do you want us to sign David Bentley?

[Liquid football]

I actually don't think, that in general play, Bentley is much of an improvement on Pennant. Pennant has always made far more assists than he is given credit for.

 

Goals are crucial though (pearl of wisdom by me) and Pennant seems to have a mental block when it comes to scoring goals (and even getting into goal scoring situations). Bentley being younger obviously tips the scales further in his favour too.

 

So basically, if we can't make a Torres/Masch level signing, i.e £14 million plus, i would be happy with Bentley.

[Stouffer]

I hate Illinois Nazis.

[Liquid football]

Also, i don't know where this myth of Pennant being slow comes from, he's just average.

[Liquid football]

I hate Illinois Nazis.

 

I hate bermuda shorts and captain birdseye.

[Rashid]

I have been in meetings all day so haven't been able to post (much to your pleasure) however, I have been thinking about this all day and just realised that David Bentley is this year's Darren Bent. Loads on the forum want him, some will even say he would be better than a Spanish superstar (Moschops stop hiding at the back) as he is English and adapted etc.

 

The realisty is, come 1 years time, Bentley will have moved to Tottenham, been shit and we will be over the moon with Quaresma.

 

;)

[Moschops II]

Darren Bent's a good player. The fact he's had a wasted season at Tottenham doesn't change that, and if we're looking at bringing in a pacy striker to take some of the weight off Torres next season, I'd be happy to see him brought in.

[stringvest]

Darren Bent's a good player. The fact he's had a wasted season at Tottenham doesn't change that, and if we're looking at bringing in a pacy striker to take some of the weight off Torres next season, I'd be happy to see him brought in.

 

he's the poor man's Torres. That's why I was perplexed by people saying 4-2-3-1 has always been Rafa's preferred setup. If that had been the case, he'd have spent 10mill on Bent rather than 18 million on Crouch and Kuyt.

[Dirk]

he's the poor man's Torres. That's why I was perplexed by people saying 4-2-3-1 has always been Rafa's preferred setup. If that had been the case, he'd have spent 10mill on Bent rather than 18 million on Crouch and Kuyt.

 

Another erroneous illogical leap. 2+2=5. He's played Miguel Mista and John Carew in a 4-2-3-1 but he had pace in the team from deeper positions, so it's easier to compensate the lack of pace in the striker. I really don't know how you can arrive at the conclusion that if he had planned to play 4-2-3-1 he'd have bought Darren Bent.

[Rashid]

Who was Pacey in that Valencia team Dave? None of them. Not even Vicente was lightening. And for the 10th do people really think Vicente played the inside left of a three?

 

As for Bent. Hmmm more "honest" mediocrity chops.

[Dirk]

Another thing that irritates me is people conveniently forget that we played 4-5-1 quite a bit before, with Crouch up top, Cisse on the right (a striker), Garcia/Kewell on the left, Gerrard, Sissoko and Alonso in the middle, with Gerrard bursting beyond Crouch. We did quite well that season. It's not entirely dissimilar to how we are set up now except we have Kuyt and Babel tucked in a bit more.

[Guest TK-421]

Who was Pacey in that Valencia team Dave? None of them. Not even Vicente was lightening. And for the 10th do people really think Vicente played the inside left of a three?As for Bent. Hmmm more "honest" mediocrity chops.

 

He's a more orthodox winger than Babel or Kuyt but he still got in the box, otherwise he wouldn't have scored goals.

[Paul]

I fucking love the fact that Rash spent all day thinking about his own opinion and therefore now sees it confirmed as correct, bordering on fact. Genius. I mean, seriously that is comic genius. Who wants to collaborate with me on a script for a radio comedy? Working title "A Rash All Over the Net".

[Moschops II]

Nothing mediocre about being an honest player, just like being a cheat doesn't make you Pele.

[StevieH]

Another thing that irritates me is people conveniently forget that we played 4-5-1 quite a bit before, with Crouch up top, Cisse on the right (a striker), Garcia/Kewell on the left, Gerrard, Sissoko and Alonso in the middle, with Gerrard bursting beyond Crouch. We did quite well that season. It's not entirely dissimilar to how we are set up now except we have Kuyt and Babel tucked in a bit more.

