Paul Lambert

[Grasshopper]

What worries me above all is the knock on effect/inevitable that will happen to our assets.

 

Guzan - Vlaar - Delph - Benteke - Grealish.

 

Liverpool & Arsenal may be looking for new GK soon and if Kroll moves on the merry-goalie-round may just bring in offers for Guzan - would you want to stay if you were him?

 

Vlaar's injury history may just save us here, but would he say no to a better deal/club?

or just leave for free

 

Delph's injury needs to keep him out till February to put the brakes on offers for him.

or leave for free too

 

Benteke - only a matter of time I'm afraid.

 

Grealish - No chances? ok I'm off then

 

That alone will cost a fortune to replace just to stand still.

around 25mill

Then there's blowing 8million on Cleverley if PL has his way

32Million

Is RL going to sanction that?

 

Of course if we were a fluent attacking side having a real go then maybe they'd all consider staying.

 

For that we'd need a change of Owner/Manager/Tactics/Coaching/Playing style and results

 

Still we can all wait for PL to grow some.........

[CVByrne]

 

Thing is though people mistake a clean sheet for a solid defence

There were two specific occasions I can recall last night where they had 3/4 attackers bearing down on 1/2 defenders, we were just lucky that they had frazier Campbell on the pitch with his heavy touches otherwise we'd have conceded at least one

This is not the basis of a solid defence, not imo

 

Disagree with this. Our defence is solid - the statistics show that. The best defences often rely on last ditch tackles and top class goalkeeping saves. 

 

Unfortunately, the price of our defence being solid is that we score very few goals.

Lambert has set us up so our midfield gives excellent cover to our defence. Unfortunately this means our midfielders rarely get beyond our strikers or into the opposition box, which probably also explains why we are so bad at retaining possession when attacking.

But I think this is conscious decision which Lambert has made, rightly or wrongly.

 

 

Surely the way we are set up is very different when we have Benteke in form and the team used to playing with him up top. As I've said his physicality and Gabbys pace forces teams to defend deeper. especially teams who are in the bottom half.

 

Take Sunderland, O'Sea and Brown have the turning speed of an oil tanker and they are going to come to Villa Park this month and defend deep. Period. This is where we will have the space in midfield and need some guile from Cole or Grealish, or a set piece to win. 

[Richard]

 

All I am saying is I am not sure our fans would be prepared to change their opinion on Lambert like wet spam and barcodes fans have done for their manager

Yes but there are people with entrenched opinions on both sides. If we lose our next ten games, we all know that you'll still be backing him and sticking to your claim that he is our best manager in the last thirty years. For some reason, the narrative seems to be that if you are supportive of the manager then you are automatically a rational and open-minded individual whereas if your are against him then ergo you are the complete opposite.

 

You obviously missed my bit above the one you quoted in the same post where I admitted that I support him and said thats on the back of poor results and performances.  Just that if we won a few on the trot would those not supportive change?  I fully expect I'm probably in a minority of one with my support.

 

Of course the bit of your post starting "For some reason,...." is uitterly nonsense and not true.  My commentary is not on anyone in terms of their state of mind or ability to be open minded in all they do,  my commentary was on their support or otherwise for a manager of a football team they support

 

That's a weird stat

But a stat that says we are 20th in terms of shot conversion is not weird?

[Isa]

 

Aside from Richard maybe, that's very wide of the mark. 

 

The lines are drawn on "Lambert out now" vs "give Lambert the season". 

 

You'll find very few people who will support him if we are in the relegation zone in Feb or March. I'll want rid if that happens with the players he has available and have stated as much.

There are quite a few others as well who unequivocally believe the manager is doing a good job and palm off his faults and failures on financial contraints and/or injuries. Though they have diminished in the last couple of months admittedly.

For me personally, it's simple. It took me a substantial period to lose faith in the manager and it would take him picking it up over an equally substantial period to regain my support.

[Isa]

Just that if we won a few on the trot would those not supportive change?

Well no, in the same way that you wouldn't expect fans to suddenly turn on a popular manager on the back of a few bad results. That's simply fickleness of the highest order.

This is my point though, remaining supportive of the manager through difficult results is 'seeing the bigger picture' and a positive. Not suddenly changing a negative opinion of a manager (that has been formed over a two and a half year reign) due to a few good results is seen as stubbornness.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Isa

[Richard]

Have i said stubbornness ? No nor that I see it as that.  Just wondering if we would be the same as wet spam and barcodes fans who thought similarly about their managers and actually a little worse I think,  but have since changed their views. 

[Isa]

I wasn't directly quoting you, I mean it is often implied that anti-Lambert posters inheritly possess that trait (not solely from you). In my opinion, any Newcastle fans that have changed their opinion of Pardew in recent weeks deserve no respect whatsoever. He had done more than enough to warrant being sacked and (as said above) you shouldn't change your opinion of a manager based on a few results.

[bannedfromHandV]

Thing is though people mistake a clean sheet for a solid defence

There were two specific occasions I can recall last night where they had 3/4 attackers bearing down on 1/2 defenders, we were just lucky that they had frazier Campbell on the pitch with his heavy touches otherwise we'd have conceded at least one

This is not the basis of a solid defence, not imo

 

Disagree with this. Our defence is solid - the statistics show that. The best defences often rely on last ditch tackles and top class goalkeeping saves. 

 

Unfortunately, the price of our defence being solid is that we score very few goals.

Lambert has set us up so our midfield gives excellent cover to our defence. Unfortunately this means our midfielders rarely get beyond our strikers or into the opposition box, which probably also explains why we are so bad at retaining possession when attacking.

But I think this is conscious decision which Lambert has made, rightly or wrongly.

No sorry, it's not solid. Solid is the last term I'd use for our defence.

One ball bypasses our midfield easily and regularly and wide players have the freedom of the touch line throughout the game

We must be watching different matches

[P3te]

 

Guzan - Vlaar - Delph - Benteke - Grealish.

 

That alone will cost a fortune to replace just to stand still.

around 25mill

 

That's not how it works though. Guzan cost us 250k first time around, and nothing second time. Vlaar cost 3m, Delph 7m, Benteke 6m and Grealish nothing. So, technically, you COULD replace those guys for 16.25m, but that's not how football works. We could spend 2m replacing them all and end up with better players, or spend 50m and end up with worse ones

[bannedfromHandV]

Thing is though people mistake a clean sheet for a solid defence

There were two specific occasions I can recall last night where they had 3/4 attackers bearing down on 1/2 defenders, we were just lucky that they had frazier Campbell on the pitch with his heavy touches otherwise we'd have conceded at least one

This is not the basis of a solid defence, not imo

how many saves did Guzan have to make, not many

But how much was that down to wastefulness by Palace as opposed to great defending?

For me it's weighted heavily on Palace's inability last night

[Rob182]

Well we can see many in this thread have made their mind up and now good results become a burden for them because it puts their entrenched views very much open to criticism.

They need to reel off the bad first 2 seasons under Lambert as that is obviously of more importance than any current team or results.

I wouldnt quite go that far CVB to be honest just that it seems that sometimes the following is adopted (not saying everyone does this just the way it seems)

Bad result and bad performance = everything is awful (regardless of opposition)

Bad result and good performance = its the result that counts so we are awful

Good result and bad performance = its all about the performance so we are awful

Good result and good performance = Well the opposition werent the best were they?

So to put it in other words, lads, 'If you criticise Lambert, you're in the wrong'.

That looks like what you're basically saying.

No it isn't.

I don't agree with Richard, but that's not what he's saying.

Yes it was. The context in which it was being said, was very much making out that people were in the wrong. Using ridiculous, extreme examples to make things look even worse. From "everything is awful" to "the opposition weren't the best" being the spectrum of what these people supposedly 'sometimes' say. It's just making crap up to criticise people who have fairly criticised Lambert.

[Grasshopper]

 

 

Guzan - Vlaar - Delph - Benteke - Grealish.

 

That alone will cost a fortune to replace just to stand still.

around 25mill

 

That's not how it works though. Guzan cost us 250k first time around, and nothing second time. Vlaar cost 3m, Delph 7m, Benteke 6m and Grealish nothing. So, technically, you COULD replace those guys for 16.25m, but that's not how football works. We could spend 2m replacing them all and end up with better players, or spend 50m and end up with worse ones

 

I'm not into argueing but 25 is somewhere near the middle between 2 & 50

[foreveryoung]

 

 

All I am saying is I am not sure our fans would be prepared to change their opinion on Lambert like wet spam and barcodes fans have done for their manager

Yes but there are people with entrenched opinions on both sides. If we lose our next ten games, we all know that you'll still be backing him and sticking to your claim that he is our best manager in the last thirty years. For some reason, the narrative seems to be that if you are supportive of the manager then you are automatically a rational and open-minded individual whereas if your are against him then ergo you are the complete opposite.

 

You obviously missed my bit above the one you quoted in the same post where I admitted that I support him and said thats on the back of poor results and performances.  Just that if we won a few on the trot would those not supportive change?  I fully expect I'm probably in a minority of one with my support.

 

Of course the bit of your post starting "For some reason,...." is uitterly nonsense and not true.  My commentary is not on anyone in terms of their state of mind or ability to be open minded in all they do,  my commentary was on their support or otherwise for a manager of a football team they support

 

That's a weird stat

But a stat that says we are 20th in terms of shot conversion is not weird?

 

Your support or Lambert seems to be personal, to the rest of us its business!!!

Edited December 3, 2014 by foreveryoung

[pacbuddies]

1 win in 10 games. A minus 10 goal difference. 8 goals scored in 14 games (the worst in the division).

 

When things significantly improve (including the way we play) then I might just have second thoughts about Lambert as our manager.

 

My opinion will not be swayed by a 'backs to the wall' 1-0 victory over the mighty Crystal Palace.

[Stevo985]

That's a weird stat

If that stat is true then I bet there is a stat on the internet showing that Hilter was good for the Jews?

What the actual ****?

[momo]

Undefeated in 4 games. Positive results against teams around us. Don't worry!

[foreveryoung]

Undefeated in 4 games. Positive results against teams around us. Don't worry!

I worry that Lambert will turn us into the new........................Stoke. Midtable boring football is not nice, gets you a bad rep!

[dounavilla]

Hahaha

[sexbelowsound]

 

Undefeated in 4 games. Positive results against teams around us. Don't worry!

I worry that Lambert will turn us into the new........................Stoke. Midtable boring football is not nice, gets you a bad rep!

 

 

And yet some people are calling for Tony Pulis as a replacement.

[villalad21]

What worries me above all is the knock on effect/inevitable that will happen to our assets.

 

Guzan - Vlaar - Delph - Benteke - Grealish.

 

Liverpool & Arsenal may be looking for new GK soon and if Kroll moves on the merry-goalie-round may just bring in offers for Guzan - would you want to stay if you were him?

 

Vlaar's injury history may just save us here, but would he say no to a better deal/club?

or just leave for free

 

Delph's injury needs to keep him out till February to put the brakes on offers for him.

or leave for free too

 

Benteke - only a matter of time I'm afraid.

 

Grealish - No chances? ok I'm off then

 

That alone will cost a fortune to replace just to stand still.

around 25mill

Then there's blowing 8million on Cleverley if PL has his way

32Million

Is RL going to sanction that?

 

Of course if we were a fluent attacking side having a real go then maybe they'd all consider staying.

 

For that we'd need a change of Owner/Manager/Tactics/Coaching/Playing style and results

 

Still we can all wait for PL to grow some.........

Why do you put Grealish there? He haven't done anything yet. Might end up like another Delfouneso, you'll never know.