weedman

I've seen it all now. Ok so you'd rather have a player in the team doing less and playing worse just because they're thought of as "world class" than a player in the team playing better and contributing more because they're not a big name? Sadly that doesn't even surprise me. How good a team looks on paper is worthless, it's what they do on the pitch that counts. If we stepped out on the pitch with a world class player in every position worth £50 million and were finishing 10th, would you not rather having a team of grafters worth 20p each finishing 1st? Judging by how you responded to my previous post I guess not, it's all about the names

If you remove the first 4 games of the season (in which we massively overachieved) from the equation how does Gabby's contribution to results look like? I think you will agree that the those games are in no possible way a reflection of our season. And Gabby hasn't come back from a bad injury. Well sure you can remove the stats that don't suit your argument all you want I suppose, still doesn't make them any less valid. I agree with the injury excuse, but it is still an excuse, same as the poor tactics or no service or mismanagement excuse. With Benteke all people look for is excuses as to why he isn't playing well, with Gabby all people see is that he's not playing well and instantly hate him for it, even though you could easily argue that Gabby has a lot more valid excuses than Benteke does. Again I'll clarify, I'm not saying I think he's better than Benteke, I'm simply saying he's putting in far more effort and currently performing far better than Benteke and gets nothing but hate for it. Give me a choice of a world class player like Ronaldo sulking around doing piss all every match or a bang average grafter like Harewood running his arse off and at least doing his absolute best every match I'll take Harewood every time (especially if his recent record is actually better, as Gabbys is now). A player can't really control how good/crap they are, what they can control is the effort they put in, that's why I'll defend players like Gabby and Weimann. They don't pick the team, they can't suddenly make themselves as good as Ronaldo, but they do their best for the team. Benteke? When he starts putting some effort in I'll defend him too It's not that they don't suit my argument, it's that it's a case in which the WHOLE team overperformed and isn't a fair reflection of the situation. You can take a brief spell of games to prove anything you like, it's as if back then you said that we were the second best team in the country just because we were second in the league. If Heskey managed to score a hattrick against Bayern, that wouldn't be enough to make him a prolific striker, and that's all I was saying. Ok but I'm looking at stats over the course of the whole season, not picking and choosing the best or worst ones throughout it. And I'm not trying to prove that he is a prolific striker, because a) he rarely plays as a striker and he is clearly not prolific. I'm simply saying he is bringing more to the team this season than Benteke. Is it not odd that in a team where everyone except the defence has been crap we as fans will put that down to "poor management and tactics making them under perform" with players we like (Delph, Benteke) and "crap players who are playing at the top of their game and are just rubbish" with players we don't like (Gabby, Weimann, Cleverley). If ALL the attacking players are playing rubbish that's down to tactics, in the same way that all the defence playing well except Lowton and Richardson that's not down to tactics, because they're fine for everyone else, it's just Lowton and Richardson not being good enough. If everyone attack minded was playing well and Gabby wasn't, that's not a tactical thing because it's working for everyone else, but that isn't the case, they're all playing badly and therefore they all get to use the same excuse, not just the ones that everyone likes

If you remove the first 4 games of the season (in which we massively overachieved) from the equation how does Gabby's contribution to results look like? I think you will agree that the those games are in no possible way a reflection of our season. And Gabby hasn't come back from a bad injury. Well sure you can remove the stats that don't suit your argument all you want I suppose, still doesn't make them any less valid. I agree with the injury excuse, but it is still an excuse, same as the poor tactics or no service or mismanagement excuse. With Benteke all people look for is excuses as to why he isn't playing well, with Gabby all people see is that he's not playing well and instantly hate him for it, even though you could easily argue that Gabby has a lot more valid excuses than Benteke does. Again I'll clarify, I'm not saying I think he's better than Benteke, I'm simply saying he's putting in far more effort and currently performing far better than Benteke and gets nothing but hate for it. Give me a choice of a world class player like Ronaldo sulking around doing piss all every match or a bang average grafter like Harewood running his arse off and at least doing his absolute best every match I'll take Harewood every time (especially if his recent record is actually better, as Gabbys is now). A player can't really control how good/crap they are, what they can control is the effort they put in, that's why I'll defend players like Gabby and Weimann. They don't pick the team, they can't suddenly make themselves as good as Ronaldo, but they do their best for the team. Benteke? When he starts putting some effort in I'll defend him too

And the rest of our team have been well and truly banging them in in that period have they?

Whats keek? I've never seen him say anything negative about fans and he is not on twitter

Weedman with all due respect all you are doing here is comparing Gabby who quite frankly is not capable of being any better than he is right now because this is what he is full stop against a clearly out of sorts Benteke who is clearly a much better and gifted player than what we are witnessing at the moment. He is a professional footballer for goodness sake, if he cant handle playing in different positions then I'm afraid there is no place for him in the premier league, and don't get me started on his scoring record Is that what i'm doing? Or am I comparing two players both out of form who have both performed far better in the past? Look, I didnt want to turn this into a "Gabby is better than Benteke" thing, because I dont believe that - I was simply pointing out the facts and those facts show that a) Gabby has been better this season, despite the abuse, at this moment in time Benteke is nothing more than a 1 season wonder who has completely failed to live up to the hype c) Benteke has been here 2.5 years and has already tried to jump ship once, Gabby has been here his whole career and repeatedly stated he wont leave unless pushed (and you may think thats said with a lack of options, but believe me there were definitely options for him during the MON years, he was very highly regarded outside of Villa), so I simply find it amusing that the same people that are furious with the likes of Stewart Downing for his "lack of loyalty" will openly lambast our most loyal player and pick apart every game, and every mistake with a fine toothcombe while resting all their hopes on a man who cant even be bothered to TRY and play football while out of form I believe Gabby is a limited footballer, for sure, it just a wind up that people go on calling him lazy etc when he is one of the hardest working players in the team who would probably put his hand up and volounteer to play in goal if Guzan got injured, and those same people idolise Benteke who wont even move 3 yards away from his designated position if his bloody life depended on it. EDIT - Oh, and have a look at other wingers playing for relegation threatened teams goalscoring records...none of them score many bar the odd exception. Basically Gabby is being berated for performing at the same level as other similar players in similar standard teams in the same league...

I supported Lambert until the Hull game, and I still think that he's a good manager who could be a success in the future, but it wasn't working for him here. Through a combination of a lot of things - budget, bad luck, poor tactics etc we hit a major block this season and he didn't have a clue how to address it. Maybe it would have been different if we had an assistant manager to advise, sometimes you get so obsessed with making something work that you cant see whats right in front of you, that's where he needed a bit of help but there was no one there. This move was best for everyone, it'll serve us better as a club and should allow him to go somewhere else and get his career back on track using what he learned here to help him Good luck to him, and I'm sure we'll see him in the Prem again

But he can control a football, of course he's no Hazard where the ball is going to stick to him like glue every time it comes his way - the problem is people's minds have been made up and when a game comes where he will miscontrol maybe 1 out of 10 passes, its the 1 that people remember and crucify him for. Benteke has been infinitely more wasteful this season, but again, that's blamed on a "lack of confidence and mismanagement" The problem I believe stems from how both players began their careers, Gabby was always seen as a sprinter, nothing more - I think even MON or one of the coaches at the time said that when he made his debut he really couldn't play football, just run in a straight line - but that was said as a precursor to how far he's come along since then and developed his game - but since that's the opinion that people naturally formed when he started playing, even when he got better people seemed to just expect the good performances to be 'more luck than judgement' and waited for him to inevitably make another mistake so they could say "I told you so". Now he's career has been seriously threatened as a result of this mismanagement the "I knew he was awful straight away" people are in with a vengeance, no mention of him constantly being played out of position. You compare to Benteke who's first season he was like a freight train destroying teams and scoring goals for fun before losing his form - form that is still lost 2 years later, and everyone is more inclined to think the poor form is nothing more than a blip, its not his fault, how could ANYONE score goals or move 3 feet with this service, he was injured etc etc. I'm not saying Gabby is a great player, far from it, but I do believe he has a place in this team as it stands. The chronic mismanagement excuse cannot only be applied to players we like, it has to apply to all and that includes Gabby. It really irks me when people will moan about how lazy he is and how he doesn't care when it was only 2 days ago against Hull, following another error in a long line of errors from Delph recently that he chased back 50/60 yards and made a tackle on the edge of our own box - while playing as a striker! He isn't a gifted player but he does work hard and I feel that is the level of commitment that we need while entrenched in a relegation battle and should be applauded. Instead it gets ignored and he's berated because he missed a pass once in the game - I can all but guarantee that had that been Benteke, and it was Benteke that chased 50/60 yards back towards his own goal to make a tackle on a striker charging towards our goal, with the rest of his performance being identical it would be all people were talking about on here, how it proves that he's not lazy, proves it is Lamberts tactics after all etc etc. Something else to consider from this season Games involving Gabby - Pld 23, Won, 5, Drawn 6, Lost 12, GF 9, GA 16, Pts 21 = 0.91 pts per game 22% win ratio 0.39 goals scored per game Personal record - Played 23 - Goals 3 = (0.130 goals per game) (remember he has not played up front for the majority of those games either, playing out of position on the wing) Games involving Benteke - Pld 16, Won 2, Drawn 3, Lost 11, GF 4, GA 11, Pts 9 0.56 pts per game 13% win ratio 0.25 goals scored per game Personal record - Played 16 - Goals 2 = (0.125 goals per game) (playing as the figurehead central striker) We have been consistently better as a team with Gabby in it than with Benteke in it...the two goalscoring records this season are virtually identical despite one being a winger at least 60% of the time and the other playing as a striker 100% of the time, who do you think has taken more stick?

I find the Gabby hate quite amusing at times really. I mean, no one has ever said he is a world class player (except possibly as a joke), and yet some people seem to expect him to be and he comes in for huge amounts of criticism when he isn't. I mean, people have moaned constantly about Paul Lambert mishandling Benteke. It's Lamberts fault that Benteke isn't scoring, its poor tactics, poor formation, he's unhappy that's why he doesn't move, just a little 2 year blip in an otherwise phenomenal 8 month career blah blah blah. All this despite Benteke being the damn near record signing focal point of the team playing in his preferred position up front where 90% of our (albeit still very limited) chances will fall to Then you have Gabby, a more limited player, who, having played up front for most of his career decided he needed a bit more "Carew" about him and bulked up, way too quickly as it happened, leaving him out of shape the following season until he got more up to speed with it. Once he had gotten up to speed with his new strength, he was immediately thrown out onto the wing where none of it matters, and told to play football as a winger who can defend, completely negating anything he had done previously as a striker and making the whole reason for his bulking up completely redundant and yet, according to the masses it would seem, Benteke is due to poor management, Gabby is because he's lazy and stealing a living. Go figure

Seriously? There's 13 games left and we're in the bottom 3 on goal difference and 2 points away from 15th with potentially 5 winnable games coming up and we can hope for a bit of a 'new manager syndrome' to help us out with a pretty decent squad compared to the teams around us...not exactly walking on water territory just yet

Don't get the abuse today, of all the players on the pitch and management on the sidelines he was far from the worst player.

I've been one of his supporters, and I still can't see much changing long term but that's the final straw for me now. He simply has to go. I still think he could do a job at Prem level somewhere but we desperately need a new lease of life because the players look dead and defeated out there before the game even started. 1 Lambert supporter lost today, I still see the reasoning behind keeping him, but it's the first time I genuinely feel we will go down if we don't do something, we are stuck in a rut and need something to get us out of it

Ok I know that, but it was more a stats can be deceiving type thing. I'd also wager this season we as a team have scored more goals with Gabby playing up front than with Benteke playing up front. My main point I do think is valid though, if being dropped for an hour has given him the kick up the arse that he needed, then great, bring him back in and he could destroy Hull on his own - he, as we all know, is unplayable when on form. However, if it has not then he should remain on the bench. At this moment in time, Gabby contributes more to the team than Benteke, and I never thought I'd say that!

Agree with this - Benteke should start. Remember though with Gabby playing Aston Villa scored, when Benteke was playing Aston Villa did not. When Gabby doesn't score (which is often) 90% of the time he still contributes something, whether it's winning a soft free kick and relieving some pressure on us or chasing a lost cause and at least trying to bully the defenders, when Benteke doesn't score he stands around moaning at everyone and contributes nothing (at the moment) He is our best striker by far, but he needs a kick up the arse, hopefully for everyone that happened with him missing the last game and he'll start at Hull back to the Benteke we all know, if he's spent the last few days sulking around and moaning then he should stay on the bench for it and Gabby should start IMO

Sacking him now is a massive risk, it's more likely that we get relegated if we get rid now than if we stick with him. Mainly because he knows the players, knows their strengths etc and they are his players and he has been here before and we are still in the PL. There are loads of stats on here that go against him but people seem to ignore the one overriding stat in his favour - he is managing a team with virtually no transfer budget (have we even spent £10mil this season?), no wiggle room whatsoever for wages. We had no valuable saleable assets when he arrived, so he was not even in a position to generate funds by selling players, and we have not been relegated. Despite all the winter and spring predictions every season since he's been here that we definitely would be, we haven't been - and despite everything this season we still are not in the bottom 3. We're close, sure, but why does everyone expect more with the current set up? Until this club changes from the top down we WILL be involved in relegation scraps, with relegation scraps you get poor runs, you get inconsistent performances, you get big defeats. The important thing after all that is that you don't get relegated, and we haven't. Changing him now may improve us, it may not, but sticking with him isn't a guaranteed relegation as he has proven in previous seasons by not being relegated, and proven in this season by keeping us out of the relegation zone up until this point Is it entertaining football? No Is it comfortable mid table football? No Is Lambert faultless in this shambles? Of course not Is he the only or main reason we're in this mess? No I think Lambert is the best we can get at the moment, this may not be the case at the end of the season, maybe after this seasons over the risk of replacing him would lower and it's probably worth looking at other options (mainly because he's lost the fans, and we as people are a stubborn bunch so once the fans are lost they're lost). Tactically we have every right to complain, but remember most top managers do things that don't make sense to us as fans. Man Utd fans we're often left scratching their heads about SAF's team selections and his playing players out of position, but he was one of the greatest managers of all time, we were the same with MON but we were consistently challenging at the right end and even got to the latter stages of cups, we are not managers, there is a reason for that despite what Football Manager would have you believe We are the way we are because of the puppeteer, not the puppet, changing the puppet won't make much different to the show

In all fairness, we would most likely have lost either way. If we'd played defensive and lost 2-0 he would have been crucified on here for not "having a go". A 5-0 defeat is somewhat of a freak result and we clearly had the idea that if we were going to lose, at least we'd give it a go and try and get a bloody goal Arsenal are probably the best team in the league right now on form, and we are probably one of the worst - the sensible thing would have been to go for damage limitation from minute one and take a 2 or 3 goal defeat most likely. Can you imagine the reaction had we done that? Lose without even trying to score? The defense was woeful against Arsenal, poor positioning and poor decision making all round, that's what cost us and given that it's been the one area where we have been pretty solid this season, I don't consider it outrageous that Lambert would have expected better even though the naive formation was a major hindrance. We all know that tactically he's not the best, and he can be blamed for that no question, but the defense yesterday played like a Sunday league team and they need to take as much criticism for that as Lambert does for his tactics IMO, it was a combination of both that lost us the game so heavily, directing all or 95% of the blame on one person is wrong, that 5-0 was a team effort and they all deserve as much stick for it as each other

Agree with this, as an Australian I would love to see Cahill in a Villa shirt, legend!

.....I could'nt disagree with you more.Which part do you disagree with? most of it, particularly in relating to the mitigation you apportion to the manager. it is not to be denied that he has not had an easy time with finances. How many men have had wives who have spent recklessly and has cost them their marraiges? Randy Lerner trusted his managers to spend well.....they didn't and he rained the spending in( eventually)......Had they of spent well, he would have been pushing money in to their hands.....I am amazed at how many fans struggle to comprehend that FACT. He has had his fingers burnt and this manager is at the brunt of the failings of their predessors. Having said all of that, we still have a situation where most of our signings temporary or perminent have had form regress as opposed to progress. The problem is one of multiple contribution and there is no sign of the end of it yet. Ok, but I agree with that? The point of my post wasn't "Randy Lerner has never done anything for us and he only ever wanted to ruin us but Lambert is amazing and we're lucky to have him", if it was then I would have said it. I wasn't debating the reasons for Lerner withdrawing his funding, and I agree had MON spent it wisely we would be nowhere near this mess, but he didn't and the rest is history, I was simply stating he has withdrawn it, leaving us with a meagre transfer budget and wage cap and this shows no sign of changing. My argument (and I hate to think of myself as "pro Lambert" because like anyone else I'm bored at the football on display and not happy with results) is that given the constraints that we have and will continue to have it will take a very shrewd managerial appointment to improve us long term. I don't see the point in replacing Lambert for a short term gain, then be left well and truly without a paddle, we may as well stick with what we've got until we are prepared to change from top to bottom. My local pub has been through a dozen landlords in the last ten years all with big new ideas and plans to make it great, every single time there was a short term boost with loads of people going for it before it just dwindled again as it was the same pub, the same prices, the same everything just with a different person there. The brewery have since come in and done a £500,000 renovation, they employed the most rude and unlikeable manager that I've ever seen but the place is booming now - now obviously a football club is a different proposition from a pub but the principle is the same - changes HAVE to come from the top or else nothing really changes, it'll just be a different wrapper for the same old crap Do I think we should stick with Lambert forever? God no. But until we are ready to change the way the club is run I don't see any point, anything we do is short term and I can't see it benefiting us. Once things change, either by Randy selling, or by him fully committing, then yes we should sack Lambert and get a new man for a new era and a fresh start. Until then I can only see the same old drivel we're getting now, and (touch wood) at least Lamberts drivel has kept us in the league so far, someone else's drivel may not have

.....I could'nt disagree with you more. Which part do you disagree with?

