penguin Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Holy multi quotes batman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 So apparently we would have got 5-8 points more (at least) if Benteke hadn't got injured. That word again "if" Benteke played most of last season and we were rubbish for most of that one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macandally Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I could waste my time responding but why bother? I suggest you read my post again unless you truly are blinded by your prejudice? In fact, dont bother Read your post and the responses, which seem perfectly reasonable. Why bother posting if it touches such a nerve when people try and debate, isn't that what a forum is for? I would like to think I am reasonable and am happy to debate, I wouldnt post otherwise! What I was unwilling to do is argue with people who hadnt either read the post, or understood it, or selected bits in isolation which changed the context. A example being where I state "tried to do" which is then somehow construed as "did do" and stated as a ridiculous claim! That is creating an an argument to argue against which is symptomatic of people who are blinded by their own views! If we were all still like that we would still think the earth was flat! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Has he built a better squad than the one he inherited? Yes. He inherited a squad going on a downward slope and rebuilt it cheaply to a squad with potential to be on an upward slope. 1 win in 8 games soon to be 1 win in 9 games sounds like a downward slope. So? This is a league 1 team with 3-4 premier league players. Do you expect them to win the Premier League? Aston Villa is exactly where I expect them to be, in the bottom half, but not among the relegated teams because Lambert is a damn good manager, in my opinion. People compare Villa with Hull...Hull bought TWO premier league strikers in Long and Jelavic when they where forced to in January. Lambert could only afford to loan Holt. People say he has used a lot of money...they say he used £40 million, like that is enough to rebuild a premier league squad....they say he bought 17 players, but fail to then mention that the total cost they lambasted him with was only £40million...they say the players should be better, but fail to mention that none of the non- loanees had premier league experience...or even experience from the big leagues. How can a club who can't afford premier league wages compete with those who can? I say it will soon be 1 win in 9 and you say "so!" 1 win in 9 is not good enough for Aston Villa football club particularly with some of the tosh that has come before that run. Hull bought two premier league strikers in January. Lambert could has had Benteke, Agbonlahor and Weimann for most of the season (i.e for a longer period) with the option of having Darren Bent as well who he decided to loan out. It could be argued Lambert had better resources but got less out of them. But poor old Lambert could only get Holt (never mind that we had Helenius anyway!) Funny how Stephen Ireland has gone to Stoke and started to find some form again. Some managers can get the best out of what they have got and some can't. Unfortunately we're stuck with one who can't. Then again it has helped that Stoke pass the ball about. Stephen Ireland is popular now? He has scored 2 goals this season. Westwood has 3, Delph has 3, El Ahmadi has 2. And they offer better work rate. Bent back too? He has scored less then Weimann, less then Agbonlahor, less then Kozak, less then Benteke. If you think game time, even Holt has better statistic. What is the point having these on the payroll if the difference is minimal? Villa was in a good position until Benteke was injured. I can't believe those who lambaste Lambert don't want to acknowledge that the turning point was the injury to Benteke. Without this, you would not have complained, even if you didn't like the football. Only because with Benteke the points tally would have been 5-8 points more. at least. .....so after 2years in charge... We still rely on one player. This is some building programme. Do you think West Ham without Carroll would have been relegated? Until his return they were down there. Do you think Liverpool without Suarez would be fighting for the championship? No! His goals and penalties gained got them up there. Look at Barcelona without Messi injured/out of form this season...they were ordinary... So did Moyes get granted mitigation with van persie being out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dukes Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I already mentioned similar figures, Steve Bruce has spent £32M in two years at hull including the two strikers you mention. So he has built a premier league squad got less. Mark Hughes signed 7 players for £7M at Stoke. Who decided to sign all these sub-standard lower league players ? Who wasted money on 2left backs and still then had to loan another ? Who spent £7M on a striker that wasn't needed or another £1.2M on another inexperienced striker that he refuses to play ? Lambert bought quantity, he chose that path rather than buying fewer but better quality players, or supplementing purchases with better use of the loan system, perhaps if he'd not signed so many players he wasn't prepared to play he could have signed Barry on loan ? Stoke did not need to rebuild. Hull City are like Villa when it comes to the player's experience. And they are one point below Villa. Without Long and Jelavic, they might have been relegated. And they spent close to £30M this season not over 2 seasons. I can go through Steve Bruce's signings. Which one of his bad signings do you want? Danny Graham? Yannick Sagbo? Two strikers he replaced with two other strikers in January. Hughes completely changed Stoke's style of play, therefore taking players that played under Pulis and making them actually play football is an even bigger achievement considering he only spent £7M. According to transfermarkt.co.uk Hull city Spent £27M this year and £7M last year, so apologies Bruce took an ordinary Hull side, got them promoted to the premier league and kept them in it for £34M over two years. Whereas Lambert took over a struggling Villa team filled with experienced players and replaced them with numerous substandard budget buys plus Vlaar and Benteke at a cost of £40M.....and turned us into a struggling premier league side. What's your point exactly ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaGoMarching Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Well Paul, I hope you enjoy your final game in charge, you may be the only one associated with the club who does. I'm expecting a rather meek collapse and a forgettable day for us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Bruce also got Hull to the cup final Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) Has he built a better squad than the one he inherited?Yes. He inherited a squad going on a downward slope and rebuilt it cheaply to a squad with potential to be on an upward slope.And this is what I keep getting told. That's he's replaced players with better and that those bombed out weren't good enough either. So if he's built a better squad than McLeish had why is him surviving a success and McLeish a failure? We lose tomorrow and this season is worse than McLeish and with what I'm told is a better squad.McLeish did it with a team full of prem league players and wages. Lambert did it on naff all. Lambert could have utilised some of those players. Instead he chose to let them rot, thus reducing their confidence and value to zero. Edited May 10, 2014 by jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) I could waste my time responding but why bother? I suggest you read my post again unless you truly are blinded by your prejudice? In fact, dont botherRead your post and the responses, which seem perfectly reasonable. Why bother posting if it touches such a nerve when people try and debate, isn't that what a forum is for?I would like to think I am reasonable and am happy to debate, I wouldnt post otherwise! What I was unwilling to do is argue with people who hadnt either read the post, or understood it, or selected bits in isolation which changed the context. A example being where I state "tried to do" which is then somehow construed as "did do" and stated as a ridiculous claim! That is creating an an argument to argue against which is symptomatic of people who are blinded by their own views! If we were all still like that we would still think the earth was flat! :-) How has he tried to get us to play good attacking, passing football? We play more long balls than any team in the league and only 3 teams have a lower average possession per game than us. I think that's been his big problem, he was unable to build on such a strong end to last season. He had another pre season, signed more players and for some reason has been unable to get us playing good football and for the most part we don't even look like a team that wants to play attacking, passing football. Edited May 10, 2014 by Big_John_10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momo Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I already mentioned similar figures, Steve Bruce has spent £32M in two years at hull including the two strikers you mention. So he has built a premier league squad got less. Mark Hughes signed 7 players for £7M at Stoke. Who decided to sign all these sub-standard lower league players ? Who wasted money on 2left backs and still then had to loan another ? Who spent £7M on a striker that wasn't needed or another £1.2M on another inexperienced striker that he refuses to play ? Lambert bought quantity, he chose that path rather than buying fewer but better quality players, or supplementing purchases with better use of the loan system, perhaps if he'd not signed so many players he wasn't prepared to play he could have signed Barry on loan ? Stoke did not need to rebuild. Hull City are like Villa when it comes to the player's experience. And they are one point below Villa. Without Long and Jelavic, they might have been relegated. And they spent close to £30M this season not over 2 seasons. I can go through Steve Bruce's signings. Which one of his bad signings do you want? Danny Graham? Yannick Sagbo? Two strikers he replaced with two other strikers in January. Hughes completely changed Stoke's style of play, therefore taking players that played under Pulis and making them actually play football is an even bigger achievement considering he only spent £7M. According to transfermarkt.co.uk Hull city Spent £27M this year and £7M last year, so apologies Bruce took an ordinary Hull side, got them promoted to the premier league and kept them in it for £34M over two years. Whereas Lambert took over a struggling Villa team filled with experienced players and replaced them with numerous substandard budget buys plus Vlaar and Benteke at a cost of £40M.....and turned us into a struggling premier league side. What's your point exactly ? What is your point? I say Villa bought League 1 players last season, you say Hull went up to the premier league with league one players. I say Hull spent close to £30M this season, you say Lambert spent £40M over two seasons, but fail to mention that Hull spent more THIS season than Villa. And still Hull are placed behind Villa in the league. Whoever the manager is, Villa can't afford proven Premier League quality players. Hull can, but still they are behind Villa on the table. Stoke HAVE a premier league team that need no rebuilding, just tweaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Will Villa be playing in Europe next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 What is your point? I say Villa bought League 1 players last season, Didn't you earlier say that Lambert had built a better squad than the one McLeish left? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 What are you guys going to talk about when his gone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarpie Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 What are you guys going to talk about when his gone? How shit is the <insert new manager here> and how they/we want him out! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 What are you guys going to talk about when his gone? . MON still gets the odd mention so we'll get a few more years out of him yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) What is your point? I say Villa bought League 1 players last season, Didn't you earlier say that Lambert had built a better squad than the one McLeish left? I'm getting lost with the amount of contradictions in some of the support for Lambert; Straw-clutching at it's finest. Edited May 10, 2014 by penguin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 MON out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I already mentioned similar figures, Steve Bruce has spent £32M in two years at hull including the two strikers you mention. So he has built a premier league squad got less. Mark Hughes signed 7 players for £7M at Stoke. Who decided to sign all these sub-standard lower league players ? Who wasted money on 2left backs and still then had to loan another ? Who spent £7M on a striker that wasn't needed or another £1.2M on another inexperienced striker that he refuses to play ? Lambert bought quantity, he chose that path rather than buying fewer but better quality players, or supplementing purchases with better use of the loan system, perhaps if he'd not signed so many players he wasn't prepared to play he could have signed Barry on loan ? Stoke did not need to rebuild. Hull City are like Villa when it comes to the player's experience. And they are one point below Villa. Without Long and Jelavic, they might have been relegated. And they spent close to £30M this season not over 2 seasons. I can go through Steve Bruce's signings. Which one of his bad signings do you want? Danny Graham? Yannick Sagbo? Two strikers he replaced with two other strikers in January. Hughes completely changed Stoke's style of play, therefore taking players that played under Pulis and making them actually play football is an even bigger achievement considering he only spent £7M. According to transfermarkt.co.uk Hull city Spent £27M this year and £7M last year, so apologies Bruce took an ordinary Hull side, got them promoted to the premier league and kept them in it for £34M over two years. Whereas Lambert took over a struggling Villa team filled with experienced players and replaced them with numerous substandard budget buys plus Vlaar and Benteke at a cost of £40M.....and turned us into a struggling premier league side. What's your point exactly ? Those managers didn't have to clear out a whole squad. Also he didn't turn us into a struggling prem team, we were that anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Lambert didn't have to clear out a whole squad either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 MON out. He'll be sniffing around again if we get new owners. Bet his first signing would be Tom Cleverley for 40 million????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts