maqroll Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 He was under contract at the time, though. That should have been good (or bad) enough for prospective buyers to make their decision at that time of "tidying up". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 Why would a new owner only buy a club if a fairly unpopular manager, who was getting poor results had a long term contract? That leaves them in the position of having to pay large amounts of compensation when they want to bring in their own man. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 Yep, any kind of new contract would most likely be seen as a hindrance for buyers, unless the manager was SAF or Wenger. Lambert was a nobody on a brutal losing streak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 I think Lambert was offered a new contract because he was daft enough to be happy working for the ambition set by the owner. Fox knew no sale was coming and thought keeping Lambert was the best chance of surviving on the cheap till sold. It failed miserably. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderball Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 6 minutes ago, DCJonah said: The players inherited are shit but this transfer committee added a large number to it. And while there's been a few decent performers its quite clear that on the whole this bunch is one of the worst squads in premier league history. Things may have been different but that's a maybe, facts are that it hasn't been different. It's been abysmal. Lerner will always be the root cause of our problems but fox has done nothing to improve us, he's contributed to the downfall of the club. DCJ, I respect your view, it may play out that Fox does get viewed in the way you suggest, but my view is that it is the far too early to judge. The trajectory and momentum was set long ago, and it just can't be turned around in a season. We've been circling the drain for 4 years, and only Benteke and Bent were worthy additions in that time, everything of value was sold off or walked away. The cupboard is now bare, no continuity, or core of solid reliable players. Fox cant influence those poor decisions but is at least putting a structure and plans in place. I just think all he can do is sow the seeds but it won't bear fruit for some time, we need to be patient or we will continue to fire fight. Trust me what's happening to our club makes me sick, but I don't think the problem lies with Fox or Garde (yet). I do think that the club will prosper in 2-3 years because of difficult decisions being made now, but there's more pain and anger to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 17 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I think Lambert was offered a new contract because he was daft enough to be happy working for the ambition set by the owner. Fox knew no sale was coming and thought keeping Lambert was the best chance of surviving on the cheap till sold. It failed miserably. I was under the impression, and I'm not sure where I got this from but it might have been implied somewhere, that Lambert signed a new contract which was beneficial to him but also added the reduced severance deal should we drop in to the relegation zone. So suited and benefitted both parties. He was sacked shortly after we dropped in to the relegation zone for the first time. To me, if true, this is clever business by Mr. Fox. But still on the fence about him in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 I just can't see what we've put in place under fox that is going to allow us to prosper in 2-3 years. I haven't seen anything to suggest we won't be stuck in the championship. You're correct in that we have been circling the drain for a long time and fox had nothing to do with that but he's doing nothing for us IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderball Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 13 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I just can't see what we've put in place under fox that is going to allow us to prosper in 2-3 years. I haven't seen anything to suggest we won't be stuck in the championship. You're correct in that we have been circling the drain for a long time and fox had nothing to do with that but he's doing nothing for us IMO I agree is not easy to see. If it holds together, and the contracts are honoured, I think most of the players we have bought will work out and can be added to - investing in decent prospects rather than the punts we have taken on Tonev etc, or the expensive past-it rejects like Senderos, Cole etc with no sell on value and just here to play out their careers on motivation less contracts. Due to age and 4-5 year contracts if they need to be sold we should get a return. I can see Veretout, Ayew, Amavi or Adama being worth double what we paid under the right circumstances. It should prevent us needing to sign players on loan that ultimately only serves them or their clubs, such as Cleverly, Walker etc. Whatever you think of the Arsenal management appointments contingent, they should liberate and facilitate the Manager (Coach), and the moneyball approach, whilst an easy media target for a soft throwaway story, does have merit, and every team in top flight football uses statistics to inform decisions - even Sam Alladyce was an early adopter. i think some poor PR and spin on savvy and weary fans leads to knee jerk detractors and emotional responses against them, but I think there is a lot of sensible decision making going on at long last, we need to think like a big club. I do agree that there are no guarantees in football, and the Championship is an unknown to everyone at the club except Gestede, it could all go very wrong next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 As Mark wrote so eloquently.....We need a bit of honesty from B6 it appears there is an agenda, that we are not privy too. We need to know the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 The truth? Not sure that anyone at the club is going to come out and say "yes we are going down but don't worry we thought we might and have factored that into our thinking, there is a bigger picture that we are working to here of rebuilding the club and we realised from the outset that it may involve a year or two outside of the premiership all in the long term plan of future greater stability as you have seen at their clubs" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 hour ago, Richard said: The truth? Not sure that anyone at the club is going to come out and say "yes we are going down but don't worry we thought we might and have factored that into our thinking, there is a bigger picture that we are working to here of rebuilding the club and we realised from the outset that it may involve a year or two outside of the premiership all in the long term plan of future greater stability as you have seen at their clubs" Pretty sure this is it. I think the "new" management structure (ie. everyone since Faulkner) made a calculated risk of rebuilding with youth ala Borussia Dortmund, and it hasn't paid off. Although to be fair Dortmund also spent a year relegated in Bundesliga 2 so maybe they are following the plan a little too word for word... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 55 minutes ago, mwj said: Pretty sure this is it. I think the "new" management structure (ie. everyone since Faulkner) made a calculated risk of rebuilding with youth ala Borussia Dortmund, and it hasn't paid off. Although to be fair Dortmund also spent a year relegated in Bundesliga 2 so maybe they are following the plan a little too word for word... no they didnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 5 minutes ago, Zatman said: no they didnt Sorry you're right... the year I was thinking of was 07/08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grasshopper Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 On 3. Januar 2016 at 23:52, maqroll said: He was under contract at the time, though. That should have been good (or bad) enough for prospective buyers to make their decision at that time of "tidying up". The conversation went like this RL hey paul PL please sack me i've had enough R wanna give you a new deal as a thank you P why? R we go again...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 The problem for us who care, is as a result of the changes i.e Manager/CEO there may be good/better things going on to arrest the slide, but until we see these improvements ( assuming there is some) find their way on to the pitch, we will not know, if we are still on the slide. These things are not static they are dynamic, we ARE moving in a direction that is better or worse. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 21 hours ago, Grasshopper said: The conversation went like this RL hey paul PL please sack me i've had enough R wanna give you a new deal as a thank you P why? R we go again...... i still cannot believe those fools gave lambert a new contract after three games in the season. Absolute fools. More money lost for the great businessman that is Randolph Lerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted January 6, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2016 14 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: i still cannot believe those fools gave lambert a new contract after three games in the season. Absolute fools. More money lost for the great businessman that is Randolph Lerner But weren't we starting that season pretty well? And Lambert had kept us up the previous two seasons, correct? On top of that, management and Paul at that point seemed to be getting on quite well. It all added up to a nice contract extension, I would have thought. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 On 1/3/2016 at 21:30, maqroll said: Lambert was sacked just a few months after Fox determined he was good enough to warrant a contract extension. And why award a manager a new contract one month into the new season? How does that make any sense at all? Total idiocy, and this guy is some sort of business hot shot? We've been run into the ground by imbeciles and snake oil salesmen. Fox has been found out, IMO. He's a phony. He's a shyster of the highest imaginable order and should be sacked immediately, however this is really a sideshow to the real problem, Randy Lerner. Lerner must be removed from this club by any means necessary. Not only has he choked off real investment such that we are now left with a squad not of Premier League quality, but time after time he has proven utterly incapable of hiring the right people. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 27 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said: But weren't we starting that season pretty well? And Lambert had kept us up the previous two seasons, correct? On top of that, management and Paul at that point seemed to be getting on quite well. It all added up to a nice contract extension, I would have thought. On that basis Sherwood started well as he won one of his first three games. Should have given him longer. Was a terrible decision in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 6, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2016 I think too much is made of the new Lambert contract. I think it was probably a routine contract update based on certain criteria. The fact that he'd kept us up for two seasons was probably criteria for a contract review. Plus it was made clear when he was sacked that there were severance clauses in there as he wasn't due the full contract, so it's pretty much irrelevant anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts