Bent was so bad in the first few months of this season that he remained our top scorer until a few weeks ago, when Gyan overtook him! He's since gone on to be the third top scorer in the league. However, who pulled the strings in that deal - I don't know. It may or may not have been Bruce's doing. I can see the wisdom of Bent going to a Brum hotel though - look at what happened to Andy Carroll's house! Who wants that hassle?
He had stopped scoring though, after a great start, and a fair percentage were pens. Believe me mate i know we were.would be better off with Bent, but it's no good us saying 'we told you so', cos we blatantly didn't. We all, or the majority, thought we'd manage without the lad. We haven't.
Well, with respect, Muff, I didn't. I wrote on here at the end of January ; "Make no mistake, we will miss Darren Bent." You're right to say he'd dried up a bit, but he'd just come back from a month out, and was having to learn what the hell Asamoah Gyan was about (I think we can agree that Gyan is just a weeeeee bit different from Jones!). I always felt he would come good though - he's so tunnel-visioned that he'll get goals wherever he goes. I miss him - a lot. Whether I'm prepared to blame Bruce alone for his leaving is a different matter. I'm not at all sure about that.
That's my point i guess mate, i don't think for a second that Bent leaving had owt to do with Bruce, less so his daughter. Would a new bumper pay rise have kept him? Probably would. In hindsight should we have gave him it? Probably again. Facts are he's gone now, and trying to pin it all on Bruce is bollocks. No manager on the planet wants to lose his best goalscorer, much less one of the best goalscorers on the whole continent! We can't replace dazzler, we need to find a different approach, basically.
Firstly, in Bruce's AND Quinn’s words, they knew full well that Bent wanted away in August. The only people it was a shock to, was us as fans in January, so lets not let the club off the hook here. They were in full ownership of the circumstances surrounding Bent. If I informed my boss in August that I wanted to leave my current company, it would be extremely remiss of her not to have a replacement lined up to ensure my leaving didn’t disrupt the company I work for. If I just told her in January and left in February then she would be excused any blame. Bruce was FULLY aware that Bent was unhappy and simply didn’t bother to prepare for the inevitable, or didn’t have the ability to make him stay until a replacement was found. It’s not a case of us having 2 weeks to find a replacement, Bruce had 6 MONTHS. It’s a case of gross mismanagement and absolutely a sackable offence IMO. Would I employ a manager that didn’t plan and prepare? What the **** are we paying him for if not to manage just such scenarios? His ONLY remit is that of managing the first team and he failed miserably in that cause. Bruce was either arrogant, naive or just plain thick. Either way, he should be relieved of a position he is quite obviously not fit to be employed in.
Spot on - and that's the problem. I always felt Bent and Gyan were a perfect pairing because they wouldn't get under each other's feet. Gyan would be free to wander and crack in the occasional scorcher without the pressure of scoring regularly - Bent was there for that. And Bent would thrive from a more varied type of supply than he'd got from Jones. But another Bent is precisely what we can't get .... so? I think, as you say, we have to find another approach - and I haven't a clue what it should be. Gyan and Welbeck did well together for a while. Maybe there are some pointers in there somewhere. I honestly don't know.
Cest, Clearly the lad was after more money, as the Turkish story proves. Is it not the case of a manager wanting to keep an asset rather than replace, and therefore the fault of whoever refused the pay rise, for a player who, bear in mind, dropped 30k a week to sign for us, who is the main man at fault in the scenario? I'm not a Bruce 'happy clapper', i'm far, far from it, but at the same token i don't think it's fair that he takes all the flak. No way did he wanna sell Bent, and no way could we replace a goalscorer that consistent like for like. Cutey, Gyan and Wellbeck are similar, mobile and good feet, there's a clue there maybe?
This is not a defence of Bruce. I tried to take some perspective on the situation he was faced with on the evening of Sun Jan 16th after DB handed in his transfer request. The leading scorers from play at that point were: 7 - Gyan 6 - Welbeck 5 - Bent Bardo had knocked in 1 or 2 and Hendo had managed 1 Welbeck and Campbell were due back from injury Bent looked to be a spent force compared with last season ã18 mill to ã24 mill (whatever it was) on the table, Bent physically already in B'ham and mentally gone months before then 14 days to find a stop-gap replacement There was no comparison whatsoever with the Rooney situation. Not saying he made the right call but I would certainly not demonise him for the call he did make.
Muff - It’s not the fact he was sold that’s the issue though. Whether it was Bents greed; Bruce’s daughter or the fact we wanted to cash in, it’s the planning, or more to the point the total lack of it, that led to our collapse since January. Bruce knew in way back in AUGUST that he was more than likely to lose his top scorer. He also knew Campbell would likely be out for the majority of the campaign. He knew we had only 2 other strikers at the club if Bent were to go and one of them was making his EPL debut season. Bent will have to face us next season and fans can make their judgment at that time as to how he is received. However, if you think that’s good planning and good management on Bruce’s part, then I am afraid we will always differ on its definition mate. Bruce should be absolutely pilloried for this lamentable decision that almost cost us our EPL status. Do you really want the kind of manager that operates with such wild abandon in charge of our club?
