AstonMartin82

I can't believe for a second that anyone who is of sound mind and is not speaking out of pure emotion would believe this for a second. Everyone losses from time to time and it is how you cope with losing that makes you who you are, not avoiding losing. Using your logic you must think every manager in Aston Villa's history has been the worst manager in the world at some point. Right now it is time to support the team, not to unstablise it with this tedious rhetoric.

So you want to get rid of a mid table manager and replace him with another mid table manager? Seriously, what is the point? You are too short sighted. In a couple of weeks if Stoke lose, Palace lose, and Villa win then all of a sudden Lambert will be a much better manager than the other two. I wish the majority football fans would think longer term than 2 weeks ahead.

Agreed mate. Bacuna is not the creative player we crave (but would still deliver more in Bannans position than Bannan himself).

I don't think Lambert is useless but I'm wondering about the sense in selling our most creative midfield player and getting no replacement in! He's no leader but he has a great first touch and can see a pass. One assist last season, and 3 in his whole career is hardly our most creative player. He can see a pass, but can never pull it off which is why he is so frustrating. Granted though it is incredibly obvious that we need a creative midfielder. I thought Bacuna was going to be this player but with him being played at right back it obviously isn't. Keeping Bannan was never an option for Villa. He simply isn't Premier League quality let alone Villa quality. Edit: Westwood got 6 assists last season and more goals. Even Sylla got more assists even though he hardly played at all and when he did he didn't take any of our free kicks, unlike Bannan. Lowton got more assists (and goals) even though he played in defense. It is a myth that Bannan is a creative player just because creativity is his strongest attribute!

Jedinak was a country mile better than any other player on the pitch on Thursday. He isn't pretty to watch but he is very effective. The complete opposite of Bannan actually, who is pretty to watch and very ineffective... by all means a "Match of the Day" player and anyone who thought he did well against us is basing their opinions on a single clip from MotD and not his all round game, which was once again poor. We need a Jedinak in our team... it is very clearly what we are missing - some steal and leadership in the middle of the pitch.

This. 1000% this. UTV

Anybody who makes claims that any manager is worse than McLeish is grossly exaggerating, is clearly far too emotional to think clearly and losses any argument immediately. Do you think the football we are playing is better than anything we played under McLeish? Are you talking about over the last 5 games, or the last 50 games? McLeish had done nothing to prove he could put together a decent side whereas Lambert guided us to safety last season in what was always going to be an incredibly difficult season. The football for the last few months has not been of a good standard but it was similar last season when we were losing 8-0, 4-0 and then turned it around in the new year. People are over-reacting to the latest blip. I'm not surprised, it's the nature of most football fans but changing the manager won't change the fortunes for us... only changing the owner will do that. This is wholely Lerners fault, not Lamberts. Oh do get over yourself old boy. The only "blip" has been the odd game where we've actually looked remotely look a football team. Lambert has turned us into the worst footballing side in the division, so yes, he is worse than McLeish. Lambert's whole tenure has been an unmitigated disaster, and it only seems to be getting worse. A year and a half in, and he's bought a whole load of dross for £40m+, and has shown a level of ability to coach them into an effective unit that would embarrass an under sevens dad. This isn't a debate about McLeish vs Lambert, however McLeish had no "blips" at all which made us look like a football team, so for Lambert to take over that team and win plaudits during parts of last season for his attack minded, counter attack football is a hell of a damn site more than McLeish ever did for us so any talk of McLeish being better is simply emotions talking and not sense. Anyway, I'm not pro Lambert or against Lambert, I'm ambivalent towards him. Though if Lambert were to leave then who do you suggest could take over and provide us with entertaining and winning football on a shoe budget? I can't think of anyone and some of the names being banded around on this thread are simply laughable. The reality is that you will find as many failings in Lambert as you would with any other available manager and the only way the fortunes of this club are going to improve is by a change at the very top, not the middle. Pretty much anyone based on the last few games. "Last few games" says it all really. And we wonder why the word fickle sticks with the club. How is this clear?

The Benteke, Guzan, Westwood, Lowton and Vlaar signings are used to defend Lambert. If Benteke didn't want to play for the manager do you think he would have signed a new contract a few months ago? Something has gone wrong for the last couple of months though these players have what it takes to turn it around as they did at a similar point last season. We have a young squad and inconsistency was always going to be an issue. Turning on the players and management staff for very little chance of good does not seem to me to be a wise thing to do right now.

