nick76

I think as villa fans we generally think on the negative side so I'm not sure we ever over rate our players as such. Always wondered why people loved Alan Wright, always thought he was shit, and was happy when he wasn't in the team and then eventually left us. I always felt we were vulnerable down the left side with him. I was a massive Angel and Savo fan but I know many that thought they were over rated by some villa fans.

Totally agree It was definitely Allan Disagree slightly I believe it deserves it's own place 1. McGrath 2. Southgate 3. Mellberg 4. Mellberg's beard 5. Laursen

Think he is distinctly average but today in the first half he was really impressive

KEA has played really well, why take him off?

60% possession for villa as well apparently.....wow! Come on keep it up!

But indignantly demanding that someone you're disagreeing with post the particular stat that supports your own position isn't petty? If you've got an argument to make, make it yourself. The basic disagreement between the "Lambert apologists" and the "Negative Nellies" mostly boils down to their interpretation of what rebuilding entails and what's the best approach in the long run. It's clear Lerner, Lambert and Faulkner all agreed it's best to start from scratch with young (mostly), hungry, passionate players on similar (mostly) wages to bond and get the high-earners out the door. This approach required spreading the transfer kitty and salary funds among more players, with the obvious sacrifice in quality and greater risk of signing flops. It also means risking relegation for a season or two until ther funds can go to quality vs. quantity. But if the plan works, the club is in a good position financially and can start rewarding the players who did well with better contracts and replacing those who didn't with better quality at higher wages without blowing the wages out of the water again. If you accept this approach, then the club's record since Lambert took over isn't necessarily the most important measure of success at this point in the project, as long as the club stays up. At the moment, you could argue that Lambert has been successful, if only by a margin, against this measure. If the rest of the plan plays out (relegation is avoided, money from clearing out dead wood is made available for better players in the summer), next season is the real test of both Lamber and Lerner. Football style and results need to be significantly better and showing signs of continuous improvement. If you don't agree that a total clearout was necessary, as a number of you don't, then of course it's hard to view Lambert as being successful. As you've argued, the transfer funds could have gone to fewer players of higher quality and results likely would have been better to date. The question is whether the club would be better posed for a resurgence after this season under this scenario. You clearly believe so. Team togetherness and the ability to build up from a good foundation, both football-wise and financially, would probably not be as good but maybe results would be similar without having had to go through 2 seasons of relagation risk and unattactive football. We may never know. Lambert was clearly brought on board to do the job in a particular way. Slate him for choosing to go along with the plan if you want, or slate Lerner for hiring a manager to take this approach. But given the job he was asked to do, I don't think Lambert's been too bad. Thanks for the advice but as regular readers of this forum would tell you I have continually put my argument forward and that argument is not exclusive to just the above stat. If however you feel that asking the said poster to be balanced in his argument by producing a stat showing Lambert's overall record with us is petty please avail me of another stat showing Lambert's overall performance which in your opinion, isn't? Secondly it isn't clear at all that the Chief Executive, Chairman and manager made a collective decision on a policy of youth. What is clear though is that the Chief Executive has already stated that Lambert was given a budget and it was up to him how he spent it. That is further substantiated by who we've been linked to and who we've signed this season. The fact is that with one relegation battle behind us under Lambert and losing six out of the last eight this season Lambert has realised that his youth policy has failed and is now targeting more Premiership experience which he should have done from the start. Several posters on this site including myself stated that under this policy we would struggle and I don't think to date we have been proven wrong. playing poor football I agree, looking over a short period of games looks bad but struggling we aren't. Half way through the season which is a fair reflection of us because we had played each team once and we were 11th in the league and that's with missing Vlaar and Benteke for major parts of it. That's improvement on last season and 11th isn't struggling.

2nd half performance we need more of and a couple of additions will help with this

that's what baffles me

Ohhhhhhhhhhh

Stupid thread!

rubbish!!! we've played half the season thus every team once so 11th is a fair reflection of us. Being short sighted is viewing our position over the next two games against two of the best teams around, so we should be viewed at the end of the season should be the next time we really see our position. otherwise you are weighting our position after playing the bigger teams more, which while it suits your argument is not a fair reflection or as you put it a false position.

really? mind numbing boring I agree, out of the FA cup agree but he's not going to lose his job because we are 11th in the league on a piss poor budget. I think he's miles away from even the thought of getting the sack in Lerners mind, so don't pin your hopes on that

well said.. this talk of lambert getting the sack is ridiculous i say. he's doing a decent jobs so far and IMO will only get better now he has a squad. just a little tweaking here and there with better quality and we'll be a decent team. i really think were not that far away yep I agree, can we rename the thread please mods?

we wanted experience didn't we, 75 year old woman has experience lol

Thank god for that....woohoo!

Blandy you are on fire today, some great posts!

8 hours into the window and still nobody signed!

wow far better than what we have now. imagine a fit Benteke upfront with Angel! Bouma at left back, Barry who if I remember was playing left centre back at the time was now in our midfield with Milner, and then Mellberg and Laursen at Centre back.

If 50000 Villa fans all put in £5k, then we can become a supporters co-op and buy him out I'll even put in £10k so I can be on the board ! then what about the 30m per year for transfer fees, signing on bonuses that us the fans demand? Where is that money coming from

are you really talking about Bannan like that, he's hasn't looked a better player at all. Bannan will always be that player who looks better on a highlights reel and even then over a very long period or short video clip.....98% ineffective, liability or didn't even know he was playing and 2% wonder pass or little flick

Given our run rate is 1 point per game I'll say 5 points. A shock win against a big boy and two draws

not a one man crusade, just the arguments keep coming back are the same....less of a debate, more of a repeating of the same arguments and getting nowhere so I got bored and backed out of the argument

Luna- loses the ball and position all the time Tonev- is he really a pro player Kea- no better than Bannan Bennet-Showed nothing specail now been dropped Bowery- better than Delfonso, Questionable So yeah we have a much better team after 40 million! and of that 40m how much did those 5 players cost? Exactly!

Very average midfielder, would hope if we do buy a midfielder he gets pushed down the pecking order

Ermmmm No!