Paul Lambert

[The_Lions_Roar]

If we finished 10th this season with, say, 10 more points - would it then have been labeled bad management?

But we didn't and we won't. We were close to getting relegated, again this in the second season was not good enough. Put it this way, regardless of finances no other manager would have been offered another season with the results we have had!!

Regardless of fiances? Yeah Let's just ignore one of the biggest factors on the teams performance.

Graham Taylor was spot on on Saturday saying its too easy to just look at the league table and the results and say its not good enough but you can't. You need to take into account injuries, finances etc.

[PieFacE]

took nearly a quarter of our points against top 4 teams which shows their is ability in this team and defensive ability, don't know why we cant do it against the lesser teams

Simple, no creativity, no movement.

 

We can counter attack teams who play a high line and attack us. When the lesser teams sit back we struggle. Same problem we've had for about 8 years.

Edited May 6, 2014 by PieFacE

[SikhInTrinity]

 

Seriously OVF, don't you think Lambert would have loved to sign the players we need to play in a different style? No manager refuses to sign players: Lambert would have wanted a creative CAM more than any of us.

 

Maybe I'm in a minority, but I just don't believe that our problems could all be resolved if only the manager chose to tell the players we have to just go out and play in a different "style". The players you have determine what style you can play.

It's a very good point you make concerning 'the players you have determine what style you can play' which incapsulates what I was originally trying to say.

With few exceptions Lambert bases his style of play around a big man up front. He has purchased Bowery, Kozak, Benteke and replaced the second two with Holt.

If we buy better players in the summer particularly in midfield do you think he will suddenly bench those front players and replace them with either Gabby upfront on his own or two new smaller but more nippy forwards to encompass a change of style?

That's what I was getting at with the signing of Holt. He might have been able to bring another forward in on loan even from Europe to change our style of play but he chose to go with yet another big target man up front.

You also have to remember that it was he who brought those 17-18 players in and if we are going to give Lambert some credit then he brought those players in with a style of play in mind which would substantiate your original point and mine that even with better players he would still play them in his preferred system with a target man upfront which would nevertheless still produce the archaic, insipid hoof football we've seen while he has been our manager.

My opinion may be bollox but it is bollox based on what I've seen first hand with few exceptions over the last two seasons under Lambert and even with better players I don't think we will necessarily see better football under him.

 

 

Don't know how many times we have to go over the Holt signing, he was cover for Kozak, a player who we had lost for a season. On top of that we had an injury to Benteke. As for this AM, didn't he have Hoolahan at Norwich? I honestly think he tried for an AM, he stated he was in for Holtby but finances but an end to that, he was in for Kiyotake but his club were quoting a price tag of 12million plus. Now people will come on here and state other Am's are available, well not the one's he wanted. I have no doubt he had others on his list. But to me the signings in Jan said it all about his budget.

[Eames]

 

took nearly a quarter of our points against top 4 teams which shows their is ability in this team and defensive ability, don't know why we cant do it against the lesser teams

Simple, no creativity, no movement.

 

We can counter attack teams who play a high line and attack us. When the lesser teams sit back we struggle. Same problem we've had for about 8 years.

 

The solution to this being the oft mentioned No 10. Those players that tend to be the most expensive to buy and pay....... given our restrictions its easy to see why we weren't able to sign one this season.

[Richard]

Still a Lambert fan.  Still think he needs to stay and have some decent money to spend this summer.  Hoping he will on both counts

[PieFacE]

 

 

took nearly a quarter of our points against top 4 teams which shows their is ability in this team and defensive ability, don't know why we cant do it against the lesser teams

Simple, no creativity, no movement.

 

We can counter attack teams who play a high line and attack us. When the lesser teams sit back we struggle. Same problem we've had for about 8 years.

 

The solution to this being the oft mentioned No 10. Those players that tend to be the most expensive to buy and pay....... given our restrictions its easy to see why we weren't able to sign one this season.

 

Completely agree. 

 

Though at the time of the Kozak signing I said it was a mistake and we should have used that money on a CAM (even if it was just Hoolahan).

