Jump to content

Paul Lambert


limpid

Recommended Posts

While more money will help I don't think its just a lack of cash that has us playing awful football, sees formations and tactics that don't work and is why Lambert so often fails to react to how a game is going.

I'm not sure what Lambert has done in these 2 years that make people think a few more months will completly change things. To have a season like last year and not progress I think shows any more time given to Lambert will be wasted.

He may be a different manager without the coaching staff problems, realising he is in the **** & with more pressure on him. Especially if he knows a potential takeover may mean a new gaffer.

I'm not saying these off field pressures WILL make him perform better but its worth a shot. If it doesn't work then yes it may have been time wasted but at least we gave Lambert every chance before we did part ways.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I can think of, and it's a big one, is because they don't know enough about the club or sport yet to have "their own man". Likely they'd see how lambert did on a reasonable budget, but by no means big one, maybe the same transfer fees but a bit of relaxation on the wages, and see how that fares.

Did Lerner keep DOL?

There's no way new owners haven't paid attention to the club recently so there's no way they'd have not seen how awful it's been. I just can't see any reason why they'd keep him.

Ellis got rid of dol and brought in Mon before Lerner arrived?

You don't think MON knew about the takeover happening and you don't think Lerner had any say in MON getting the job?I think that's ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While more money will help I don't think its just a lack of cash that has us playing awful football, sees formations and tactics that don't work and is why Lambert so often fails to react to how a game is going.

I'm not sure what Lambert has done in these 2 years that make people think a few more months will completly change things. To have a season like last year and not progress I think shows any more time given to Lambert will be wasted.

He may be a different manager without the coaching staff problems, realising he is in the **** & with more pressure on him. Especially if he knows a potential takeover may mean a new gaffer.

I'm not saying these off field pressures WILL make him perform better but its worth a shot. If it doesn't work then yes it may have been time wasted but at least we gave Lambert every chance before we did part ways.

I just don't think these 2 years suggest he is worth a shot.

If he doesn't improve it will be more money wasted and another 12 months before we can start again. He's done nothing here to show he's worth risking that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care either way if he is sacked or not such is my apathetic stance towards Lambert & the club but I'd rather exhaust all options & do things the proper way in a sport that's fast becoming a joke.

I can understand not giving him more time, I know i said Xmas so i guess even at my most impatient I'd give him until the end of the season at least, take stock then see what his strengthening plans are then act accordingly depending on whether they are good plans or if it looks like the same old again.

Edited by Ingram85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The only reason I can think of, and it's a big one, is because they don't know enough about the club or sport yet to have "their own man". Likely they'd see how lambert did on a reasonable budget, but by no means big one, maybe the same transfer fees but a bit of relaxation on the wages, and see how that fares.

Did Lerner keep DOL?

There's no way new owners haven't paid attention to the club recently so there's no way they'd have not seen how awful it's been. I just can't see any reason why they'd keep him.

Doug sacked DOL and hired MON.

MON agreed to sign under Doug on the proviso that there was a new owner coming in and he would get money to spend. Lerner had planned to bring Klinsman in but decided to see how Doug's new appointment got on instead.

I find that hard to believe. There's no way MON would have taken the job and risked being replaced a few weeks later.

 

 

My memory that MON joined under Doug - but with the approval of Lerner (I even think MON\Lerner met before he took the job) - I don't think there was every any chance of Lerner coming in and Ousting MON

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I can think of, and it's a big one, is because they don't know enough about the club or sport yet to have "their own man". Likely they'd see how lambert did on a reasonable budget, but by no means big one, maybe the same transfer fees but a bit of relaxation on the wages, and see how that fares.

Did Lerner keep DOL?

There's no way new owners haven't paid attention to the club recently so there's no way they'd have not seen how awful it's been. I just can't see any reason why they'd keep him.

Ellis got rid of dol and brought in Mon before Lerner arrived?
You don't think MON knew about the takeover happening and you don't think Lerner had any say in MON getting the job?I think that's ridiculous.

Of course he did but dol was wanted out for about 5 months before that happened. I was at Doncaster away when we lost 3-0 in Jan and he'd lost the fans by then both home and away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I can think of, and it's a big one, is because they don't know enough about the club or sport yet to have "their own man". Likely they'd see how lambert did on a reasonable budget, but by no means big one, maybe the same transfer fees but a bit of relaxation on the wages, and see how that fares.

Did Lerner keep DOL?

There's no way new owners haven't paid attention to the club recently so there's no way they'd have not seen how awful it's been. I just can't see any reason why they'd keep him.

Ellis got rid of dol and brought in Mon before Lerner arrived?
You don't think MON knew about the takeover happening and you don't think Lerner had any say in MON getting the job?I think that's ridiculous.
Of course he did but dol was wanted out for about 5 months before that happened. I was at Doncaster away when we lost 3-0 in Jan and he'd lost the fans by then both home and away.

I'm not sure what's that got to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure MON clarified who recruited him in his autobiography. I used to have a copy, but I can't remember exactly what was said.

Glad to be of help :thumb:

Would you recommend it as a doorstop?

Alex Mcleish's autobiography is useful for wonky furniture, in that it can be used to hold up the rest of a table.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why new owners sticking with the current manager is doing things the proper way. They don't owe anything to Paul Lambert and he's done nothing in 2 years to make new owners have faith in his managerial abilities to match their new ambition for the club.

If we have another season and he struggles that 12 more months of fans being annoyed, players needing to be replaced and potentially losing out on TV money finishing lower in the league. I think its an unnecessary gamble that Lambert doesn't deserve and I also don't think the potential pay off is worth it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why don't the Lambert lovers recognize the job McLeish did for us? Because they have basically achieved exact the same, exept Lambert got another year and haven't progressed.

 

 

Why do the McLeish lovers defend him with such quotes?*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

While more money will help I don't think its just a lack of cash that has us playing awful football, sees formations and tactics that don't work and is why Lambert so often fails to react to how a game is going.

I'm not sure what Lambert has done in these 2 years that make people think a few more months will completly change things. To have a season like last year and not progress I think shows any more time given to Lambert will be wasted.

He may be a different manager without the coaching staff problems, realising he is in the **** & with more pressure on him. Especially if he knows a potential takeover may mean a new gaffer.

I'm not saying these off field pressures WILL make him perform better but its worth a shot. If it doesn't work then yes it may have been time wasted but at least we gave Lambert every chance before we did part ways.

 

 

In my opinion, giving Lambert another chance would purely be based on sentimentality and not good business practise.  If the new owners gave him money, and there was no upturn in the style of play and results, you'd then be stuck with another year of reduced income, and would be landed with more of his players that a new manager probably wouldn't want.  Whatever the outcome of this summer, Lambert simply HAS to be sacked.  Anything else would be utter madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Owner: "So Paul, can you tell me what you have achieved over the last 2 years in your capacity as team manager, you know, things like improved the quality of football on display, improved the points total year upon year over your predecessor, improved the home win ratio, bought a high percentage of good quality players, that sort of thing".

 

Paul Lambert: "Er well, um....I managed to get my two trusted coaches suspended from their jobs after it turned out they were screwing me over".

 

New Owner: "Ok, well we have a few other candidates to see, we'll be in touch over the next few days. Thanks for your time".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I am too soft. I'm definitely leaning more towards Lambert out but part of me feels like he should be given just a little more time. I dunno.

 

I'll adjust my previous post from Christmas to the end of the season as stated earlier. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â