BOF Posted November 20, 2015 Moderator Share Posted November 20, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Is that asking if I'm serious? If so then yes. I'd be interested to hear why you disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted November 20, 2015 Moderator Share Posted November 20, 2015 You say that in Lambert's position you would forego millions of pounds. That's easy to write. Not as easy to follow through with. Granted, you'll never have to prove it, but I find it extremely difficult to believe you. Put plainly, I don't believe you. The payoff had no bearing on Villa's fortunes. Only Randy's. You then say that a fairly wealthy man putting his career above the welfare of a club that has existed as long as it has is a pretty despicable thing to do. It might be if the club's existence was on the line but, again, it wasn't on the line (and we've bounced back from worse) and even if it was on the line he's still not completely to blame for the situation (Randy is a huge reason), and he still has his contract. I find it hard to take seriously the notion that Lambert should do himself out of fortunes because his boss decided to be a skinflint and make his working conditions as difficult as he did. Lambert may be wealthy but he went through the mill trying to do his best for this club. You only have to look at the before and after pictures. That environment was created by Lerner. A few quid thrown the manager's way in a 'thanks but no thanks' gesture is not going to break the bank. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 20, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted November 20, 2015 1 hour ago, DCJonah said: Depends. In his situation I'd like to think I would. This is a football club supported by hundreds of thousands of people, that has existed for over a hundred years. I think a fairly wealthy man putting his own finances as priority over the welfare of the club is a pretty despicable thing to do. To stay, while the club drifted towards relegation and potentially huge long term damage, just so he could get a pay off seems a shitty thing IMO. I'm surprised any fan would feel differently. I'd honour this post with a proper response if 1. BOF hadn't said all I would have said 2. You hadn't turned your reply into a pathetic "better fan" dig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 You say that in Lambert's position you would forego millions of pounds. That's easy to write. Not as easy to follow through with. Granted, you'll never have to prove it, but I find it extremely difficult to believe you. Put plainly, I don't believe you. The payoff had no bearing on Villa's fortunes. Only Randy's. True, but i'd honestly like to believe I'd view certain things above money. May be different if I was in that position but I'm not. You then say that a fairly wealthy man putting his career above the welfare of a club that has existed as long as it has is a pretty despicable thing to do. It might be if the club's existence was on the line but, again, it wasn't on the line (and we've bounced back from worse) and even if it was on the line he's still not completely to blame for the situation (Randy is a huge reason), and he still has his contract. Randy is a huge reason, not sure what that's got to do with anything. And just because the clubs existence isn't on the line doesn't make it better. It's still putting the welfare of the club behind his own selfish reasons. Just because we've bounced back from worse doesn't make it right to allow the club to slip down because he wants a pay out. I'm amazed a fan of this club could make that argument. And again how does having a contract make it right for these actions? Lots of weak excuses to justify a poor performing manager making sure he gets plenty of money. I find it hard to take seriously the notion that Lambert should do himself out of fortunes because his boss decided to be a skinflint and make his working conditions as difficult as he did. Lambert may be wealthy but he went through the mill trying to do his best for this club. You only have to look at the before and after pictures. That environment was created by Lerner. A few quid thrown the manager's way in a 'thanks but no thanks' gesture is not going to break the bank. He should do himself out of fortunes if he didn't want to be there. Nothing to do with anything else. If he wanted out then clearly he's not going to be performing to his best and that's going to hurt the team. Again I can't quite believe a fan of the club, has no issue with their club performing badly while the manager responsible waits for his pay off. The money won't break the bank, for some reason you've made it about the money. It's not about the amount he got, its about how the club dropped and performed poorly because he wouldn't quit when he wanted to. But seems you've made it about money, let's look at the fact we were already in a situation where spending is low, Lambert waiting to be sacked meant we were in a desperate situation and hired Sherwood. We finished low in the league, which means less money. We then had to pay off Sherwood and his staff and we're bottom of the league in a season where finances sky rocket for those that stay in it. So no, his payment didn't break the bank, but his actions have cost us more and could lead to potentially costing us an absolute