 

I can remember us playing a 4-2-3-1 formation & beating Arsenal 2-1 at Anfield when Mellor got the winner. I thought we were excellent that day and the formation worked a treat with Hamann and Alonso playing as holding midfielders, which released Gerrard to bomb forward and support Mellor with Pongolle and Kewell providing the width.

[Hazel Motes]

I can remember us playing a 4-2-3-1 formation & beating Arsenal 2-1 at Anfield when Mellor got the winner. I thought we were excellent that day and the formation worked a treat with Hamann and Alonso playing as holding midfielders, which released Gerrard to bomb forward and support Mellor with Pongolle and Kewell providing the width.

 

Those three words in the same sentence makes me want to rip out my eyes.

[stringvest]

Another erroneous illogical leap. 2+2=5. He's played Miguel Mista and John Carew in a 4-2-3-1 but he had pace in the team from deeper positions, so it's easier to compensate the lack of pace in the striker. I really don't know how you can arrive at the conclusion that if he had planned to play 4-2-3-1 he'd have bought Darren Bent.

 

He bought Kuyt. What for? To play the forward role in that formation? To play a wide role? I think the answer to both of those questions is 'no'.

 

He bought Crouch. What for? Plenty of people on here feel that Crouch is totally unsuited to any role in that formation.

 

I was using Bent as an (inferior but recently available) example of the sort of player that we have in the forward position.

[Dirk]

He bought Kuyt. What for? To play the forward role in that formation? To play a wide role? I think the answer to both of those questions is 'no'.

 

He bought Crouch. What for? Plenty of people on here feel that Crouch is totally unsuited to any role in that formation.

 

I was using Bent as an (inferior but recently available) example of the sort of player that we have in the forward position.

 

He's played Crouch in that role. Quite a bit in 2005/2006.

[stringvest]

He's played Crouch in that role. Quite a bit in 2005/2006.

 

Indeed. Crouch played most effectively in a 4-5-1 (which is essentially the same thing) because he's skillful, great at holding the ball up, and great at bringing others into play. But there are plenty on here who think that Crouch can't do it. My question was aimed more at them.

[StevieH]

Indeed. Crouch played most effectively in a 4-5-1 (which is essentially the same thing) because he's skillful, great at holding the ball up, and great at bringing others into play. But there are plenty on here who think that Crouch can't do it. My question was aimed more at them.

 

I don't think Crouch has the mobility to play up front on his own, and hasn't got the upper body strength either. However, his most effective game in a Red shirt came when he played up front on hos own with Gerrard tucked in behind when he netted 3 against Arsenal.

[Moo]

This summer I'd be delighted with Bentley, two new first choice pacey full backs, and a promising young striker.

 

Out would go Crouch (even though I love him), Voronin, Kewell, Aurelio or Riise and probably Pennant.

 

We'd still have many possibilities.

[Guest TK-421]

Indeed. Crouch played most effectively in a 4-5-1 (which is essentially the same thing) because he's skillful, great at holding the ball up, and great at bringing others into play. But there are plenty on here who think that Crouch can't do it. My question was aimed more at them.

 

My answer to that would be that as the sole striker there is a massive burden to score goals regularly. A player like Drogba or Torres can do this, but I'm not sure about Crouch. With Crouch playing in that position you have to rely much more on the supporting three to weigh in with the goals rather than supply them to the striker. Crouch gets his fair share of goals but would it be enough? I'd say he is more effective playing with another prolific centre forward alongside him like with Kevin Phillips at Southampton.

[MLB]

David Bentley is a good player.

 

Darren Bent is a good player.

 

Rashid is a biff.

[Rashid]

David Bentley is a good player.

 

Darren Bent is a good player.

 

Rashid is a biff.

 

Peter Crouch is a good player

 

Dirk Kuyt is a good player

 

Your point is?

[coop]

There is a huge difference between Torres been the lone striker and Crouch been the lone striker.

 

Torres runs towards the opposition goal for a starters.

 

Crouch can be effective as a lone striker but it requires pace all round him so he can bring them into play.

[Rashid]

There is a huge difference between Torres been the lone striker and Crouch been the lone striker.

 

Torres runs towards the opposition goal for a starters.

 

Crouch can be effective as a lone striker but it requires pace all round him so he can bring them into play.

 

In short Crouch NEEDS other players to play, Torres can do it on his own.