dakid007 Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 He clearly doesn't know what he is doin 98% of the time. We need a manager who actually tries to play football and win matches. He is not savvy enough in his transfers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tomh621 Posted April 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 15, 2014 Dont understand why people fight on here. Some people want Lambert out because there's a possibility he may not get anywhere with the club and he's made some bad decisions and hasn't been able to stick to his plan on rebuilding the club. All that shows is that they've had enough of the same shit but different year. That's fair enough! It means they care about the club. On the other hand…. Some people want Lambert to stay because they think there's a possibility of Lambert gradually building and achieving what he wants to do here at the club and actually getting us to climb the table and bring in quality players. That's also fair enough - these people don't want the club to just fire another manger, bring a new one in with the same owner, board, and shitty wage budget and see them not do any better than Lambert - because they think that'll just put us back to square one again and things needed time to build from the bottom. This ALSO shows that they care about the club. Everyone loves Villa. Hurrah. UTV. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 You are right tom, but I'm right too 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post lexicon Posted April 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 15, 2014 The whole notion that the club is 'rotten to the core' is hilarious. No, it's not. Go and compare the way we're run to clubs that actually are that way, Coventry for example. People are attributing bad performances on the pitch to the board but it's Lambert who makes those decisions. He has had reasonable backing while the club has looked to secure its future financially and that project was the most sensible option available to us. The hysteria and fantasy is hilarious - it's really not that bad, there isn't anyone who'll be happy to bung in 50mil no questions asked because of the regulations and we have to build slowly and stably. Maybe it's just the culture of instant gratification that has got people all mixed up but it's not realistic at all. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh621 Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 The whole notion that the club is 'rotten to the core' is hilarious. No, it's not. Go and compare the way we're run to clubs that actually are that way, Coventry for example. People are attributing bad performances on the pitch to the board but it's Lambert who makes those decisions. He has had reasonable backing while the club has looked to secure its future financially and that project was the most sensible option available to us. The hysteria and fantasy is hilarious - it's really not that bad, there isn't anyone who'll be happy to bung in 50mil no questions asked because of the regulations and we have to build slowly and stably. Maybe it's just the culture of instant gratification that has got people all mixed up but it's not realistic at all. Good point! I just think people are bored of the many years we've been so average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 More than likely yeah - it's understandable that people are frustrated but the frustration is misguided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I never wanted him in the first place either. I remember when i researched him, when the rumors started. When i saw his statistic with Norwich and how many goals they conceded, that alone was enough to convince me he never were the right man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Most of the fans wanted him here, I for once never wanted him. Apparently the away fans at Norwich wanted him. Maybe a few others who saw him as the potential reincarnation of their beloved O'Neill. But for the rest of us it was indifference. I was pleased because I backed him to cover my substantial outlay on OGS, but that was the only reason. With hindsight, I would prefer to have just lost the money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Maybe Lambert will stay but the club is starting to look a bit desperate Pat Murphy and now this Telegraph article.. Not to mention that Faulkner statement (which Lerner didn't sign) sounds like the club is panicking a bit to me. Probably fearing the worst if anything goes wrong against Southampton and season ticket sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Most of the fans wanted him here, I for once never wanted him. Apparently the away fans at Norwich wanted him. Maybe a few others who saw him as the potential reincarnation of their beloved O'Neill. But for the rest of us it was indifference. I was pleased because I backed him to cover my substantial outlay on OGS, but that was the only reason. With hindsight, I would prefer to have just lost the money. I disagree and think is pretty revisionist - the vast majority of fans wanted him and were happy at the appointment. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Maybe Lambert will stay but the club is starting to look a bit desperate Pat Murphy and now this Telegraph article.. Not to mention that Faulkner statement (which Lerner didn't sign) sounds like the club is panicking a bit to me. Probably fearing the worst if anything goes wrong against Southampton and season ticket sales. If anything it shows that they aren't happy with our recent form and fearing the worst is a good, healthy thing when so much is at stake. Boggles the mind when people claim that the board 'doesn't care', of course they bloody do. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCAM Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 The whole notion that the club is 'rotten to the core' is hilarious. No, it's not. Go and compare the way we're run to clubs that actually are that way, Coventry for example. People are attributing bad performances on the pitch to the board but it's Lambert who makes those decisions. He has had reasonable backing while the club has looked to secure its future financially and that project was the most sensible option available to us. The hysteria and fantasy is hilarious - it's really not that bad, there isn't anyone who'll be happy to bung in 50mil no questions asked because of the regulations and we have to build slowly and stably. Maybe it's just the culture of instant gratification that has got people all mixed up but it's not realistic at all. I completely agree with this, everyone seems to chastise Lerner for not throwing money at the problem. Surely by wanting to balance the books and make us a sustainable business is a better way to run a club that to just plough more and more money into it, throwing us into more and more debt. Just imagine the financial hit Sunderland will take if they are relegated, with player contracts similar to what we had under O'Neill, Fulham are the same. Surely safeguarding the future of the clubs finances was and is a sensible idea. Sure, we have risked our premier league survival, which could be counter productive, but at least we wouldn't be hit as hard if we did go down. Plus, Lambert has spent £50m, it's not like we've not spent at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Most of the fans wanted him here, I for once never wanted him. Apparently the away fans at Norwich wanted him. Maybe a few others who saw him as the potential reincarnation of their beloved O'Neill. But for the rest of us it was indifference. I was pleased because I backed him to cover my substantial outlay on OGS, but that was the only reason. With hindsight, I would prefer to have just lost the money. I disagree and think is pretty revisionist - the vast majority of fans wanted him and were happy at the appointment. Maybe, but I am pretty much meh about whichever manager we get. McLeish, Lambert, Bruce, Attila the Hun, I really don't care, and will support whoever is in the seat at the beginning of next and every season, including Lambert, although I sincerely hope that he isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 The whole notion that the club is 'rotten to the core' is hilarious. No, it's not. Go and compare the way we're run to clubs that actually are that way, Coventry for example. People are attributing bad performances on the pitch to the board but it's Lambert who makes those decisions. He has had reasonable backing while the club has looked to secure its future financially and that project was the most sensible option available to us. The hysteria and fantasy is hilarious - it's really not that bad, there isn't anyone who'll be happy to bung in 50mil no questions asked because of the regulations and we have to build slowly and stably. Maybe it's just the culture of instant gratification that has got people all mixed up but it's not realistic at all. I completely agree with this, everyone seems to chastise Lerner for not throwing money at the problem. Surely by wanting to balance the books and make us a sustainable business is a better way to run a club that to just plough more and more money into it, throwing us into more and more debt. Just imagine the financial hit Sunderland will take if they are relegated, with player contracts similar to what we had under O'Neill, Fulham are the same. Surely safeguarding the future of the clubs finances was and is a sensible idea. Sure, we have risked our premier league survival, which could be counter productive, but at least we wouldn't be hit as hard if we did go down. Plus, Lambert has spent £50m, it's not like we've not spent at all. 37.5 net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Which isn't bad considering. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Yep my point all along Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 The whole notion that the club is 'rotten to the core' is hilarious. No, it's not. Go and compare the way we're run to clubs that actually are that way, Coventry for example. People are attributing bad performances on the pitch to the board but it's Lambert who makes those decisions. He has had reasonable backing while the club has looked to secure its future financially and that project was the most sensible option available to us. The hysteria and fantasy is hilarious - it's really not that bad, there isn't anyone who'll be happy to bung in 50mil no questions asked because of the regulations and we have to build slowly and stably. Maybe it's just the culture of instant gratification that has got people all mixed up but it's not realistic at all. I completely agree with this, everyone seems to chastise Lerner for not throwing money at the problem. Surely by wanting to balance the books and make us a sustainable business is a better way to run a club that to just plough more and more money into it, throwing us into more and more debt. Just imagine the financial hit Sunderland will take if they are relegated, with player contracts similar to what we had under O'Neill, Fulham are the same. Surely safeguarding the future of the clubs finances was and is a sensible idea. Sure, we have risked our premier league survival, which could be counter productive, but at least we wouldn't be hit as hard if we did go down. Plus, Lambert has spent £50m, it's not like we've not spent at all. so we have reduced wages by £20-£30m - but the price worth paying would be a loss of £60m in tv money alone ? - doesn't sound that shrewd a move to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 i really dont see us getting another point this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Just imagine the financial hit Sunderland will take if they are relegated, with player contracts similar to what we had under O'Neill, Fulham are the same. Surely safeguarding the future of the clubs finances was and is a sensible idea. Sure, we have risked our premier league survival, which could be counter productive, but at least we wouldn't be hit as hard if we did go down. Plus, Lambert has spent £50m, it's not like we've not spent at all. I would have agreed, well somewhat, however the actual accounts point to the fact the wage bill has increased, not been reduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bose Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 i really dont see us getting another point this season It really is tough seeing where any points will come from. The Southampton game is absolutely crucial - if we somehow manage to start the game well that will get the crowd going. The impetus is on the players to start the match in full force and the crowd will be right behind them. If we start the match by misplacing passes and the usual then we're in for a long afternoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts