Why Paul Lambert should get the sack

[villa-revolution]

 

 

 

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

I think it just quite clearly wasn't to make the squad better - that was always going to be an "if possible" situation.  How can you see this as a ridiculous statement?  I'm not defending Lambert's record with us; the results on paper have been poor in the whole.  However, I expected them to be poor as we're in such a transitional stage.  The worrying thing is that our good results have come against teams that we're unlikely to repeat them against... although perhaps the same could be said for those teams we've lost against?

 

I'm honestly not concerned with the tedium of how many games we've won or lost or drawn or should've won or whatever.  The main thing this season is for Aston Villa to survive in the Premier League.  I don't really care if this is via the scrappiest of most scrappy last games of the season where we scrape a 1-1 draw against Spurs and survive.

 

I've always maintained (and will likely continue to do so) that goal difference is the greatest indicator of how poor a team truly is.  Last season, we had the 5th worst goal difference and just about survived whilst the 3 teams that went down had the worst 3 goal differences in the league.  This season, we've seen a marked improvement in our defensive performances and are currently sat on a -6 goal difference.  I'm firmly of the belief that if Benteke and Vlaar weren't injured for periods, we'd not be posting in a "Lambert should be sacked thread".  Lambert's fault for a lack of squad depth?  Maybe so, but see my previous posts r.e: budget and realistic goals.

 

There are obvious weaknesses in the team but, season on season, I think we're addressing these points.  2 seasons ago, our main problem was scoring goals so we signed Benteke and scored goals.  Last season, our main problem was atrocious defending, so we signed a defender (Okore, unlucky) and have obviously been working on tightening things up.  This season, our main problem has been ball retention and a lack of creativity.  I think we know where Lambert will be looking next in the market...

 

If you can't see/don't want to acknowledge these small (and they are small!) steps in the right direction and, instead, wish to bemoan the team for unattractive football and a run of poor results then fair enough - that's your prerogative.  For me, I'd rather not boo the team and will continue to assess the work being done at the club on a wider scale.  It's my opinion that Lambert recognises where we are weakest (then again, it's not hard), knows what we need to do to improve (again, not hard) and will continue to address these issues as he did last season and going into this one.

 

As per my initial post, I'll personally be judging his time at the end of next season.  Right now we're in the teething stage; after 3 seasons in charge, there should be a notable improvement.

 

Best pot I've read in while.

 

 

You're supposed to smoke pot not read it Skruff

[Skruff]

Guess I got to do some editing

[VillaCas]

 

 

The problem is that even though he has identified where the problems are he has yet to find the solution. This season not one part of the team is stronger than before Lambert became manager and therein lies the main problem.

Bent did work out with his goals saving us from relegation.

Again, though, you're not looking at the bigger picture.

Lambert's remit has obviously never been to install a first 11 that was better than it already was - it was to reduce the playing staff costs whilst maintaining a squad. In that respect, he really hasn't done too badly. Having said this, though, I'd rather have Benteke and Kozak as our strike force than Bent and Heskey, I'd rather have Guzan as first choice goalkeeper than Given and I'd rather have Vlaar and Okore/Baker/Clark than Collins and Dunne (especially now). The only part of our team that is now definitely weaker than before Lambert became manager is midfield - and how much of that has been down to Petrov's illness? That kind of experienced head in the centre of the park would work wonders right now, especially alongside Westwood who is tidy yet unspectacular and Delph who has improved in abounds but is still a naive player.

Now, in terms of looking for a solution, you'll not always get exactly what you thought you were getting. This isn't really down to the fault of anyone - on YouTube footage (lol) alone, I was quite excited by the prospect of Tonev and, from a scouting point of view, he'd have looked like a good gamble from Bulgaria. That's all it ever is though; a gamble. Sometimes the gambles work (Benteke) sometimes they don't (Soldado), but ultimately our approach is less risky which is only a good thing for the football club itself coming from where we've been financially. It will never please the fans because we want instant success on the pitch (whether success is trophy-based or attractive football-based) but fans, ultimately, are passion led and, thus, completely open to swinging bias.

At the start of the season, we beat Arsenal 3-1 away from home. Our season was looking rosy, we followed it up with good performances on the whole against Chelsea, Liverpool and half a game against Newcastle (up until Benteke got injured against Norwich really) and Arsenal fans wanted Wenger sacked. How things have changed, eh? Fans will always want things instantaneously but, the reality is, it's rarely if ever that good.

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better or that it's not Lambert's fault for his duff signings. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

Bobzy - You'll find you get a lot of this on here. Don't let it put you off though!!

[Houlston]

The football we currently play is not sustainable. You cant keep hoping the other team makes a mistake or that you score with one or two of your three shots on target.

 

Nor is it sustainable in a bums on seats way either. No one wants to see 90 minutes of defending.

 

New players coming in may help our cause but they certainly aren't going to improve Lamberts tactical brain - "Right I'm pulling Libor off, no sit back down Nicklas, Jordan you're on the wing son. Aye, we go again, yanoe."

[Mic09]

As a Lambert fan I find this rather annoying..

I work in one of the bars on broad street in bham and one of my friends is a bit of a party animal. I know for a fact (and she has showed me several pictures ) that our own mr Andreas Weimann and Mr Cieran Clark like to party on saturday nights in one of the clubs in the city centre. She actually knows them personally.

Now, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but the last time she went out with them was after the crystal palace game and before swansea. So during a disgracefull run of form. Add this the reaction after Gabby's goal with swansea, I think we have a clue that Lambert is not a 'big boss' of the team.

I mean, no one wanted to celebrate with Lambert. 
And can you see Mourinho or Fergie allowing their players party in the clubs after a horrendous run of form? 

Is Lambert a weak manager? 

[sne]

As a Lambert fan I find this rather annoying..

I work in one of the bars on broad street in bham and one of my friends is a bit of a party animal. I know for a fact (and she has showed me several pictures ) that our own mr Andreas Weimann and Mr Cieran Clark like to party on saturday nights in one of the clubs in the city centre. She actually knows them personally.

Now, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but the last time she went out with them was after the crystal palace game and before swansea. So during a disgracefull run of form. Add this the reaction after Gabby's goal with swansea, I think we have a clue that Lambert is not a 'big boss' of the team.

I mean, no one wanted to celebrate with Lambert. 

And can you see Mourinho or Fergie allowing their players party in the clubs after a horrendous run of form? 

Is Lambert a weak manager? 

It's the oldschool type of british football culture that it's ok for players to let out some steam and drink during season.

One of the reasons that foreign managers sometimes has such a hard time when trying to enforce their more professional policy on a squad that has a core of players that are used to doing what they wan't.

Houllier, Villas-Boas, Juande Ramos...

Others like Capello and Mourinho had the same issues but made it work. Mourinho got the players on his side and Capello scared the crap out of the players.

 

I really hate the drinking culture in british football and the managers that condone it or look the other way. One of the main reasons i don't wan't a british manager at Villa

[Zatman]

dont think Lambert is the same though, he has played abroad and learned discipline 

[Mic09]

 

As a Lambert fan I find this rather annoying..

I work in one of the bars on broad street in bham and one of my friends is a bit of a party animal. I know for a fact (and she has showed me several pictures ) that our own mr Andreas Weimann and Mr Cieran Clark like to party on saturday nights in one of the clubs in the city centre. She actually knows them personally.

Now, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but the last time she went out with them was after the crystal palace game and before swansea. So during a disgracefull run of form. Add this the reaction after Gabby's goal with swansea, I think we have a clue that Lambert is not a 'big boss' of the team.

I mean, no one wanted to celebrate with Lambert. 

And can you see Mourinho or Fergie allowing their players party in the clubs after a horrendous run of form? 

Is Lambert a weak manager? 

It's the oldschool type of british football culture that it's ok for players to let out some steam and drink during season.

One of the reasons that foreign managers sometimes has such a hard time when trying to enforce their more professional policy on a squad that has a core of players that are used to doing what they wan't.

Houllier, Villas-Boas, Juande Ramos...

Others like Capello and Mourinho had the same issues but made it work. Mourinho got the players on his side and Capello scared the crap out of the players.

 

I really hate the drinking culture in british football and the managers that condone it or look the other way. One of the main reasons i don't wan't a british manager at Villa

 

I honestly don't mind players having a drink, but not when they perform like Andi does. That's the problem.

[sne]

 

 

As a Lambert fan I find this rather annoying..

