Paul Lambert

[Amo69]

My biggest disappointment with Lambert is our lack of plan B against weaker opponents, in particular the cup games. That semi final against Bradford for example. There was no plan for if Bradford scored. He just threw on loads of strikers and started to lump the ball up to Bentake. This was even tho we had a whole half to play.

Isolated incident but an example of what appears to be lack of preparation to various scenarios that could occur.

[Tomaszk]

Bradford, Millwall and Sheff Utd must have had really high wage bills, and sides full of expensive, experienced players when they outplayed us.

[Rovers13]

Bradford, Millwall and Sheff Utd must have had really high wage bills, and sides full of expensive, experienced players when they outplayed us.

Yeah and arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool must've had really low wage bills, all free transfers and no experience for villa to outplay them.

Edited June 7, 2014 by Rovers13

[blandy]

 

I think this has been covered about 100 times.

 

It maybe has, but I've still to see one decent argument for the way we've bombed players out, thus reducing all their values to nil.  I suspect that's a lot more to do with Lerner than Lambert, but it's still stupidity of the highest order.

 

It's wasteful, but even then was the wage more to do with the manager who identified them and bought them. None of them had much if any of a case to say they had "earn" the right to be part of the team. You could perhaps make a case for DB, though he didn't pull up any trees at Fulham when he went there.

 

I think it's a case of a manager (and board) faced with the need to cut costs (and yes, raise revenue) had hobson's choice - they could be part of the squad on a match day, not play, but still pick up the bonuses, or they could be left out of the squad/loaned out as possible/sold as possible. a few went on loan, selling them - no one wanted them, because of the wages and level of ability, with a few exceptions, where mostly we paid a fair chunk of their salary, still. Bent we got 2 million loan fee and his full wages paid. Which was a bargain for us. Not for Fulham.

 

There was not much else could be done, tbh.

 

Absolutely it was a waste and a mess, but mainly (IMO) down to the muppets who bought them - McLeish in the main. I don't hold Lambert responsible. I do think Randy Lerner bears some of the blame, via lack of advice on wages, and the Ireland signing. But it was mainly McLeish and Houllier.

[Amo69]

Bradford, Millwall and Sheff Utd must have had really high wage bills, and sides full of expensive, experienced players when they outplayed us.

Yeah and arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool must've had really low wage bills, all free transfers and no experience for villa to outplay them.[/quote

Beat them and get a draw. Let's not get carried away and say we out played them.

[Amo69]

I think this has been covered about 100 times.

It maybe has, but I've still to see one decent argument for the way we've bombed players out, thus reducing all their values to nil. I suspect that's a lot more to do with Lerner than Lambert, but it's still stupidity of the highest order.

It's wasteful, but even then was the wage more to do with the manager who identified them and bought them. None of them had much if any of a case to say they had "earn" the right to be part of the team. You could perhaps make a case for DB, though he didn't pull up any trees at Fulham when he went there.

I think it's a case of a manager (and board) faced with the need to cut costs (and yes, raise revenue) had hobson's choice - they could be part of the squad on a match day, not play, but still pick up the bonuses, or they could be left out of the squad/loaned out as possible/sold as possible. a few went on loan, selling them - no one wanted them, because of the wages and level of ability, with a few exceptions, where mostly we paid a fair chunk of their salary, still. Bent we got 2 million loan fee and his full wages paid. Which was a bargain for us. Not for Fulham.

There was not much else could be done, tbh.

Absolutely it was a waste and a mess, but mainly (IMO) down to the muppets who bought them - McLeish in the main. I don't hold Lambert responsible. I do think Randy Lerner bears some of the blame, via lack of advice on wages, and the Ireland signing. But it was mainly McLeish and Houllier.

But why should the manager be blamed for what the club has spent on the players? McLeish identified a RB and at the time it didn't seem like the worst signing in the world. If the club felt the wage demands were too high then the transfer should have been denied and McLeish told to find another target.

The same with any of Houllier's signings who again at the time we were all very happy about.

All managers will get some signings wrong. It's down to the club to decide what the wage structure is, maybe a football director to help the manager too decide which player is worth what they are demanding. I don't know how it works at other clubs but it doesn't seem right to blame managers because of the salary's players are on. Blame them for signing poor players but don't blame them for what contracts were negotiated.

