jackbauer24

Christmas in this country never feels like it 'should'. We're showered with images of cottages, 6 ft deep snow, a roaring fire and massive vintage looking Christmas trees. What we get is our normal house (just a bit fuller) with grey skies and cold winds, a tacky plastic tree with awful tinsel on! 

I think it's because I like the movies and we never get the image that films portray. However, last year I decided to visit New York for Xmas. It IS like the movies, it is massive, it can snow, I can ice-skate on central park. It's not a Victorian English Xmas but it is much closer to the 'image' the films portray about Xmas in NYC.

So I'm back there this year and fully intend to make it a tradition!

At the start of the season I just wanted us to compete, results come before performance. I think most fans have to be realistic and accept we are unlikely to beat last season's top 6 (although good to push them) but want to compete against the other 13 teams. I think a good season would see us finish 12th with our position in the footballing world at the moment.

So with this in mind, taking out the top 6 from last year, our record is pretty good!

Stoke, Newcastle, Hull, QPR, West Ham, Southampton, Burnley, Crystal Palace and Leicester. P9 W4 D4 L1 = 16pts

The performances havent been great but the results aren't that bad. This isn't even taking into account the great season West Ham and Southampton are having. I'm happy with the season so far and haven't wavered from that belief since August.

He's improving which is key but still think he's a bit of a luxury player at the moment. For all the sublime cross field passes or through balls, he still has the tendency to hesitate on the ball, get surprised by how quickly he's closed down or play sloppy easy balls that put us in trouble. At the moment I think he's more likely to cost us points than gain us them, but given maybe this season to settle he might prove a solid, even good, acquisition.

Actually one final thing - of the £45m Lambert has spent whilst here, Benteke, Kozak and Okore have been unavailable for huge periods of time: that's nearly half the value of the whole squad.

 

 

We know he wanted better players. Couldn't every manager outside of the top 5/6 say this? If he'd had more money to spend and brought in these players we'd expect more. But he hasn't so our expectations are lowered. Its these low expectations that he's struggling to match that see so many wanting him replaced. I don't see what players he wanted and couldn't get changing that

 

I'm really struggling to understand how you don't understand!! Surely if you're accepting that Lambert might have preferred better players than he's been able to get due to financial constraints (whether transfer fee or wages) then you are acknowledging that it is Lerner not Lambert who is the MAIN problem.

Most of the Lambert sympathisers (not necessarily pro) suggest he couldn't have done much better in the transfer market than he has done. Yes one or two haven't worked out like all managers and others have. His record is fine really, above average I'd say. But you seem to be blaming him for Lerner not providing competitive transfer fees or wages! 

 

 

His transfer record has been mostly not very good at all:

 

KEA - hopeless

Sylla - terrible

Lowton - rubbish

Bennett - dismal

Luna - worse than Bennett

Tonev - George Weah's cousin

Bowery - pub player

Cissokho - crap

Vlaar - always injured

Bacuna - average at best

Joe Cole - elderly

Helenius - another flop

 

How to answer this ridiculous post politely....

You have picked out 12 players from all his transfers. You name Vlaar as bad value (doesn't even need a comment), You say Cissokho is crap (very few would agree with that at this stage), You say Cole is elderly (we've been crying out for experience as a fan base) you say Lowton is rubbish (not the common consensus just a season or two ago)

Furthermore the players you have named are generally under £2m, Bowery ended up costing us £0.25m! EVERY manager will have some bad signings. It's Champ manager thinking that ruins modern football... "should have bought x from Kazakhstan...."

Please name like for like value players that Lambert could have bought (try to do same with wages too!). If you can pick and choose a first XI from any teams in the Premiership I'll be quite surprised, if you can do it from just one or two teams I'd be shocked! I'll even let us assume they of course want to play for the mighty Aston Villa without hesitation.

Genuine challenge - base it on our team against Crystal Palace:

Guzan (I'll be nice and say £1m even though for Lambert he was a free)
Clark (free)
Okore (£4m)
Hutton (£4m - although not a Lambert signing)
Cissokho (£2m)
Westwood (£2m)
Sanchez (£4m)
Cleverley (any player on loan of similar wages/value)
Weimann (free)
Agbonlahor (free)
Benteke (£10m)

Complete fantasy football with all the benefits of hindsight but I think if you try it you'll really struggle to make a better first XI with £27m.


 

We know he wanted better players. Couldn't every manager outside of the top 5/6 say this? If he'd had more money to spend and brought in these players we'd expect more. But he hasn't so our expectations are lowered. Its these low expectations that he's struggling to match that see so many wanting him replaced. I don't see what players he wanted and couldn't get changing that

I'm really struggling to understand how you don't understand!! Surely if you're accepting that Lambert might have preferred better players than he's been able to get due to financial constraints (whether transfer fee or wages) then you are acknowledging that it is Lerner not Lambert who is the MAIN problem.

Most of the Lambert sympathisers (not necessarily pro) suggest he couldn't have done much better in the transfer market than he has done. Yes one or two haven't worked out like all managers and others have. His record is fine really, above average I'd say. But you seem to be blaming him for Lerner not providing competitive transfer fees or wages! 

If we get to pick and chose, we could have used Hutton from the start and not bought Lowton. We also could have not bought Kozak and used Bent or Helenius as the Benteke back-up (as that position was fairly well stocked already).

That would have made an extra £4m-6m available, in my opinion.

 

This is very 'current' thinking with all the benefits of hindsight. Who on here would genuinely think Hutton didn't need replacing a few years back when he had played appallingly game after game? Then he was replaced with a very cheap Lowton from a League One side (so unproven and low wages) who went on to be an near ever present and be considered one of the players of the season and score an amazing goal against Stoke that arguably begun our survival bid.

But because he's been dropped for unknown reasons and Hutton has had a rebirth this means Lambert misspent?! It's too easy to pick and chose who we should have bought and when but with ALL the things people beat Lambert with - his transfer record is amongst the better ones in the division with the funds he's had available.

Someone above very astutely mentioned that he's only spent significant funds on a few players (let's say £4m as a guide using transferleague.co.uk for fees)

Carlos Sanchez (£4.7m) - Early but looks like at least a partial success.

Jores Okore (£4m) - Injured within three games but has had a fairly good reintroduction recently.

Libor Kozak (£5m) - Injured, but £5m for a striker is incredibly cheap anyway.

Christian Benteke (£10m) - Success. Saved us several times, will be sold for a lot more than he's worth.

That's it. But maybe we try above £3m players (you know, like broke small teams buy to keep afloat)

Leandro Bacuna (£3m) - I'd say easily worth that - some of the freekicks have been outstanding!!

Matthew Lowton (£3m) - see above but good value

Ron Vlaar (£3.2m) - much like Benteke, but error with contracts - is that Lambert's fault?

Now we have to look at under £3m players... In fact, I'll list the players who can be considered a waste of money since Lambert took over:

Sylla (£2m), Bowery (£0.5m - or 0.25m after sale), Bennett (£2.5m), Tonev (£2.5m), Helenius (£2m), Luna (£2m)

£11m over three seasons. So he could have gambled on two or three (considering our average transfer fee) different players over that time and who knows whether they would have been any better or whether we would have had the squad depth.

Lambert has spent £50.9m on 25 players since he has been in charge (an average of £2m a player) and the documented reduction of wages (and therefore quality) that goes with it.

For all you fantasy football fans, please give me a squad of players (picking and choosing with the benefit of hindsight) from any team in the Premiership with the maximum amount you are allowed to spend being £50m. It's slightly unrealistic because obviously we had players when he took over (but no-one of any value left, or ageing/ over-paid players he didn't want or wasn't allowed to play).

As a rough guide you need to spend £1m on your keepers

Maybe £8m on your four defenders

Say £16m on your four defenders

And the same on your two strikers = £41m

You then have £9m to spend on AT LEAST a competent 5 subs and use youth for the rest of the squad.

And it's not just transfers either - everyone knows our wage cap is crippling and has to be heavily reduced. We couldn't compete with West Brom for Lescott on his wages...

Interesting stats for those that worry about progression: Villa are the second most improved team based on like for like fixtures last year. West Ham are clear winners on that front at the moment (£31m will do that) but Villa are making progress, albeit from a very poor position last year.

http://bwinbetting.com/leagues/premier-league/west-ham-aston-villa-chelsea-201415s-most-improved-teams,64594.html?

The worst performance I've seen in a few seasons and yet three points! Sorry Palace, you were robbed. Struggled to give any player MOTM as they were all pathetic. How can I be so angry after a win?!

There's no way that 67% stat for possession can be right, unless they're counting the minutes it's in the air whilst we've sliced it in an attempted clearance?!

I'm shocked we're not losing this by three or four, if Zaha manages not to sky every pass he makes we're screwed in the second half. Absolutely shocking display.

 

Doesn't really matter whilst Lambert is still the manager. Will make no difference to how good we are.

Much like changing the manager will make little difference whilst Lerner is the chairman...

How old is he?! I'd hope that he could at least manage 60minutes for all these three games, just go easier on training if that's a great concern.

Easily MOTM today, ran the midfield and Burnley today. I'd hope he'll strike up a good relationship with Benteke in the next few matches.

It was like playing with ten men in the first half. For all the good, even impressive, stuff we did he looked a liability and Burnley seized upon that. Second half he improved but nothing remotely spectacular - still the weakest midfielder out there.

He doesnt react quickly, he's sloppy and he gets turned so easily. Im not writing him off yet but he has a long way to go to get up to Prem standard. I'd have felt more comfortable with El Ahmadi out there!

Just hope it's an adjustment thing and he makes the same strides Petrov did after a shaky start.

I thing the argument that has been made over the last 1000 pages comes down simply to Villa's position in this world.

If you believe we are a midtable team then you're right and Lambert should be sacked.

If you believe we are a struggling team, lower midtable then you think he's under-performed.

If you believe, like me, that the finances and set up of this club and barely enough to survive then Lambert isn't the problem.

I think a lot of managers would have got us relegated. I'd prefer to play the cr*p anti-football of last night and tread water in the hope of a better future (change of ownership) than play exciting football and be destroyed because we don't have the finances to be that exciting.

Lerner doesn't deserve a Premier League team, and pushes the boundary further every year. One year he'll push too hard. Lambert has limited chance to improve the style of team.

But i think at this point, few will be swayed from their viewpoint.

Although I have no clue what any of you are talking about.... I was thinking of going to a Giants game just to experience it.

I try to spend every Xmas/ New Year in NYC and last year went to MSG to see the Knicks, needed a small mortgage for the tickets but thought it must be due to popularity/ the name. Looking at Giants tickets and they too require loans to be taken out on your first born! Cheapest tickets are easily £100, right at the back.

Is all US sport this expensive?! How do people afford it? Going to see Brooklyn Nets at Barclays Centre this year and thats a lot more reasonably priced.

Makes me think the Premier League is a bargain.

 

 

Hey just in  case anyone wondered. at this point in time of the 15th November 2014 Ched Evans is a convicted rapist  on the Violent and Sex Offender Register. Maybe think about that before you embark on a spirited defence of him.

 

I don't think anyone is forgetting that or defending the man himself. It is the principle of justice/fairness. If the law we all follow suggests he is free to continue his normal life then it doesn't matter what he did, whether he's an idiot or what his job is. If he shouldn't be allowed to then he should still be in jail.

 

He will have certain restrictions on him but the law does not stop him from being a footballer so it is irrelevant. He can't be a teacher etc, but footballer is not on that list. If it were placed on the list how would you decide - salary cap (so apply to bankers/ self employed entrepreneurs?) or fame (A list not allowed, 'f' list ok....).