Anybody who makes claims that any manager is worse than McLeish is grossly exaggerating, is clearly far too emotional to think clearly and losses any argument immediately. Do you think the football we are playing is better than anything we played under McLeish? Are you talking about over the last 5 games, or the last 50 games? McLeish had done nothing to prove he could put together a decent side whereas Lambert guided us to safety last season in what was always going to be an incredibly difficult season. The football for the last few months has not been of a good standard but it was similar last season when we were losing 8-0, 4-0 and then turned it around in the new year. People are over-reacting to the latest blip. I'm not surprised, it's the nature of most football fans but changing the manager won't change the fortunes for us... only changing the owner will do that. This is wholely Lerners fault, not Lamberts. Oh do get over yourself old boy. The only "blip" has been the odd game where we've actually looked remotely look a football team. Lambert has turned us into the worst footballing side in the division, so yes, he is worse than McLeish. Lambert's whole tenure has been an unmitigated disaster, and it only seems to be getting worse. A year and a half in, and he's bought a whole load of dross for £40m+, and has shown a level of ability to coach them into an effective unit that would embarrass an under sevens dad. This isn't a debate about McLeish vs Lambert, however McLeish had no "blips" at all which made us look like a football team, so for Lambert to take over that team and win plaudits during parts of last season for his attack minded, counter attack football is a hell of a damn site more than McLeish ever did for us so any talk of McLeish being better is simply emotions talking and not sense. Anyway, I'm not pro Lambert or against Lambert, I'm ambivalent towards him. Though if Lambert were to leave then who do you suggest could take over and provide us with entertaining and winning football on a shoe budget? I can't think of anyone and some of the names being banded around on this thread are simply laughable. The reality is that you will find as many failings in Lambert as you would with any other available manager and the only way the fortunes of this club are going to improve is by a change at the very top, not the middle.

Anybody who makes claims that any manager is worse than McLeish is grossly exaggerating, is clearly far too emotional to think clearly and losses any argument immediately. Do you think the football we are playing is better than anything we played under McLeish? Are you talking about over the last 5 games, or the last 50 games? McLeish had done nothing to prove he could put together a decent side whereas Lambert guided us to safety last season in what was always going to be an incredibly difficult season. The football for the last few months has not been of a good standard but it was similar last season when we were losing 8-0, 4-0 and then turned it around in the new year. People are over-reacting to the latest blip. I'm not surprised, it's the nature of most football fans but changing the manager won't change the fortunes for us... only changing the owner will do that. This is wholely Lerners fault, not Lamberts.

Anybody who makes claims that any manager is worse than McLeish is grossly exaggerating, is clearly far too emotional to think clearly and losses any argument immediately.

People like managers going because it offers hope and a little bit of excitement and gossip for the next 2 weeks. Reality is that changing the manager is going to have little to no effect other than adding a little more instability into the club. There is only one person who could leave and make a difference to the future of AV. Lerner.

There is a good player in there somewhere and this season was always going to be difficult for the standout performers last season to carry that into this season once again. He needs to be given a month off with perhaps Helenius coming in, but definitely not at the point where we should sell. He's a very good player.

Exactly.

Fully agree. I've just left the Villa facebook page... not because I don't care for Villa anymore, but simply to get away from all the arrogant whingers on there. I believe the expectation levels at Villa are the biggest problem. We were a mid-table team over the last 20 years, we are a mid-table team now and will be a mid-table team at best for the next 10 years at least. The sooner Villa fans recognise this the sooner we will give the relevant people the patience to build something sustainable for the future. It's a very boring approach knowing we will never do anything significant in the league, but the FA are the problem here with their ridiculous "un" Fair Play rules, not Lambert or Lerner. Well that's a new one on me. It's the F.A fault we're so poor. Best one yet. Way to twist a point. If you ever expect Villa to compete at the top end of the league with the fair play rules then you are very deluded. We will always be a midtable team because of these rules as quite simply we have a mid-table team turnover. You don't see mid-table teams turn over, or win, against Man Utd very often so to expect a win, or anything at all from todays game, was always misplaced optimism. It's a shame we didn't compete harder than we did, but we require an older team with more experience to do that.

Agree with the competing angle. Unfortuately we need leaders on the pitch to do that. We have none. Too young a team. Vlaar is sorely missed, and Gabby, although a great Villa servent is the most pathetic captain / vice captain in the history of Villa. Leaders, and a hard bastard in midfield definitely required.

Fully agree. I've just left the Villa facebook page... not because I don't care for Villa anymore, but simply to get away from all the arrogant whingers on there. I believe the expectation levels at Villa are the biggest problem. We were a mid-table team over the last 20 years, we are a mid-table team now and will be a mid-table team at best for the next 10 years at least. The sooner Villa fans recognise this the sooner we will give the relevant people the patience to build something sustainable for the future. It's a very boring approach knowing we will never do anything significant in the league, but the FA are the problem here with their ridiculous "un" Fair Play rules, not Lambert or Lerner.

I agree, he probably came back way too early, and is now paying the price. What I refuse to agree with is when some say he is disinterested. He may be frustrated, and for sure is, but not disinterested. He came back too early because he wanted too much to be the player he was last year. And he wanted to show that WC striker position is his. I'm Benteke's biggest fan and I hate to say it he does look uninterested to me. Against Sunderland he barely moved. When he lost possession he made no attempt to win the ball back. This is unlike him, and very unlike last season where he was living to impress people. It would appear to me that this season he hasn't the fear of failing in him, which is making him complacent.

Nah, it'll drift into nothingness. We haven't got anyone pumped up and Fulham will just chill out.

Incredibly naive from Bacuna... doesn't matter if it was a soft penalty or not, he should have never put himself in that position. Our midfield is quite simply woeful. Sylla needs to come on now.

Where I live, around 5 miles away from Selhurst Park, Palace fans are few (!) but I can confirm that whilst everything is currently rosy in their garden and they see nothing bad in anything, they are at times frustrated with Bannan's poor crossing and wayward passing. On MOTD yesterday though he did look quite instrumental in a number of their moves. (See Con, I am able to give balanced opinions unlike your one track mind). However, we all know how seeing 3 minutes of highlights can potentially be very misleading. (Whoscored.com had him down as their second worst player). If Bannan had put in the same cross that Puncheon (generally considered the worst Palace player by their fans) had for Jerome's goal Con would be going wild and be quoting it for the next 2 years with all sorts of gifs and heat maps.

First off, AM82 didn't say he got 0 assists, he said that when we play Palace he will get no assists and his crosses will just float into Guzan's hands. Thank you for clarifying this is what I meant, however Con is the Max Clifford of VillaTalk and I suspect he knew this himself though is simply trying to discredit the claim with his normal spin. They didn't start playing Bannan... Bannan has played in the majority of Palace's games so again you are spinning to try to back your point. Palace fans have equal frustration about his lofted crosses. This wasn't a Lambert instruction, it is Bannan's style. I've debunked this about 10 times. You keep coming back with it. Sidwell was used as sub extra defensive midfielder when we were already winning. That's very different way to compile a win ratio than from games started. It's the start win ratio you need to use. The win ratio stat that includes sub-appearances (less than 45 minutes) is pointless. Frustrating when you debunk peoples claims yet they continue to quote it isn't it? The one good stat you refer to regarding Bannan has been debunked at least 50 times. You have no answer to it, yet you still continue to quote it. So basically red all to the 2 easiest games in the season against QPR and Reading. He played awfully in these games followed by the worst performance I've ever witnessed from any Villa player against Liverpool (where he played Suarez clean through on goal TWICE in one game) and got dropped. We then go on excellent form, only losing to top quality teams, and continue that form into this season. Yeah, that's really proved your point!!

Bannan starts most of the first 18 games last season and at which time we were relegation fodder. Bannan gets dropped we go on the best run of the season and survive. Bannan leaves the club and within the first 14 games we win 5 games... it took us until after Bannan was dropped, and 25 games into the season last season, to win 5 games. Yes, Bannan kept us up. What you fail to mention is Bannan played his part in our strong run of form - he helped kick-start the real purple patch - Stoke and Sunderland - starting the wins over QPR and Reading. It amazes me how you blank those initial games out, as if he didn't play them. Those were an important 6 points. I was at the games against QPR and Reading. He was by far the worst player on the pitch. We won these games DESPITE him playing NOT BECAUSE he played (your favorite site all back this up also). Were you at the games? Nope. Yes, those 0 assists from all those longs balls into Guzans hands will obliterate us.

Bannan starts most of the first 18 games last season and at which time we were relegation fodder. Bannan gets dropped we go on the best run of the season and survive. Bannan leaves the club and within the first 14 games we win 5 games... it took us until after Bannan was dropped, and 25 games into the season last season, to win 5 games. Yes, Bannan kept us up.