 

But who knows, maybe it was Kozak's goals which have kept us up. 

[shaggy]

Could have been Kozak's goals as it could have been one or a culmination of many things but playing a team with their minds on a cup final certainly didn't do us any harm even though we did beat what was in front of us.

Seriously OVF, don't you think Lambert would have loved to sign the players we need to play in a different style? No manager refuses to sign players: Lambert would have wanted a creative CAM more than any of us.

 

Maybe I'm in a minority, but I just don't believe that our problems could all be resolved if only the manager chose to tell the players we have to just go out and play in a different "style". The players you have determine what style you can play.

It's a very good point you make concerning 'the players you have determine what style you can play' which incapsulates what I was originally trying to say.

With few exceptions Lambert bases his style of play around a big man up front. He has purchased Bowery, Kozak, Benteke and replaced the second two with Holt.

If we buy better players in the summer particularly in midfield do you think he will suddenly bench those front players and replace them with either Gabby upfront on his own or two new smaller but more nippy forwards to encompass a change of style?

That's what I was getting at with the signing of Holt. He might have been able to bring another forward in on loan even from Europe to change our style of play but he chose to go with yet another big target man up front.

You also have to remember that it was he who brought those 17-18 players in and if we are going to give Lambert some credit then he brought those players in with a style of play in mind which would substantiate your original point and mine that even with better players he would still play them in his preferred system with a target man upfront which would nevertheless still produce the archaic, insipid hoof football we've seen while he has been our manager.

My opinion may be bollox but it is bollox based on what I've seen first hand with few exceptions over the last two seasons under Lambert and even with better players I don't think we will necessarily see better football under him.

 

Don't know how many times we have to go over the Holt signing, he was cover for Kozak, a player who we had lost for a season. On top of that we had an injury to Benteke. As for this AM, didn't he have Hoolahan at Norwich? I honestly think he tried for an AM, he stated he was in for Holtby but finances but an end to that, he was in for Kiyotake but his club were quoting a price tag of 12million plus. Now people will come on here and state other Am's are available, well not the one's he wanted. I have no doubt he had others on his list. But to me the signings in Jan said it all about his budget.

Which completely misses my point.

[bobzy]

 

Seriously OVF, don't you think Lambert would have loved to sign the players we need to play in a different style? No manager refuses to sign players: Lambert would have wanted a creative CAM more than any of us.

 

Maybe I'm in a minority, but I just don't believe that our problems could all be resolved if only the manager chose to tell the players we have to just go out and play in a different "style". The players you have determine what style you can play.

It's a very good point you make concerning 'the players you have determine what style you can play' which incapsulates what I was originally trying to say.

With few exceptions Lambert bases his style of play around a big man up front. He has purchased Bowery, Kozak, Benteke and replaced the second two with Holt.

If we buy better players in the summer particularly in midfield do you think he will suddenly bench those front players and replace them with either Gabby upfront on his own or two new smaller but more nippy forwards to encompass a change of style?

That's what I was getting at with the signing of Holt. He might have been able to bring another forward in on loan even from Europe to change our style of play but he chose to go with yet another big target man up front.

You also have to remember that it was he who brought those 17-18 players in and if we are going to give Lambert some credit then he brought those players in with a style of play in mind which would substantiate your original point and mine that even with better players he would still play them in his preferred system with a target man upfront which would nevertheless still produce the archaic, insipid hoof football we've seen while he has been our manager.

My opinion may be bollox but it is bollox based on what I've seen first hand with few exceptions over the last two seasons under Lambert and even with better players I don't think we will necessarily see better football under him.

 

 

All of this is fair enough but I think we've seen a change in style from Lambert towards the back end of this season?  It's actually probably coincided with some poor results, but we've been retaining possession much more effectively in the last few games.  Against Swansea and Southampton in particular, both sides absolutely dominated us in terms of possession earlier in the season but we held the ball better against them in recent games (a quick glance at the BBC site tells me we had 27% possession against Swansea (52% recently) and 22% against Southampton (38% recently)).

