Ghost_of_Pongo_Waring

I'm surprised that so many people think Fulhams last game will be easy because it's Palace.

It's a local derby and Palace will have the chance to relegate Fulham. I can't see them being 'on the beach' for that one.

Hopefully it'll all be academic after we win on Saturday.

It's not a lap of honour, it's a lap of appreciation.

It's the players thanking the fans for their support not the other way around.

Whether it's a good thing for them to do on Saturday, I'm not sure.

 

 

Point taken, but I think he does know, but the players don't, or if they do, can't do it regularly. Agree on the consistency.

 

If the players Lambert brought could play at their best consistently they would not be here because we wouldn't have been able to afford their fees or wages.

 

Lambert hasn't done a great job, and has made plenty of mistakes, but rebuilding the whole squad, on an average £2million per player, while keeping us in the Prem has not been an easy task.

 

Agree with the second line, but the first, not really, but I take your point. Again it's hard, but when he bought them, if they'd turned out to be capable of it, then they'd still be on the same wages, and we'd have bought them. He couldn't know, of course, and it wouldn't be likely that they all would work out like that, but fewer than we'd like have.

He's bought too many young 'uns, perhaps because that's al lhe could get, but the lack of experience ot cajole and marshall them has been telling, IMO.

 

What I meant Blandy was that if they were capable of playing at their best consistently in the top flight then they'd have already been flagged as an exciting prospect, as Delph was, and the fees and wages would be in keeping with that.

Even when you've got a prospect like Delph it takes time for them to settle and adapt. There were plenty who had written Delph off, even before his injury problems, which of course disrupted his progress.

Consistency is the hardest thing to achieve, well being consistently certainly good is.

H'es not though, hes been training for a few weeks. Havent got the link but im pretty sure lambert admitted not to long ago that hes training with the kids.

He's recently started light training. There's no way he'll be anywhere near match fit before the end of the season.

Point taken, but I think he does know, but the players don't, or if they do, can't do it regularly. Agree on the consistency.

If the players Lambert brought could play at their best consistently they would not be here because we wouldn't have been able to afford their fees or wages.

Lambert hasn't done a great job, and has made plenty of mistakes, but rebuilding the whole squad, on an average £2million per player, while keeping us in the Prem has not been an easy task.

 

Poorest start to the season will probably be next on his checklist

Didn't we tick that one off last season?

 

Without any sort of standard definition of what a season 'start' comprises that stat is largely meaningless. It's used by media to pad out reports/articles and some were even using the worst start since ... (insert year here).... rubbish nearly half way through the season.

 

Ok I concede to you on the figures, but what about the rest of my post? How does £1.2m negate that argument in any way?

It's not just Helenius though is it? He has spent 'little' amounts on quite a few players who are now surplus to requirements. When tallied up, such money could've gone to much better use.

Martinez got Wigan relegated on a similar budget to what Lambert has worked with...

Simply not true. Martinez averaged a spend of around £12m per season during his time there and that's not even taking net-spend into account which links to the fact that they lost their best players every year.

 

Martinez was building on the squad that was already there. Lambert has had to replace a squad.

 

 

 

 

Why would new owners give a Manager that has achieved 2 relegation battles in his 2 years another year? It doesn't take a genius to realise Lambert is a bad manager.

In your opinion.

It's a fair point, it doesn't reflect well on Lambert, he has hardly distinguished himself here.

I'd be very surprised if the new owners didn't remove him and bring someone else in.

Its been done to death though hasn't it. You can't state he's a bad manager when working under the contraints he has, he's got faults but who hasn't? Its just sad that people can't recognise anything he's done for the club.

Replacing McLeish and looking doomed. Having to ship out players and rescue the wage bill yet still keep us in the league is in my opinion a very good achievement. You have to spend at least £30 mil a season just to stand still in the prem. Many other clubs fans recognise the job he's done yet our own fans would rather knock him.

 

Then why don't the Lambert lovers recognize the job McLeish did for us? Because they have basically achieved exact the same, exept Lambert got another year and haven't progressed.

 

Except they haven't achieved the same at all.  

McLeish had an expensive and highly paid squad to work with. Lambert had to replace the expensive, highly paid squad and replace them with lower paid players whose average cost is about two million pound per player.  All that while remaining in the Prem.

So that aside then you feel the away support at the Palace game were chanting Lambert in?

That's rather a bizarre comment. Where has anyone said that?

