stanthemanisgod

I certainly wouldn't argue that Lambert hasn't got a clue. I think he's trying to make the best of a limited budget. It's that i'm not impressed with.

While defoe would be a good signing it doesn't seem right that we have to weaken our defence in order to get him.

Surely with our wage bill at around 50% and our small net spend so far it wouldn't be too much to sell Dunne, sign a cheaper replacement and sign someone like Defoe.

Now that would be a positive move for the club.

Also given the comments Lambert made about dunne only a few weeks ago I'd be surprised if he genuinely felt replacing him with Chris Herd was better for the club.

But that's the nature of his job, our wage bill is restricted w could sit here and argue why or whether it should be all day long but it won't change the way in which our business will need to be conducted.

It's all relative, yes selling Dunne buying a cheaper CB and still having money for Defoe would be the ideal solution, but I would still argue Dunne for Defoe is a positive move, albeit one that comes with a high degree of risk. But it's Lambert's job to manage risk.

The flip side of the coin is that we also need to give our young players a chance, lots of people happy to moan about the club selling Cahill without giving him a chance.

Your issue is clearly the finance side of things and that's fine but where do you go from there? It's not going to change if you ask me, and if we want to continue to have players like Bent on their wages then the rest of the budget has to be managed.

Personally I would get the replacements in - and then sell Dunne, Warnock , Hutton when the chance arrives.

Would you take out a second mortgage and buy your next house before having an offer on your current one?

Also you're making an assumption as to why the Vlaar deal stalled, could equally be something else, any restriction on transfers is likely to be wage related rather than fee related in my opinion, with any business being dependent on that.

But I think the apparent sell to buy policy is enough reason for people to doubt Lambert will bring in the quality we need in certain positions.

The need for wages to fall within a certain % of income isn't apparent it's absolute, and undoubtedly that is making transfer dealings more difficult.

But people are claiming the club is doing nothing, that Lambert and Lener are doing nothing and using that as a reason to get very negative. If you believe the club is not doing everything possible to sell the players we want sold and buy the players Lmabert want bought that's up to you but I think it's ridiculous.

But do I think Lambert will have the opportunity to sin all of the players he want's in this window? No, I dont, but I'm not about to start blaming him for that or throwing abuse at Lerner. As a club we are where we are, we have the wage budget we have, and dependent on UEFA that's not likely to change regardless of who owns the club. So as a supporter of the club I'm happy to contructively criticise things that are not owrking but would prefer to look for positives than bleat on about perceived negatives.

Quote:

What's happened so far is enough for people to form an opinion.

To be fair there is enough to form an opinion, the issue is when opinion is banded around as fact. For example it is fair to form the opinion that Lambo prefers cheaper unproven players from lower leagues and abroad based on his purchases to date. However, tomorrow we could sign Defoe or Johnson on big money and prove that to be only partially correct.

People could, and have, form the opinion we're not doing enough in the window based on the dealings thus far, but we could have 5 deals lined up proving it wrong. we could be doing nothing proving it right, and we could be getting turned down by everybody making it worse than anybody thought.

The only thing we do know for sure is that we don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

No it isn't. These are people who forget that by far the busiest week of a summer transfer windows is ALWAYS the final week. So any opinion at this stage is based on paranoia. I don't know why I'm even responding.

Torn between knowing any deal we can get for Dunne at this stage is good business, but it'll leave us weak at the back on paper. Hope if there's no direct replacement lined up that either Clark or Baker can make the step up.

Lambert's had a look at the squad and it's his call, his job on the line if it goes wrong. It would, however, be interesting to see if Dunne would have gotten anywhere the squad on Saturday if fit, or he'd have been outcast like Warnock and Hutton.

Big_John_10 wrote:

Any negativity is just what people think might happen from the facts and evidence they see.

This.

The only evidence we actually have is the transfers already completed. Whether you see them as negative or positive is up to you. But it seems to me that the majority of the negativity is coming from the perceived lack of activity.

We may, notice may, have 8 players signed up to be completed in the next 10 minutes. We may be doing absolutely nothing. We may have been turned by every other player we've approached since Vlaar. Not hearing anything is not proof of nothing happening, in fac the truth could be more positive or more negative than anything either side of this debate are coming up with but the only thing we know is that we know very little about what's going on behind the scenes.

There is no evidence till the window has closed.

Big John,

I think there's a difference between stating as I did that the wage bill needs to be jigged around, and stating that the club's a bag of shit and Lerner hasn't got a clue etc etc (as some have on other threads) because the wage bill needs to be jigged about. whilst being a valid opinion, not one I agree with, it adds little to the debate and is often argued to the extreme ignoring all reasonable counter points.

There have been a few people jumping onto this thread claiming Lambo hasn't got a clue etc because we'd be left with Vlaar and some kids. They have a point in that we'd be lacking cover but again the point is taken to the extreme.

If you put a poll on here asking who you'd rather have in the squad Dunne or Defoe I bet I could guess which way it would swing. Lambert clearly has some tough decisions to make, some will have negative implications some will have positive, but that's the nature of his job.

AVFCforever1991 wrote:

Still cant see us getting defoe..

They are going for a winger/Attacking Midfielder now. Willian/Isco type player.

Isco would be fantastic!!

Sadly think we're out of his league

Think he was talking about spurs?

Agreed.

He might just think Dunne is shit and we're better off without him.

But despite us being on the outside I think it's clear to most that there is pressure on the wage bill, I think it's therefore fair to speculate that the sale of Dunne could be to free up a rather large chunk of the wage bill for other areas, be it defence, midfield or another striker.

Personally I'd see a Defoe for Dunne exchange as a positive despite being worried about the cover in defence

I'd be very happy with this but IMHO the London factor will weigh heavily in any Defoe decision. 100% QPR or Reading ahead of us based purely on location.

Don't think you're wrong but I do think he'd still talk to us, down to Lambo to sell the dream. But yes a big ask to drag him and the wag out of London for the bright lights of Brum.

The Times claims Lambo has asked Faulkner for the funds to buy Defoe, could he need to ship out Dunne in order to free up the wages for Defoe?

But then again the club probably aren't doing anything or talking to any players or anything because the window may as well be closed already :winkold:

Just read in The Times that Lambo has asked Faulkner for the funds to buy Defoe.

Made it sound like it was dependant on the wages being approved, and also waiting on Spurs signing another striker before they'll let him go.

I'm bored of reading about people who are bored of waiting for Stephen Ireland to turn up, but that's not adding much to the debate either!

Obviously the manager has seen something in him that warrants a place in the side, so a few of us have debated what formation and combination of player would suit his natural game.

Perhaps stating who you would play instead and in what formation, or perhaps countering some of the points already raised my help alieviate some fo your boredom?

Whether you think it's Lerner being a tight arse, Lerner sulking after MoN, Lerner being sensible, or the club wanting to adhere to the UEFA rules should we ever get close to qualifying for a UEFA comp, our wage structure is restrained by our income.

Do I want to see us exposed at the back with only 1 'experienced' CB? No.

Can we afford to have average at best players on wages that are reported to be around £40-50k a week? No.

In fact we can't realistically afford to continue paying the likes of Bent £60-80k (lots of figures banded around) so something needs to be done. If Lambert believes we'll be ok then that's his decision he'll be the one that answers with his job if we're not.

I like this kind of statement almost as much as the why didn't we 'go in for' so and so moan.

Seriously what are people expecting a morning press release every day detailing the specifics of all ongoing player negotiations? We've already seen in the Vlaar signings how leaking information early can potentially **** up any deal being discussed.

Good points and I agree with a lot of what you say.

I ask myself the question - would I play Ireland in midfield in a 4-4-2? And I'd answer no personally meaning I wouldn't like him in the position in your second line up.

I think there's some mileage in this:

---------Bent----------

N'Zog---Ireland---Gabby

---Delph----El Ahmadi---

Provided Lambert is able to shove a rocket up both Charlie and Gabby's arses and get them playing the right way.

Failing that I think we need a proper No 10 and some better wingers.

The Sigurdsson link is interesting, don't think many would have predicted that, and can't see why he'd make it up on such a public forum.

The way we set up on Sat could and should be just as effective as 2 wingers banging in crosses all day, in fact more effective as Bent isn't prolific in the air.

But the tactics are still filtering through and it's not there just yet. I'm imagining a forward 3 of Gabby, Bent and N'zog with Ireland pulling the strings, and in theory that should work.

Sat was step 1 - get used to keeping the ball we now need to instill the confidence to make the movements and passes that get the attacking players into the right positions and move the opposition defence out of position to give Bent the time and space to score.