I work in one of the bars on broad street in bham and one of my friends is a bit of a party animal. I know for a fact (and she has showed me several pictures ) that our own mr Andreas Weimann and Mr Cieran Clark like to party on saturday nights in one of the clubs in the city centre. She actually knows them personally.

Now, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but the last time she went out with them was after the crystal palace game and before swansea. So during a disgracefull run of form. Add this the reaction after Gabby's goal with swansea, I think we have a clue that Lambert is not a 'big boss' of the team.

I mean, no one wanted to celebrate with Lambert. 

And can you see Mourinho or Fergie allowing their players party in the clubs after a horrendous run of form? 

Is Lambert a weak manager? 

It's the oldschool type of british football culture that it's ok for players to let out some steam and drink during season.

One of the reasons that foreign managers sometimes has such a hard time when trying to enforce their more professional policy on a squad that has a core of players that are used to doing what they wan't.

Houllier, Villas-Boas, Juande Ramos...

Others like Capello and Mourinho had the same issues but made it work. Mourinho got the players on his side and Capello scared the crap out of the players.

 

I really hate the drinking culture in british football and the managers that condone it or look the other way. One of the main reasons i don't wan't a british manager at Villa

 

I honestly don't mind players having a drink, but not when they perform like Andi does. That's the problem.

 

I'd say one of the reasons he's preforming like he does might be because he drinks?

[pacbuddies]

dont think Lambert is the same though, he has played abroad and learned discipline 

Pity he didn't learn about being a football manager while he was there too! 

[The_Lions_Roar]

As a Lambert fan I find this rather annoying..

I work in one of the bars on broad street in bham and one of my friends is a bit of a party animal. I know for a fact (and she has showed me several pictures ) that our own mr Andreas Weimann and Mr Cieran Clark like to party on saturday nights in one of the clubs in the city centre. She actually knows them personally.

Now, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but the last time she went out with them was after the crystal palace game and before swansea. So during a disgracefull run of form. Add this the reaction after Gabby's goal with swansea, I think we have a clue that Lambert is not a 'big boss' of the team.

I mean, no one wanted to celebrate with Lambert.

And can you see Mourinho or Fergie allowing their players party in the clubs after a horrendous run of form?

Is Lambert a weak manager?

It's the oldschool type of british football culture that it's ok for players to let out some steam and drink during season.

One of the reasons that foreign managers sometimes has such a hard time when trying to enforce their more professional policy on a squad that has a core of players that are used to doing what they wan't.

Houllier, Villas-Boas, Juande Ramos...

Others like Capello and Mourinho had the same issues but made it work. Mourinho got the players on his side and Capello scared the crap out of the players.

I really hate the drinking culture in british football and the managers that condone it or look the other way. One of the main reasons i don't wan't a british manager at Villa

I honestly don't mind players having a drink, but not when they perform like Andi does. That's the problem.

Come off it. You have a bad day at work, do you go home and sulk or do you get on with life and enjoy it?

Let's be honest with his money a night iyr would be a pretty decent one. I've got no problem with players going out as long as it isn't the night before a game. Which it wouldn't be as they stay in hotels.

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

Weimann looks like a chunky lager lout thesedays. That explains it

[Morpheus]

 

 

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

I think it just quite clearly wasn't to make the squad better - that was always going to be an "if possible" situation.  How can you see this as a ridiculous statement?  I'm not defending Lambert's record with us; the results on paper have been poor in the whole.  However, I expected them to be poor as we're in such a transitional stage.  The worrying thing is that our good results have come against teams that we're unlikely to repeat them against... although perhaps the same could be said for those teams we've lost against?

 

I'm honestly not concerned with the tedium of how many games we've won or lost or drawn or should've won or whatever.  The main thing this season is for Aston Villa to survive in the Premier League.  I don't really care if this is via the scrappiest of most scrappy last games of the season where we scrape a 1-1 draw against Spurs and survive.

 

I've always maintained (and will likely continue to do so) that goal difference is the greatest indicator of how poor a team truly is.  Last season, we had the 5th worst goal difference and just about survived whilst the 3 teams that went down had the worst 3 goal differences in the league.  This season, we've seen a marked improvement in our defensive performances and are currently sat on a -6 goal difference.  I'm firmly of the belief that if Benteke and Vlaar weren't injured for periods, we'd not be posting in a "Lambert should be sacked thread".  Lambert's fault for a lack of squad depth?  Maybe so, but see my previous posts r.e: budget and realistic goals.

 

There are obvious weaknesses in the team but, season on season, I think we're addressing these points.  2 seasons ago, our main problem was scoring goals so we signed Benteke and scored goals.  Last season, our main problem was atrocious defending, so we signed a defender (Okore, unlucky) and have obviously been working on tightening things up.  This season, our main problem has been ball retention and a lack of creativity.  I think we know where Lambert will be looking next in the market...

 

If you can't see/don't want to acknowledge these small (and they are small!) steps in the right direction and, instead, wish to bemoan the team for unattractive football and a run of poor results then fair enough - that's your prerogative.  For me, I'd rather not boo the team and will continue to assess the work being done at the club on a wider scale.  It's my opinion that Lambert recognises where we are weakest (then again, it's not hard), knows what we need to do to improve (again, not hard) and will continue to address these issues as he did last season and going into this one.

 

As per my initial post, I'll personally be judging his time at the end of next season.  Right now we're in the teething stage; after 3 seasons in charge, there should be a notable improvement.

 

It is a ridiculous statement and in explaining why i'll be succinct.

 

Why is any manager sacked? Why does your respective chairman then employ another manager?

 

I can understand why like other posters I've posed the same question to, you would find it tedious to address the most important stat of all and not want to answer it and then focus on 'goal difference.'

 

Moreover, just because we are in a transitional stage, or yet another 'five year plan' it shouldn't mean that the type of records set, the type of football played or a relegation battle should be acceptable to the fans especially when another 40m has been spent on absolute dross.

 

It's not a manager called 'traditional stage' or 'five year plan' that has purchased our current squad, alienated players he could have used or formulated tactics which has caused a lot of head scratching, it has actually been Lambert.

 

The very same Lambert who has now decided that after 18 months of some of the worst results and performances this club has ever seen to do an about turn on his original policy and seek to rectify his mistakes by trying to bring more experienced players into our squad.

 

To me it's not addressing issues or taking small steps in the right direction. It is however an admittance of failure. 

[Morpheus]

 

 

 

The problem is that even though he has identified where the problems are he has yet to find the solution. This season not one part of the team is stronger than before Lambert became manager and therein lies the main problem.

Bent did work out with his goals saving us from relegation.

Again, though, you're not looking at the bigger picture.

Lambert's remit has obviously never been to install a first 11 that was better than it already was - it was to reduce the playing staff costs whilst maintaining a squad. In that respect, he really hasn't done too badly. Having said this, though, I'd rather have Benteke and Kozak as our strike force than Bent and Heskey, I'd rather have Guzan as first choice goalkeeper than Given and I'd rather have Vlaar and Okore/Baker/Clark than Collins and Dunne (especially now). The only part of our team that is now definitely weaker than before Lambert became manager is midfield - and how much of that has been down to Petrov's illness? That kind of experienced head in the centre of the park would work wonders right now, especially alongside Westwood who is tidy yet unspectacular and Delph who has improved in abounds but is still a naive player.

Now, in terms of looking for a solution, you'll not always get exactly what you thought you were getting. This isn't really down to the fault of anyone - on YouTube footage (lol) alone, I was quite excited by the prospect of Tonev and, from a scouting point of view, he'd have looked like a good gamble from Bulgaria. That's all it ever is though; a gamble. Sometimes the gambles work (Benteke) sometimes they don't (Soldado), but ultimately our approach is less risky which is only a good thing for the football club itself coming from where we've been financially. It will never please the fans because we want instant success on the pitch (whether success is trophy-based or attractive football-based) but fans, ultimately, are passion led and, thus, completely open to swinging bias.

At the start of the season, we beat Arsenal 3-1 away from home. Our season was looking rosy, we followed it up with good performances on the whole against Chelsea, Liverpool and half a game against Newcastle (up until Benteke got injured against Norwich really) and Arsenal fans wanted Wenger sacked. How things have changed, eh? Fans will always want things instantaneously but, the reality is, it's rarely if ever that good.

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better or that it's not Lambert's fault for his duff signings. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

Bobzy - You'll find you get a lot of this on here. Don't let it put you off though!!

