Paul Lambert

[The_Lions_Roar]

I was always under the impression MON came to the club knowing that Randy would be taking over and investing. MON might not be a very good football manager but he's a very clever man. I doubt he would have joined the club without having a very good idea of who would be his boss.

This absolutely is the case, there's absolutely no chance that MON would have come here to work under Doug, it's only because Lerner was coming in (and Lerner obviously took the advice given to him viz. MON) that he accepted Doug's 'offer'.

No ones said that Mon came here to work under Doug, he came here knowing new owners were on their way and Doug getting Mon in was part of the agreement if you like.

Lerner didn't ask specifically for Mon to be made manager which is what bj10 is saying.

That last part is just bonkers. Who spends millions buying a business and has no say in who runs it for them? Or has no real interest in choosing someone to run it for them?

You believe Lerner and MON just put 100% faith into Doug Ellis? Why would they do that?

Also the date of DOL being sacked shows he wasn't going. That to me shows he was going as the takeover became more certain of happening.

I've not said he wasn't involved at all, I've said he didnt come to the club stipulating that he wanted Mon in charge. Of course he was involved in the choice of manager but it wasn't solely down to him which you're saying it was. Why would an out going owner bother to sack a manager if it was the new owner that wanted to make that change?

[Big_John_10]

Why would an out going owner bother to sack a manager if it was the new owner that wanted to make that change?

So that MON could come in and get started. If you remember the full takeover wasn't complete in time for the start of the season which is why MON was only allowed to sign petrov in that summer window and which is why he came in while Doug was still in charge.

[penguin]

Will always have a soft spot for O'neil tbh just for the 07/08 when I had a season ticket, it's the best football I've ever seen us play, the three game run where we scored 15 goals including beating Derby 6-0 and Blues 5-1 my personal highlight.

[The_Lions_Roar]

Why would an out going owner bother to sack a manager if it was the new owner that wanted to make that change?

So that MON could come in and get started. If you remember the full takeover wasn't complete in time for the start of the season which is why MON was only allowed to sign petrov in that summer window and which is why he came in while Doug was still in charge.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/aston-villas-doug-ellis-claims-7336

So he'd hire a manager on the request of a new owner that wasn't even the owner until nearly a month later?

Also you said Mon wouldn't of took the job under Ellis but when he took the job Lerner hadn't even reached an agreement to buy us.

I know Ellis likes to blow his own trumpet but he states he appointed Mon in that article.

[Risso]

 

Houllier would have been the man to take us forward had the funds not stopped period!!! Tin hat on!

Completely agree. Importantly, he had a coherent and progressive philosophy, unlike his backwards successors.

 

 

I can't agree I'm afraid.  Some of the football that year was every bit as bad as under McLeish and Lambert, and he still had the likes of Ashley Young, Petrov and Downing to call on.  People say "oh, we'd have bought Cabaye if we'd stayed in charge".  Well maybe, but then you have to ask who else he's have bought, given that he thought that Darren Bent and Jean Makoun were worth spending the thick end of £30m on, and also that Pires was fit for the Premier League, when in fact he looked like a rheumatic 80 year old.   Look back at his last few years as Liverpool manager, and it was marked with him spending fortunes on absolute tat.  £14m on Djibril Cisse, £5m on Salif Diao, £4m on Cheyrou, £10m on Diouf etc.  He was well past his best in my opinion.

[Big_John_10]

Why would an out going owner bother to sack a manager if it was the new owner that wanted to make that change?

So that MON could come in and get started. If you remember the full takeover wasn't complete in time for the start of the season which is why MON was only allowed to sign petrov in that summer window and which is why he came in while Doug was still in charge.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/aston-villas-doug-ellis-claims-7336

So he'd hire a manager on the request of a new owner that wasn't even the owner until nearly a month later?

Also you said Mon wouldn't of took the job under Ellis but when he took the job Lerner hadn't even reached an agreement to buy us.

I know Ellis likes to blow his own trumpet but he states he appointed Mon in that article.

If you think MON was going to join a villa team that had just finished 16th and spent little money under Doug then I'll leave the debate there.

I thought everyone realised MON came to the club because he knew the takeover was happening.

[The_Lions_Roar]

Why would an out going owner bother to sack a manager if it was the new owner that wanted to make that change?

So that MON could come in and get started. If you remember the full takeover wasn't complete in time for the start of the season which is why MON was only allowed to sign petrov in that summer window and which is why he came in while Doug was still in charge.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/aston-villas-doug-ellis-claims-7336

So he'd hire a manager on the request of a new owner that wasn't even the owner until nearly a month later?

Also you said Mon wouldn't of took the job under Ellis but when he took the job Lerner hadn't even reached an agreement to buy us.

I know Ellis likes to blow his own trumpet but he states he appointed Mon in that article.

If you think MON was going to join a villa team that had just finished 16th and spent little money under Doug then I'll leave the debate there.

I thought everyone realised MON came to the club because he knew the takeover was happening.

It was happening, but nothing had been signed and agreed. No I don't think he agreed to manage under Doug at all but that wasn't the debate. But yes let's leave it there.

[pacbuddies]

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

[Eames]

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

I agree the MON stuff is boring..but given the lack of poll I'm not sure how you can conclude "most" want him out.

[penguin]

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

I agree the MON stuff is boring..but given the lack of poll I'm not sure how you can conclude "most" want him out.

The polls on two other forums seem to strongly suggest it, so not too wild an assumption.

[Isa]

Houllier would have been the man to take us forward had the funds not stopped period!!! Tin hat on!

Completely agree. Importantly, he had a coherent and progressive philosophy, unlike his backwards successors.

 

I can't agree I'm afraid.  Some of the football that year was every bit as bad as under McLeish and Lambert, and he still had the likes of Ashley Young, Petrov and Downing to call on.  People say "oh, we'd have bought Cabaye if we'd stayed in charge".  Well maybe, but then you have to ask who else he's have bought, given that he thought that Darren Bent and Jean Makoun were worth spending the thick end of £30m on, and also that Pires was fit for the Premier League, when in fact he looked like a rheumatic 80 year old.   Look back at his last few years as Liverpool manager, and it was marked with him spending fortunes on absolute tat.  £14m on Djibril Cisse, £5m on Salif Diao, £4m on Cheyrou, £10m on Diouf etc.  He was well past his best in my opinion.

Darren Bent was Lerner's signing. Houllier wanted Benzema.

[Dodgyknees]

Houllier would have been the man to take us forward had the funds not stopped period!!! Tin hat on!

Completely agree. Importantly, he had a coherent and progressive philosophy, unlike his backwards successors.

I can't agree I'm afraid. Some of the football that year was every bit as bad as under McLeish and Lambert, and he still had the likes of Ashley Young, Petrov and Downing to call on. People say "oh, we'd have bought Cabaye if we'd stayed in charge". Well maybe, but then you have to ask who else he's have bought, given that he thought that Darren Bent and Jean Makoun were worth spending the thick end of £30m on, and also that Pires was fit for the Premier League, when in fact he looked like a rheumatic 80 year old. Look back at his last few years as Liverpool manager, and it was marked with him spending fortunes on absolute tat. £14m on Djibril Cisse, £5m on Salif Diao, £4m on Cheyrou, £10m on Diouf etc. He was well past his best in my opinion.

Darren Bent was Lerner's signing. Houllier wanted Benzema.

Do you have a link to that?

[pacbuddies]

 

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

I agree the MON stuff is boring..but given the lack of poll I'm not sure how you can conclude "most" want him out.

 

I don't need a poll. I just read the posts in this thread and not many want him to stay. If there are more then they are not coming forward.

[foreveryoung]

Houllier was the best of the bunch. O'neil, McLeish, Lambert, An shock horror he wasn't Scottish, Irish, or British

[foreveryoung]

 

 

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

I agree the MON stuff is boring..but given the lack of poll I'm not sure how you can conclude "most" want him out.

 

I don't need a poll. I just read the posts in this thread and not many want him to stay. If there are more then they are not coming forward.

 

3 maybe 4 people I know on this forum have faith he can turn us around in his third season. Although I think 2 of emm will give him till Christmas. He just needs a chance????

[The_Lions_Roar]

This is the Paul Lambert thread right? You know, the thread where most of us want rid of him and argue the toss with the few that want to keep him.

That's like most threads on here!

[swaib2004]

The injuries we had under houllier were horrendous.

[pacbuddies]

The injuries we had under houllier were horrendous.

Shush, don't mention that. It will take away another excuse for Lambert supporters.

[DamsonwoodVillan]

If we're honest everything has gone backwards since we lost the Carling Cup Final and the FA Cup semi just after.

The slide had already started before O'Neill left.

Since then we have had managers who have all had good points but also big shortcomings and incredibly difficult situations.

To be honest I've always been a big fan of Lambert. But this season has shown his shortcomings in tactics, selections and staffing. Even if he does lead us to 3 or 4 more points and safety next month, I honestly think Lambert's position in untenable now because of what's happened behind the scenes and any prospective new owner is likely to have their own ideas.

Lambert will be relieved of his position if and when a new owner takes over, as well as Given.

Sid will stay on as youth coach I think.

[Isa]

Do you have a link to that?

Not a link as such but I've heard it claimed by quite a few people on Twitter including Matt Kendrick, Matt Turvey and Howard Hodgson. Feel free to ask them.

Edit: Not that it makes a difference to me anyway even if he was Houllier's signing. He scored goals under Houllier and would've scored many more had he stayed I believe. Even if he was a bit overpriced, it's hardly Houllier's fault that Lambert came in with a new system and Bent's value has been eroded now.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Isa