fortune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 9 hours ago, Stevo985 said: I'd honour this post with a proper response if 1. BOF hadn't said all I would have said 2. You hadn't turned your reply into a pathetic "better fan" dig. No dig at all. I'm just surprised anyone would defend it. The club suffers while one man worries about his finances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancvillan Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 1 hour ago, DCJonah said: True, but i'd honestly like to believe I'd view certain things above money. What if you were managing St Mirren? Lambert isn't a Villa fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Players and managers do their job for money like the rest of us. The end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 47 minutes ago, Genie said: Players and managers do their job for money like the rest of us. The end. Genie steps up and buries it. BACK OF THE NET! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 1 hour ago, Genie said: Players and managers do their job for money like the rest of us. The end. That's not the argument though is it? At the point someone decides they don't want to be there then there's no way they are performing to the best of their abilities. In certain jobs that probably doesn't have a major effect, as a football manager it certainly will, how can someone be an effective leader and motivator when they've decided they don't want to be there? It's his right, like everyone else, to carry on being employed until he's paid off. But if that's leading to the company, or in this case, the football club performing badly then I think it's a pretty shitty thing to decide to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 5 hours ago, Vancvillan said: What if you were managing St Mirren? Lambert isn't a Villa fan. He doesn't have to be fan. Just a decent person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 He fully expected to be sacked when he hopped onto the plan to New York after the Spurs game in 2014. We'd just ended that season in dismal form. Apparently Faulkner wanted him sacked before he himself left that summer so when your line manager wants you gone that's not a great state of affairs. Also remember at the time that was one of the periods when there was great hope a takeover would occur so he would've been sacked if that happened anyway. I don't know, maybe the two years had worn him out and he just wanted out but for whatever reason Lerner told him to stay which was a bigger error than keeping Sherwood on as the following season has to remain some of the worst football I've every seen in my 20 years supporting us. How many games did we not score in, there was a 6 and then a 7 game run we had wasn't there? That's why I struggle to take people seriously who declare Sherwood worse. Think of all the embarrassing results we had in Lambert's reign, all the cup defeats, 15-0 over xmas, those long scoreless runs, we really made us a laughing stock at times in the press and to other fans. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Because at least Lambert had a plan. Has had success in the past. Sherwood's reign was akin to throwing darts at a dartboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Maybe season but Sherwood had a plan last season. O.k getting the ball to Benteke wasn't some revolutionary tactic but look how much better our midfield was under him particularly Cleverley. And our performance v Liverpool was our best tactical performance v a top level team since the MON era, we were excellent that day. Even sceptics like ISA admitted it. God knows what happened to Sherwood over the summer, the problems properly began then. You won't get defence from me on that. A bit part of Lambert I have is just how long his reign was considering the awful results, he somehow last 2 years and 9 months here, Sherwood got 8 months so it's naturally as time passes his tenure will go into the distance as there were less matches to judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Lambert only had a plan if you believe parking the bus and hoping Benteke can make something out of nothing constitutes a plan. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Which is a perfectly acceptable plan when you are a poor/average team with one superstar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 No it isn't. Especially when the 'plan' wasn't working or effective in the slightest hence our extremely poor points total and record-breakingly poor amount of goals under his tenure last season. A poor /average team with a superstar should look to ultilise his strengths and ensure he has gets support, not just park the bus and hope he can conjure up some magic on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 Yes, It's definitely that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 1 minute ago, sexbelowsound said: Yes, It's definitely that simple. It's that simple Sherwood managed it to keep us up didn't he.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted November 21, 2015 Share Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) 3 minutes ago, penguin said: It's that simple Sherwood managed it to keep us up didn't he.... I'm not saying Lambert's approach was the best one but it was definitely acceptable. Edited November 21, 2015 by sexbelowsound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts