TRO Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Alex Ferguson, had a doubtful 5 years at Old Trafford to start with and Roberto Martinez had a difficult time with Wigan. One thing that kept their personal stock high, was playing football. Their template was clear and they played the game the right way. Results are ultimately what the game is all about, but your football philosophy is what wins you friends and helps to fill the stadium. If we were winning and losing in equal lots, but the football was good, folk would be quicker to believe we are in progress, but whilst the play and the basics of it are in short supply, its no wonder there are an increasing number of doubters. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Lambert wasn't forced to take the job. He had a perfectly comfy one in East Anglia. There could be many scenarios to this: 1) he believed the youngsters he inherited were better than they are. 2) Lambert believed his own hype too much and has to adapt. 3) Lambert is the real deal and the plan is well on course (providing we don't go down). This is my fervent hope. and 4) He's crap, 1 dimensional and stuck in the dark ages. (unpalatable I know) but some on here just stick their fingers in their ears and won't entertain this as a valid option. Option 3 Like you I hope so. I agree there has to be time. twelve more months for me. I know so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 My point is that none of the scenarios you posted were likely to be the real reason Lambert chose to join Villa. So you don't agree with point 3 then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Lambert wasn't forced to take the job. He had a perfectly comfy one in East Anglia. There could be many scenarios to this: 1) he believed the youngsters he inherited were better than they are. 2) Lambert believed his own hype too much and has to adapt. 3) Lambert is the real deal and the plan is well on course (providing we don't go down). This is my fervent hope. and 4) He's crap, 1 dimensional and stuck in the dark ages. (unpalatable I know) but some on here just stick their fingers in their ears and won't entertain this as a valid option. Option 3 Like you I hope so. I agree there has to be time. twelve more months for me. I know so. You are Yuri Geller and I claim my five pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 If Lambert is so fond of target men then why did he go for Helenius? He may be tall but he's not a target man. Well, he won't play him unless forced so maybe he is a target man 'work in progress'. In your view what is he then? Genuine question. And how do you know that? Why would Lambert buy somebody that isn't a target man in order to turn him into one? There are plenty out there. He's good with the ball at his feet. Got good technique but not as strong as you might think. That's not even my view - that's the kind of player he is. His height is virtually irrelevant to that. Ok, fair enough. I'll rephrase that.... Helenius can describe himself as the next Iniesta or Tony Morley, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Look, let's be honest, we all know where players this tall end up playing in this league. He's no number 10. Never said he'd ever be as good as those two, but to brand him as a target man purely becuase of his height is just ridiculous. He may work on the physical aspects of his game but he will never be a target man. This is the problem with English football. It's all about height and size. If you're short you must be either a technical player or a fast winger, if you're tall you've got to be a CB or a target man. It doesn't seem to occur to some people that while height and size are relevant, they do not ultimately determine what kind of player a person will be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Alex Ferguson, had a doubtful 5 years at Old Trafford to start with and Roberto Martinez had a difficult time with Wigan. One thing that kept their personal stock high, was playing football. Their template was clear and they played the game the right way. Results are ultimately what the game is all about, but your football philosophy is what wins you friends and helps to fill the stadium. If we were winning and losing in equal lots, but the football was good, folk would be quicker to believe we are in progress, but whilst the play and the basics of it are in short supply, its no wonder there are an increasing number of doubters. What is the right way TRO? It is arbitrary, I personally view consistently winning matches as the right way and it is something I am desperate for Paul Lambert to achieve. I want us to become a winning club...I am sure the style and the adulation will come from winning and being successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 TRO-You cannot call these blokes incumbents. They are professionals who have track records. Lets keep it real. We had MON who spent vast amounts signing players & with the exception of possibly Harewood, I never heard one moan or groan about how much we paid (£9 mil for Davies, £8.5 mil for NRC etc) It was a recepie for disaster that caught up with us. Lambert has unfortunately copped for the task of putting the house in order. That is his remit-Not going on cup runs, not qualifying for the Europa & not playing tippy tappy 1 or 2 touch football. His job is to cut the outgoings drastically & instantly & to keep us in the division at the same time. He's over the worst of this now & its almost as if the real job starts in this window (as far as us fans are concerned) I agree that something has gone wrong-Maybe the double whammy of Okore & Vlaar is that something? Benteke loosing form? Lifes not a bed of roses & there will always be peaks & troughs. At the moment, the peaks are outweighing the troughs. Maybe not as greatly as we'd like but that can still change. I remember the first interview I heard from Lambert after he joined us-He kept saying "theres no quick fix" I realise what he was saying now. He has no support-A chairman who wants to sell & a waste of space CEO who has delusions of grandeur with the FA. Add to that a fanbase who demand instant success & he wouldn't be human if his confidence was to take a knock. I just think it would help him (who cares about us & wants to be here) & help our club if we could cut him a bit of slack & get behind him. If the next 18 months don't produce progress then I agree questions should be asked but not now, not with such a major overhaul taking place. perhaps it was a bit uncharacteristic of me to be derogatory, but we have signed a lot of players over the years we have had little from in terms of consistent performance. yes, I accept Paul Lambert has the sad old task of clearing up the mess, with little money to fix it. i won't say anymore, we know what needs to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butterfingers Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Fair