Why Paul Lambert should get the sack

[Villarocker]

While he had the remit of change DK was he forced into doing it so quickly or could it have been more gradual. Giving Bent the captaincy would suggest the latter but the real question should be has he improved our squad and one would have to say looking at the standard of football played and present points trend the answer would have to be no. That may change though if he brings the right signings in when the window opens and I am prepared to give him that time to turn us around. That's why it's probably the most important transfer window coming up in Lambert's tenure and if backed by Lerner he must get it right this time with no more shocking purchases.

We are in a cost-cutting operation - the real question is are we getting better value for the amount of resource employed and CLEARLY we are - Lambert earnt more points and better position than McL whilst utilising resource that cost and earnt massively less - so by any standard that is better

That's a very fair point. However, after achieving that you would expect us to improve further this season. Now, points wise, we may be better off. But, football wise, we are going backwards and playing arguably worse football than under McLeish's short reign. Also bear in mind that this is Lambert's second season. We only suffered one season of McLeish so we don't know whether the football would have actually improved in his second season. FFS Paul, sort it out mate. You've even got me using the worst Villa manager ever in a discussion because our football has become so bad! Hopefully, with a creative midfielder brought in, we can become a much better team than we are now. Edited December 30, 2013 by villarocker

[Villarocker]

Another point I'd like to make, and this isn't going to go down too well with some fans, is that we are not being as tolerant as we were last season.

I think everyone agreed, last season, that this was work in progress and wouldn't be fixed overnight. The fans were very supportive and patient, even in the face of some shocking results. Lambert said time and again how grateful he was for the support of his young team and what it meant to him and them.

This season hasn't quite been the same and I think that's reflecting in the nerves that the players are showing. Maybe that's why they don't give the impression that they are trying? Maybe they're just scared of having the ball and making mistakes, because they fear being booed or jeered by the fans?

I'm sure the people at the club can understand that the fans are the paying customers and have had it rough for a few years now, they're bound to be aware of that. But, that doesn't deflect from the fact that our team has a lot of younger players in it, as well as players who are foreign to this country and playing in the most competitive league in football, for the first time in their young careers.

[VillaCas]

 

 

While he had the remit of change DK was he forced into doing it so quickly or could it have been more gradual. Giving Bent the captaincy would suggest the latter but the real question should be has he improved our squad and one would have to say looking at the standard of football played and present points trend the answer would have to be no.

That may change though if he brings the right signings in when the window opens and I am prepared to give him that time to turn us around. That's why it's probably the most important transfer window coming up in Lambert's tenure and if backed by Lerner he must get it right this time with no more shocking purchases.

We are in a cost-cutting operation - the real question is are we getting better value for the amount of resource employed and CLEARLY we are - Lambert earnt more points and better position than McL whilst utilising resource that cost and earnt massively less - so by any standard that is better

 

That's a very fair point. However, after achieving that you would expect us to improve further this season. Now, points wise, we may be better off. But, football wise, we are going backwards and playing arguably worse football than under McLeish's short reign. Also bear in mind that this is Lambert's second season. We only suffered one season of McLeish so we don't know whether the football would have actually improved in his second season.

FFS Paul, sort it out mate. You've even got me using the worst Villa manager ever in a discussion because our football has become so bad!

Hopefully, with a creative midfielder brought in, we can become a much better team than we are now.

 

 

You're right - we should be better this season - the reason we are not is due I think to a number of factors - i) Bad form of certain players, Weimann, Lowton, Benteke etc, ii) Injures to key players Vlaar, Delph, Okore, Benteke  and finally  iii) other teams more familiar with our style

 

There is a load of nonesense currently being spouted about "young and hungry" has failed and now there is a rush for experience. In his first season I think Lambert expected that Ireland, Bent, Dunne and Zog could provide the experience to help the youngsters but none really stepped up to the plate. During last summer Lambert enquired about Sissoko (not experience but quality) and Kiyotake and also apparently wanted Barry and Lukaku but funds were not available - it may be that Lambert felt like whatever was available experience-wise was not VFM or any better than what was here already

 

Lambert's achilles heel is the signing of Tonev and Helenious which although only for relatively small amounts have failed to deliver so far

[lmarsha_926]

At times last season under Lambert we played the best football we have seen in years but 5 players integral to that are now out of form (Lowton, Westwood, Agbonlahor, weimann, Benteke)

[AstonMartin82]

 

 

 

You could be right although I'd suggest if it was the case that those would be easily moved they'd probably return to the same level where they came from.

