penguin

Even if we finish with less points? Yes, for reasons I and others have already been through. Haha shock. Mantis has a valid point here. Though it has been done to death, I'll try to summarize: Some seasons the spread of points is more even than others. Last year ManUre won with 89 points and were 11 points clear at the top. This year Liverpool need to win every remaining game to equal that point score and even then (barring the extremely unlikely) they will not win the competition by 11 points. Yet the result for both sides would be the same: They win the league. Similarly with points and relegation. There have been teams that hit 40 points and still got relegated. There have been teams have managed less but remained safe. As such, you cannot look at points in isolation. It needs to be taken within the context of league position. But using league postion rather than points as an indicator as progression doesn't make sense to me. As the points are completely down to how you've performed whilst league postion is influenced by how other teams have performed. What if next season three teams finish on 20 points and we finish a couple of places higher than this year, does that mean we've made progress?

He has turned down a pay-rise to leave City so you never know he may be one of these mythical footballers we've heard about in legend who actually cares more about playing than his wallet.

I state is Lambert is the fifth longest serving manager in the premier league and get moaned at as it "lacks context" yet the league table position is being used to demonstrate progress is this not subject to the same argument?

I could say the same about people defending this season. NO ONE IS DEFENDING THIS SEASON. [text removed by mods] NO ONE THINKS THIS SEASON IS OK. The only debate is between those who believe that Lambert is the Anti-Christ and those who can see that the embarrassing shit we have seen is not solely his fault. (Yes Mods I accept the warning points) Right. Because everyone who wants Lambert replaced is that over the top and black and white whilst those who don't are the definition of balance

As much as we like to think it's OUR club, according to the law the club belongs to a Mr. Randolph Lerner and whilst he is in charge I fear things will stay pretty much as they are. We will not progress without not only a new owner but a new and BETTER owner. Finding one of those is something that it is easier said than done. Just ask our neighbours. Thing is, I doubt that Randy even wants to sell the club and if that is he case then we are stuck with something slightly less than mediocrity for the foreseeable future. Custodian, tbh fwiw IMO.

Didn't the accounts that were published prove that Lambert had understated players transfer fees?

How is Marlon Harewood a relevant example for money spent? The financial situation and club aspirations where completely different then.

The team have proved they are capable of playing good positive football; this is what frustrates me the most. It proves the ability is there but, for me, it proves the managerial nous isn't in order to achieve some kind of consistency.

It says only four mangers in the premier league and looking at it further 21 managers in the whole football league have had had more time in the job than Paul Lambert. Is a debate for another time/thread whether mangers get the sack to soon, so I'm still failing to grasp how using a statistic which compares how long a football manger has been in a job compared to his peers is out of context when used in a football forum.

It's not as if there has been a greater turnover of managers than any other season, well id be surprised if this was so, so fail to see how there is no context as it's comparing his time in employment to his peers.

To be fair, and I'm not getting involved in the argument, but that is a totally misleading statistic that you're using. Why exactly is it misleading?

Immediate? Again I don't understand this argument, as if it's been five minutes and people are on his back, as I said earlier he's the fifth longest serving manager in the premiership. Additionally I don't think anyone is/was expecting him to be an immediate success but at least progress to be made under his tenure and in my opinion there has been none.

Yet certain performances like Chelsea for instance prove, well to me anyway, that the players do have the ability to perform better than our results would, on a whole, suggest.

This is how I feel. I think he'd be a great player but I'd imagine in order to land him he'd immediately be in the upper echelons of our wage bracket and with our current financial situation it's too big a risk for a player with such a poor injury record.

Just had a quick look and I counted 6 away losses to 10 home defeats so this is probably where the feeling of being better way is coming from and as people have said the fact the expectation is less when away.

Why? Isn't that blatantly obvious ? No. It isn't. Please explain. If you PAY to go and watch this heap of shit, you are clearly going to suffer more than those that don't. Did that really need pointing out ? If you sit at home and listen to the match on radio/TV you aren't going to feel the full force anguish and shitstorm as you are at the ground obviously. So paying makes you a better/more knowledgable fan? That isn't how I read it, he's talking about being more emotional involved when your time and money is being spent, which is a fair point imo.

I'm surprised at that also, always thought we were much better away from home.

He's the fifth longest serving manager in the premier league, it's hardly like he's been given five minutes and people are calling for his head.

Though i hate the principle, i think Evertons approach of getting in Top class Loans for a year to get them into Europe is probably the only way we will make it into Europe. Once in Europe we can push on with the extra revenue and buy better players. What happens if Everton don't get into top 4 then Barry lukaku & delofeu leave? They have to get in a 3 top class players I'd rather have three top class players for a year than never to be honest.

I thought he was a decent manager and thought he got a real raw deal getting sacked by Newcastle but deservedly sacked by Norwich.

He's due a goal and I think a lot of the animosity towards him will vanish when it happens, especially if it's a belter, do his confidence the world of good also.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26934864 Sign him up

To be fair although I found the Insomnia saga hilarious at the time, I don't think he was over-reacting to it that much looking back at it. Kinnear was obviously a bubbling fool and it does show a lot of disrespect and a lack of professionalism to mis-pronounce a players name in that manner and I know I'd want to distance myself from the man and anything he was involved in.

Good post, completely agree. Used to hate the idea of a director of football but it does seem to be what our club is crying out for as essentially everyone above Lambert has no real clue about the game.

Of course nobody could say with any certainty but it seems many believe that, that isn't a significant enough reason not to replace a manager who has produced record-breakingly poor results.