As we roll into another week of pre-season, speculation is running rife around the future of our Belgian striker Christian Benteke.
Courted as he appears to be, by a gamut of clubs, things have become slightly more agitated from a fan perspective, ever conscious of a fact that losing a key player such as Benteke is potentially disastrous.
On that statement, I can’t argue against the premise, understanding, of course, the key word “potentially”, and the variable nature of its ability to affect our future in possible terms.
The reality is, however, a little more clear cut if we are to move forward, regardless of what happens. The reality is this:
Benteke is just one player.
Obvious as the aforementioned statement is, it is a truism. Despite the role that his goals played in our survival, Benteke is a single cog in a machine, a piece of a jigsaw and, therefore, is replaceable.
Postulations that Aston Villa would have been gone without Benteke’s goals are, at best, completely impossible to prove. Sure, in pure statistics purposes, an absence of the goals he scored would have left us relegated, but a) that didn’t happen and b) in this alternate universe where we didn’t have Benteke, anything could have happened.
After all, it isn’t like we are suggesting that not buying Benteke would have meant Villa would have fielded ten men on a pitch. We would have played with an alternative buy who may, or may not, have been better. The reality is nobody can ever know because it didn’t happen.
Getting back to the point, we should be fairly understanding of the key Paul Lambert ethos that the new Villa is being built on – the team concept.
This idea is far from revolutionary, but its implementation is something of a deviation from recent Villa policy. Could anyone argue that teamwork – real teamwork – is anything other than a complete change from past strategies of the past few seasons? That trying to move from a single point of failure (aka the “supply Darren Bent to score” strategy) concept to a team spread of goals is sensible in many ways?
Before anyone decides to excoriate me for appearing to snipe at the use of Bent at the club, the reality is that my issue was purely with the underlying strategies that were in place, not Bent as a player.
Some may argue that the strategy merely shifted to “get the ball to Benteke” rather than “get the ball to Bent”, but the 40+ goals in all competitions scored by Benteke, Andreas Weimann, and Gabriel Agbonlahor showed that it wasn’t a one man team anymore.
Getting back to star strikers, Benteke is a more well rounded player, but the concept is the same – I can’t castigate Bent for being a solely focus of attacks and then say it would be great to build a team around a guy whose name is identical bar a three letter suffix.
Both Bent and Benteke are Ferrari-grade strikers, the difference being that the Bent Ferrari cost four times to run and only starts when the seats are in a particular position, whereas the Benteke Ferrari goes regardless. There’s a reason why we Benteke would cost £20m+ to buy and Bent will be lucky to fetch £5m net of pay offs.
Whatever happens, the truth is this:
If Benteke leaves, we will survive as a club.
I should clarify that statement to mean that should we sell our top goal scorer this year, we will, as a club, continue to operate. How we perform in league terms is, as ever, open to conjecture.
Last season, had we sold Bent, many would have gone crazy, but the reality is that his replacement did perfectly well, quickly shrugging off his “new Emile Heskey” tag.
If we sell Benteke, I expect the same furore but, ultimately, I expect a similar situation – any replacement will be consonant with regard to potential.
How we fare in the league in the 2013/14 season is, at best, a complete guesswork job because nobody has seen enough of this group, itself an ever evolving set of names, playing together.
We could do better if Benteke leaves, just as much as we could do worse. Same goes for if he stays.
The truth is that if he does go, we will be paid well for his deal, to the tune of £20m or more. Anyone who thinks that the money garnered from such a deal – or at least a significant chunk – would be anything other than reinvested in a replacement needs to think logically.
No, I am not saying that we would spend £20m on one player – largely due to the wages that would go with a £20m player – but, and this is a certainty, Benteke would be replaced by another body of similar potential, not a cheap replacement.
Such a similar replacement would be akin to Wilfried Bony, a player who topped the Dutch scoring charts last season and who was nearly at Villa Park a year ago.
Now this is where faith comes into play. Paul Lambert’s targets last season for the big spend striker were Benteke, Bony, and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang.
Of the three players, Benteke came within a goal of being the first Villa player to score 20 goals since Peter Withe, Bony took the Eredivisie golden boot, and Aubameyang won player of the tournament in the African Cup of Nations before being courted by some of the biggest clubs in Europe.
Which shows, if nothing else, that Lambert can find great strikers if the need arises, especially when he can pay substantial money for them. We won’t be defensively stable under Lambert in reality – Norwich conceded goals aplenty under him – but we will certainly be exciting and full of flair.
Which, after years of lacklustre football, suits me fine. I don’t expect to be challenging at the top just yet, but last season captured my interest far more than the prior campaign. We may not be much further from the bottom – bar a few places – but progress and excitement is a lot more than many other clubs face.
With or without Benteke, we will be good to watch. What happens this year is, as ever, still there to be written. I, for one, enthusiastically look forward to see how the latest chapter of a life long passion pans out because whatever happens there won’t be a dull moment.
The Author
