Paul Lambert

[The_Steve]

Leaving out the fact the majority of our performances this season have been woeful. Lambert should go because he failed to keep a handle on his trusted lieutenants.

 

Are people not responsible for their own actions?

Edited May 6, 2014 by The_Steve

[smetrov]

 

 

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

Those players are actually decent squad players though. And haven't those sat on the bench rather than bent, Hutton etc is far better for us.

 

Agreed - And what we need is a squad - these are part of the squad - just add quality to the team and we won't need to sell them at all - given more game time they could become better - Bowery had more than 15 mins on the pitch and had his best game for Villa after being deemed shit and not good enough. In the eyes of the 'experts' he probably still is.

 

 

The bomb squad idea is flawed IMO. We need fringe players to step in for injuries \ loss of form or to try different formations. Certainly for me KEA has a lot offer in such a role - no world beater granted - but a handy guy to have on the bench...

[jim]

Leaving out the fact the majority of our performances this season have been woeful. Lambert should go because he failed to keep a handle on his trusted lieutenants.

 

Are people not responsible for their own actions?

Lambert is the manager, he should know what is going on!

[villan_007]

Leaving out the fact the majority of our performances this season have been woeful. Lambert should go because he failed to keep a handle on his trusted lieutenants.

 

Are people not responsible for their own actions?

Lambert is the manager, he should know what is going on!

Ever occurred to you it didn't happen in front of him? Bullying rarely does. Should he have mutant powers? See through walls, hear from miles away?

[Bunnski]

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

We could easily shift most of them players,  if can't sell them then it would be easy enough to loan them out and have a championship club pay most of their wages. 

[King Cropley]

Leaving out the fact the majority of our performances this season have been woeful. Lambert should go because he failed to keep a handle on his trusted lieutenants.

 

Are people not responsible for their own actions?

Lambert is the manager, he should know what is going on!

Ever occurred to you it didn't happen in front of him? Bullying rarely does. Should he have mutant powers? See through walls, hear from miles away?

I wouldn't blame him for not knowing about any bullying allegations.....however, promoting your brother-in-law into a position like the one he had at a Premier League club, when he's barely kicked a ball himself, rarely ends well.....another error of judgement to add to the catalogue of shite he's presided over.

[King Cropley]

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

We could easily shift most of them players,  if can't sell them then it would be easy enough to loan them out and have a championship club pay most of their wages.

Most of these are probably on £10-15k a week....not mega money in the scheme of things, but I'd be interested to hear which Championship teams would dig up £7-12k a week to take any of this lot on ?

[darrenm]

 

 

 

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.

 

 

I think the difference in quality between the football under McLeish and Lambert is so small as to be not worth bothering with.  It was crap and depressing with poor results under McLeish, and it's crap and depressing with poor results under Lambert.  Neither are good enough for Villa, but only one of them managed our bitter enemies, so that makes him worse in a lot of people's eyes.

 

Personally I think the poor football thing has been oversold a bit this season. I remember some awful performances this season, but nowhere near as dour, uninspiring and dull to watch as McLeish's team was. I also don't think that teams have total control over the type of football they play. It's more how confident, risk-averse or trusting of their team-mates they're allowed to be, mainly by the opposition. Sure, Arsenal have that philosophy of keeping the ball down a lot, but that's because they have many top-of-their game players who have been bought specifically because they're good with the ball at their feet.

 

If you look at games where we've been recognised as playing well this season, it's generally against teams who will attack us and leave space behind, or teams who don't feel they have to press and harry quite as much because they believe they're better and don't have to be as committed. It's no coincidence that when we have space for Gabby etc. to run into and to carry the ball a long way i.e. move the ball forward quickly at pace, it's generally considered a good performance. When teams see us as a bit of a challenge, they'll press us and close us down, forcing the easy way out, either a long ball, or back to the keeper. This is my assertion, bad performances are more down to how much is riding on the game, the confidence, but mostly how the opposition allow us to play. 

Edited May 6, 2014 by darrenm

[Mantis]

I agree Darren. While our style football has been poor quite a bit this season, as I've said previously I think it's been exaggerated quite a bit now that it's becoming a "thing".

[TrentVilla]

I think the difference in quality between the football under McLeish and Lambert is so small as to be not worth bothering with.  It was crap and depressing with poor results under McLeish, and it's crap and depressing with poor results under Lambert.  Neither are good enough for Villa, but only one of them managed our bitter enemies, so that makes him worse in a lot of people's eyes.

 

 

Maybe it does but not in mine.

 

There are differences which even those who want rid of Lambert should really accept, it is possible to want Lambert out without thinking every single thing he does is bad.

 

For a start the football at Norwich under Lambert was entirely different to the football of Small Heath under McLeish which is for me a factor worthy of note and consideration. Lambert played decent football with Norwich but the same simply cannot be said for McLeish at Small Heath or Rangers for that matter.

 

Under McLeish we frequently tried to draw games rather than win them, who can forgot 6 defenders in the side and Heskey in midfield against Spurs at home.