Bent being on a lot more than Benteke yet Benteke being the better player is exactly my point concerning wages v performance,

 

I don't know if really you don't understand or if you're being deliberately dense but obviously one example does not disprove a rule

 

Quote  "The logical conclusion is that the more you spend on wages, the more points you got in the Premier League"

 

http://www.squawka.com/news/2013/07/09/value-index-part-1/2013070912877

Ok I'll give you another example and one which your sarcasm will like. QPR last season.

 

 

Well, you've had two attempts at this and have spectacularly and magnificently totally misunderstood the concept. To be honest, your lack of understanding here puts the rest of your posts into context

 

In a nutshell, well established rules of economics dictate that in general, the more talented you are, the more you can expect to get paid - this is not in dispute

 

In football terms, there is a massive correlation (statistical relationship) between what you pay your players in wages and how many points you should expect to get back in return

 

 

 

Teams to the left of this line have under-performed ie they have not earnt the number of points that the amount of money they have paid out deserves

 

Teams to the right of the line have over-performed earning more points than you would expect

 

The best (worst?) example of a team under-performing during 2011/12 was McL's Villa - given the high wage bill they should have been expected to earn around 12 additional points. The fact that they didn't is clearly a function of bad management and players not performing to the level that their pay would indicate.  

 

Using a different metric, McL team was the 7th best paid but finished 16th - the worst differential (-9) between pay and position in the division (the best differentials were Brendan Rodgers' Swansea (+9) and Lambert's Norwich (+7))

 

It is not really possible to exactly say what % of under or over-performance is due to management and what % is due to players, but in the example that you provide, Bent v Benteke it seems pretty clear that your poster-boy Bent at £65k a week was not returning value and that Benteke at c£25k a week was massively over-performing (this is further confirmed by Bent's contribution at Fulham)

 

Your other example (QPR) shows exactly the same situation as at Villa in 2011/12 - a combination of bad management and players not delivering performance commensurate with their wages. Even your hero Redknapp who overachieved with Spurs couldn't turn it around

 

I would think that Lambert's team are now on something like 50% of the wages that McL's team was on - when you cut wages so dramatically, statistics would suggest that you should see a proportionate reduction in the number of points you should expect. We don't yet have the figures available but I would expect that we have moved from a position of massively under-performing under McL, to a position under Lambert where, so far, we have earned more points than the wage bill would suggest

 

http://www.squawka.com/news/2013/07/09/value-index-part-1/2013070912877

 

In my day job, I work with companies to improve their customer service - the biggest source of dissatisfaction with companies is where performance does not meet customer expectation. For example, Ryanair is clear with customers that it is a no-frills airline and so customers have fairly low expectations of the level of service they can expect and people are mostly satisfied, but if BA offered the same level of service their customers would be dissatisfied because their expectations are much higher

 

Our problem is that we have, somewhat understandably given the relatively decent performance of a few years ago, the mentality and expectations of a big club, but people who think like this are undoubtedly going to feel disappointed because their expectations are way out of step with what can feasibly be delivered with the resources employed. 

 

Personally, I've lowered my expectations and I'm not currently judging Lambert against the same standard that I judged MON, Houllier or McL - if and when Lambert gets more money (to spend on wages not on fees - there is a much much lower correlation between fees and performance) my expectations of him will rise accordingly

 

I've got no particular favouritism towards Lambert but whilst in my opinion he is keeping us on the plus side of the chart I continue to support him

 

 

Fantastic post Cas.

 

It would be interesting to see the same stats but only using the regular starting 11 wages rather than the squads wages. This I think would highlight just how huge a job Lambert took on last year. The majority of our big earners were not / are not contributing on the pitch suggesting that we probably over-achieved last season using the players which we did.

 

This season was always going to be a struggle and all I was hoping for was less of a relegation battle than last season and thus far we are achieving that, despite the recent downturn in results. If we win the bottom half of the table then it will be a very successful season in my opinion.

 

I find it sad that Lambert is losing some of the Villa faithful after what would have been a pretty ugly job description that he took on at the beginning of last season and one which he has done well at so far. I think he deserves more time to see this job through as in the bigger picture he is only really just started it. That said though I do sympathsise and feel the frustration of the fans who are annoyed at losing games without even competing. This to me is a lot worse than just losing the games but I have faith that we will turn it around soon.

[The Fun Factory]

Another point I'd like to make, and this isn't going to go down too well with some fans, is that we are not being as tolerant as we were last season.

I think everyone agreed, last season, that this was work in progress and wouldn't be fixed overnight. The fans were very supportive and patient, even in the face of some shocking results. Lambert said time and again how grateful he was for the support of his young team and what it meant to him and them.

This season hasn't quite been the same and I think that's reflecting in the nerves that the players are showing. Maybe that's why they don't give the impression that they are trying? Maybe they're just scared of having the ball and making mistakes, because they fear being booed or jeered by the fans?

I'm sure the people at the club can understand that the fans are the paying customers and have had it rough for a few years now, they're bound to be aware of that. But, that doesn't deflect from the fact that our team has a lot of younger players in it, as well as players who are foreign to this country and playing in the most competitive league in football, for the first time in their young careers.

What do you expect? 6 defeats at home already and it isn't even January.Other than the Sunderland game last season when is the last time Villa have played well and won a game at home in the league? You could be talking years. I think the fans are being amazingly tolerant, we are averaging more this season than the past 2 in which we came 16t and 15th. A few half hearted boos after a excuse of a peformance versus palace, the worst side on paper in the league, is fairly kind on them. We are not asking much, just more than 5 wins at home in season. We will do well to get 4 more wins in 9 matches.

[Villarocker]

Fun Factory, I totally understand where you're coming from mate. I am sure that the players and management understand it too. They can't look at our home form/performances and be happy. They must know the fans deserve more for their money and support. But, that still doesn't mean that the moans and groans doesn't have a negative effect on the players. Like I said, maybe that's scaring them into not wanting the ball? Maybe that's why they shoot when they should pass? Maybe that's why the back four don't want the ball off Guzan? Or, why Guzan doesn't give it to them because maybe he feels that they don't have the nerves to cope with it in that position?

All maybes, I know. But, there could be a lot of truth in that lot. What we really need now is for our injured players to come back and to bring in a couple of decent players in January. That has to have a positive effect on the club overall. I personally wouldn't mind going into the last 2-3 months of the season with this starting eleven, if we could manage to make it happen:

-----------------------Guzan--------------------

Lowton----Okore------Vlaar-----Clark

---------------Delph------Westwood------

--------------------Hoolahan------------------

De Bruyne------------------Agbonlahor

---------------------Benteke--------------------

That would be a decent team to see us home into the summer when we can hopefully strengthen further.

[Morpheus]

You could be right although I'd suggest if it was the case that those would be easily moved they'd probably return to the same level where they came from.

Bent being on a lot more than Benteke yet Benteke being the better player is exactly my point concerning wages v performance,

I don't know if really you don't understand or if you're being deliberately dense but obviously one example does not disprove a rule

Quote "The logical conclusion is that the more you spend on wages, the more points you got in the Premier League"

http://www.squawka.com/news/2013/07/09/value-index-part-1/2013070912877

Ok I'll give you another example and one which your sarcasm will like. QPR last season.

Well, you've had two attempts at this and have spectacularly and magnificently totally misunderstood the concept. To be honest, your lack of understanding here puts the rest of your posts into context

In a nutshell, well established rules of economics dictate that in general, the more talented you are, the more you can expect to get paid - this is not in dispute

In football terms, there is a massive correlation (statistical relationship) between what you pay your players in wages and how many points you should expect to get back in return

Teams to the left of this line have under-performed ie they have not earnt the number of points that the amount of money they have paid out deserves

Teams to the right of the line have over-performed earning more points than you would expect

The best (worst?) example of a team under-performing during 2011/12 was McL's Villa - given the high wage bill they should have been expected to earn around 12 additional points. The fact that they didn't is clearly a function of bad management and players not performing to the level that their pay would indicate.

