shaggy

I thought Up until they scored the first goal Man U were very poor again yesterday and then Norwich just rolled over very much in the way we still do when playing Man U. Happy for Gigs to get the win though.

Yeah that's a fair point but surely you can see someone who can get the best out of what he has and someone who simply can't.

Palace were in a much worse position than us though dodgy and they were going down before Pulis arrived. He has turned the club around with the same or worse quality at his disposal while under Lambert we have just gotten worse.

Pulis.

I agree Darren. I don't think he's the root of all our problems. In fact I cannot imagine any manager doing any better in the circumstances. We need changes at the club financially which will hopefully come this summer and I for one would like to see lambert given a season without financial constraints as I think sacking him now after him keeping us safe with a championship team two seasons in a row would be a bit harsh. I know some people will point out that he signed lower league players etc but with the wage structure as it is that's about all he could do. You don't think any other manager would do better than 18 defeats in a season and who built that championship team?

John Denver lovely voice and one of the good people. Will record it. Thanks for the heads up.

The problem is that if the mooted take over rumours are true if we are in the Premiership next season then the new owners will want their own manager in. At the moment we haven't secured that yet so the new owners can't be consulted yet in who they would want so I think we're stuck with him until the end of the season come what may.

Yeah but records don't mean anything. Sorry forgot about that.

18 defeats in a season. We've never had that before. Yet another record Lambert.

The worrying thing for me is that there will still be those who will try to defend him.

Good one John. I see it's Hansen's last Match Of The Day tonight so I'm sure we'll see that quote again.

I would rather eat old rusted nails than have Lambert at the Villa for another year. Just no way.

Would anyone give Ryan'Gigs a chance at our club when Manchester bring in their new manager.

A bit of both I guess, be interesting to compare the starting 11 wages with the other teams, I'd bet we'd be lower than our league placing has us. So his ability to run a premier league first team on a shoestring is evidence of how good he is at getting poor results but not as poor as they might be. I think I'm getting the hang of this argument now. Put it this way, one caller last week after the game told the presenter we have a league 1 standard team, the presenter said but you're still in the premiership so is Lambert over achieving a working a miracle with these league 1 standard players? Thats one way of looking at it but did Lambert buy those players with two relegation battles in mind or did he expect to advance the club further up the table.

Ferguson also recommended McLeish to the board of Villa. I think it's fair to say Ferguson isn't exactly the best judge of manager. Yes I do agree mostly with that yet my point really was to do with matching the manager with the same footballing philosophy and maybe that's why Mourinho wasn't approached by Manchester?

That's such bizarre logic. So Ferguson's opinion of Moyes (which in itself isn't directly related to playing style) now overrules what people saw with their own eyes? Yet you give stick to those on here who use the same logic to criticise Lambert.

What was the point of buying the player if he isn't going to get game time with our injuries.

He is one of us. Hopefully not for much longer.

For those who are against Moyes coming to the club due to Everton playing negative football under him with Manchester United's heritage of playing pass and move football why would Ferguson recommend Moyes to the board of Manchester United. Doesn't really make sense does it.

Don't take it to the higher level of Liverpool and Citeh, talk at our level. Which managers have deployed a similar budget in a vastly superior fashion? The principle is exactly the same and it is relative. Poor use of budget equates to under performance. In direct reply to your question when lambert arrived at out club and was given his first transfer budget did you expect two relegation battles.

No they haven't been appalling, that's your interpretation. Lowton was nearly POTS last year, Sylla came in a did a good job etc etc For the 1st 10 games, everyone thought Luna was wonderful. Bennett against Chelsea was arugably MOTM - when he came he weighed about 4 stone, now he's bulked up and looks much better imo. KEA has done much better this year, than last year. For many of these players it's still too early to judge them. A lot of them have either came up a league or two or have come from a completely different country and have been thrown into this situation. The cost of any individual player is arbitury, it's their wages which accounts for more in our situation.. Not many existing professional footballers in the premier league would come to Villa on 10k a week, when most of them ar comfy on their bums for 20k. The quality of player we've bought is largely down to wages, not one of fee's. Of course it's my interpretation but one based on performances and results. How many of the players you mention are still first team regulars?

Yes that's fine but it still doesn't exclude managerial choice in the transfer market which the other poster was trying to explain to you. He did have a choice you know and while that choice may have been narrowed by what he had to spend eighty per cent of his budget was spent unwisely which makes his overall performance in the transfer market poor. If you take it to a higher level then has Rodgers spent more than the managers at Man City for instance and you would have to say no. So taking that into account Rodgers did better with his budget than say Peligrini because he used his budget better. Lambert on a much lower level wasted his budget on under performing players and players not even considered first choice anymore and that's why we have struggled more than anyone imagined when lambert first came to the club.

Do you mean done better over all or done better in the transfer market? I think we'd make at least double, probably triple. The ones we'd lose money on would be the cheap players, we'd make massive profits on players like Bacuna, Westwood, Benteke and Vlaar. Appalling based on what exactly? Because if you take into account what he's had to spend on both wages and transfer fees then calling his record "appalling" is flat out wrong. Risso made a good point, although I'm not sure he intended it that way. You could say around 75% of the money Lambert's spent has been spent wisely (although IMO Lowton and Sylla were ok buys given that they were very good last season) - that's a really good record. Appalling based on performance-results.

It's relative to performance though. You can't gage a player by what he cost. He must be judged on performances and those performances as a whole by the majority of Lambert's signings have been dreadful.