Paul Lambert

[Brumstopdogs]

So which players exactly has Lambert sold for a profit for us? 

[CrackpotForeigner]

 

Chills out lads.....

 

Even if we bought Clyne he would not be playing as good for us as he is for Southampton. For one he would never have been aloud that far down the pitch to score that goal, breaks the Lambert philosophy of having a tight defensive unit.

Very true!

 

 

Oh, get a room. The hotel could call it the "Nonsense Suite".

 

Our full backs most certainly have the freedom to get up the pitch.

[TrentVilla]

Lambert has said before that Lerner has not stopped him from spending larger sums of money on transfers and wages, he has on many occasions seemed to imply that the players he bought were his choice and that he could have spent more if he wanted.

 

That is an assumption though but that is how I read it.

 

Whether it is Lambert's choice/fault alone we have spent around 6/7 million on left backs. Were we could have spent 7 million on a decent one from the start.

 

Trust me the first assumption, while I understand why you make it, isn't correct.

 

On the second point again I understand the logic but the point you are missing is that they money spent (on left backs as with other players) was spent over a number of windows. I don't think Lambert was ever in the position to spend £7m (I'd dispute that figure but never mind) on a LB and even if he were he wasn't in a position to pay the wages a player of that value would command.

 

I understand where you are coming from but its a little more complicated than the scenario you are describing, please don't take that as some sort of dig though because it isn't intended as such.

[Brumstopdogs]

 

 

Chills out lads.....

 

Even if we bought Clyne he would not be playing as good for us as he is for Southampton. For one he would never have been aloud that far down the pitch to score that goal, breaks the Lambert philosophy of having a tight defensive unit.

Very true!

 

 

Oh, get a room. The hotel could call it the "Nonsense Suite".

 

Our full backs most certainly have the freedom to get up the pitch.

 

As long as they stop at the half way line

[Brumstopdogs]

 

Why? Both were available for sale and you have no idea what wage demands clyne was making.

 

I do seem to remember rumours before he signed for Southampton that we were interested in Clyne, and then it went quiet. So I don't know for sure that it was all about wages, but it does add up. The point is that we don't KNOW that Lambert had a perfectly good opportunity to sign him, so to condemn him for not doing so is idiotic.

 

Funny the other day Lambert mentioned he was interested  in Tadic and Forster but didn't mention any interest in Clyne. 

 

Oh well, I'm sure Bennett will come good in time.

[CVByrne]

Sanchez was dropping off a cliff in that Southampton game.

 

Regardless of who replaced him, the decision to bring him off was a good one, imo.

 

You are missing the point though. The Bent substitution is the method to attack Lambert for Monday as the actual result was a positive one. 

 

Unless we win a game, the relentless attack needs to continue, regardless of things like Benteke being at fault for Spurs loss, or previous 2 matches being draws are not bad results. 

 

This is to many a black and white issue, there are no shades of grey. Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

It is one of the things about football. Suppose just gotta accept it

Edited November 26, 2014 by CVByrne

[CrackpotForeigner]

 

Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

You do many of us a disservice there CVB. There's such a thing as "Lambert is doing okay, considering, and better him than the unknown poor fool who wants the job in his place."

[Shaw_nuff]

 

Sanchez was dropping off a cliff in that Southampton game.

 

Regardless of who replaced him, the decision to bring him off was a good one, imo.

 

You are missing the point though. The Bent substitution is the method to attack Lambert for Monday as the actual result was a positive one. 

 

Unless we win a game, the relentless attack needs to continue, regardless of things like Benteke being at fault for Spurs loss, or previous 2 matches being draws are not bad results. 

 

This is to many a black and white issue, there are no shades of grey. Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

It is one of the things about football. Suppose just gotta accept it

 

I'm sorry, but this is utter drivel.

 

I made my mind up gradually over 100 games, not overnight, just like so many others.

 

Nothing black and white about it at all - rather a progressive march of greyer and greyer perfomances with a couple of bright moments thrown in, until the shade of grey turns so pitch-black it's like looking for a lump of coal up Randy's shit-pipe.

[maqroll]

 

 

Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

You do many of us a disservice there CVB. There's such a thing as "Lambert is doing okay, considering, and better him than the unknown poor fool who wants the job in his place."

 

Agreed, CF. Lambert has been praised when praise is due and gotten stick when it was appropriate too. The rhetoric on here might get out of hand right after a match, but when fans have a long look at him, I think most believe he's just not good enough to lead the team forward. IMO, he's done ok. He's brought in Benteke and Vlaar, and at times the team has played well. But not well enough, and not often enough. I think some of the players have tuned him out, and they know Roy Keane has split allegiances. I think Lambert and Keane need to go, and the sooner the better. The fact that most people think a loss at Burnley is likely says it all.

[sexbelowsound]

 

 

Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

You do many of us a disservice there CVB. There's such a thing as "Lambert is doing okay, considering, and better him than the unknown poor fool who wants the job in his place."

 

 

I would suggest that what CF has said is the top end of the scale with the 'Lambert Out' people at the other. I haven't seen anyone suggesting he is faultless or as you put it, our savior.

[Wishin'nhopin]

It’s difficult to argue against the Lambert criticism – not that I'm inclined to. But to be honest I feel that I've no idea what quality of manager Lambert really is.

 

Has he had a fair crack of the whip at Villa? Has he had a reasonable Premier League budget for players and just squandered it on (mainly) mediocrity? Does he fail to inspire Villa’s squad whereas another manager could get more out of them? Or, has he always had to manage against a background of belt-tightening and very limited funds - always looking for that hidden gem in the bargain basement?

 

Does the style of football we play just reflect the quality of players we have? If you look at the records of Lambert and Robert Martinez for instance, they are quite similar up to Martinez joining Everton. In fact it is arguable that during his time in the Premiership with Norwich Lambert did better that Martinez did with Wigan. It seems odd that Martinez was widely praised for Wigan’s style of play when he was there, but saw them relegated. Was he just being too ambitious to think that the quality of players he had could survive in the premiership trying to play that way. Does Lambert feel that with what he’s got at his disposal the only chance of survival is to play the way his team does?

 

Like I say I honestly don’t know – and the only way I see anything of any significance changing is with a change of ownership. It appears Lerner’s no longer interested, so even within the constraints of FFP I can’t see him wanting to spend a lot more money than he already has / does. My main beef with Lambert is that he’s been complicit in Lerner’s current philosophy of ‘Premiership on the cheap’. Perhaps that’s how he got the job, perhaps that’s how he keeps the job. The problem is that even if Lambert were to go Lerner would find someone else to take the job on the same basis – but it wouldn't be anyone of the proven quality we’d like to see.

[smetrov]

Surprisngly the tipping point for me was the second 45 v liverpool - we were coming of the back of some decent results - had dominated liverpool and could have easily been 0-3 up. But the second half we didn't play at all - we just kept it tight and cleared our lines. OK you could (and will !) argue that we won - so what the hell - but that should have been the springboard for a different style of play.

 

Whilst I like lambert, he is IMO entrenched in this fear strategy - in his defence he's got the desired results (he's kept us up) - but after that second 45 v liverpool i gave up ant hope of being anything other - than a smash and grab team - grinding out enough results to keep us in the division - but no aspiration beyond that.

[Richard]

 

 

Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

You do many of us a disservice there CVB. There's such a thing as "Lambert is doing okay, considering, and better him than the unknown poor fool who wants the job in his place."

 

I think CVB knows that.  I get what he was suggesting I think which is people who are not prone to support the manager currently think those that do not hold exactly that opinion must therefore view Lambert as our saviour which of course not many of them do.

 

Only me 

[DCJonah]

I think the extreme views come out the more it's argued.  It seems to be more about arguing your case and I'm probably guilty as that as well.

 

I don't think anyone genuinely thinks Lambert is the root of all our issues and likewise I doubt anyone genuinely thinks Lambert is doing an amazing job and proving to be a fantastic manager. 

 

Now I think we are all agreed that performances and results are not good enough, I'm sure we'd all agree that on the whole they've been horrible and no one wants them to continue.  Part of the defence for Lambert has been the issue regarding funding and that it's unrealistic to expect better or more from him given the funds he's had, I can see some valid reasons there, I don't agree with it but I can see a valid argument there.

 

But then my question is why do you want it to continue?  If we agree that performances and results aren't good and we hate it and we agree that it's unrealistic to expect lambert to do much better, then why would anyone want to continue seeing the club they support perform at a level which they hate?  Surely there's no one who wants to watch this for the next 3 years is there?

 

So replacing Lambert may end up with the same issues and may end up with similar results but maybe it wouldn't.  Maybe a different manager would have a different style that suits the squad, maybe a different manager would pick different players in different positions. 

 

Is the defence of lambert just down to the worry of it being worse under someone else?  Because surely if you believe that things will be good under lambert then it's not unrealistic of us to have expected better from him. 

[sexbelowsound]

Lerner is the one that needs to go. I wouldn't trust him to pick out a bloody sandwich from the local garage, let alone another manager. 

 

Before anyone says "But he chose Lambert" I think the fans had a massive say in that.

[bobzy]

I think the extreme views come out the more it's argued.  It seems to be more about arguing your case and I'm probably guilty as that as well.

 

I don't think anyone genuinely thinks Lambert is the root of all our issues and likewise I doubt anyone genuinely thinks Lambert is doing an amazing job and proving to be a fantastic manager. 

 

Now I think we are all agreed that performances and results are not good enough, I'm sure we'd all agree that on the whole they've been horrible and no one wants them to continue.  Part of the defence for Lambert has been the issue regarding funding and that it's unrealistic to expect better or more from him given the funds he's had, I can see some valid reasons there, I don't agree with it but I can see a valid argument there.

 

But then my question is why do you want it to continue?  If we agree that performances and results aren't good and we hate it and we agree that it's unrealistic to expect lambert to do much better, then why would anyone want to continue seeing the club they support perform at a level which they hate?  Surely there's no one who wants to watch this for the next 3 years is there?

 

So replacing Lambert may end up with the same issues and may end up with similar results but maybe it wouldn't.  Maybe a different manager would have a different style that suits the squad, maybe a different manager would pick different players in different positions. 

 

Is the defence of lambert just down to the worry of it being worse under someone else?  Because surely if you believe that things will be good under lambert then it's not unrealistic of us to have expected better from him. 

 

In this case, I think it's partly better the devil you know.

 

Lambert has built this low-budget squad - he knows it better than anyone else.  Most managers taking a new job would want to refresh their playing staff but, in our case, would this even be feasible?  If not, would a new manager actually do any better with what is available to him?

 

But also, I'd actually like to see Lambert given some decent money to spend.  When he's shopped in the upper-end of his budget constraints, I think he's done well (and, in the case of Benteke, very well).  His decision to bring back Guzan was also great - it's just the quality in that team is lacking.  Now, this could well be down to tactics (there's certainly a gulf between our midfield and our attack) rather than personnel and, for me, that's why this run of games is important for both Lambert and Villa.

 

Draws away from home against West Ham and at home to Southampton aren't bad results in isolation.  However, we need to pick up some victories between now and January.  If we're still stuck in this rut, I wouldn't be against seeing Lambert replaced.

[DCJonah]

Yep Lerner is the main issue at the club.  I can't remember feeling more deflated about villa than this summer when a takeover didn't happen.

[CVByrne]

 

 

Sanchez was dropping off a cliff in that Southampton game.

 

Regardless of who replaced him, the decision to bring him off was a good one, imo.

 

You are missing the point though. The Bent substitution is the method to attack Lambert for Monday as the actual result was a positive one. 

 

Unless we win a game, the relentless attack needs to continue, regardless of things like Benteke being at fault for Spurs loss, or previous 2 matches being draws are not bad results. 

 

This is to many a black and white issue, there are no shades of grey. Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

It is one of the things about football. Suppose just gotta accept it

 

I'm sorry, but this is utter drivel.

 

I made my mind up gradually over 100 games, not overnight, just like so many others.

 

Nothing black and white about it at all 

 

 

Yet after 92 games you were not at all calling for his sacking. 8 games later you want him gone. So your 100 games argument, very weak in my opinion. 

 

 

And before you or others immediately type the words "Well I knew that was only temporary, that we'd slump back to this afterwards etc..."  nonsense, instead post a link to the time between Liverpool & Arsenal matches this season where you called for Lambert out. 

 

 

It would be a quiet thread if people had to do that  

[pacbuddies]

 

 

 

Sanchez was dropping off a cliff in that Southampton game.

 

Regardless of who replaced him, the decision to bring him off was a good one, imo.

 

You are missing the point though. The Bent substitution is the method to attack Lambert for Monday as the actual result was a positive one. 

 

Unless we win a game, the relentless attack needs to continue, regardless of things like Benteke being at fault for Spurs loss, or previous 2 matches being draws are not bad results. 

 

This is to many a black and white issue, there are no shades of grey. Lambert out or Lambert is our saviour. There are only two sides and nothing inbetween. 

 

It is one of the things about football. Suppose just gotta accept it

 

I'm sorry, but this is utter drivel.

 

I made my mind up gradually over 100 games, not overnight, just like so many others.

 

Nothing black and white about it at all 

 

 

Yet after 92 games you were not at all calling for his sacking. 8 games later you want him gone. So your 100 games argument, very weak in my opinion. 

 

 

And before you or others immediately type the words "Well I knew that was only temporary, that we'd slump back to this afterwards etc..."  nonsense, instead post a link to the time between Liverpool & Arsenal matches this season where you called for Lambert out. 

 

 

It would be a quiet thread if people had to do that  

 

Seriously! I have wanted him gone since his first season. The short spell of good fortune at the start of this season never lulled me. I had witnessed the garbage he served up before and I have now witnessed the garbage he has served up since. Don't be thinking that the calls for his sacking only started after the Liverpool game. How very naive.

[DCJonah]

 Lambert has built this low-budget squad - he knows it better than anyone else.  Most managers taking a new job would want to refresh their playing staff but, in our case, would this even be feasible?  If not, would a new manager actually do any better with what is available to him?

 

It's up for debate, we're not going to get a top class manager so it is a valid concern to have if he was replaced.

 

 

But also, I'd actually like to see Lambert given some decent money to spend.  When he's shopped in the upper-end of his budget constraints, I think he's done well (and, in the case of Benteke, very well).  His decision to bring back Guzan was also great - it's just the quality in that team is lacking.  Now, this could well be down to tactics (there's certainly a gulf between our midfield and our attack) rather than personnel and, for me, that's why this run of games is important for both Lambert and Villa.

 

I'd be interested to see what he could do with more money but if we're being realistic it's not going to happen at this club.  If we get taken over i see a new manager coming in and if we don't it's business as usual in terms of low backing from the owner.

 

 

Draws away from home against West Ham and at home to Southampton aren't bad results in isolation.  However, we need to pick up some victories between now and January.  If we're still stuck in this rut, I wouldn't be against seeing Lambert replaced

 

If things pick up my opinion of him will begin to change but at the moment i'm just so bored of the whole mess of a club i want a change.