The way I see it : 1) the financial constraints will not improve while Lerner is in charge 2) we can all pretty much agree that despite one of the lowest transfer budgets in the league, Lambert has built a team that should be capable of say, 10th-12th 3) he consistently cannot get the most out of those players and we seem to end up nearer relegation places (15th) 4) while a new manager may well be capable of getting this squad of players up to about 10th, it's unlikely that he will also have Lamberts eye for a player - managers that can pick up bargain players and get them to consistently over perform won't come to Villa, and if they do it won't be for long as every team would love a manager like this 5) if another manager doesn't have as good a transfer history as Lambert, our squad will gradually become weaker the longer they stay with us 6) a weaker squad will eventually get relegated, regardless of who's in charge Ask yourselves what you would rather, someone who can take the 18th best transfer budget, and buy players capable of getting 10th underperforming in 15th - or someone who will take the 18th best transfer budget, gradually turn our team into one that can only achieve 18th and inevitably get relegated? Now obviously it's not as simple as that, but I do worry if we sack Lambert. Yes on the field he's getting it wrong, but him getting it right off the field is what's saving us at the moment. To improve we would need to get a manager who is every bit as good in the transfer market as Lambert AND can consistently get the best out of players, and those managers are hard to find - given Lerners history of employing managers, how anyone trusts him to find that candidate is a mystery and IMO extremely unlikely. It's far more likely we would get some short term improvements before slipping further downwards. Again, nothing is certain, but I'd say that was a more likely scenario given Randy Lerners poor track record and the general difficulty in finding managers that can do that (see Ole Gunnar S... for an example of how easy it is to get wrong) We are underachieving based on the team we have, but based on the money we've spent we're probably about bang on. The best long term we could realistically expect to happen from signing a new manager (unless by some stroke of pure luck they turn out to be the next Fergie) is short term gain, followed by a gradual decline as our bargain, better quality players get replaced by players that aren't as good. End result being worse players getting largely the same results. That's realistic, worst case we go down, best case we get mid table. Is it worth the risk when the most realistic scenario sees us being the same as we are now but with worse players? I also find it ridiculous that people suggested Pulis, a true short term manager so desperate to keep his 'never been relegated' USP that he bails the second things don't go his own way or he's told he can't sign a first choice player - which would be as soon as a transfer window opens for us leaving us back at square one. I hate to say it with the boring football of late, but given the state of our club, Lambert and Villa are a good fit. The transfer budget and wage structure from the club should see us flirting with relegation, and that's exactly what we're doing. Changes can only come from the top and filter down, otherwise it's meaningless.

This is painful to watch

yeah I saw that. good goal. One of the most expensively assembled teams in the world struggling to score against much weaker team at home bring on 2 players worth about £50 million and end up scoring a goal shocker