 

Evidently, any change of style/play is going to take an amount of time to embed but I think Lambert is generally getting us into a style of play he'd want us to play rather than one he feels we need to play.  Cynically, perhaps he's only done this as he's been without Benteke/Kozak.  Either way, it would certainly be harsh to class the football we've played recently as "hoof ball".

[LondonLax]

I'd be inclined to keep him on next season. With a bit more investment in the right areas we should be able to move into the top half. We have shown we can beat the top sides (the only team in the league to have taken points off all of the top 4) this means we can do the hard stuff. Getting more points from the teams around us shouldn't require massive changes, with a couple of key additions we can make a step forward again. 

 

I feel like we will be back to building a team from scratch if we change manager again. Another season of fighting relegation whilst the transition is made. 

[nazvfc]

All of us that sit in the Upper Holte and have been in the same seats for years commented that the passing and movement and balls in the channels was looking like the influence of Cowans (not saying it was all him) but also Lambert. The movement was good and there was little or no 'hoofball'. The passing was the best I've seen for a while. Reminded me a little of Cowans Mortimer Bremner (not as good of course) but the desire etc.

 

Maybe the team of Lambert Cowans and Given was a contributary factor also - not just Hull having the cup on thier minds - seeing as Long and Jelavic are not eligible they surely did not have thier mind.

 

Could they make Villa play better given more time - who knows but noticed since Cowans and Given joined the coaching staff there have been signs that bode well.

 

Then again I could be completely wrong and it was just a fluke - but I feel the players (and the coaches/manager) handled the pressure (and it was a real pressure game) well. I hate to imagine what would have happened if they had of gone behind early doors!! and MAYBE the fans getting on their backs!

[PussEKatt]

Keeping Lambert would be too risky.

What if the season had another 5 games to go ? would you be confident that we would move on up the table or go down for sure.Also it took us 36 games to be safe...bit too close for comfort for me.

[Big_John_10]

Keeping Lambert makes no sense which is why it won't happen.

[LondonLax]

Keeping Lambert makes no sense which is why it won't happen.

 

So you keep saying...

[mikeyp102]

Let's change manager every 1-2 seasons. Proven method of success

Seems to work for Chelsea/real Madrid etc

[PussEKatt]

We have had 2 managers in the last 3 seasons,its not working for us ?

[Richard]

Sacking him makes even less sense

 

Let's change manager every 1-2 seasons. Proven method of success

Seems to work for Chelsea/real Madrid etc

 

so does spunking millions at it

[darrenm]

 

Let's change manager every 1-2 seasons. Proven method of success

Seems to work for Chelsea/real Madrid etc

 

It doesn't. Chelsea massively underachieve for their level of investment. The clubs which overachieve are the ones who keep as much stability as possible. E.g. Everton.

[Ghost_of_Pongo_Waring]

Keeping Lambert would be too risky.

What if the season had another 5 games to go ? would you be confident that we would move on up the table or go down for sure.Also it took us 36 games to be safe...bit too close for comfort for me.

 

Actually we were safe after the Chelsea game. It took until Saturday to confirm it but we've been safe for weeks.

[Richard]

 

Keeping Lambert would be too risky.

What if the season had another 5 games to go ? would you be confident that we would move on up the table or go down for sure.Also it took us 36 games to be safe...bit too close for comfort for me.

 

Actually we were safe after the Chelsea game. It took until Saturday to confirm it but we've been safe for weeks.

 

Not really.  If we hadn't won on saturday we'd be on 35 points and one of three teams who could realistically still go down.  As it happens we are on 38 points and now safe thanks to that victory

[daggy_333]

Keeping Lambert would be too risky.

What if the season had another 5 games to go ? would you be confident that we would move on up the table or go down for sure.Also it took us 36 games to be safe...bit too close for comfort for me.

Actually we were safe after the Chelsea game. It took until Saturday to confirm it but we've been safe for weeks.

Not really. If we hadn't won on saturday we'd be on 35 points and one of three teams who could realistically still go down. As it happens we are on 38 points and now safe thanks to that victory

Saying what if the season was 5 games longer is pointless. You could say what if it was 5 games shorter. We would have been safe ages ago then.