Paul Lambert

[darrenm]

edit: please ignore

Edited October 12, 2014 by darrenm

[TRO]

 

Only nine clubs in the premier league had possession stats of over 50% in 13/14.

Of those nine, eight occupied the top nine places. The exception being Stoke.

 I think it's obvious the more you control the ball the better you will do over a season.

 

 To you it may be obvious....but evidently not to all.

[TRO]

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

 so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

[Vive_La_Villa]

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

I think that's been the problem for a while.

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Vive_La_Villa

[TRO]

 

 

Possession is quite the opposite actually, boring football.

Good lord, really?

 

So you think watching the ilk of Messi, Xavi and iniesta in their pomp is boring? Watching them run rings around Man united like they're not even there? Playing football like chess rather than than hit and hope is boring?

 

I can lump a ball aimlessly 80 yards. I want to see footballers who can do things I can't.

 

No wonder our national team has been so dreadful over the years.

 

You need to watch the season review when we finished second under Big Ron and the tell us if you think that football was boring. 

 

 

 

 

 

Possession just doesn't mean much anyway.  

 

We really need to step away from this obsession.  It's just so unimportant.

 

 

possession is not an obsession...its a piece of criteria in a game of football that ALL the top sides buy in to.....and they ALL execute very well on their way to winning trophies. If we havn't got the players to do it, then we have something to aim for and work on.

 

To then allude to its not the "be all and end all" .....that could be said about any aspect of football, in isolation....but I for one was never speaking in isolation.

 

....but with those comments you made, I will bow out of the argument gracefully, thanks.

[Vive_La_Villa]

TRO people seem to think we are asking and expecting for Barcelona style possession. I couldn't care less what the stats say. All I want is for the team to be able to pass the ball more than five or six times without either a) giving the ball away, or feeling the need to lump it forward or in to the box. Is that much to ask of a Premier League team?

[TRO]

 

 

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

I think that's been the problem for a while.

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

 

 

These are the kind of examples that make the question worth raising. I too am tired of hearing it takes a kings ransom to secure a player before he can trap the ball or shield it from an advancing opponent...sure the game is quick today, but surely we should see some improvement over the months/years from the work at Bodymoor Heath....or do they just sign in work on fitness for a couple of hours and go home?

[Rob182]

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

Not necessarily, it could be down to tactics/ formations/ player roles/ training. In recent years we've seen promoted clubs come up and control the game really well, despite not having the best players.

[TRO]

TRO people seem to think we are asking and expecting for Barcelona style possession. I couldn't care less what the stats say. All I want is for the team to be able to pass the ball more than five or six times without either a) giving the ball away, or feeling the need to lump it forward or in to the box. Is that much to ask of a Premier League team?

 

No its not too much to ask.

you say "people seem to think" its because they have their own agenda and are not listening to what we are saying. I never had a thought in my head about Barcelona, they are light years away from us...i would be looking at say Southampton or Everton...no doubt someone will remind me that Everton are below us right now.

 

you are quite right, they are exaggerating our point about possession and putting their own spin on it.

 

The problem is in supporting/defending the need for possession, it sounds like we are over stating the point.....hence this obsession, being mentioned.

 

All I believe is that if we could improve our possession ( not to mention a few other things, shooting etc, headed corners) our results would be better and more sustainable......IMO

Edited October 12, 2014 by TRO

[villan_007]

 

 

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

I think that's been the problem for a while.

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

 

 

Poor example to use. If you know anything about Swansea then you'd know the answer to that.

 

Give me an example of another team and I'll listen.

[ozvillafan]

Poor example to use. If you know anything about Swansea then you'd know the answer to that.

 

Give me an example of another team and I'll listen.

 

 

I know nothing about Swansea personally. Perhaps you can tell us why that's a poor example before asking for another? (Otherwise you can just keep dismissing them all without having to provide a reason)

[Vive_La_Villa]

The better players you have, the more you will control the ball. You don't even need to set up to play possession football.

so it would follow then,that if you can't consistently keep the ball, you are not very good?