[TRO]

a lot of our players on higher wages simply aren't as good as their wages would suggest,

 

 

That is the simplicity i was alluding to.

 

we have signed players we have got little from for too long.....and they haven't all been lower league signings on low wages that we have got wrong.

[TRO]

 

 

 

I think this has been covered about 100 times.

It maybe has, but I've still to see one decent argument for the way we've bombed players out, thus reducing all their values to nil. I suspect that's a lot more to do with Lerner than Lambert, but it's still stupidity of the highest order.

It's wasteful, but even then was the wage more to do with the manager who identified them and bought them. None of them had much if any of a case to say they had "earn" the right to be part of the team. You could perhaps make a case for DB, though he didn't pull up any trees at Fulham when he went there.

I think it's a case of a manager (and board) faced with the need to cut costs (and yes, raise revenue) had hobson's choice - they could be part of the squad on a match day, not play, but still pick up the bonuses, or they could be left out of the squad/loaned out as possible/sold as possible. a few went on loan, selling them - no one wanted them, because of the wages and level of ability, with a few exceptions, where mostly we paid a fair chunk of their salary, still. Bent we got 2 million loan fee and his full wages paid. Which was a bargain for us. Not for Fulham.

There was not much else could be done, tbh.

Absolutely it was a waste and a mess, but mainly (IMO) down to the muppets who bought them - McLeish in the main. I don't hold Lambert responsible. I do think Randy Lerner bears some of the blame, via lack of advice on wages, and the Ireland signing. But it was mainly McLeish and Houllier.

But why should the manager be blamed for what the club has spent on the players? McLeish identified a RB and at the time it didn't seem like the worst signing in the world. If the club felt the wage demands were too high then the transfer should have been denied and McLeish told to find another target.

The same with any of Houllier's signings who again at the time we were all very happy about.

All managers will get some signings wrong. It's down to the club to decide what the wage structure is, maybe a football director to help the manager too decide which player is worth what they are demanding. I don't know how it works at other clubs but it doesn't seem right to blame managers because of the salary's players are on. Blame them for signing poor players but don't blame them for what contracts were negotiated.

 

 

But you can't seperate the two. Good players cost lots of money,we all know that. Good managers cost lots of money too, they also want lots of money to spend.

 

Good up and coming managers/coaches/ scouts can find good players that other managers have missed or they can see potential others miss....they can also develop them on their training grounds.

 

We have not got lots of money .....all the more reason to try and find a manager that can do the above.

 

We thought we had one, but we haven't.

 

I hear some folk say all mangers get SOME wrong.....ALL of our managers over the last ten years get MOST wrong.

Edited June 7, 2014 by TRO

[Dodgyknees]

I believe the 'bombing out' of certain players was to try and force their hand into a move elsewhere. Unfortunately a lot of our players on higher wages simply aren't as good as their wages would suggest, so they've simply decided to sit out their contracts.

The football purist in me feels a bit let down that professional footballers would rather sit on the bench (the majority of our 'bomb squad' didn't/don't even do that!) than play for another club on a lower wage, but at the end of the day it is AVFC that have given them that deal, and you cannot blame them for making us honour it.

Could Lambert have handled things differently? Sure, but we don't know the whole story regarding appearance bonuses etc, only snippets for ITK's.

For me, probably my biggest disappointment with Lambert is the performances regressing from 12 months ago when the team that he had built looked like it was going somewhere, which IMO has nothing to do with the 'bomb squad'.

Spot on.

[Amo69]

But you can't seperate the two. Good players cost lots of money,we all know that. Good managers cost lots of money too, they also want lots of money to spend.

Good up and coming managers/coaches/ scouts can find good players that other managers have missed or they can see potential others miss....they can also develop them on their training grounds.

We have not got lots of money .....all the more reason to try and find a manager that can do the above.

We thought we had one, but we haven't.

I hear some folk say all mangers get SOME wrong.....ALL of our managers over the last ten years get MOST wrong.

I think we all know the wrong manager was backed at the start. After that it's been a case of cleaning up the mess left behind without spending the same kind of money.

It could have all been so different but I guess it's easy to say in hindsight.

[TRO]

I think we all know the wrong manager was backed at the start. After that it's been a case of cleaning up the mess left behind without spending the same kind of money.

It could have all been so different but I guess it's easy to say in hindsight.

I concur

[ozvillafan]

 

Absolutely it was a waste and a mess, but mainly (IMO) down to the muppets who bought them - McLeish in the main. I don't hold Lambert responsible. I do think Randy Lerner bears some of the blame, via lack of advice on wages, and the Ireland signing. But it was mainly McLeish and Houllier.

 

 

I'd agree with most of your post...

 

... but Houllier?

 

He signed Bent and Makoun. One that was exactly what we wanted with Young and Downing providing for him, and one that was a total disaster. The rest were short term loan signings (Walker, Pires, Bradley) to cover what was a hole at RB and in midfield for our mounting injury toll.

 

So that's 1 from Column A (which we managed to offload from Lambert's "bomb squad") and 1 from Column B. 2 in total. 2!

 

Not sure how those 2 players constitutes contributing mainly to the mess we were in with wages.

[blandy]

Absolutely it was a waste and a mess, but mainly (IMO) down to the muppets who bought them - McLeish in the main. I don't hold Lambert responsible. I do think Randy Lerner bears some of the blame, via lack of advice on wages, and the Ireland signing. But it was mainly McLeish and Houllier.

 

I'd agree with most of your post...

 

... but Houllier?

 

He signed Bent and Makoun. One that was exactly what we wanted with Young and Downing providing for him, and one that was a total disaster. The rest were short term loan signings (Walker, Pires, Bradley) to cover what was a hole at RB and in midfield for our mounting injury toll.

 

So that's 1 from Column A (which we managed to offload from Lambert's "bomb squad") and 1 from Column B. 2 in total. 2!

 

Not sure how those 2 players constitutes contributing mainly to the mess we were in with wages.

yeah, no argument from me. Mainly McLeish, as I said! but Bent is/was on massive wages & cost a great deal. Agreed he probably kept us up, and Makoun was a misfit, which is why I think Houllier carries a small part of the blame. The real killer was McLeish, who was the most stupid choice for manager you could ever think of.

[Rovers13]

Just because the fans wanted bent doesn't mean a manager shouldn't have been able to realize that a player as limited as bent isn't worth £18-24m and those wages.

[Isa]

Wow. That is um, well, what exactly does MON do as a manager? He doesn't so training, his transfers are shit and his tactics are pretty similar and basic every match.

Word-for-word, who else could that description apply too?

Eh, lambert deploys different formations almost every match. And doesn't he do training?

So? Playing different formations didn't mean the tactics in play are therefore less basic in every game. Ultimately, the team play the same one-dimensional, men-behind-the-ball counter-attacking style regardless of which formation is played.

Also no, Culverhouse took control of training sessions, not Lambert.

[nazvfc]

Bradford, Millwall and Sheff Utd must have had really high wage bills, and sides full of expensive, experienced players when they outplayed us.

I probably might get warning - but can we please forget this shit about Bradford Millwall and Sheffield United. BETTER VILLA TEAMS (and I mean the European Cup Winners and League Champions and even the better team that preceeded that one) and teams managed by better managers have lost to lower placed teams  so it's NOT a new phenomenon so I wish fans would not try to make out it's just under lambert that this has happened as seems to be the case. 

 

Lambert is far from perfect (and probably will never be perfect for Villa based on the feelings on here). Just my opinion.

[Isa]

There is a difference between the odd cup upset which can happen and presiding over three such upsets in just two seasons of management here including one over two-legs against fourth-tier opposition which in itself is simply disgraceful and indefensible.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Isa

[mykeyb]

If you were Lambert why on gods earth would you not be interested in the Celtic job?

[Mantis]

He's got a point though. Yes those defeats are shameful but at the same time we've also beaten Liverpool, Arsenal, Man City and Chelsea (the former two away) while Lambert's been here. The only cup upset I think you could really single out is the defeat to Bradford. They were a League 2 team and it was over 2 legs after all, but then again you also have to remember that they beat Arsenal before playing us.

 

Obviously you can't just ignore those games but people do seem to give them more attention than they deserve, especially when there are other more important criticisms of Lambert.

[chrisp65]

It's a reflection on our squad, or Manager and our mindset that right now, that if we were somehow told tomorrow we'd drawn Gillingham or Chesterfield in the FA Cup I'd consider it more a worry than a bye to the next round.

 

That's a mindset Lambert has to change.

 

Hopefully Keane can help with that. Unfortunately there's as much chance of Keane walking in November as there is of him actually helping.