 

I'd never heard of Ched Evans before this so don't have any particular interest particular in him/ the case, but I feel he should be treated like all other released prisoners.

 

He should be treated the same as any other convicted rapist who has served half their sentence, I 100% agree with you. 

 

So do you agree? If a office worker can go back to their job then so should he even if he's a footballer on a ridiculous wage.

However, whether either should be entitled to do that after half their sentence is a different matter. Whether five years is sufficient even is another matter. The issue is the law not whether he is a footballer or an average guy.

Hey just in  case anyone wondered. at this point in time of the 15th November 2014 Ched Evans is a convicted rapist  on the Violent and Sex Offender Register. Maybe think about that before you embark on a spirited defence of him.

I don't think anyone is forgetting that or defending the man himself. It is the principle of justice/fairness. If the law we all follow suggests he is free to continue his normal life then it doesn't matter what he did, whether he's an idiot or what his job is. If he shouldn't be allowed to then he should still be in jail.

He will have certain restrictions on him but the law does not stop him from being a footballer so it is irrelevant. He can't be a teacher etc, but footballer is not on that list. If it were placed on the list how would you decide - salary cap (so apply to bankers/ self employed entrepreneurs?) or fame (A list not allowed, 'f' list ok....).

I'd never heard of Ched Evans before this so don't have any particular interest particular in him/ the case, but I feel he should be treated like all other released prisoners.

To me this is incredibly simple; if he's out of jail and allowed to resume his life then he should be fully entitled to do whatever he is able to as long as it fits his conditions of release.

It doesn't matter what the crime is, it doesn't matter if he's an idiot, it doesn't matter what job he does - we must attempt to treat all people equally and if that means rich people can't pay their way out of law they equally can't be penalised more than your average Joe.

The argument should only be whether the sentencing of crimes is sufficient. But a postman would be allowed back to work, a head of a company would not be forced to start at the bottom again and a millionaire banker would be allowed to earn his ridiculous salary again. So, for me, he should be permitted to play for whatever club wants to take him on without threat of public backlash. If any backlash exists, it should be again the Justice system.

 

he's just head of a badly managed company with a limited chance of being able to fix it. 

 

Or alternatively he is badly managing the team and he has limited ability to resolve the mess that he has partly created.

  

I think he's done what he needs to so far, which is to keep us up. I think that's all that has been asked of him and has been a deciding factor on budget and player signings. Lerner gave him an extended contract based on this rather than four games in all likelihood. He's been given the transfer and wage limits to survive and nothing more and he's done this.

So whilst I hate where we are, I think Lambert has done what's been required. It all comes down to where you believe our ceiling is at the moment, for me we could not get higher than 12th with any manager with our transfer and wage limitations. So whilst there is room for some improvement, which early season suggested was possible, I don't think he's done an awful job. I firmly believe a lot of other managers would have seen us relegated whilst only a few may have made us reach 12th. Lambert is the safe, sensible, stable and proven bet to keep us up until we are sold are can start competing again.

If we are to judge Lambert on purely the results and ignore all outside influences, mitigating circumstances and the modern game then there is little to support him. We are having awful season after awful season.

HOWEVER, then surely the same should apply to Lerner. Ellis was a better chairman than him; it's simple, we won two cups under his stewardship and were frequently in Europe. We are not allowed to look at the environment surrounding their tenure - simply what results we have while they are in charge.

And this, for me, is why saying Lambert is awful is too simplistic. I hate as much as anyone what is happening to our club but I don't feel changing the manager will change our fortunes. I think he's doing a good job based on what he has to work with, which is unfortunately bad players. He's made mistakes but to judge him on all the awful records we have broken is too easy - he's just head of a badly managed company with a limited chance of being able to fix it. 

But I know this will fall largely on deaf ears because we're all hurting too much at the results. I just think we're looking in the wrong place for the fault.