Jump to content

ArteSuave

Established Members
  • Content Count

    2,046
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

ArteSuave last won the day on September 1 2014

ArteSuave had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,460 Excellent

About ArteSuave

  • Rank
    First Team

Profile Information

  • Interests
    ArteSuave

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Why are so many people so obsessed with pointing out stuff that show how far we've fallen? Yes, we've fallen very far. Nobody is happy about it but its the reality. Very sad. Much crying. Maybe its time to stop wallowing in self pity and get over it. Sacking the manager won't put more money in the transfer fund. I was going to write out a point by point rebuttal but reading through it seems like you've attributed every success he's ever had to blind luck. I've already done that dance, its shit. The rest is just the same nebulous, cookie cutter complaints some fans of every team in histor
  2. Soo 1 or 2 more wins in either season he's had here then? Not exactly unforgivable underachievement really. Maybe we have been a few wins short of our squads potential but we've clearly budgeted for 17th. If he'd got less value for money in the transfer market would it be more acceptable? I doubt it.
  3. The right skills for what? The last 3 seasons have shown Lambert is not out of his depth and has the right skills to keep a cheapskate team in the Premier League. He may not have the skills to achieve more than that but to pretend he is incapable of keeping a team in the PL is nonsensical when he's done it repeatedly and succeeded at every attempt in doing it. The empirical evidence (the non relegation of Lambert teams for every season he's managed in the PL) shows exactly the opposite of what you claimed it does.
  4. Based on the fact he's had his contract extended, he's clearly met whatever targets were set out for him. Based on the reported fee's we've paid and contracts we've handed out he's done a good job building a squad of reasonable players that are evidently capable of staying in the Premier League. Based on some of our highlights of the last few seasons he's able to win more than his fair share of matches against some of the best teams in the world. Based on improvements in our goals scored, goals conceded and points earned you'd be hard pushed to argue too strongly in his favour. The
  5. Holy ****, you made this hard to quote. So have we regressed or was that bullshit? WRONG. No he doesn't. Why would you bring up something as objective and as easy to look up and compare as win % and then be so wrong? To clarify, 21 ≠ 31. How is that relevant to our wins against them? They weren't patting anyone when we beat them. There's not been much improvement but as mentioned we win 50% more often (which equates to about 3 extra wins a season ).
  6. More so than under McLeish, definitely. Pretending we've regressed from when McLeish was here is ludicrous. Not higher value, better value. Massive difference. The cost of our first team (fees and wages) is much lower and they win more games. What constitutes a "deserved win" in your mind? We're never going to outpass a £300m squad over 90 minutes. We won games without incorrect decisions or freak own goals, that's not luck.
  7. He's been here more than two years, he's assembled a much better value squad than the one that was here when he got here and the previous style of play left no room for regression. We didn't even try to win games. Has anyone ever said this in real life? Ah yes. Start from the conclusion, work backwards and attribute any conflicting evidence to luck.
  8. Swansea. They won and scored more than us last season (and conceded less) and their good striker was injured less. But I'd rather watch Atletico than Swansea. I was also happier watching Villa than Norwich, Fulham and Cardiff (all had more possession than Villa). I want to see wins more than anything, then goals, then good dribbling, good attacking play, then good defensive play, THEN passing / possession. To be honest, safe possession when losing is my pet peeve. I hate 17 passes between our back 5 when we're losing. I'd rather we risked losing it trying to dribble past them.
  9. Is that a fact? Swansea were equal 2nd (56%) for possession last season and finished with 42 points (12th). Atletico averaged 49% possesion (10th) and finished with 90 points (1st). Better teams tend to have more possession but they also tend to have more expensive players and we're not a better team. I'm not saying that possession is entirely irrelevant but, depending on your style of play, more possession won't necessarily mean more points.
  10. It was a parody of earlier comments based on the fact we had 15 shots to 11, 6 to 4 on target and had 65% possession. Similar stats but the opposite way around to when we were actually winning against teams like Hull. We didn't actually dominate anything, we went behind early and couldn't claw our way back. Same as Hull.
  11. We dominated possession and chances against QPR. Are the a lot of people happier with that or would they rather we protected leads with men behind the ball?
  12. Source? I don't think we've spent £60m gross, let alone net. I don't think we've spent £50m gross tbh. It's more like <£40m net. SOURCE
  13. So you ask why anyone doesn't want him sacked, you get an answer but seemingly discount because you've heard it before. Fantastic. How many defences does he need? The last few years have been pure shit and yet he's clearly met his targets as he's still here. Changing him won't change our budget and it won't change our targets. Survival is the goal and anything more is a bonus. Edit - If we sack him we'll just have the same shit with a different asshole.
  14. Grealish's leg is thicker than Di Maria's torso. He seems to be coping OK.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â