Jump to content

Darren Bent


DEL

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Bizarre.

I said why buy him if we aren't going to put him on when we need a goal.

My point vindicated. 

@lackofcomprehension

 

 

Wasn't you against signing him as well as Bris? Apologies if I'm mistaken, you all look the same from my keyboard 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't you against signing him as well as Bris? Apologies if I'm mistaken, you all look the same from my keyboard 

Yes I was.

You referenced my 'why why why' thread in which I clearly said I wasn't criticising his ability rather than disparity between signing him and not using him.

@lazylinker   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I was.

You referenced my 'why why why' thread in which I clearly said I wasn't criticising his ability rather than disparity between signing him and not using him.

@lazylinker   

I wasn't, just know you're a fan of your why why whys and it worked well in this situation as I was also saying why Del why, will need more than one cameo performance to "shut the haters up"

I also don't think you or anyone else "hates" Bent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he did. He was exactly what we needed yesterday because it allowed Ince to get into the game more too. Martin was awful yesterday. Martin is a good player but he isn't capable of playing well or effectively every game against every opposition. When he's having a bad one, Martin to me seems almost incapable of turning it around. He doesn't change it up. He gravitates towards the issues he is facing. If he is in someones pocket he won't try to be out of their pocket by changing his position or approach. His tactic is to continue but put the opposition into his pocket. Yesterday he was through on goal and should have done better. 3/4 times he didn't need to stray offside and did. Ince was the same. Should have at least scored once before his assist. 

Our forwards still aren't clicking and it's good to have someone in Bent, who's only aim in a game is to get himself into a goal scoring position. You have just got to put the ball into his path. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least try to use your own language with some kind of accuracy. 

You don't want to come across as a ******* moron, do you?

My first language is BSL. So please leave me alone 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he did. He was exactly what we needed yesterday because it allowed Ince to get into the game more too. Martin was awful yesterday. Martin is a good player but he isn't capable of playing well or effectively every game against every opposition. When he's having a bad one, Martin to me seems almost incapable of turning it around. He doesn't change it up. He gravitates towards the issues he is facing. If he is in someones pocket he won't try to be out of their pocket by changing his position or approach. His tactic is to continue but put the opposition into his pocket. Yesterday he was through on goal and should have done better. 3/4 times he didn't need to stray offside and did. Ince was the same. Should have at least scored once before his assist. 

Our forwards still aren't clicking and it's good to have someone in Bent, who's only aim in a game is to get himself into a goal scoring position. You have just got to put the ball into his path. 

Would you start Bent? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bizarre.

I said why buy him if we aren't going to put him on when we need a goal.

My point vindicated. 

@lackofcomprehension

 

 

 

Yes I was.

You referenced my 'why why why' thread in which I clearly said I wasn't criticising his ability rather than disparity between signing him and not using him.

@lazylinker   

Why are you using an @ symbol like you would a hashtag?! 

@Bizarre

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...