No its not a cop out, it is the one blindingly obvious fact that people are ignoring in order to lay the blame at Bruce's door. You cannot sell a player who has won you as many points as Bent and simply expect to maintain a good run of form, I just cannot believe anyone would think this would be so - explain why you think we could do this BruceysBeak. Who sold Bent - do you believe the geordie propaganda that Bruce had a falling out - rubbish, he was sold by Short as it represented a good return on the investment, this was "little club mentality" and just bad business, did they get this from the Bob Murray book of football ownership under the "lets sell Don Hutchison" chapter? To save a few millions we sold too quickly and without taking into account the affect on the teams moral - again a reason for the bad form, the boat was well and truly rocked and results suffered. We blinked first and after that Torres and Carroll deals were struck, inflating the cost of replacing Bent and the wages we will have to pay - effectively wiping out any financial gain - selling Bent was a horrendous footballing decision. I have no doubt Bruce being backed in the transfer market came with caveats, with one of them being every player has his price and Villa met bents price, which the board got wrong. Selling Bent has set us back badly, how much remains to be seen.
I disagree with you regarding Bent Mackemman....By all accounts Bent had been negotiating with Villa without the clubs knowledge before admitting his transfer request. It is my belief that I don't want players with so little loyalty or morals representing the club I love. Yes, it did have a detimental affect on our season, but to hang on to a player who can do what he did to us would have been wrong.
cant believe what I'm reading but nice to see we have a poster in the know, how else can you be so certain of your facts? I must admit I'm not ITK so can only give my opinion, one based on what I have seen. Did Short sell Bent, not certain because not there but I doubt it, making money has never seemeb his motivation.esent form yes, Did we lose an assett, on past form yes, on present form yes, on form for us this season no. Did the club have a choice, not in my opinion, he wanted out and to keep him would be wrong, we did that in the summer and the effect was there for all to see.
Do you all know Bent was after a move - your just as well informed as me, your just believing certain rumours to make the pill easier to swallow- I'm just taking a step back and analyzing the overall picture. Bent was after more money, if he got it from us he would have been happy to stay, he is a mercenary, money talks and ours would have smelt and felt just the same as Villa's. How many goals has he scored for Villa - probably more than anyone at Sunderland in the corresponding period, what has happened to villa's form since Bent went there? Bent was our talisman, if Bent was not so central to our success then why have we done so badly since he left, this is not conjecture, or based on me being "ITK" - just a fact. Did Short sell bent - how many times have you heard Bruce allude to the fact that every player has his price - again, Villa met Bent's price - it was set to low, again this is fact, it will now cost us more to replace him(with an inferior player no doubt). If he was unhappy he should have been allowed to go before the season started, not half way through a promising campaign. If we are all going to be pedants I will insert a footer to read" This is merely my opinion", however I thought this would have been patently obvious to you, a moderator, that as I'm not claiming to be in the know then I'm not. It is all getting a tad holier than though on this board isn't it.
Point out where i suggested Bruce decided to sell Bent? You can't because i didn't. What Bruce DIDN'T do, as MANAGER of the club, was try out different systems and tactics with the players STILL AT THE CLUB, which would have avoided the run, and which is what GOOD MANAGERS do, do you understand my point more clearly now? I'm not going to dispute that selling Bent knocked us a bit, but of you're telling me that after 2 years and numerous signings the players BRUCE BOUGHT aren't good enough to beat the likes of Stoke, WBA etc, then you are actually making an even more binding point for him to be sacked. He's bought well, but is tactically inept, if we signed ****ing Messi, i'd expect to see him left ****ing back. Clear enough? Or have you not been at the match and watched talented players played out of position and bumbling about being wasted? Bruce picks the team. I am not anti-Bruce, i AM pro Sunderland.
So 2 of the games u had bad look and could easily have had an extra 4 points, I just think u'd have been happy with 10th at the start of the year. And what with this 50 million quid thing, Bruce certainly hasn't spent that amount.
It's not bad luck, it's bad organization, and Bruce has spent ã50 million, bringing money in for **** players doesn't change the fact he's bought players in, does it now?
Utter tosh fromm BB being ahead at Spurs n Stoke 10 minutes to go. All ifs n buts that all teams could also say. What about Cattermole handball at home to Stoke. So delete those points for a starting point. Mackemman u know u have to be careful with certain super sensitive moderators. The top n bottom of your season was Bent going. I doubt Short forced the sale n Bruce probably wanted to keep him. Once he left he has clearly shown what i have said for years- theonly difference between the also rans is goals and only a top striker gets these goals. Since he left you been in freefall and this is not Bruces fault
Christ, this has turned into a me against Bruce thread, when it's clearly not where i started. I state, clearly, that Bruce, as the manager, a manger who has built a squad of players that should be capable of coping without Bent, has to take responsibility for the recent run, and i'm sure he would, if you asked him. I said i'm ok with him getting another season, i said i appreciate he's built a better squad, but players out of position and tactical ineptitude has to stop!
But Bent going SHOULDN'T have been, there are more than enough capable players left at the club to be winning games, if there isn't then that again comes back to the man who brought them players in, yes?
aye manageordial, ivory tower syndrome, what was hoped to be not 606's strength is becoming its weakness, its all getting a bit parochial and clicky with little room for an alternative view. When you have to start and end every post with "this is my humble opinion" its taking itself a little bit to seriously - and based on my experience this afternoon, thats how it is getting.
Bent - ã10million Gyan - ã13million Cattermole -ã6million Cana -ã4million Sessegnon -ã6million Angleri - ã2.5million Campbell -ã6million Turner- ã2million Riveros -ã1.5million Titus - ã1million. Off the top of my head. There's more i'm sure, but that's ã50million for starters, bright spark.
I'm not denying anyone's right to an opinion, i am expressing mine. You can't have it both ways, do you not see how ridiculous your comment is, when you're chowing on that i'm having the gall to give my opinion? I'm not saying you have to ****ing agree with it, but i'll argue my side, as i believe it.
BruceysBeak, was Welbeck injured when we sold Bent - I'm sure he was - why did we not go for someone like James Beattie - a big lad, good in the air - just as a short term replacement, just my opinion. In my opinion, Bent scored so many important goals, even this season - I'm sorry but it would have been a great achievement to continue the early season run of form without Bent, regardless of what sort of form he was in - he got goals. I have enjoyed my time on not606 until this afternoon when I think I have taken a kicking and treat with contempt for no reason than for not saying "in my opinion", I had the greatest respect for the mods however they have been trite with me this afternoon. Well done lads.
He got injured against Villa, but was expected to be fit in 2 weeks initially. We should, absolutely, have brought in a stop gap, but we didn't, and if you feel i've somehow had a go at you, i'm sorry, but i defended my own opinion in this article that was being questioned, that's the meaning of the word 'debate'. If someone disputes a point, you put your feelings across to try and justify your opinion, which is all that i've done, i'll never try and deny someone their opinion, but if i don't agree with it, i will argue with my side. That's the point, ain't it?
Explain how my comment is ridiculous BruceysBeak(again trite), don't just dismiss it and say it is so. Read my previous posts - I'm not normally an argumentative or a disagreeable type - I respect your opinion and I'm trying to debate it with you - however when a anybody, lest a "super moderator" simply cuts and pastes my comment and responds with "ffs" then I shake my head.