 

What, facts?

[BOF]

Aggression.

[foreveryoung]

 

 

 

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

I think it just quite clearly wasn't to make the squad better - that was always going to be an "if possible" situation.  How can you see this as a ridiculous statement?  I'm not defending Lambert's record with us; the results on paper have been poor in the whole.  However, I expected them to be poor as we're in such a transitional stage.  The worrying thing is that our good results have come against teams that we're unlikely to repeat them against... although perhaps the same could be said for those teams we've lost against?

 

I'm honestly not concerned with the tedium of how many games we've won or lost or drawn or should've won or whatever.  The main thing this season is for Aston Villa to survive in the Premier League.  I don't really care if this is via the scrappiest of most scrappy last games of the season where we scrape a 1-1 draw against Spurs and survive.

 

I've always maintained (and will likely continue to do so) that goal difference is the greatest indicator of how poor a team truly is.  Last season, we had the 5th worst goal difference and just about survived whilst the 3 teams that went down had the worst 3 goal differences in the league.  This season, we've seen a marked improvement in our defensive performances and are currently sat on a -6 goal difference.  I'm firmly of the belief that if Benteke and Vlaar weren't injured for periods, we'd not be posting in a "Lambert should be sacked thread".  Lambert's fault for a lack of squad depth?  Maybe so, but see my previous posts r.e: budget and realistic goals.

 

There are obvious weaknesses in the team but, season on season, I think we're addressing these points.  2 seasons ago, our main problem was scoring goals so we signed Benteke and scored goals.  Last season, our main problem was atrocious defending, so we signed a defender (Okore, unlucky) and have obviously been working on tightening things up.  This season, our main problem has been ball retention and a lack of creativity.  I think we know where Lambert will be looking next in the market...

 

If you can't see/don't want to acknowledge these small (and they are small!) steps in the right direction and, instead, wish to bemoan the team for unattractive football and a run of poor results then fair enough - that's your prerogative.  For me, I'd rather not boo the team and will continue to assess the work being done at the club on a wider scale.  It's my opinion that Lambert recognises where we are weakest (then again, it's not hard), knows what we need to do to improve (again, not hard) and will continue to address these issues as he did last season and going into this one.

 

As per my initial post, I'll personally be judging his time at the end of next season.  Right now we're in the teething stage; after 3 seasons in charge, there should be a notable improvement.

 

It is a ridiculous statement and in explaining why i'll be succinct.

 

Why is any manager sacked? Why does your respective chairman then employ another manager?

 

I can understand why like other posters I've posed the same question to, you would find it tedious to address the most important stat of all and not want to answer it and then focus on 'goal difference.'

 

Moreover, just because we are in a transitional stage, or yet another 'five year plan' it shouldn't mean that the type of records set, the type of football played or a relegation battle should be acceptable to the fans especially when another 40m has been spent on absolute dross.

 

It's not a manager called 'traditional stage' or 'five year plan' that has purchased our current squad, alienated players he could have used or formulated tactics which has caused a lot of head scratching, it has actually been Lambert.

 

The very same Lambert who has now decided that after 18 months of some of the worst results and performances this club has ever seen to do an about turn on his original policy and seek to rectify his mistakes by trying to bring more experienced players into our squad.

 

To me it's not addressing issues or taking small steps in the right direction. It is however an admittance of failure. 

 

 

 

 

 

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

 

I think it just quite clearly wasn't to make the squad better - that was always going to be an "if possible" situation.  How can you see this as a ridiculous statement?  I'm not defending Lambert's record with us; the results on paper have been poor in the whole.  However, I expected them to be poor as we're in such a transitional stage.  The worrying thing is that our good results have come against teams that we're unlikely to repeat them against... although perhaps the same could be said for those teams we've lost against?

 

I'm honestly not concerned with the tedium of how many games we've won or lost or drawn or should've won or whatever.  The main thing this season is for Aston Villa to survive in the Premier League.  I don't really care if this is via the scrappiest of most scrappy last games of the season where we scrape a 1-1 draw against Spurs and survive.

