Paul Lambert

[foreveryoung]

 

we shouldn't STILL be speculating every year if only relegation will see Lambert fired

 

But it's likely to be the case unless the owner gets more ambitious.  If we're spending £30m in a transfer window and flirting with the drop, he'd go.  If we're spending £5m, staying up is good enough.

 

Not Very ambitious from Lambert either though is it? If he is happy signing a new 4 year contract knowing the contriants and the future is just to keep us in the premier league, says alot about him really. Any other manager i.e like Pulis, would not sign another contract knowing he will have to struggle through with little or no transfer fees. 

[pacbuddies]

 

a] I don't give a t*ss about Norwich, they are a nothing club.

 

 

b] Lambert has been here long enough, spent enough money and bought enough players in to achieve at least mid table mediocrity. The seasonal event of languishing around the relegation zone, the amount of games we lose, the poor home form and the turgid style of play is totally unacceptable.

 

The money issue is a very lame excuse.

 

 

"Spent enough to achieve at least mid table mediocrity" based on what?  I can agree with issues over style of play or not performing well at home - and, indeed, perhaps the manager isn't good enough - but some fans honestly live in the past where being a "big club" was enough to mean... well, something.

 

You can see the money issue being a "very lame excuse" but, unless you spend in the Premier League, you go nowhere.  Currently, we're going nowhere.

 

OK let's simplify it.

 

Every transfer window (of which he has had a few) he should be getting in players that improve the situation and improve our position. If you are suggesting that he has only bought players that are worse than what we had or at best the same as what we had then that signifies that he is a poor manager.

 

If, by chance, some of the players that he has bought has improved our squad then we should be seeing an improvement in position, results and performance. We are not so I can only conclude that he is a poor manager.

 

In the time that he has been here he has spent enough money and brought in enough players to move forward but he has not. Money is not everything, spending it wisely is.

[foreveryoung]

 

a] I don't give a t*ss about Norwich, they are a nothing club.

 

 

b] Lambert has been here long enough, spent enough money and bought enough players in to achieve at least mid table mediocrity. The seasonal event of languishing around the relegation zone, the amount of games we lose, the poor home form and the turgid style of play is totally unacceptable.

 

The money issue is a very lame excuse.

 

 

"Spent enough to achieve at least mid table mediocrity" based on what?  I can agree with issues over style of play or not performing well at home - and, indeed, perhaps the manager isn't good enough - but some fans honestly live in the past where being a "big club" was enough to mean... well, something.

 

You can see the money issue being a "very lame excuse" but, unless you spend in the Premier League, you go nowhere.  Currently, we're going nowhere.

 

Question to you Bobzy?

 

How are we losing so poorly without fight against league 1 opposition. 

How did we lose against Bradford over 2 ****** legs.

We have enough of a team and money to be competing with League 1 opposition don't you think

An another question. 

How do we beat top 4 sides and then completely lose confidence to even compete against poorer team than us!

[bobzy]

 

 

we shouldn't STILL be speculating every year if only relegation will see Lambert fired

 

But it's likely to be the case unless the owner gets more ambitious.  If we're spending £30m in a transfer window and flirting with the drop, he'd go.  If we're spending £5m, staying up is good enough.

 

Not Very ambitious from Lambert either though is it? If he is happy signing a new 4 year contract knowing the contriants and the future is just to keep us in the premier league, says alot about him really. Any other manager i.e like Pulis, would not sign another contract knowing he will have to struggle through with little or no transfer fees. 

 

 

Why is it not ambitious from Lambert?  You think he doesn't want to win every game he's in charge of?  Nonsense.  I don't know the explanation or reasoning behind him getting/signing a new contract.  It could be that he's happy to be in a job and getting paid, it could be that he's had reassurances over upcoming transfer windows, it could be that he relishes a challenge - who knows.

 

r.e: The lower league opposition, the answer is simple for me - the players let us down.  Now it may be that Lambert didn't sufficiently motivate them but, as you say, our team is good enough to beat League One sides.  I'd lay blame at Lambert's door moreso for things like the home loss against Crystal Palace last season than being knocked out of the cup by lower league opposition.  Obviously, though, it happened on his watch so he has to take responsibility for it.

[bobzy]

 

 

a] I don't give a t*ss about Norwich, they are a nothing club.

 

 

b] Lambert has been here long enough, spent enough money and bought enough players in to achieve at least mid table mediocrity. The seasonal event of languishing around the relegation zone, the amount of games we lose, the poor home form and the turgid style of play is totally unacceptable.

 

The money issue is a very lame excuse.

 

 

"Spent enough to achieve at least mid table mediocrity" based on what?  I can agree with issues over style of play or not performing well at home - and, indeed, perhaps the manager isn't good enough - but some fans honestly live in the past where being a "big club" was enough to mean... well, something.

 

You can see the money issue being a "very lame excuse" but, unless you spend in the Premier League, you go nowhere.  Currently, we're going nowhere.

 

OK let's simplify it.

 

Every transfer window (of which he has had a few) he should be getting in players that improve the situation and improve our position. If you are suggesting that he has only bought players that are worse than what we had or at best the same as what we had then that signifies that he is a poor manager.

 

If, by chance, some of the players that he has bought has improved our squad then we should be seeing an improvement in position, results and performance. We are not so I can only conclude that he is a poor manager.

 

In the time that he has been here he has spent enough money and brought in enough players to move forward but he has not. Money is not everything, spending it wisely is.

 

 

I want a better player than player <x> and I identify a few players - however, I'm unable to get the financial backing from the board to bring these players in.  The squad is struggling and needs some fresh impetus, but I can't get the first players I want so I work, essentially, down a list.  Can I get player <a>?  No.  How about player <b>?  No.  Turns out I can get player <c> so I go for him - the 31st player on my list.  I hope he has an impact on the team because it's needed but the purchase is more of a gamble because, for better quality, I recognise that I likely need to pay more.

 

I understand he can't win in your situation (surprise, eh?!), but the general consensus is pay more, get more.  On the whole, I think Lambert has done pretty well in the transfer market and I think the squad is improved from when he joined.  Therefore, disappointing that we're currently not playing much better football in terms of pure aesthetics.  On the whole, though, I don't think our results have been that bad this season when taken in isolation.

 

Since Lambert has joined Aston Villa, I don't think we've gone backwards.  We probably haven't gone forwards that much either - which rightly disappoints fans and likely disappoints the manager/the players - but I can't see that changing too much until we start to spend decent amounts on decent players.  Bear in mind that, in keeping with this rhetoric, Lambert's most expensive signings have been Benteke, Kozak, Sanchez and Okore - 2 of these players have been injured for longer than they've been fit, 3 of them have suffered serious injuries and one has only joined this season.

Edited November 16, 2014 by bobzy

[pacbuddies]

 

 

 

a] I don't give a t*ss about Norwich, they are a nothing club.

 

 

b] Lambert has been here long enough, spent enough money and bought enough players in to achieve at least mid table mediocrity. The seasonal event of languishing around the relegation zone, the amount of games we lose, the poor home form and the turgid style of play is totally unacceptable.

 

The money issue is a very lame excuse.

 

 

"Spent enough to achieve at least mid table mediocrity" based on what?  I can agree with issues over style of play or not performing well at home - and, indeed, perhaps the manager isn't good enough - but some fans honestly live in the past where being a "big club" was enough to mean... well, something.

 

You can see the money issue being a "very lame excuse" but, unless you spend in the Premier League, you go nowhere.  Currently, we're going nowhere.

 

OK let's simplify it.

 

Every transfer window (of which he has had a few) he should be getting in players that improve the situation and improve our position. If you are suggesting that he has only bought players that are worse than what we had or at best the same as what we had then that signifies that he is a poor manager.

 

If, by chance, some of the players that he has bought has improved our squad then we should be seeing an improvement in position, results and performance. We are not so I can only conclude that he is a poor manager.

 

In the time that he has been here he has spent enough money and brought in enough players to move forward but he has not. Money is not everything, spending it wisely is.

 

 

I want a better player than player <x> and I identify a few players - however, I'm unable to get the financial backing from the board to bring these players in.  The squad is struggling and needs some fresh impetus, but I can't get the first players I want so I work, essentially, down a list.  Can I get player <a>?  No.  How about player <b>?  No.  Turns out I can get player <c> so I go for him - the 31st player on my list.  I hope he has an impact on the team because it's needed but the purchase is more of a gamble because, for better quality, I recognise that I likely need to pay more.

 

I understand he can't win in your situation (surprise, eh?!), but the general consensus is pay more, get more.  On the whole, I think Lambert has done pretty well in the transfer market and I think the squad is improved from when he joined.  Therefore, disappointing that we're currently not playing much better football in terms of pure aesthetics.  On the whole, though, I don't think our results have been that bad this season when taken in isolation.

 

Since Lambert has joined Aston Villa, I don't think we've gone backwards.  We probably haven't gone forwards that much either - which rightly disappoints fans and likely disappoints the manager/the players - but I can't see that changing too much until we start to spend decent amounts on decent players.  Bear in mind that, in keeping with this rhetoric, Lambert's most expensive signings have been Benteke, Kozak, Sanchez and Okore - 2 of these players have been injured for longer than they've been fit, 3 of them have suffered serious injuries and one has only joined this season.

 

To be honest he can't 'win' very often and that is the bottom line.

[terrytini]

I agree with a lot of what Richard said but I can't accept his reasoning - which sounds well informed ? - that we don't attack or entertain because, effectively, we would be more likely to be relegated.

Yes against the top 6....defend and counter.

But not against the rest surely? Give em a game !

Does lambo really feel if he was to attack the other 13 sides we'd be worse off ?

If so I think he is both wrong and defeatist, and that defeatism will most definitely aftfect\ have affected, the players.

If anything that explanation.....which may be as close as we ever get to one from the man himself.....convinces me even more he will never do it for us.

Do we really want a boss who writes off points, performances, and entertainment, because he thinks he'd get beat unless he can spend a fortune ?

Edited November 16, 2014 by terrytini

[Brumstopdogs]

r.e: The lower league opposition, the answer is simple for me - the players let us down.  Now it may be that Lambert didn't sufficiently motivate them but, as you say, our team is good enough to beat League One sides.  I'd lay blame at Lambert's door moreso for things like the home loss against Crystal Palace last season than being knocked out of the cup by lower league opposition.  Obviously, though, it happened on his watch so he has to take responsibility for it.

 

I take it you missed the Bradford games then!

[DCJonah]

I agree with a lot of what Richard said but I can't accept his reasoning - which sounds well informed ? - that we don't attack or entertain because, effectively, we would be more likely to be relegated.

I agree with you. I think that argument is a poor one.

It's not like we're surviving by holding onto draws and grinding out 1-0 victories.

To think we'd somehow get worse results that losing 50% of the time if we were more of an attacking team doesn't seem to be based on much.

It seems to me the reason we offer little in attack is that the manager has put together a very average squad and is incapable of getting the best from them.

[Brumstopdogs]

The loan signing (and attempted purchase of Cleverley) when we could have signed a creative midfielder just about sums Lambert up.

[bobzy]

The loan signing (and attempted purchase of Cleverley) when we could have signed a creative midfielder just about sums Lambert up.

 

Who was the creative midfielder we were signing?

[nik986]

We play not to lose. Therefore, Lambert is basically playing for a draw or 1 point a game.

If we played to win, we may actually win.

Under Lambert it'd take 3 games to earn 3 points.

Under a manager who tries to win, it may only take one.

If anyone questions whether Lambert plays for a point, look at our point hauls over 38 games.

Edited November 16, 2014 by nik986

[Brumstopdogs]

 

The loan signing (and attempted purchase of Cleverley) when we could have signed a creative midfielder just about sums Lambert up.

 

Who was the creative midfielder we were signing?

 

Certainly not Cleverley.  I guess when the aim of a football match is to win 0-0 who needs creativity. We might as well just play forwards on the wing because that is really working.

[TRO]

Look, To say he wants to win is ridiculous, of course he does, so did McLeish and O'leary and so did Turner and McNeill its a ridiculous comment.

 

Its how you go about winning and what mentality you instill in the players to attempt to win.

 

4-3-3 away from home with 2 of the 3 up front that can't score in a brothel... what kind of mentality and approach is that?

 

if it wasn't so serious to some of us ....it would be funny.

[penguin]

The loan signing (and attempted purchase of Cleverley) when we could have signed a creative midfielder just about sums Lambert up.

Who was the creative midfielder we were signing?

He's clearly saying the £8M we apparently had to spend on Cleverly would have been put to better use on a creative player, which is surely hard to dispute. Edited November 16, 2014 by penguin

[Ulver]

To be fair to Lambert, he's only had 3 seasons to find a creative/attacking #10 type. Give the poor bloke a chance. It can't be easy

 

Far easier to spunk 8m on another battler

[ozvillafan]

To be fair to Lambert, he's only had 3 seasons to find a creative/attacking #10 type. Give the poor bloke a chance. It can't be easy

 

Far easier to spunk 8m on another battler

 

I wonder about this. We do have some decent midfielders in the club. Could not one of them be coached/deployed to play the AM role since we have no specialist? Cleverly? Delph? Richardson? N'Zogbia?

[DelboyVilla]

 

To be fair to Lambert, he's only had 3 seasons to find a creative/attacking #10 type. Give the poor bloke a chance. It can't be easy

 

Far easier to spunk 8m on another battler

 

I wonder about this. We do have some decent midfielders in the club. Could not one of them be coached/deployed to play the AM role since we have no specialist? Cleverly? Delph? Richardson? N'Zogbia?

 

 

 

At BMH a coach is the bus that takes the players to the games!

[Richard]

Sorry if people think using the issue of money is a poor excuse.  Trouble is that is what the game is about these days ,  those with it and those without it.  Those with it can buy the better players and be more successful.  Those without it cant

[dn1982]

Lambert lost my support when Orient beat us. He's attitude in that game I believe transmitted to the players. He was sat down virtually the whole game with out his usual Jack in the box intensity. That to me showed he didn't really care if we progressed or not and when its the probably the only chance we have at any success that is seriously wrong.

A lot of people go on about this mythical AM but it doesn't matter where your creativity comes from so long as you get it. For me Lambert is more bothered about defending than anything else. He picks wide players who even though they are strikers are picked because they are better at defending than others. Grealish will create more than Gabby but may cost at the other end. Cissokho is getting forward less and less. Who's fault is that? If We play defensive against Sothampton hoping to knick one I think the crowd will turn and Lerner will have to do some thing but I think Lambert will get a sneaky draw and we'll go again which is just prolonging the pain and delaying the inevitable.