OK, I don't post often but thought I'd weight in with my thoughts here. (its long, so bear with me!) We have clearly just completely changed our style of play. We have gone from a very defensive, smash and grab 'style' to a possession based game. Our old style, while painful to watch has kept us in the league for the last couple of years, despite massive cost cutting and very little in the way of transfer spending. Our new style is, at the moment, equally painful to watch - we are having huge amounts of possession with very little end product - and obviously our "goals for" column is shocking. A defensive, smash and grab tactic will always leave you near the bottom, and should only be used by teams that are weak and struggling, as we have been. The next step is a direct counter attacking team, where you need slightly better players. We combined these two tactics depending on who we were playing. The direct counter attack is a decent system, but has a ceiling, the best you can realistically get to would be us under MON/Everton's kind of level. Big Sam is playing the exact same way with West Ham as we did with MON, with similar results (this, incidentally is the only system where playing with wingers works, pace for counter attacking and a good cross, they don't fit into other styles). The possession based game is difficult, as you do need some much better players to make it work, but it has no real ceiling, play this way and you could finish either 20th in the league or 1st. Its a more risky system, do it wrong and you wont score goals or win games (see - us now), but do it right and you can fly up the table (see - Southampton) - it is the only way to play if we are to have any chance at all to progress. Look at the difference when Houllier came in, it took all season for the players to get used to it then it all went out the window when he left, now we are only just starting all over again. The players are adapting to this system, and that will take time. It's as if we have just changed manager and are now in our transitional period, only we've done it without the hassle of sorting out compensation for a sacked manager. I firmly believe that this new way of playing will reap rewards for us, despite the lack of goals we are creating more chances than we have done previously, and with more consistency. As we play this way more and more players will start playing differently, at the moment its all about keeping the ball, so the players are going for the safe easy pass every time. As they adapt they'll try more risky passes more often, while still maintaining a decent possession percentage. They'll try shooting from outside the box. The attacking players will start moving expecting a pass rather than waiting for a pass before moving - it sounds simple, but the players brains have to be retrained until these things (things they didn't do previously because the style of football didn't call for it) become natural to them. When the window opens (or when Mr Lerner kindly allows us to spend some of that TV money) I'm sure we'll be looking at bringing in players who more suit this style, rather than the old one. I was firmly in a Lambert out position, there was no improvement in the football or the results (bar the odd point) but now I want him to stay, I can see improvement. Perhaps if you only look at the result then there is none, but the last two years I've watched 90% of most games expecting us to concede a goal at any moment, and for the most part genuinely surprised when we scored one or even won a game. The last few games haven't been thrillers by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't find myself expecting us to concede a goal every time the opposition have the ball. Despite our horrific goalscoring record (which, just to note, was horrific this season long before we changed our style), I actually am expecting us to get chances. We have also been pretty unlucky with some pretty harsh red cards against pretty defensive teams in our recent games that have not helped in implementing our new style A manager is important, but they can only work with what's in front of them, Alex Ferguson couldn't get us into the Champions League right now, for example. I'd say a good manager could probably get a team 4 or 5 places higher than they should be with the right tactics and time to adapt. So for a team such as ourselves I'd expect a very good manager could probably get us as high as say, 7th or 8th with a bit of luck. On the flip side, the complete opposite is true of a bad manager, they could definitely get us to finish 4 or 5 places lower in the league than we might expect, which could be as low as 19th or 20th with a bit of bad luck. We are currently 12th, and I'd say the only team below us that has a better first team would be Everton, the rest our players are better or comparable overall, and the only team above us I think that we could claim to be better than would be Stoke - so in my eyes our position in the table, ignoring performances, pretty accurately reflects the quality of our players - given that many teams have outspent us in recent windows, credit has to go to Lambert for getting a team together that could realistically consider itself to be the 12th best team in the league. (Although no-one really disputes that he has been good in the transfer window) Is it acceptable that its taken Lambert over 2 years to figure out we needed to change? Of course not Could sacking Lambert and bringing in somebody better improve us? I believe it definitely could, although managers are a mixed bag, and while changing could get us an extra few places in the league, it could also see us relegated. Given that we have actually started playing some more progressive football of late, and have a manager that is good at picking up players on our non existent transfer budget, I think it would be foolish to risk it It's easy to look at Lamberts entire reign and want a change, I did for a long time, but we are changing and part of bringing in a more up and coming manager is accepting that they will mess up every now and then, but hopefully will learn and adapt as they go - at the moment Lambert seems to be doing this. OK, it has taken WAY too long for him to do it, but it is happening. I think he is on the brink of becoming a pretty decent manager and I'd rather look forward than backwards. We sack him now and the next team will get all the benefits from our struggles, we'll see none. I want to support someone who, despite being pretty rubbish, has got the job done. Someone that has supported us when a lot of other managers would have walked given the constraints. And, most importantly, someone who has shown signs that they are getting better, someone who is showing us that they aren't old timers stuck in their ways but young (relatively speaking) managers who are prepared to adapt - managers that are willing to change their style are a VERY rare breed Paul Lambert certainly isn't perfect, he's no messiah - and if Jose Mourinho wanted to come and manage us I'd sack Lambert and get him in immediately - the odds of that happening are slim, so be careful what you wish for - Ole Gunnar Sol...(no idea how to spell the rest) hasn't turned out to be the managerial gem everyone thought. No manager carries guarantees, no manager we could attract at least, and certainly not for anything more than mid table mediocrity, which is exactly where we are now anyway so why waste the compensation when we could get a player instead? Sorry this is so long and if you've read this far...for God's sake get a life!

Surely that'll be overturned?

Thats wrong then because he made a foul before his yellow which should have been a yellow but the ref told him its his last chance after 5 mins lol. Then the yellow came on 9 First tackle wasn't a foul, advantage played and used. Still a foul then no? Not a free kick but a foul surely? Advantage can only be played when there is a foul beforehand