 

McLeish's brand of football is turgid, dour, defensive in large numbers and is all about not losing not trying to win. I don't think that is true of Lambert at all, for all our faults or his faults or the poor performances I don't think Lambert's approach, tactics or football are remotely close to being as bad as those of McLeish.

 

And that is without getting into the respective sizes of the two managers wage bills or the quality of players under their control during their times at the club. But lets park that one rather than get into another debate over Lambert's signings.

 

There have been lows under Lambert, no question and no argument from me. But we've had some extremely good results and good performances particularly against the very top sides, we never ever got close to that under McLeish and we wouldn't have done so if he stayed longer.

 

I understand some peoples views that Lambert isn't good enough but lets not be silly and say his football is no better than McLeish's. And please, don't dismiss the views of people who think differently as being little more than anti Blues bias. 

[The_Lions_Roar]

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

Those players are actually decent squad players though. And haven't those sat on the bench rather than bent, Hutton etc is far better for us.

No they aren't, honestly. Lowton isn't bad and for all his detractors KEA works his goolies off. The rest of them ? I wouldn't feed 'em never mind pay 'em.

I wouldn't keep all of them, but lowton, Bennett, Clark or baker, kea and even tonev would make a decent enough bench.

[AVTuco]

Oh my it will be difficult to find this Lambert discussion interesting again if we don't get taken over by someone like Ellison and be flooded with money.

That's how far I've gone.

[Davkaus]

 

 

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

But they won't be the overpaid half arsed don't give a damn in it for the money lot we had under MON and Houllier and McLeish. They will be lowish paid - young with still some resale value and easier to shift so there's no comparison really - in my humble opinion.

I doubt those listed would have much resale value. Lambert also hadn't managed to shift the high earners

 

 

They'll sell for more than we paid for them. Possibly only to Championship clubs, but the PL experience adds on to the price tag.

[mikeyp102]

If he does keep his job, and gets given a decent budget, we will end up with another bomb squad of players he signed that don't have a long term future here

Luna

Bennett

Lowton

Sylla

Tonev

plus the likes of Clark, Baker & KEA who are not good enough for a side trying to get into the top 10, Let alone compete with Everton/Southampton etc for top 8

But they won't be the overpaid half arsed don't give a damn in it for the money lot we had under MON and Houllier and McLeish. They will be lowish paid - young with still some resale value and easier to shift so there's no comparison really - in my humble opinion.

I doubt those listed would have much resale value. Lambert also hadn't managed to shift the high earners

They'll sell for more than we paid for them. Possibly only to Championship clubs, but the PL experience adds on to the price tag.

I don't think that they have done anything (Lowton last season maybe) to justify teams paying more than we did.. Maybe the same amount for some, but some (Bennett probably) will in my eyes be sol for less than we paid.

[mikeyp102]

I think the difference in quality between the football under McLeish and Lambert is so small as to be not worth bothering with. It was crap and depressing with poor results under McLeish, and it's crap and depressing with poor results under Lambert. Neither are good enough for Villa, but only one of them managed our bitter enemies, so that makes him worse in a lot of people's eyes.

Maybe it does but not in mine.

There are differences which even those who want rid of Lambert should really accept, it is possible to want Lambert out without thinking every single thing he does is bad.

For a start the football at Norwich under Lambert was entirely different to the football of Small Heath under McLeish which is for me a factor worthy of note and consideration. Lambert played decent football with Norwich but the same simply cannot be said for McLeish at Small Heath or Rangers for that matter.

Under McLeish we frequently tried to draw games rather than win them, who can forgot 6 defenders in the side and Heskey in midfield against Spurs at home.

McLeish's brand of football is turgid, dour, defensive in large numbers and is all about not losing not trying to win. I don't think that is true of Lambert at all, for all our faults or his faults or the poor performances I don't think Lambert's approach, tactics or football are remotely close to being as bad as those of McLeish.

And that is without getting into the respective sizes of the two managers wage bills or the quality of players under their control during their times at the club. But lets park that one rather than get into another debate over Lambert's signings.

There have been lows under Lambert, no question and no argument from me. But we've had some extremely good results and good performances particularly against the very top sides, we never ever got close to that under McLeish and we wouldn't have done so if he stayed longer.

I understand some peoples views that Lambert isn't good enough but lets not be silly and say his football is no better than McLeish's. And please, don't dismiss the views of people who think differently as being little more than anti Blues bias.

I would say at times, especially towards te end of this season that Lambert has picked a team not to lose rather than to win. Palace away, Southampton at home would be examples. He has also fielded some very defensive teams. For the last ten minutes of the game against hull at 3-1 up we were virtually playing 6 at the back as Lowton moved more central and bacuna was rb.

As for mcleish he did beat Chelsea. So it could be argued he could've got more results against better teams in his second yr (like lambert this yr).

[Big_John_10]

The vast majority have just been as bad as McLeish. Stats show the lack of possession and long ball football we've played most of the time.

[srsmithusa]

Might be just me, but I think the bomb squad put themselves on it. Mostly (not all of them) but mostly, from being half arsed and putting in effort only if the mood struck or personal credit was likely.

The question for me is about the business strategy to be done with 'em. I think the plan made sense, but it didn't work, I don't know who made the plan, but it didn't work. In theory players would be willing to compromise to get real playing time at a decent club. In reality, they demonstrated they would rather get paid to sit on their arse and get paid, than take a cut and get to play.

In one sense, the players handled their bomb squad status the same way they played. "I'll be happy to be paid millions to do nothing." They were never for the club at all. It showed in their play, it echoed in their refusal to take a pay cut to move on.

They weren't unfair to the club, just didn't care if they hurt the club or not. From a business sense, I think they and their agents were short sighted. They could have taken a deal at a lesser salary and played well enough to earn it back and advance their careers. They chose to stick with the big salary they had, so the plan didn't work, now they are worth much less.

Can't see any of them have been world beaters in what they've done after bombing. Often for the same reasons they bombed here.

[Risso]

 

I think the difference in quality between the football under McLeish and Lambert is so small as to be not worth bothering with.  It was crap and depressing with poor results under McLeish, and it's crap and depressing with poor results under Lambert.  Neither are good enough for Villa, but only one of them managed our bitter enemies, so that makes him worse in a lot of people's eyes.

 

 

Maybe it does but not in mine.

 

There are differences which even those who want rid of Lambert should really accept, it is possible to want Lambert out without thinking every single thing he does is bad.

 

For a start the football at Norwich under Lambert was entirely different to the football of Small Heath under McLeish which is for me a factor worthy of note and consideration. Lambert played decent football with Norwich but the same simply cannot be said for McLeish at Small Heath or Rangers for that matter.

 

Under McLeish we frequently tried to draw games rather than win them, who can forgot 6 defenders in the side and Heskey in midfield against Spurs at home.

 

McLeish's brand of football is turgid, dour, defensive in large numbers and is all about not losing not trying to win. I don't think that is true of Lambert at all, for all our faults or his faults or the poor performances I don't think Lambert's approach, tactics or football are remotely close to being as bad as those of McLeish.

 

And that is without getting into the respective sizes of the two managers wage bills or the quality of players under their control during their times at the club. But lets park that one rather than get into another debate over Lambert's signings.

 

There have been lows under Lambert, no question and no argument from me. But we've had some extremely good results and good performances particularly against the very top sides, we never ever got close to that under McLeish and we wouldn't have done so if he stayed longer.

 

I understand some peoples views that Lambert isn't good enough but lets not be silly and say his football is no better than McLeish's. And please, don't dismiss the views of people who think differently as being little more than anti Blues bias. 

 

 

 

Whatever football McLeish and Lambert did or didn't play at SHA and Lambert doesn't have any bearing on my post, which was comparing the football they've played at Villa.

 

As for 6 defenders in a starting line up? What like the time we lined up with 6 defenders (Vlaar, Baker, Clark, Bennett, Bacuna, Bertrand) against the bottom team in the league, at home, AND STILL LOST?

 

And I'll repeat, at Villa Lambert's football has been no better than McLeish's, the league table doesn't lie.   And please point out where I've dismissed anybody's views as merely being anti-Blues bias.  It's impossible to argue that his previous employment didn't colour people's perceptions of him, given that people were protesting on the steps of Villa Park before the season had even started.  Yes there have been some good results under Lambert, but these are just mere pin pricks of light in an almost constant night of poor football.  McLeish only won one game against a top side, but then he didn't serve up the many lows like we've had under Lambert, like Christmas 2012 including the 8-0, like losing to Bradford over 2 legs, like giving us 10 home league defeats in a season etc etc etc.

[TrentVilla]

 

I would say at times, especially towards te end of this season that Lambert has picked a team not to lose rather than to win. Palace away, Southampton at home would be examples. He has also fielded some very defensive teams. For the last ten minutes of the game against hull at 3-1 up we were virtually playing 6 at the back as Lowton moved more central and bacuna was rb.

As for mcleish he did beat Chelsea. So it could be argued he could've got more results against better teams in his second yr (like lambert this yr).

 

 

I'm not sure I'd agree about those teams against Palace or Southampton personally but no real way to say either way, its not 6 defenders and Heskey in midfield though. There is also a big difference between setting out to not lose certain games at certain times and doing that as your default standard tactics which is what McLeish did year after year.

 

As for the last 10 minutes against Hull, in a vital game when 3-1 up what on earth would you expect? I'd expect even the most attack minded manager to do the same…. unless he is Brendan Rodgers obviously.

[Big_John_10]

he didn't serve up the many lows like we've had under Lambert, like Christmas 2012 including the 8-0, like losing to Bradford over 2 legs, like giving us 10 home league defeats in a season etc etc etc.

Meaningless stats though I hear.