To be fair for the sample size, villa fans, even 300 respondents is way more than a market research company would use and happily extrapolate the results.

It's not just sample size though, in my opinion (before anyone else takes umbrage),

If such a poll was taken at a game, for example, it'd be much more representative, and have a larger cross section of Villa support, than that which relies purely on the minute section of our support that post on message boards.

The poster asked for evidence to suggest that the majority wanted Lambert out. I gave him evidence to suggest as such or do you want me to quote the youtube video at the Palace game? Maybe that too wouldn't be suitable?

I'm fully aware of why you posted the link. If you think that can be considered 'evidence' of the feelings of all Villa fans then you're perfectly entitled that opinion. Nowhere have I said, or implied, that you aren't allowed that opinion or that you shouldn't express it.

However I'm entitled to disagree, which I do, and I stated, quite reasonably, why I disagreed.

Ah sorry. My mistake for thinking that one way of gaging opinion on a villa topic would be to quote a poll from Villa fans. In future I'll just quote something pro Lambert to appease you.

To appease me?  Where have I made any demands?

I don't think a poll that takes such a narrow slice of Villa support can be considered to represent the fan base. Am I not allowed to post that opinion then?

 

 

 

To all those Lambertiles out there, who is wondering why the majority of fans wants Lamberk out.. here are the main reasons, at least in my opinion:

It's a real shame you ruined a potentially solid and well-reasoned argument with the childish bolded words.

I'd also contest your statement that the majority of fans want Lambert out. Where is your evidence for this? This is certainly not my experience.

 

http://www.heroesandvillains.info/forumv3/index.php?topic=51442.4710

 

Graph at top of page. We should do a poll here as well.

 

The vast majority of Villa fans do not post on message boards so any poll can hardly be considered to represent the fan base.

That poll has 363 votes. If you had a poll on here and on TBAR and added them to the H&V poll you'd still be looking at less than a 1,000 people.

 

They weren't responsible for this were they they ?

 

 

Who knows.  I've seen this posted a few times and i still am not able to read it even when i zoom in.  Anyone a better copy?

 

I wouldn't bother it's obviously fake anyway.

 

 

Just imagine the financial hit Sunderland will take if they are relegated, with player contracts similar to what we had under O'Neill, Fulham are the same. Surely safeguarding the future of the clubs finances was and is a sensible idea. Sure, we have risked our premier league survival, which could be counter productive, but at least we wouldn't be hit as hard if we did go down. Plus, Lambert has spent £50m, it's not like we've not spent at all.

 

 

I would have agreed, well somewhat, however the actual accounts point to the fact the wage bill has increased, not been reduced. 

 

The accounts show the first year, not the picture now. It's obvious that originally there would be some increase in wages while the high earners, that we're trying to offload, and the cheaper replacements were pretty much all on the books together.

Now with a number of them off the books, and hopefully the remainder to follow, our wage bill should be far healthier.

Lambert must have known the budgetary constraints when he took the job and must have agreed to them.

So why has he apparently been wasting his time scouting and bombarding the board with requests to buy players he knows they won't stump up for?

Wouldn't he have been better off drilling the squad he could afford to play a little more consistently, especially against the lower-table clubs we should have beeen picking up more points from?

Perhaps the financial constraints are worse than he was lead to believe?

If he buys cheap players he's at fault, if he trys to buy more expensive players he's at fault?

 

Why is he either a liar of stupid? That's a pretty childish thing to say. 

 

He gave an interview where he claimed that the reported costs of his signings were rubbish.  The accounts reveal that they were actually pretty well spot on.

 

He was asked in an interview about the cost of a couple of his signings and he said the fees were lower than reported. It is quite possible for the total amount spent to be right AND Lambert to be correct on the players he mentioned.

Still, lets not let that get in the way of childish & cowardly abuse.

There's nothing to say we are going to sign Holt or are even considering signing Holt.

It's not "a sign of how low we've sunk" because somebody makes up some scenario in their head.

I haven't seen this linked here. Apologies if it's already posted

http://financialfootball.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/aston-villa-the-three-year-plan-analysed/

Aston Villa – The Wages Battle

It only made sense that I start this blog off with a report on my beloved club, Aston Villa. The end of the 2013/14 season is fast approaching and Villa are amidst one of the tightest relegation battles in years. Minds are starting to worry (again!) and the promised rebuilding of the squad seems all but a distant memory.

Why Lambert?

So, why did Randy Lerner and Paul Faulkner decide that Paul Lambert was the right man for the job? He had certainly made a decent name for himself, taking Norwich from league 1 to the top flight in just 3 seasons but is one impressive season in the premier league the real reason?

A quick comparison of Aston Villa and Norwich’s financial accounts for the 2011/12 season, Lambert’s last in charge of Norwich, shows what is most likely the real reason for his appointment. During the 2011/12 season, the wage/revenue ratio of Aston Villa was the highest in the league at 94% and there are no prizes for guessing which club had the lowest ratio. That’s right, Paul Lambert’s Norwich had a wage/revenue ratio of just 49%! It is important to remember that there is no split between players and back-room staff wages in this calculation however, it is likely that the majority of wages will be going to the players.

Now, I just want you to take that figure in for a minute…94% of the money coming in was being sent straight back out on wages, we were in a bad place and something needed to happen! My only guess for why the wages got in such a state, would have been our failed attempt at european football. I don’t want to go into detail about the extra income received from achieving european football, perhaps thats a topic for another day but it’s no secret that clubs will see a considerable boost in income. Perhaps this is what happened in the pre-Lambert era, money was thrown at ‘quality’ players without fear because the extra money from european football would mean the players practically paid for themselves. The only problem with this is that when you don’t reach european football, you’re left in a financial mess!

The Lambert Effect

So, have things changed since Lambert’s arrival? Well, we can only go based on figures from the 2012/13 season, as the 2013/14 season is still in play and the financial statements will not be filed until around March 2015. It would be unfair to judge Lambert’s wages fix, as 2 transfer windows to unload multiple high earning players is not enough. The wages costs actually increased by 3% during his first season in charge, which is most likely due to Lambert’s new signing as well as, the addition of a couple of his most trusted coaches. Luckily, we had a 27% increase in turnover (presumably due to increased broadcasting revenue, another topic that I won’t get into now), which reduced the wages/revenue percentage down to 76% and is a lot closer to the 2011/12 premier league average of 70%.

One of many controversial decisions made by Lambert, is his lack of inclusion of the ‘bomb squad’ members. Villa’s young squad are renowned for their inconsistency and are prone to making errors on the pitch, an issue that could be resolved by including some of our more experienced players. After all, we are still paying their wages, so why not play them?! Many fans have accused Lambert of falling out with the players but this might no be the case. The equal pay act 1970 states that employees in an equivalent role should not be paid less based on their age, sex, religion, etc. Now, I’m no law expert, but I’m pretty sure that the Villa back-room staff are protecting themselves against this law.

I’d really like to hear from someone that works in employment law to tell me if that’s the case or not? My thoughts are that if you’re playing 2 strikers every week and one is getting £20k and the other £50k, is this not discrimination? They’re doing the same job, are they not? But, force the player on £50k in with the youth squad and you could probably argue that he’s technically a player/coach? Any employment law professionals out there that could shed some light on this?

To Conclude

Were Villa right to appoint Lambert in the first place? Absolutely! The club had some serious issues with wages and who better to sort it out than the manager of the club with the best wage control?

Has Lambert reduced the wage bill? It’s hard to tell until the accounts for the 2013/14 season are released. During Lambert’s first season with Villa, the wages stayed roughly the same but it would’ve been a near impossible task to reduce them that quickly!

So, is he doing a good or a bad job? Again, it’s hard to tell until we can see this seasons accounts but, in my opinion, it looks like he is on track to do a good job so long as he can keep us in the top flight for another year.

All in all, It’s hard to assess how well the three year plan is going until we can see the figures for the 2013/14 season. As soon as they are released, sometime around March 2015, I will look to further analyse the club’s position to see if the Lambert effect is visible or not.

I hope this report has proved to be an interesting read for Aston Villa fans and that it has shown everyone the extent of the wages mess we were in prior to Lambert’s arrival.

If you ask me, the real test for Lambert will be the 2014/15 season. There are a few more contracts due to expire at the end of this season and hopefully we will be able to lose a few more members of the bomb squad. This should give us a little bit extra money to start re-investing and the squad rebuild can finally get underway!

Mike Jefferson

 

Sources: Deloitte Annual Review of Football Finance 2013, Aston Villa FC Limited accounts for the year ended 31 May 2012 and 31 May 2013.

 

 

 

 

Lamberts clueless. This is not how you sell players. They have all lost value now. Keep them fit and around the squad. Most are professionals so i doubt they were bad influences. It is not the right way to get rid of these players.

I know i would prefer Darren Bent and Nzogbia upfront as apposed to the current dross we saw on the weekend. Ridiculous. Were paying Nzogbia anyway.. so why not just use him when we have such an injury crisis? Stubborn.

Because he is injured? You want an injured player to train, and to play ?

Just like dunne was? Lambert is a liar. Don't trust a word he says.

 

 

Yes, just like Dunne was.

 

Dunne was injured and if you you don't believe that please explain why Dunne himself says he was injured and had no problem with Lambert.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2459753/Richard-Dunne-interview-QPR-defender-return-fitness-Harry-Redknapps-side.html

 

I believe he was injured but i dont believe Lambert saying that was the reason he was being left out. Regardless he would have been back in the squad in April when he was training again.. but he said it himself he was training with the kids. This is exactly what Nzogbia will get when he returns.

 

Yes he was back training in April but he'd obviously not be anywhere near match fit after being out all season.  He'd already had one breakdown, when on the verge of coming back, and there had been a possibility that his career could have been over.

Lambert not throwing him straight into the middle of a relegation dog fight at that time, with a handful of games left, was correct in my opinion.

Remember after weeks of training and building himself up he still only managed 25 minutes in a friendly.  It would have been just to risky to Dunnes fitness to play him as soon as he was back training.

You think then that if Dunne hadn't been injured he'd have been part of the 'bomb squad'?  You may be right but there's no way of knowing it and it's hardly a reason to call Lambert a liar. It's just baseless speculation.

Well there is but we differ on interpretation of it.

N'Zogbia did not say he's fit, he didn't even hint that he's fit.  He simply asked a rhetorical question, of which the answer was obviously no.

Whether thats because he'd be in the 'bomb squad' if fit, or the straight forward fact that they wouldn't let him train because he's injured, to leap to the conclusion that he's fit now but the club are pretending he's not is baffling.

As has been said before, and not countered by anyone,

1. Why would the club do that. It makes no sense in any way. 

2  Why would CNZ go along with it, it wouldn't benefit him at all. If he's got no future at the club, which if the ridiculous speculation was true would be the case, what has he got to lose by coming out and actually, clearly, declaring himself fit.

3. Why has only CNZ been granted this paid holiday approach. Why wasn't this done to Bent, when he was injured, or any other of the 'bomb squad'.

If you say so...

Well there is no evidence to suggest anything else.

Mat Kendrick's reaction to this:

 

@ianashworth80 @issassin @nmashiter_star Seen the Instagram, doesn't surprise me. Bomb Squad in everything but name

And Nick Mashiter's:

@ianashworth80 @issassin @MatKendrick aware of it, agree with Mat, he's a paid up member of the Bomb Squad, regardless of PL comments.

Shame that the local media is full of kooky conspiracy theorists also...

 

Where do they say he's not injured. Where does anyone say he's not injured.

Whether he'd be part of the 'bomb squad' if fit is just pure speculation as CNZ is injured. He's not fit, unable to train ......... as he's injured.

 

 

Lamberts clueless. This is not how you sell players. They have all lost value now. Keep them fit and around the squad. Most are professionals so i doubt they were bad influences. It is not the right way to get rid of these players.

I know i would prefer Darren Bent and Nzogbia upfront as apposed to the current dross we saw on the weekend. Ridiculous. Were paying Nzogbia anyway.. so why not just use him when we have such an injury crisis? Stubborn.

Because he is injured? You want an injured player to train, and to play ?

Just like dunne was? Lambert is a liar. Don't trust a word he says.

 

Yes, just like Dunne was.

Dunne was injured and if you you don't believe that please explain why Dunne himself says he was injured and had no problem with Lambert.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2459753/Richard-Dunne-interview-QPR-defender-return-fitness-Harry-Redknapps-side.html

I don't expect you to believe it, but it explains why he can't even be on the bench and Lambert was told to trim the wages - N'Zogbia not in the team and saving us money, means more than any points we might get. This is the plan.

However the most obvious and logical reason he's not on the bench is because he's still injured.

What would be the reason behind pretending he's still injured if he's not. The rest of the, self named, 'bomb squad' were instructed to train away from the first team squad but CNZ is instead allowed to have an extended holiday?

Why would the club do that? 

This theory is just crazy.