So far the choice is a relegation fight with McLeish or a relegation fight with Lambert, and that's an easy choice as well.
There was never seriously a relegation fight with McLeish last year. At the equivalent point in 2012 we were 6 points clear of the bottom 3 and it was fairly implausible that we could be caught over the next 5 matches. Fair play to McLeish, he had a jolly good go at doing the implausible and got us within 2 points of the drop zone but our early season form always put us in a strong position to withstand the effects of a typical end-of-season McSlump.
This season we have been in real peril of going down for most of the season, and still are . It may be more "entertaining" for fans of a certain disposition but it has also been crap, crap, crap to see our defence leaking so many stupid goals and our forwards struggling to score barely one per game. I don't really see how you would choose one over the other. Both seasons have been totally unacceptable.
As I've said many times on here, the difference was that mcLeish was taking us backwards. Everything just seemed to be getting worse and worse under McLeish and you couldn't see anything that would improve. I'd bet if he was here for 5 years we'd be no better off (probably relegated at least once in that time)
Lambert's taken a small step backwards, but I, at least, can see improvements in the future. i do genuinely feel like things will get better with Lambert in charge.
I never felt that with mcLeish
I agree with things both Briny and Steve said. This season compared to last has seen relegation as more of a feature all the way through it, whereas last year it only became a distant possibility in the final games. But Lambert despite all the pressure recently seems capable of building from the ashes of shite this year. As soon as we had a difficult spell under Mcliesh he grumbled, whether that was due to fan pressure or not we don't know but he never looked like revitalizing the team.
So far the choice is a relegation fight with McLeish or a relegation fight with Lambert, and that's an easy choice as well.
There was never seriously a relegation fight with McLeish last year. At the equivalent point in 2012 we were 6 points clear of the bottom 3 and it was fairly implausible that we could be caught over the next 5 matches. Fair play to McLeish, he had a jolly good go at doing the implausible and got us within 2 points of the drop zone but our early season form always put us in a strong position to withstand the effects of a typical end-of-season McSlump.
This season we have been in real peril of going down for most of the season, and still are . It may be more "entertaining" for fans of a certain disposition but it has also been crap, crap, crap to see our defence leaking so many stupid goals and our forwards struggling to score barely one per game. I don't really see how you would choose one over the other. Both seasons have been totally unacceptable.
As I've said many times on here, the difference was that mcLeish was taking us backwards. Everything just seemed to be getting worse and worse under McLeish and you couldn't see anything that would improve. I'd bet if he was here for 5 years we'd be no better off (probably relegated at least once in that time)
Lambert's taken a small step backwards, but I, at least, can see improvements in the future. i do genuinely feel like things will get better with Lambert in charge.
I never felt that with mcLeish
I agree with things both Briny and Steve said. This season compared to last has seen relegation as more of a feature all the way through it, whereas last year it only became a distant possibility in the final games. But Lambert despite all the pressure recently seems capable of building from the ashes of shite this year. As soon as we had a difficult spell under Mcliesh he grumbled, whether that was due to fan pressure or not we don't know but he never looked like revitalizing the team.