comment TRO-I would just add, David Moyes 1st 2 or 3 years at Everton were horrendous & he copped for far worse stick than Lambert is getting. Like you, I'll say no more & agree that we know what needs to happen. Shaw nuff- I don't agree with any of your points. I'm sure every manager in the Prem believes he is the "real deal" & likewise, I believe if you were to ask Lerner, the plan IS working. I believe that our club is a massive attraction, one of the top jobs in the country & any manager worth his salt would want a pop at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Alex Ferguson, had a doubtful 5 years at Old Trafford to start with and Roberto Martinez had a difficult time with Wigan. One thing that kept their personal stock high, was playing football. Their template was clear and they played the game the right way. Results are ultimately what the game is all about, but your football philosophy is what wins you friends and helps to fill the stadium. If we were winning and losing in equal lots, but the football was good, folk would be quicker to believe we are in progress, but whilst the play and the basics of it are in short supply, its no wonder there are an increasing number of doubters. What is the right way TRO? It is arbitrary, I personally view consistently winning matches as the right way and it is something I am desperate for Paul Lambert to achieve. I want us to become a winning club...I am sure the style and the adulation will come from winning and being successful. I am not one of these fans/supporters that thinks winning in isolation is the be all and end all. Equally I don't think playing expansive football and losing is the answer either. I think Martin O'Neill seemed to think its only all about winning..... and forgot a bit about the rest. There are too many things to list and its getting late to mention them all, but to be concise I will call it substance, its about getting all those little things that good players find routine, right and finding a style that fans see as believable.....it leads to consistency. A long ball that is resorted to at the first sign of danger, is not the kind of style that will disrupt the plans of an intelligent opposition, it may get you some results from time to time, but you will soon be sussed out and inconsistency will follow, like night follows day. There are many things you want to see, running off the ball, closing down, concise passing, good first touch.....all stuff you appraise as improvement or not. It is not by coincidence all the best teams, use keeping the ball as an important piece of criteria, when embarking on their road to perfection. look, I'm not advocating violence, but Wimbledon had a bit of success using it, so I guess any style can have its moments if we want to use examples. The play we managed at the end of last year and the beginning of this was ok in terms of progress. since the Liverpool game, I'm not sure what has happened. ps I think football is a bit like boxing in some respects, you can recover from a knockout and put it down to a lucky punch and retain your confidence, but being out pointed, brings with it doubts about your overall boxing abiltiy......Football is similar in as much as being out played and out possessed can be worse than losing to a breakaway goal. I think that Liverpool game brought doubts to us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 We wont finish anywhere near 11th so why does a temporary stint there make everything ok? We've been there all season. It's no stretch to say we'll finish there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 If Lambert is so fond of target men then why did he go for Helenius? He may be tall but he's not a target man. Well, he won't play him unless forced so maybe he is a target man 'work in progress'. In your view what is he then? Genuine question. And how do you know that? Why would Lambert buy somebody that isn't a target man in order to turn him into one? There are plenty out there. He's good with the ball at his feet. Got good technique but not as strong as you might think. That's not even my view - that's the kind of player he is. His height is virtually irrelevant to that. Ok, fair enough. I'll rephrase that.... Helenius can describe himself as the next Iniesta or Tony Morley, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Look, let's be honest, we all know where players this tall end up playing in this league. He's no number 10. Never said he'd ever be as good as those two, but to brand him as a target man purely becuase of his height is just ridiculous. He may work on the physical aspects of his game but he will never be a target man. This is the problem with English football. It's all about height and size. If you're short you must be either a technical player or a fast winger, if you're tall you've got to be a CB or a target man. It doesn't seem to occur to some people that while height and size are relevant, they do not ultimately determine what kind of player a person will be. Sorry, can't let you get away with that. I will stick my neck out (like I do quite often) there is no way on earth he can be a wide man - being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge. Same for being a link up man. He will eventually be a target man or nothing - that is my prediction. Peter Crouch is a target man who 'has good feet for a big man'. Same thing. BTW - it's not just an English thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 If Lambert is so fond of target men then why did he go for Helenius? He may be tall but he's not a target man. Well, he won't play him unless forced so maybe he is a target man 'work in progress'. In your view what is he then? Genuine question. And how do you know that? Why would Lambert buy somebody that isn't a target man in order to turn him into one? There are plenty out there. He's good with the ball at his feet. Got good technique but not as strong as you might think. That's not even my view - that's the kind of player he is. His height is virtually irrelevant to that. Ok, fair enough. I'll rephrase that.... Helenius can describe himself as the next Iniesta or Tony Morley, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Look, let's be honest, we all know where players this tall end up playing in this league. He's no number 10. Never said he'd ever be as good as those two, but to brand him as a target man purely becuase of his height is just ridiculous. He may work on the physical aspects of his game but he will never be a target man. This is the problem with English football. It's all about height and size. If you're short you must be either a technical player or a fast winger, if you're tall you've got to be a CB or a target man. It doesn't seem to occur to some people that while height and size are relevant, they do not ultimately determine what kind of player a person will be. Sorry, can't let you get away with that. I will stick my neck out (like I