a few have said already, Lambert's actions have done Villa no favours, as far as moving on the player for anything resembling a half decent price. Some good points there, didn't realise he was 29. 2 million for a player they no longer want and barely played for a season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 TT is livid :lol: Just sick of the BS which imo is dragging the forum down. Its supposed to be about discussion, but no one is allowed to assume anything unless its either fact (which we hardly get any of from the club) or against the club, then everyone can have a good moan. What's the fucking point man? Might as well close the forum down. 2013: The Summer of no assumption. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now