Agreed. Unquestionably he dropped a bollock not getting someone in though, i will put that squarely at his door. At the same time, didn't we get the impression he had to go cap in hand to buy Sess, as PSG rejected a loan plea initially? Maybe there was no money released for a replacement at that point, we'll never know this.
In everday jobs you give 1 month notice, so they can advertise your position, interview, you leave on the friday they come in on the Monday. Football has never been like that, what were they supposed to do in the summer, go to a club and say, "look, our best striker wants away, we may loose him in January, is it OK if we come in for XXX player when/if that happens" January comes, "Ok you said we could have him for such and such a price" reply, "bog off you just got 24 million for him, you are not getting our player for what we agreed", even though in real life, this never was an agreement, and coulnt be, the way football works. Even Bruce said they had someone lined up, but the finances didnt work, finances in my view are Short and Quinn to an extent, nothing to do with Bruce. Bent was in a Hotel Room in brum before any of us knew what was going on, and by the sounds of it, Bruce and Quinn as well, you cant just have someone lined up to replace him, if he decides to go, football has never worked like that, either you buy them before hand (which we didnt need them so would be surpless to requirements) or you just hope the club doesnt take your eyes out for the replacement, and it sounds like whoever we were after, the club tried to take our eyes out. It was a gamble that very nearly didnt pay off, but for you to say they needed a replacement ready (which may have been welbeck but he got injured) is laughable im afraid. (if it was someone from another club anyway)
I'm in full agreement mate that plans should have been afoot for a replacement, stop gap or otherwise, from the moment Campbell was ruled out, i'm not defending that side. All i'm defending is that i don't believe for a split second that Bruce wanted, encouraged or is in any way responsible for Bent leaving. As i say, i'm not in the 'Bruce in!' camp, but i'm not in the 'Bruce out' camp either.
Danny you are wrong with your scenario mate. Far from a January transfer request, Bent put one in AUGUST. Having done so then, don’t you think a clever manager would have been lining up a replacement? He had 6 months to find one not 2 weeks. Secondly, we now know that the club and Bruce knew that Campbell, far from being a few weeks away from playing, was in fact not likely to play again this season. The club has said this subsequently and the physios have backed it up too. Bents departure was the crux of our downfall and Bruce’s decisions not to plan ahead when he had the full facts of the situation back in August are unforgiveable in my eyes. He is either negligent or simply careless and neither is acceptable.
Remember the battle for Gyan Cest? We expected to pay ã9million, paid ã13million. A ã4million jump suggests the club was DESPERATE to get a big name striker in. Maybe this was intended as the replacement for Bent, at this point we couldn't have known Wellers and Frazier would be crocked, and we had Noble who was widely expected to break through even before the issues. Again, just trying to paint the full picture.
What clubs have to have are contingency plans and when they are required you make a move yourself. Footballers are fickle and can leave on the slimmest of whims. However, top, top managers either stand strong and say you’re not leaving until we say so (Whether Bent was in a hotel in B'ham or not is immaterial, as the club hold his registration and could have ordered him back very easily) or we have a replacement. Liverpool only let Torres leave when Caroll and Suarez were in the bag and look how they responded from January. Weak, feckless managers just cave in, shut their eyes and hope everything turns out ok in the end. I’m afraid that Bruce falls into the latter category mate in my eyes and whether people want to hear this or not, Quinny looks very weak in all this too if he caved in without a fight. The fact we didn’t fight for him is absolute proof that this was led by the managers desire to see him go as much as the player. If it were the board’s decision to sell wouldn’t Bruce have been incensed? Make no mistake, Bruce’s finger prints are all over this decision. However, as I have already said, it’s the fact no planning was in place to replace DB that he should be sacked for alone IMO. I mean, what planning was in place had Bent broken his leg in December or January? Would we just have dome nothingthen either? Bruce thought that with 31 or 32 points in the bag, he would let DB go and play the hand he had. The club took the money and gambled along with him and the result nearly cost us our place at the top table. Quinny has gambled twice now with the appointment of Sbragia and allowing Bruce to flog Bent without a replacement. My confidence in both has waned considerably in the last 2 years and in Bruce, its gone completely.
but they did have someone lined up, but the finances were not right, thats not bruces fault at all. and honetly, if i were the club and we had resurrected a players career, and he stuck 2 fingers up at us and wanted off (18 months later, its not like it was 4 years or somethin), then sorry, but **** off and dont come back, i dont care who it is, if he doesnt want to be here, then bye bye.
Bruce looked absolutely gobsmacked when him and Quinn faced the cameras together mate, crestfallen. The fact that the chairman was stood there with the manager could certainly be seen as contrived, by the CLUB, above the manager. There are weaknesses, clearly, in Bruce's make up, but while i respect your opinion, and laud the fact that you have given solid basis for your argument throughout, i can't point the finger at Bruce for the Bent sale, i just don't see anything factual to back it up.
One denominator that is missing here is that by January our attendances were far below expectations (despite our lofty position in the league) which will have undoubtedly affected our ability to compete at the highest level in the transfer market. Or is that Bruce's fault also?