Using a different metric, McL team was the 7th best paid but finished 16th - the worst differential (-9) between pay and position in the division (the best differentials were Brendan Rodgers' Swansea (+9) and Lambert's Norwich (+7))

It is not really possible to exactly say what % of under or over-performance is due to management and what % is due to players, but in the example that you provide, Bent v Benteke it seems pretty clear that your poster-boy Bent at £65k a week was not returning value and that Benteke at c£25k a week was massively over-performing (this is further confirmed by Bent's contribution at Fulham)

Your other example (QPR) shows exactly the same situation as at Villa in 2011/12 - a combination of bad management and players not delivering performance commensurate with their wages. Even your hero Redknapp who overachieved with Spurs couldn't turn it around

I would think that Lambert's team are now on something like 50% of the wages that McL's team was on - when you cut wages so dramatically, statistics would suggest that you should see a proportionate reduction in the number of points you should expect. We don't yet have the figures available but I would expect that we have moved from a position of massively under-performing under McL, to a position under Lambert where, so far, we have earned more points than the wage bill would suggest

http://www.squawka.com/news/2013/07/09/value-index-part-1/2013070912877

In my day job, I work with companies to improve their customer service - the biggest source of dissatisfaction with companies is where performance does not meet customer expectation. For example, Ryanair is clear with customers that it is a no-frills airline and so customers have fairly low expectations of the level of service they can expect and people are mostly satisfied, but if BA offered the same level of service their customers would be dissatisfied because their expectations are much higher

Our problem is that we have, somewhat understandably given the relatively decent performance of a few years ago, the mentality and expectations of a big club, but people who think like this are undoubtedly going to feel disappointed because their expectations are way out of step with what can feasibly be delivered with the resources employed.

Personally, I've lowered my expectations and I'm not currently judging Lambert against the same standard that I judged MON, Houllier or McL - if and when Lambert gets more money (to spend on wages not on fees - there is a much much lower correlation between fees and performance) my expectations of him will rise accordingly

I've got no particular favouritism towards Lambert but whilst in my opinion he is keeping us on the plus side of the chart I continue to support him

So let me get this straight if I may.

You have now gone from quoting our improvement in points total at the same stage last season (and I can understand why) to now quoting statistics which apparently excuse our performances under Lambert because we pay low wages. In answering your point I asked you what wages were Gabby, Vlaar, Delph, Weimann, Benteke and Guzan on. You ignored the question.

I then asked you if there is a correlation in performance to wages why is Bent on more wages than Benteke and then quoted you QPR last season who had a high wage outlay yet were relegated. Reading your above post you have yet again failed to reply in context preferring to use sarcasm concerning both Bent and Redknapp. One would have hoped you would have stopped doing that after Berbatov and Adam made you choke on your own opinion of them but obviously ignorance is bliss.

Unless you have the financial clout of the top four, in our mini league there really is no correlation in wages to performance it just comes down to how well you are organised and coached and it is no surprise at all that your very own poster boy according to HH is finally seeing the error of his ways and looking to purchase more experienced players, em, who apparently are not going to be asking the earth in wages. Strange you can actually do that VillaCas isn't it.

Finally just before you go off on another one of your disappearing acts here is a much more relevant stat for you. We'll three actually.

Under your very own poster boy this season we have won two home games in ten with the lowest goals scored in all four divisions. We've won eleven games out of the last forty eight and we're just through an easier set of fixtures.

I note since results are the most important stats of all you have yet to show a result stat table concerning Lambert. I wonder why that is?

Edited December 30, 2013 by Morpheus

[The Fun Factory]

Fun Factory, I totally understand where you're coming from mate. I am sure that the players and management understand it too. They can't look at our home form/performances and be happy. They must know the fans deserve more for their money and support. But, that still doesn't mean that the moans and groans doesn't have a negative effect on the players. Like I said, maybe that's scaring them into not wanting the ball? Maybe that's why they shoot when they should pass? Maybe that's why the back four don't want the ball off Guzan? Or, why Guzan doesn't give it to them because maybe he feels that they don't have the nerves to cope with it in that position?

All maybes, I know. But, there could be a lot of truth in that lot. What we really need now is for our injured players to come back and to bring in a couple of decent players in January. That has to have a positive effect on the club overall. I personally wouldn't mind going into the last 2-3 months of the season with this starting eleven, if we could manage to make it happen:

-----------------------Guzan--------------------

Lowton----Okore------Vlaar-----Clark

---------------Delph------Westwood------

--------------------Hoolahan------------------

De Bruyne------------------Agbonlahor

---------------------Benteke--------------------

That would be a decent team to see us home into the summer when we can hopefully strengthen further.

Like the postivity. But last January we badly needed some quality signings. We got Sylla from the french second division and simon dawkins on loan who was bobbins. So don't expect too much.

[Morpheus]

 

While he had the remit of change DK was he forced into doing it so quickly or could it have been more gradual. Giving Bent the captaincy would suggest the latter but the real question should be has he improved our squad and one would have to say looking at the standard of football played and present points trend the answer would have to be no.

That may change though if he brings the right signings in when the window opens and I am prepared to give him that time to turn us around. That's why it's probably the most important transfer window coming up in Lambert's tenure and if backed by Lerner he must get it right this time with no more shocking purchases.

 

Good grief.....again with this nonsense.   That's not at all the real question AT ALL

 

Only in your fantasy world would you expect someone going from a £70m a year to a £35m a year wage bill to "improve" the squad!

 

We are in a cost-cutting operation - the real question is are we getting better value for the amount of resource employed and CLEARLY we are - Lambert earnt more points and better position than McL whilst utilising resource that cost and earnt massively less - so by any standard that is better

 

Is that the best that any manager could do? Possibly not - Rodgers or Moyes for example might do better. Is that better than any other manager that Villa could attract could do? probably yes

 

You have totally mis-understood the nature of the task facing us

No mate in your desperation to find something to defend Lambert with it is you who is missing the overall.

You have continually described those players that were here before Lambert's arrival as poor and given their high wages that is why we got rid.

Those players who have been purchased by Lambert you have now tried to excuse their performance level by costing less and somehow you think by costing less their performance level is acceptable even though spending another 40m for that lack of improvement.

 

That is some weird logic indeed.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Morpheus

[Big_John_10]

We all know McLeish was awful we all know how bad that team was. So why is it worthy of praise or a sign of good things to come that we're performing to a similar standard with less money spent on wages?

I don't get that point at all. If McLeish had done a great job and we were doing similar with a cheaper budget then yes, I could see how that's worthy of praise but being pretty much just as crap but spending less makes no sense how its deemed a positive.

If all we're to expect is to be like McLeish but cheaper then what are the expectations for the future?

Edited December 30, 2013 by Big_John_10

[Hanky]

I'd love to think Lambert is going to turn this bad run of form and play around. However, I see a lot of excuses for him at the minute such as injuries, loss of form, wages, and unbelievably the fans. Now these are contributing factors into why we may not be challenging as high as we'd all like (bar the fan argument), but not for the absolute tripe I witnessed over Christmas in my opinion.

Lambert out? To be honest I don't know at the moment. I do know that the level of performance is completely unacceptable, and if Lambert knows this like we're being told he is, why the hell is he not addressing it on the training ground? We are getting worse as a team.

[tomh621]

Most people seem to be forgetting that most of the players signed by lambert have come from nowhere and are now playing in, arguably, the most challenging league in the world. That's a huge step up. What did you expect? Another Ronaldo to come waltzing out of Lech Poznan?

Edited December 30, 2013 by tomh621

[Big_John_10]

Most people seem to be forgetting that most of the players signed by lambert have come from nowhere and are now playing in, arguably, the most challenging league in the world. That's a huge step up. What did you expect? Another Ronaldo to come waltzing out of Lech Poznan?

If a manager signs a player not up to the level required you can't just say oh well look where he came from. Its the managers job to work with his scouts and identify players that are capable of playing at this level.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

Most people seem to be forgetting that most of the players signed by lambert have come from nowhere and are now playing in, arguably, the most challenging league in the world. That's a huge step up. What did you expect? Another Ronaldo to come waltzing out of Lech Poznan?

No.

Just someone who can competently pass the ball to a teammate and then find space to run into, mainly.

[Ulver]

Most people seem to be forgetting that most of the players signed by lambert have come from nowhere and are now playing in, arguably, the most challenging league in the world. That's a huge step up. What did you expect? Another Ronaldo to come waltzing out of Lech Poznan?

 

why sign them then ?

 

surely Lambert knew what league they'd be playing in ?, or maybe thats why he's dragging us down so they wont look so shit in the Championship

 

that would be a managerial masterstroke

Edited December 30, 2013 by Ulver

[Xann]

My perception of this is that resources were allocated thinly but accordingly (to balance the books anyway) at the beginning of the season.

 

Okore was intended to be Vlaar's partner, with a youngster filling in for injuries/suspensions/cup games.

 

Without them both our defence would struggle a league down.

 

Inevitably the midfield is shackled to the defence to stop the inevitable goal fest for the opposition.

 

Lambert is pretty much powerless to do anything about this until the transfer window opens.

 

Reserving judgement until we see what business is done, I'm hoping the defence patch isn't coming out the AM budget.

[Risso]

 

 

While he had the remit of change DK was he forced into doing it so quickly or could it have been more gradual. Giving Bent the captaincy would suggest the latter but the real question should be has he improved our squad and one would have to say looking at the standard of football played and present points trend the answer would have to be no.

That may change though if he brings the right signings in when the window opens and I am prepared to give him that time to turn us around. That's why it's probably the most important transfer window coming up in Lambert's tenure and if backed by Lerner he must get it right this time with no more shocking purchases.

 

 

Good grief.....again with this nonsense.   That's not at all the real question AT ALL

 

Only in your fantasy world would you expect someone going from a £70m a year to a £35m a year wage bill to "improve" the squad!

 

We are in a cost-cutting operation - the real question is are we getting better value for the amount of resource employed and CLEARLY we are - Lambert earnt more points and better position than McL whilst utilising resource that cost and earnt massively less - so by any standard that is better

 

Is that the best that any manager could do? Possibly not - Rodgers or Moyes for example might do better. Is that better than any other manager that Villa could attract could do? probably yes

 

You have totally mis-understood the nature of the task facing us

 

 

The wages bill for 31 May 2011 was £83m, to 31 May 2012 was £70m.  I'd be absolutely astonished if the May 2013 accounts that are due out in a couple of months show that it's dropped to £35m.

[tomh621]

Most people seem to be forgetting that most of the players signed by lambert have come from nowhere and are now playing in, arguably, the most challenging league in the world. That's a huge step up. What did you expect? Another Ronaldo to come waltzing out of Lech Poznan?

why sign them then ?

surely Lambert knew what league they'd be playing in ?, or maybe thats why he's dragging us down so they wont look so shit in the Championship

that would be a managerial masterstroke

What I should have added here was that the signings must emphasise the limitations lambert has to work with (for now), he still had high wage earners on the bill, so couldn't add more, and needed to offload players before he could spend his limited budget. He couldn't guarantee the bomb squad would be gone so he had to compensate and he certainly couldn't wait last minute to get his deals done. Not the best way to go about things but stop solely blaming Lambert he's not the only guy in this club.

[Morpheus]

 

Very well reasoned VillaCas and completely understandable. To be honest, I've no issue with the points return so far. We're a bit closer to the bottom three than I'd have liked but 3 points on Wednesday could turn that on its head.

What none of that is able to defend is the standard of football on show. How disorganised and demotivated we look. How much worse we seem to be getting game by game. Whilst I admire your persistence I know you're not stupid, you know, as a consumer, that on the pitch the level of entertainer provided simply isn't good enough and that if current form continues we're only heading one way.

 

I tend to agree with you. I've set out my reasons why I support Lambert and at the moment he is still on the plus side of the chart for me (as he has been since he came here) - however, that doesn't mean that I would continue to support him if performances continue to slide. Once he crosses over to the negative side of the line he is fair game

 

The problem for us is that resources are cut so close to the bone that, at the moment, that we really shouldnt expect much more than lower bottom half - We have a very weak squad and so a few injuries to key players leaves us very exposed. It's no wonder than confidence looks so low.   Lerner really needs to back Lambert in the window or be prepared to face the consequences.

 

To cover off the circular arguments that will undoubtedly be raised again.

 

I believe Lambert was right to freeze out the overpaid, underperformers (I also believe that this was part of the agreement with Lerner when he took the job)

I believe that Lambert would have liked to bring in a little more experience and quality but funds were not available

I believe that the £40m figure that is constantly trotted out is a red herring - in the same period we have lost players that cost double that to recruit

I firmly believe that wages = performance and whilst we are paying peanuts we will be a bottom half team

I believe that Lambert hates the style of football we are playing but is resigned to the fact that it is the best way to get points on the board

I believe that Lambert has taken a massive hit to his reputation on the gamble that Lerner will back him to achieve in Y3, Y4 & Y5

 

Just want to reply to the two points in bold as we've debated everything else.

 

I am also in no doubt that removing under-performing players on high wages was in the remit but any manager would want to do that anyway irrespective of the budget. Where we differ is that he did not have to use the guillotine on the first team in the way that he did. I have seen no quote or anything substantiated to suggest differently. What I have seen however is a quote from the chief executive stating that Lambert had a budget and it was up to him how he spent it.

 

Concerning your second point I think Risso has quoted stats showing an expenditure of 40m plus.