A lot will depend on how Lambert wants us to set up.

I think we're currently more suited to 4-3-3/4-2-1-3 type formation with Ireland in the middle and perhaps players like N'Zog, Bent and Gabby forming a front 3.

If that's the case a LB and another striker are key with a good DM as a nice to have.

Alternatively if it's going to look more like a traditional 4-4-2 then we need another winger or 2 because I dont think N'Zog is effective as an out and out winger and Albrighton isn't consistent enough for a whole season. We would also still need a LB and a second Striker and a DM would still be a nice to have.

Personally I think it'll be the former with 2 or 3 players targetted rather than the latter with 4 or 5 players targetted. Which would possibly fit with the players we're being linked with and all the talk of the importance of Ireland, N'zog and Gabby from the manager.

Thoughts?

The problem is we are stuck with him, no ones going to buy him off us because basically hes had 2 assist and 1 goal in 2 years of football and is on massive wages. I do realise we are stuck with him, and I do hope Lambert can bring that well hidden gem out, but I have my doubts. It just irritates me when some fans make excuses for him like "the Players he plays with arnt on his level". Steven Ireland's level lower midtable at best...so yes they basically are.

I think we have the players who are at his level, they just havn't quite got to grips with the movement required is my point. In order to be effective anybody in that position needs the ball quickly with players busting a gut to get into a position to receive the ball. IMO Ireland should be looking up and seeing at least Bent and 2 other players either side of him in a position to receive the ball in an attacking position. This means the defence have to think about who to mark, where to position themselves and doesn't allow them to double up on any of our attacking options.

That would be the same if we replaced Ireland with Robbie Keane, Sigurdsson, Michu or anybody you care to mention. The only significant difference being we might see more shots from deeper from another player, but that is an indication the movement is still not right.

On sat the build up was too slow, yes we kept position, but in areas of the pitch the opposition were happy for us to have the ball in, it allowed the defence and midfield to get organised, and the lack of any real forward movement from midfield meant that when Ireland did get the ball his only option for an attacking pass was he heavily marked Bent.

For me it's not about replacing the players that play around Ireland it's about them having the confidence to make the right runs, I think Gabby will help when he comes back, and could see us maybe employing a forward 3 of N'Zog, Bent and Gabby with Ireland just behind.

It's early days but in my opinion I think this will be a big season for Ireland and hopefully he'll sar to win some of us over.

I cant answer that, I havn't seen the pre-season games and I dont watch every training session. But I think he was one of the better players in the team on sat, and in terms of talent and potential he is definatley amongst the top 5 players in our current squad.

And yet the club is now performing no different to Doug's last season, has alienated a number of fans through lies to the fanbase, operating a sell to buy policy and little hope of actually managing to be anywhere near 'successful' in the near future.

So the only difference is that we're now losing £50million a season. He needs to sell up.

Seriously?

What lies has Randy told us, I'd expect you to have direct quotes and evidence proving them to be factually incorrect when quoted, hindsight doesn't do enough to prove you were lied to.

Any actual quotes from the club regarding a sell to buy policy? I've counted 3 signings this transfer window, and a bosman with only 1 player sold. Cost of incoming players exceeding the cost of outgoing. Strange sell to buy policy that is!

Please define what 'successful' is for a club with our income in light of the momey spent by the top 5 or 6 clubs and the UEFA financial Fairplay Regs coming into force.

didnt simply say anything. You quoted half a sentence.

The point is hes not worth the wages, and Lambert should be looking to get him off the books as we are seemingly operating within a strict budget.

ie a luxury we cant afford. Time has run out.

SIs reputation based on THAT season is such that someone will pick him up, it just means taking a loss on him.

The team is full of nearly men and potentially good players, but theres a fair few in our squad id rather see playing than SI.

And I would imagine that any chat regarding wage budget would have led the manager and to look at all the high earners and their value to the club, heck he might even be prepared o listen to offers but there's more to that the club taking a hit on the fee, Ireland would need to prepared to take another pay cut to move on and I dont see why he would while he's stil getting picked by Villa.

And he's stil getting picked because the manager thinks he''s one of th best 11 players available.

I think the neagaive and positive have got confused.

Look like 11/12 is the only year we can accuse Lerner of not spending any money, although even with that (negative) net spend the club still ran at a loss so he did spend some money anyway.

So hardly years of negative net spend eh Big JC?