I think that's been the problem for a while.

But what I want to know is why can a newly promoted team like Swansea a few years back keep the ball against ANY opposition?

Edit: sick of hearing excuse that team we are playing against cost millions of pounds. We're not saying beat them. We're saying do the basics right.

Poor example to use. If you know anything about Swansea then you'd know the answer to that.

Give me an example of another team and I'll listen.

Why poor example?

How about Southampton and Everton?

[Stevo985]

I think what Villan_007 is getting at is that the culture of how Swansea play had been in place for years. 

 

Martinez introduced the way they play when he took over in 2007, and they picked the right managers in Sousa and, especially, Rodgers to carry on and nurture that philosophy.

 

So yes they were a newly promoted team, but they had been playing "that way" for 4 seasons or so before they got into the premier league. it wasn't like they flicked a switch and started playing that way in the premier league.

 

So whilst I don't necessarily disagree with the point that we should be keeping the ball better, I do agree with villan_007 that Swansea is a pretty bad example to use to back up the point. It does take time to implement that sort of play. The manager can't just say "keep the ball better!" and the team just magically does it.

You need to build the team around that system, both in terms of formation and personnel.

 

The debate as to whether Lambert is doing enough to push us towards that is a valid one. I'm just saying that Swansea were years into their "philosophy" before they got to the prem.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Stevo985

[DelboyVilla]

I think what Villan_007 is getting at is that the culture of how Swansea play had been in place for years. 

 

Martinez introduced the way they play when he took over in 2007, and they picked the right managers in Sousa and, especially, Rodgers to carry on and nurture that philosophy.

 

So yes they were a newly promoted team, but they had been playing "that way" for 4 seasons or so before they got into the premier league. it wasn't like they flicked a switch and started playing that way in the premier league.

 

So whilst I don't necessarily disagree with the point that we should be keeping the ball better, I do agree with villan_007 that Swansea is a pretty bad example to use to back up the point. It does take time to implement that sort of play. The manager can't just say "keep the ball better!" and the team just magically does it.

You need to build the team around that system, both in terms of formation and personnel.

 

The debate as to whether Lambert is doing enough to push us towards that is a valid one. I'm just saying that Swansea were years into their "philosophy" before they got to the prem.

 

 

But it also points out another problem we have as a club and that's footballing philosphy. Swansea have changed manager as often as we have over the past 7 years but have never changed their style of play because a manager's style is as important to them as his previous success. We have just changed managers and styles willy nilly. We moved from MON to Houllier which nearly ended in disaster and cost a lot of money. Then from Houllier to McLeish which was again chalk and cheese and cost a lot of money. Then finally McLeish to Lambert which on the face of it was again chalk and cheese but hasn't ended up that far in terms of style but again caused a lot of distruption.

 

The worry is that under Lerner we would do the same again and completely change styles if Lambert were to walk or get sacked. The trouble is I cannot see Lambert setting a footballing philosphy up or anyone else at the club at the moment.

 

The main thing we need to change is to be less one dimensional. Relying on the counter attack will work at times but let's show some patience and composure when teams sit back and not get the shits and panic if we have to string more than 6 passes together.

[AntrimBlack]

Most of the players who play with any sort of regularity for the first team have been bought by Lambert, and I do not see any philosophy there, apart from perhaps counter attacking football.

[DelboyVilla]

Most of the players who play with any sort of regularity for the first team have been bought by Lambert, and I do not see any philosophy there, apart from perhaps counter attacking football.

 

 

Exactly!

 

And the problem is that the counter attacking style is reliant on sitting back and absorbing pressure which obviously places pressure on our defenders and we are rapidly running out of defenders and may well be having to call on our 3rd and 4th choice.

 

This has ended badly before!

[Stevo985]

 

I think what Villan_007 is getting at is that the culture of how Swansea play had been in place for years. 

 

Martinez introduced the way they play when he took over in 2007, and they picked the right managers in Sousa and, especially, Rodgers to carry on and nurture that philosophy.

 

So yes they were a newly promoted team, but they had been playing "that way" for 4 seasons or so before they got into the premier league. it wasn't like they flicked a switch and started playing that way in the premier league.

 

So whilst I don't necessarily disagree with the point that we should be keeping the ball better, I do agree with villan_007 that Swansea is a pretty bad example to use to back up the point. It does take time to implement that sort of play. The manager can't just say "keep the ball better!" and the team just magically does it.

You need to build the team around that system, both in terms of formation and personnel.

 

The debate as to whether Lambert is doing enough to push us towards that is a valid one. I'm just saying that Swansea were years into their "philosophy" before they got to the prem.

 

 

But it also points out another problem we have as a club and that's footballing philosphy. Swansea have changed manager as often as we have over the past 7 years but have never changed their style of play because a manager's style is as important to them as his previous success. We have just changed managers and styles willy nilly. We moved from MON to Houllier which nearly ended in disaster and cost a lot of money. Then from Houllier to McLeish which was again chalk and cheese and cost a lot of money. Then finally McLeish to Lambert which on the face of it was again chalk and cheese but hasn't ended up that far in terms of style but again caused a lot of distruption.

 

The worry is that under Lerner we would do the same again and completely change styles if Lambert were to walk or get sacked. The trouble is I cannot see Lambert setting a footballing philosphy up or anyone else at the club at the moment.

 

The main thing we need to change is to be less one dimensional. Relying on the counter attack will work at times but let's show some patience and composure when teams sit back and not get the shits and panic if we have to string more than 6 passes together.

 

I don't disagree.

 

Again I was just pointing out that villan_007 was probably right in saying Swansea were a bad example.

 

A better example would actually be somebody like Stoke.

They're hardly Barcelona, but they very much played direct football 2 years ago, and were very low in the league if you sort it by possession %

In the 2 seasons since they've improved significantly, simply with a change of manager. So it can be done, although Stoke haven't really backed it all up with league positions yet (but that could come)

 

 

I think the problem for Lambert is where does he stop doing what gets the most out of the team, and start playing football that will push us forward.

 

The defence of "we're playing the way that gets the most out of the team" is a valid one. But only for so long.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Stevo985

[dont_do_it_doug.]

I've yet to see anyone say that they accept that this is his philosophy and that there happy with it as long as it begins to garner better results.

Let me be the first. I enjoy counter attacking football, I did under O'Neill and should Lambert begin to move us up the table with it then I will again. I also appreciate excellent defensive displays such as the one against Liverpool.

I'm fine with the style.

Edited October 13, 2014 by dont_do_it_doug.

[Shaw_nuff]

I've yet to see anyone say that they accept that this is his philosophy and that there happy with it as long as it begins to garner better results.

Let me be the first. I enjoy counter attacking football, I did under O'Neill and should Lambert begin to move us up the table with it then I will again. I also appreciate excellent defensive displays such as the one against Liverpool.

I'm fine with the style.

That's your prerogative and I respect that.

 

I'd quite like to see a topless Kelly Brook playing up front and challenging for headers.

 

Just don't expect either to get you too far. 

[David-Copenhagen]

I've yet to see anyone say that they accept that this is his philosophy and that there happy with it as long as it begins to garner better results.

Let me be the first. I enjoy counter attacking football, I did under O'Neill and should Lambert begin to move us up the table with it then I will again. I also appreciate excellent defensive displays such as the one against Liverpool.

I'm fine with the style.

That's your prerogative and I respect that.

I'd quite like to see a topless Kelly Brook playing up front and challenging for headers.

Just don't expect either to get you too far.

Comments like that has to be applauded :-)