 

I've always maintained (and will likely continue to do so) that goal difference is the greatest indicator of how poor a team truly is.  Last season, we had the 5th worst goal difference and just about survived whilst the 3 teams that went down had the worst 3 goal differences in the league.  This season, we've seen a marked improvement in our defensive performances and are currently sat on a -6 goal difference.  I'm firmly of the belief that if Benteke and Vlaar weren't injured for periods, we'd not be posting in a "Lambert should be sacked thread".  Lambert's fault for a lack of squad depth?  Maybe so, but see my previous posts r.e: budget and realistic goals.

 

There are obvious weaknesses in the team but, season on season, I think we're addressing these points.  2 seasons ago, our main problem was scoring goals so we signed Benteke and scored goals.  Last season, our main problem was atrocious defending, so we signed a defender (Okore, unlucky) and have obviously been working on tightening things up.  This season, our main problem has been ball retention and a lack of creativity.  I think we know where Lambert will be looking next in the market...

 

If you can't see/don't want to acknowledge these small (and they are small!) steps in the right direction and, instead, wish to bemoan the team for unattractive football and a run of poor results then fair enough - that's your prerogative.  For me, I'd rather not boo the team and will continue to assess the work being done at the club on a wider scale.  It's my opinion that Lambert recognises where we are weakest (then again, it's not hard), knows what we need to do to improve (again, not hard) and will continue to address these issues as he did last season and going into this one.

 

As per my initial post, I'll personally be judging his time at the end of next season.  Right now we're in the teething stage; after 3 seasons in charge, there should be a notable improvement.

 

It is a ridiculous statement and in explaining why i'll be succinct.

 

Why is any manager sacked? Why does your respective chairman then employ another manager?

 

I can understand why like other posters I've posed the same question to, you would find it tedious to address the most important stat of all and not want to answer it and then focus on 'goal difference.'

 

Moreover, just because we are in a transitional stage, or yet another 'five year plan' it shouldn't mean that the type of records set, the type of football played or a relegation battle should be acceptable to the fans especially when another 40m has been spent on absolute dross.

 

It's not a manager called 'traditional stage' or 'five year plan' that has purchased our current squad, alienated players he could have used or formulated tactics which has caused a lot of head scratching, it has actually been Lambert.

 

The very same Lambert who has now decided that after 18 months of some of the worst results and performances this club has ever seen to do an about turn on his original policy and seek to rectify his mistakes by trying to bring more experienced players into our squad.

 

To me it's not addressing issues or taking small steps in the right direction. It is however an admittance of failure. 

 

Bang in the money for me!

If the team lambert built was half successful as it should have been, he would'nt even be thinking about bringing in experience players this window. He has failed, even though I do think this team has got it ( i.e end of last season) lambert is again failing to use these winning tactics we were seeing previous.

Edited January 7, 2014 by foreveryoung

[Morpheus]

 

 

 

The problem is that even though he has identified where the problems are he has yet to find the solution. This season not one part of the team is stronger than before Lambert became manager and therein lies the main problem.

Bent did work out with his goals saving us from relegation.

Again, though, you're not looking at the bigger picture.

Lambert's remit has obviously never been to install a first 11 that was better than it already was - it was to reduce the playing staff costs whilst maintaining a squad. In that respect, he really hasn't done too badly. Having said this, though, I'd rather have Benteke and Kozak as our strike force than Bent and Heskey, I'd rather have Guzan as first choice goalkeeper than Given and I'd rather have Vlaar and Okore/Baker/Clark than Collins and Dunne (especially now). The only part of our team that is now definitely weaker than before Lambert became manager is midfield - and how much of that has been down to Petrov's illness? That kind of experienced head in the centre of the park would work wonders right now, especially alongside Westwood who is tidy yet unspectacular and Delph who has improved in abounds but is still a naive player.

Now, in terms of looking for a solution, you'll not always get exactly what you thought you were getting. This isn't really down to the fault of anyone - on YouTube footage (lol) alone, I was quite excited by the prospect of Tonev and, from a scouting point of view, he'd have looked like a good gamble from Bulgaria. That's all it ever is though; a gamble. Sometimes the gambles work (Benteke) sometimes they don't (Soldado), but ultimately our approach is less risky which is only a good thing for the football club itself coming from where we've been financially. It will never please the fans because we want instant success on the pitch (whether success is trophy-based or attractive football-based) but fans, ultimately, are passion led and, thus, completely open to swinging bias.

At the start of the season, we beat Arsenal 3-1 away from home. Our season was looking rosy, we followed it up with good performances on the whole against Chelsea, Liverpool and half a game against Newcastle (up until Benteke got injured against Norwich really) and Arsenal fans wanted Wenger sacked. How things have changed, eh? Fans will always want things instantaneously but, the reality is, it's rarely if ever that good.

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better or that it's not Lambert's fault for his duff signings. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

 

Welcome bobzy! 

 

You'll get used to polemic rhetorical questions which inexplicably get used as "proof" that Lambert needs to go.

In reply, McLeish's stats went from ok start, to bad, to worse, to horrible. Lambert given time will continue to improve, and that for me is fundamentally why we should stick with him.

 

I haven't ask for Lambert to be sacked, well this season anyway.

 

Currently results under Lambert have been similar to the reign of Mcleish and therefore on what planet does that suggest we're going to improve under Lambert.

[Morpheus]

Aggression.

Passion.

[BOF]

I'm only commenting as a reader rather than as the poster.

[The_Lions_Roar]

The problem is that even though he has identified where the problems are he has yet to find the solution. This season not one part of the team is stronger than before Lambert became manager and therein lies the main problem.

Bent did work out with his goals saving us from relegation.

Again, though, you're not looking at the bigger picture.

Lambert's remit has obviously never been to install a first 11 that was better than it already was - it was to reduce the playing staff costs whilst maintaining a squad. In that respect, he really hasn't done too badly. Having said this, though, I'd rather have Benteke and Kozak as our strike force than Bent and Heskey, I'd rather have Guzan as first choice goalkeeper than Given and I'd rather have Vlaar and Okore/Baker/Clark than Collins and Dunne (especially now). The only part of our team that is now definitely weaker than before Lambert became manager is midfield - and how much of that has been down to Petrov's illness? That kind of experienced head in the centre of the park would work wonders right now, especially alongside Westwood who is tidy yet unspectacular and Delph who has improved in abounds but is still a naive player.

Now, in terms of looking for a solution, you'll not always get exactly what you thought you were getting. This isn't really down to the fault of anyone - on YouTube footage (lol) alone, I was quite excited by the prospect of Tonev and, from a scouting point of view, he'd have looked like a good gamble from Bulgaria. That's all it ever is though; a gamble. Sometimes the gambles work (Benteke) sometimes they don't (Soldado), but ultimately our approach is less risky which is only a good thing for the football club itself coming from where we've been financially. It will never please the fans because we want instant success on the pitch (whether success is trophy-based or attractive football-based) but fans, ultimately, are passion led and, thus, completely open to swinging bias.

At the start of the season, we beat Arsenal 3-1 away from home. Our season was looking rosy, we followed it up with good performances on the whole against Chelsea, Liverpool and half a game against Newcastle (up until Benteke got injured against Norwich really) and Arsenal fans wanted Wenger sacked. How things have changed, eh? Fans will always want things instantaneously but, the reality is, it's rarely if ever that good.

That's an interesting observation (excuse) that Lambert's remit wasn't to make the squad better or that it's not Lambert's fault for his duff signings. You are going to fit right in here with certain posters who have equally made such ridiculous statements to try and defend Lambert's record with us.

I could get into stats concerning last season and this relative to goals scored and conceded concerning whether the squad is better or not but the most overriding factor is results which have been so poor that they have reached parity with the reign of McLeish.

Would you care to reflect on how many games we have actually won with Lambert at the helm which is the 'bigger picture debate?'

Welcome bobzy!

You'll get used to polemic rhetorical questions which inexplicably get used as "proof" that Lambert needs to go.

In reply, McLeish's stats went from ok start, to bad, to worse, to horrible. Lambert given time will continue to improve, and that for me is fundamentally why we should stick with him.

I haven't ask for Lambert to be sacked, well this season anyway.

Currently results under Lambert have been similar to the reign of Mcleish and therefore on what planet does that suggest we're going to improve under Lambert.

Because if you compare this stage this season to last season we are improving, whether you want to admit it or not.

We're 11th compared to 17th

We have 23 points compared to 18

Scored 19 compared to 15

Conceded 25 compared to 39

Had to deal with more injuries and also benteke going AWOL for 3 months.

How are those for facts for you? And don't just come back with but the football's rubbish line.