bobzy

I think everyone (whether opposed to Lambert or otherwise) agrees that this summer/next season are crucial - both in terms of adding quality and also seeing an improvement on the pitch. Lambert's hands are tied to an extent given the financial restrictions he's operating under, and I've certainly defended him for this. However, you'd hope that after working with the squad for 2 full seasons now, he'd be able to get more out of them next season. If we're in a similar position (struggle/performance wise rather than position) at the end of next season, I'd probably be looking for a change. If we're fighting relegation at the end of December, I'd probably also look for a change then. Overall, I think Lambert has something but he hasn't been able to express it in his team as much as he'd have hoped. Better quality players should improve this.

People keep citing the Everton example of some managerial triumph in adversity - and Moyes did indeed do a good job. However, the start of his reign at Everton was; 1st season - Only there for 4 months, survived (aim achieved) 2nd season - Finished 7th(!) and was awarded manager of the year 3rd season - Finished 17th(!) with the lowest points total in the clubs' history This is often completely overlooked for the achievements afterwards which arose solely because Moyes was given time to influence his playing squad and stamp his authority on the club. Everton didn't go for the knee-jerk reaction after obviously completely failing in the 2003/04 season having finished 7th the campaign before and it paid off. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case at Villa/with Lambert, but I'm tired of hearing shit like "look at how well Moyes did at Everton!" as a dig at Lambert when, essentially, their tenures started in much the same vain (aside from Moyes dragging out a 7th place, of course).

I don't fancy our chances against Palace, Pulis has them really well organised. Fulham was the big game and we blew that opportunity

Ahhh, the only thing I'd read from Rosler was basically "we need to get rid of our higher earners, he's still our player though and we'll see how he does. We'll assess again in the summer".

I think he's a tidy yet unspectacular player. His skill set suggests he'd be better suited in a more central/attacking role than central/defensive role but would he ever get this opportunity? He's the most consistent of our midfield though, for sure.

No. Just people who have watched games. And those who have actually listened to what the Wigan fans and manager had to say about him. What was this by the way?

The only time Grant Holt has started a game for us was against Everton. At the time he was taken off, we were 1-0 up. Result was 2-1 Everton. This guy needs to start and play all game obviously(!)

I guess there's always a huge grey area with regards to these stats. For example, an assist can be either of; - A pass to a teammate who scores from this (what *I* would call an assist) - A shot which hits the post/keeper and is tapped in by a teammate - A cross which is handled in the area by an opposition player. Teammate scores penalty, this is an assist. But absolutely isn't, for example, a dummy/stepover from a cross which results in a teammate scoring. I'd always assume a key pass is one that results in a shooting opportunity. Whether this includes 30+ yard speculative efforts (I'd assume it does?) who knows.

Yep. It was made clear from the day he signed, by both Lambert and Helenius himself, that he wouldn't be featuring much this season. I'm not sure what the reason was, perhaps that Lambert didn't feel he was too lightweight to be effective and needed to add some muscle. Either way, nobody ever said he'd be playing much this season but a lot of people seem to have forgotten that. I think the issue is that we keep seeing players that also either a) aren't ready or not good enough. So it seems strange that helenius is the one kept away from the action. What position does Helenius play?

Off the top of my head (because the games are recent) - first time pass to Delph against Chelsea which was deflected/saved onto the bar and a cross for Benteke to air shot against Man Utd which should've been a goal. As I say, this is only because these games are in the immediate past but I'm sure there must be other such "key passes".

People always say about "Benteke's pace" - I honestly can't remember a single time he's won a foot race against anyone of notable speed. He's strong and has good technique (on the whole lolz) but I've never seen him as a particularly quick player.

Home and away, Fulham have only lost 1 in the last 7 against Villa. Which skew would you like to apply, sir?

Gabby. Honestly, Antonio Luna. He LOVES it.

J Bowz to start up top this weekend? Grant Holt tbh

The one against Man Utd that missed by a foot or so was probably his closest to date... which surely implies that he's getting there!

I'll be very surprised if some don't. I'll be even more surprised if they are not jumped on for using it. I'm not exactly pro-Lambert - too many concerns for me - but I can admit that losing (arguably) your best player would have a big effect on any side. Consider Liverplop without Suarez, ManUre without Rooney or spuds without Bale...... ... wait. Scrap the spuds one ;-) We've had him for most of the season though. Losing him for the last seven games shouldn't be an excuse for us not at least averaging the point per game needed to match last season's total. Under McLeish we lost Bent, Dunne and then Petrov to leukemia. This didn't change the fact that finishing 16th with 38 points wasn't good enough. I agree that we should still achieve 40 points (not necessarily with our games remaining, just as a general rule of thumb) but Benteke will have missed 12 league games this season and not been fully match fit for - at a guess - another 4 games? That's us essentially being without our main striker and best player for over a third of a season. Factor in that his backup has suffered from a broken leg and not featured in 2014 as well. Again, not to say that we shouldn't achieve 40 points, but that's a pretty massive blow for any team let alone one operating under our constraints.

I'm honestly more gutted about the potential of not seeing him at the World Cup

You've posted it elsewhere, but this entirely. Start with Helenius, bring on Robinson or someone after 70 mins. Just get some experience onto the youngsters that are at the club and pushing for squad places.

Of course he gets credit for the Chelsea result. But as a quid pro quo, it is also entirely reasonable that he gets flak for producing a performance such as the one against Stoke just a week later. Also, a more general question about how good a manager he is if he cannot get more consistency in the way his squad plays. EDIT: Or, to put it more starkly, manages to achieve such wild inconsistency. Like most other teams in the league? Inconsistency happens when you don't have a top squad. Get better players in, consistency improves. That's how shit works.

I disagree. Despite our "lack of quality" we completely outplayed Chelsea. And the fact that we "can" perform better means we need to look as to why we are not. It's the managers job to get us playing as a team consistently. Not to hold out for better players. Manager gets no credit for Chelsea result/performance, only questioned as to why he's not producing this level of performance every week with a squad that is short on class. Seems fair. Edit: I also expect none of the top teams to improve their squads. Take Man Utd, for example. It's obviously down to Moyes being a poor manager because they've hammered teams and drawn with Bayern Munich but they aren't top 4. They need to be more consistent rather than bring in more quality - agreed.

I have no problem with people wanting Lambert out etc, but how on Earth is he "out of his depth"?

Unconfirmed. Where the hell are you getting that from?

How are people having "blind faith"? We're currently set to improve on last season, he seems to address issues as they arise (although God only knows what's happened to our defence lately) and knows where we need to buy players. I've seen enough within certain games to know that we can perform better and a lack of quality is really what's hindering us.

I don't understand this way of thinking at all. He's essentially done the first part of his job - get rid of high earners, bring in a new squad. Why shouldn't he be given the chance to build on this? It all depends on the summer (because we really need some quality now) of course, but Lambert has until the end of next season for me. I can't get my head around why people would want to remove a manager that hasn't spectacularly failed after only 2 seasons. Short term upheaval works for about 2% of teams - the rest get shafted (Fulham, Cardiff, West Brom, Sunderland have all done it and are the bottom 4 sides).

lol.