Paul Lambert

[SikhInTrinity]

 

Arsenal 1 Villa 3.

Villa 3 Man City 2

Liverpool 2 Villa 2

Villa 1 Chelsea 0

 

So, according to your post you see nothing to suggest that Paul Lambert is up to the job. Presumably then, he should be sacked for those results alone?

 

To confirm.There is none so blind as those who can't see.

 

Try looking a little deeper.

 

OK, I looked a little deeper and found this...

 

Villa 1 Newcastle 2

Villa 0 Spurs 4 (Lge Cup)

Fulham 2 Villa 0

Villa 0 Man U 3

Stoke 2 Villa 1

Villa 0 Palace 1

Villa 1 Sheff Utd 2

Villa 0 West Ham 2

Villa 1 Stoke 4

Man U 4 Villa 1

Villa 1 Fulham 2

Palace 1 Villa 0

Swansea 4 Villa 1

 

Impressive stuff.

 

And an indication that anyone can cherry pick a few results to supposedly support their argument.

 

 

I think its more saying that he has seen nothing in PL to suggest he's up for the job, now to see nothing means he has no ability whatsoever. Hence why those results does show he has something about him, and the results you show that he has many faults.

[shaggy]

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

Some cracking posts over the last few pages but John's point is the stand out for me. Not because it agrees with my point of view but if that was the case that some were mocked on here for that opinion then expectation levels have been adjusted according to results in defence of the manager.

 

I'm asking myself why is Lambert being defended so robustly when other managers of our club weren't? By and large the results have been similar to Mcleish yet most were glad to see him go without as much as a whimper.

 

Is it that Lambert was the fans choice and its therefore hard to admit that we too got it as badly wrong as our chairman?

 

Or is it that there have been mitigating circumstances which have influenced the results under Lambert and he should be given more time?

 

I think those who are defending him maybe have lost sight of the most important factor of all in that football is a results business and for two seasons now results under Lambert have been poor with no sign of improvement.

 

Even if the chairman's remit was to reduce wages while keeping us in the Premiership I cannot believe that our chairman was satisfied with performances leaving us with one or two results away from being relegated but we will soon find that out.

[villa-revolution]

 

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

Some cracking posts over the last few pages but John's point is the stand out for me. Not because it agrees with my point of view but if that was the case that some were mocked on here for that opinion then expectation levels have been adjusted according to results in defence of the manager.

 

I'm asking myself why is Lambert being defended so robustly when other managers of our club weren't? By and large the results have been similar to Mcleish yet most were glad to see him go without as much as a whimper.

 

Is it that Lambert was the fans choice and its therefore hard to admit that we too got it as badly wrong as our chairman?

 

Or is it that there have been mitigating circumstances which have influenced the results under Lambert and he should be given more time?

 

I think those who are defending him maybe have lost sight of the most important factor of all in that football is a results business and for two seasons now results under Lambert have been poor with no sign of improvement.

 

Even if the chairman's remit was to reduce wages while keeping us in the Premiership I cannot believe that our chairman was satisfied with performances leaving us with one or two results away from being relegated but we will soon find that out.

 

 

Yes. Mitigating circumstances are the key point.

[TrentVilla]

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

 

They weren't though were they because 2 years ago McLeish was in charge and we were in more of a mess watching far worse football than we are now.

[shaggy]

 

 

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

Some cracking posts over the last few pages but John's point is the stand out for me. Not because it agrees with my point of view but if that was the case that some were mocked on here for that opinion then expectation levels have been adjusted according to results in defence of the manager.

 

I'm asking myself why is Lambert being defended so robustly when other managers of our club weren't? By and large the results have been similar to Mcleish yet most were glad to see him go without as much as a whimper.

 

Is it that Lambert was the fans choice and its therefore hard to admit that we too got it as badly wrong as our chairman?

 

Or is it that there have been mitigating circumstances which have influenced the results under Lambert and he should be given more time?

 

I think those who are defending him maybe have lost sight of the most important factor of all in that football is a results business and for two seasons now results under Lambert have been poor with no sign of improvement.

 

Even if the chairman's remit was to reduce wages while keeping us in the Premiership I cannot believe that our chairman was satisfied with performances leaving us with one or two results away from being relegated but we will soon find that out.

 

 

Yes. Mitigating circumstances are the key point.

 

Thought you would pick that one out villa rev. 

[Big_John_10]

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

They weren't though were they because 2 years ago McLeish was in charge and we were in more of a mess watching far worse football than we are now.

OK sorry. Around 21 months ago if we're going to be like that. Towards the end of the first transfer window Lambert had anyone who thought we'd struggle were mocked and laughed at.

[chappy]

And an indication that anyone can cherry pick a few results to supposedly support their argument.

You called me a Lambert apologist when I made the same point the other day, glad you're learning!

[AshVilla]

 

Arsenal 1 Villa 3.

Villa 3 Man City 2

Liverpool 2 Villa 2

Villa 1 Chelsea 0

 

So, according to your post you see nothing to suggest that Paul Lambert is up to the job. Presumably then, he should be sacked for those results alone?

 

To confirm.There is none so blind as those who can't see.

 

Try looking a little deeper.

 

OK, I looked a little deeper and found this...

 

Villa 1 Newcastle 2

Villa 0 Spurs 4 (Lge Cup)

Fulham 2 Villa 0

Villa 0 Man U 3

Stoke 2 Villa 1

Villa 0 Palace 1

Villa 1 Sheff Utd 2

Villa 0 West Ham 2

Villa 1 Stoke 4

Man U 4 Villa 1

Villa 1 Fulham 2

Palace 1 Villa 0

Swansea 4 Villa 1

 

Impressive stuff.

 

And an indication that anyone can cherry pick a few results to supposedly support their argument.

 

 

Not forgetting the Bradford Sheffield United and Millwall cup exits

 

Clearly if Lambert had another 30 mill to spend we may have got a result

 

I'm confident he won't be here next season anyway because if the new owner coming in has half a brain he will see that Lambert is clearly out of his depth and not up to the job

 

Already got the champagne on ice just waiting to pop the cork

Edited May 6, 2014 by AshVilla

[markavfc40]

 

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

 

They weren't though were they because 2 years ago McLeish was in charge and we were in more of a mess watching far worse football than we are now.

 

 

Far more of a mess financially then I would say yes we probably were back then. In terms of what we have on the pitch then I would say we are in just as big a mess.

The overall quality of the squad is the poorest I can remember since we were last relegated from the top flight in 87. As for the football being better we have in certain games produced sustained periods of decent football but you can count those occasions this season on one hand. Overall the quality of the football in the main has been dire.

To add to the above the simple fact that we will most likely finish on the same points total we did 2 seasons ago then I'd have to say overall, and certainly in terms of what we are serving up where it matters most on the pitch, that we were in a mess two years ago and are still in a mess now. The only glimmer of hope now being that Lerner may be about to sell up.

[DelboyVilla]

 

 

To expect much progress in terms of results, performances and league position in these circumstances and in the context of other clubs relative spending is, in my humble opinion optimistic at best but perhaps even a little unrealistic.

Yet two years ago anyone who thought we'd be in a relegation battle was mocked and laughed at.

 

 

They weren't though were they because 2 years ago McLeish was in charge and we were in more of a mess watching far worse football than we are now.

 

From a points and results point of view McLeish and Lambert are very similar. The product on the pitch over this season is almost the same too turgid negative football. Same shite different bucket as far as I'm concerned.

[villabromsgrove]

Two factors have persuaded me that PL is not the man for the job. His inability to control and direct his coaching staff, and the often appalling football that I've had to watch during his tenure. Even though he's been poorly supported by RL, I still think that he's shown himself to be too limited to make a real difference.

[srsmithusa]

 

 

No I think our lowest has been 17th which we were before the Hull game. I think that is correct. We also have been in top 4

 

Lowest was 16th which was before the Hull game.

 

A new straw to clutch at!

 

 

Not really, I asked because I was honestly wondering.  My reason?  The points total this season is no better than last, some of the football both seasons was dire (less, but some was pretty exciting).  I was honestly wondering why I generally felt more comfortable this season.  Genuinely curious, trying to understand my perception.  Don't know if i do now, but maybe I just feel better close to relegation zone than I feel when we're in the relegation zone.  Either way, no-one will argue against the idea that we need to win more.  Both for better results and for more entertaining play.

 

The question I think is, would Lambert get those wins and play entertaining football with more backing and fewer key injuries?    Should he be given a chance to try? 

[villa-revolution]

Yes. Yes. Yes.

[DelboyVilla]

No, No and No!

 

This is a results driven business and after 2 years we should be seeing real improvements. Injuries etc are all part of the game and always will be. It also interests me that most of our longer term injuries have been training ground incidents and very few on the pitch, has BMH had a plague of moles this year?

[nazvfc]

Only the ones leaking out little tit bits of info to the ITK (if they exist!)

[briny_ear]

 

And an indication that anyone can cherry pick a few results to supposedly support their argument.

You called me a Lambert apologist when I made the same point the other day, glad you're learning!

 

I confess I don't recall the exchange but I doubt you were making exactly the same point, since mine was very specific to the musings of villa-revolution.

[Mantis]

Not really, I asked because I was honestly wondering.  My reason?  The points total this season is no better than last, some of the football both seasons was dire (less, but some was pretty exciting).  I was honestly wondering why I generally felt more comfortable this season.  Genuinely curious, trying to understand my perception.  Don't know if i do now, but maybe I just feel better close to relegation zone than I feel when we're in the relegation zone.  Either way, no-one will argue against the idea that we need to win more.  Both for better results and for more entertaining play.

 

The question I think is, would Lambert get those wins and play entertaining football with more backing and fewer key injuries?    Should he be given a chance to try? 

 

Have we ever been less than 3 points clear of the relegation zone this season? I know we spent most of last season in it or very close whereas this year there's always been a gap, usually a fairly big one too.

[pacbuddies]

Better players ==> More possession, slicker passing, more creativity ==> Less hoofball ==> Different style, innit?

When we had Benteke in the team we still played sh*t so were does the more expensive better players fit in to a better playing style theory?

 

Given more money he will just buy bigger players who we can hoof it up to.

[thetrees]

And an indication that anyone can cherry pick a few results to supposedly support their argument.

You called me a Lambert apologist when I made the same point the other day, glad you're learning!

19 home defeats in two seasons - half of his home league games.

I would venture that being more cherries than enough.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Not really, I asked because I was honestly wondering. My reason? The points total this season is no better than last, some of the football both seasons was dire (less, but some was pretty exciting). I was honestly wondering why I generally felt more comfortable this season. Genuinely curious, trying to understand my perception. Don't know if i do now, but maybe I just feel better close to relegation zone than I feel when we're in the relegation zone. Either way, no-one will argue against the idea that we need to win more. Both for better results and for more entertaining play.

The question I think is, would Lambert get those wins and play entertaining football with more backing and fewer key injuries? Should he be given a chance to try?

Have we ever been less than 3 points clear of the relegation zone this season? I know we spent most of last season in it or very close whereas this year there's always been a gap, usually a fairly big one too.

Yet I've never felt entirely safe. Even when we were 9 points clear and closer to Newcastle than relegation. Those bad performances and terrible runs of form stick long in the memory and the good times start to feel like an aberration.

I often wonder if those performances and points against the top sides are as a result of those sides not taking us seriously. It's good that we can take advantage of that, but if that's the only strong to our bow eventually it will wear thin.