do quite often) there is no way on earth he can be a wide man - being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge. Same for being a link up man. He will eventually be a target man or nothing - that is my prediction. Peter Crouch is a target man who 'has good feet for a big man'. Same thing. BTW - it's not just an English thing. Nonsense. I'm 6'3, absolutely shite in the air and can turn on a sixpence. Can't do anything else mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 (edited) Sorry, can't let you get away with that. I will stick my neck out (like I do quite often) there is no way on earth he can be a wide man - being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge. Same for being a link up man. He will eventually be a target man or nothing - that is my prediction. Peter Crouch is a target man who 'has good feet for a big man'. Same thing. BTW - it's not just an English thing. Can't let me get away with what? I never said he would be a wide man or a number 10, I just said he's not a target man. I don't know how you can say he'll either be a target man or nothing as there are lots of examples of tall players whose height isn't the main part of their game. It is a big problem in England though - this focus on size is one of the reasons why the national team are doing so poorly. Edited January 5, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Fair comment TRO-I would just add, David Moyes 1st 2 or 3 years at Everton were horrendous & he copped for far worse stick than Lambert is getting. Like you, I'll say no more & agree that we know what needs to happen. Shaw nuff- I don't agree with any of your points. I'm sure every manager in the Prem believes he is the "real deal" & likewise, I believe if you were to ask Lerner, the plan IS working. I believe that our club is a massive attraction, one of the top jobs in the country & any manager worth his salt would want a pop at it So you don't agree with any of the points but you agree with point 3? If Lambert is so fond of target men then why did he go for Helenius? He may be tall but he's not a target man. Well, he won't play him unless forced so maybe he is a target man 'work in progress'. In your view what is he then? Genuine question. And how do you know that? Why would Lambert buy somebody that isn't a target man in order to turn him into one? There are plenty out there. He's good with the ball at his feet. Got good technique but not as strong as you might think. That's not even my view - that's the kind of player he is. His height is virtually irrelevant to that. Ok, fair enough. I'll rephrase that.... Helenius can describe himself as the next Iniesta or Tony Morley, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. Look, let's be honest, we all know where players this tall end up playing in this league. He's no number 10. Never said he'd ever be as good as those two, but to brand him as a target man purely becuase of his height is just ridiculous. He may work on the physical aspects of his game but he will never be a target man. This is the problem with English football. It's all about height and size. If you're short you must be either a technical player or a fast winger, if you're tall you've got to be a CB or a target man. It doesn't seem to occur to some people that while height and size are relevant, they do not ultimately determine what kind of player a person will be. Sorry, can't let you get away with that. I will stick my neck out (like I do quite often) there is no way on earth he can be a wide man - being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge. Same for being a link up man. He will eventually be a target man or nothing - that is my prediction. Peter Crouch is a target man who 'has good feet for a big man'. Same thing. BTW - it's not just an English thing. Nonsense. I'm 6'3, absolutely shite in the air and can turn on a sixpence. Can't do anything else mind. Remind me of which top team you play for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 His point was that being tall doesn't mean you can't be agile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 His point was that being tall doesn't mean you can't be agile. ding ding ding You said, 'being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge.' and I replied that I'm tall and fairly agile. It has nothing to do with what 'top team I play for'. What a load of patronising guff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 David Moyes 1st 2 or 3 years at Everton were horrendous & he copped for far worse stick than Lambert is getting. No idea what David Moyes has to do with this but, for the record, Moyes's first 3 full seasons with Everton produced 7th, 17th and 4th, so maybe only one "horrendous" season. By his 4th season he had them playing in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Sorry, can't let you get away with that. I will stick my neck out (like I do quite often) there is no way on earth he can be a wide man - being that tall he'll have the turning circle of a barge. Same for being a link up man. He will eventually be a target man or nothing - that is my prediction. Peter Crouch is a target man who 'has good feet for a big man'. Same thing. BTW - it's not just an English thing. Can't let me get away with what? I never said he would be a wide man or a number 10, I just said he's not a target man. I don't know how you can say he'll either be a target man or nothing as there are lots of examples of tall players whose height isn't the main part of their game. It is a big problem in England though - this focus on size is one of the reasons why the national team are doing so poorly. I said he was bought as a target man - where do you think he'll end up playing? If you remember the point it's about Lambert's reason for buying him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butterfingers Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 I didn't say Lambert was the real deal & I didn't say the plan was working-I don't even know what the plan is. So no, give yourself a big pat on the back, you've worked out that I don't agree with any of the points-Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villastine Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Alex Ferguson, had a doubtful 5 years at Old Trafford to start with and Roberto Martinez had a difficult time with Wigan. One thing that kept their personal stock high, was playing football. Their template was clear and they played the game the right way. Results are ultimately what the game is all about, but your football philosophy is what wins you friends and helps to fill the stadium. If we were winning and losing in equal lots, but the football was good, folk would be quicker to believe we are in progress, but whilst the play and the basics of it are in short supply, its no wonder there are an increasing number of doubters. Nail on the head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts