IIt's better to make a loss on Bent than a profit
Darren Bent
By glenda
January 9 2008
It 's better to make a loss on Bent than a profit on Defoe. Why sacrifice Defoe because you made a mistake on another player. Defoe is the better player and always will be. Why jeopardise this season because he has 18 months of his contract left. Would any other top club do that?
Defoe has been on fire recently and definitely adds to the team. Bent looks clumsy by comparison and is injured. It makes no sense to sell a top player like Defoe mid season.
The forward line has been the one positive area this season. Why take a hammer to it? Defoe has a better goals to minutes ratio than Berbatov. Can Tottenham really afford to sacrifice that?
Recent rumours suggest that Berbatov does not want to play with Defoe, you really cannot give such power to one player. the partnership of Keane and Berbaov failed miserable for the first few games of the season. It would not be wise the rely on it or either of them solely to mitigate for the defence.
Berbatov is under contract so he is no position to dictate who plays or not.
There could be a situation where Defoe is sold and thrives elsewhere, something that is highly likely and Berbatov is elsewhere anyway a lose, lose for the club.
Defoe is a natural goalscorer and if he plays everygame in a season he will get you 20+ goals.
we are already along way behind teams like Villa and man City and should he sign for on e of these teams they will push further in front of us. bare in mind that neither of these teams has a prolific goalscorer. he would go there and score for fun.
Its startling to think that he has only started 2 games this year and he still has 8 goals to his credit - he is only 6 behind keane who has played nearly every game.
For love nor money i do not understand how we can not accomodate a system that allows all 3 to play.