Paul Lambert

[useless]

 

 

 

 

 

Don't know why people seem to think if we gave the job to Pullis he'd automatically guarantee our survivial and do this and that. If he was that good he'd be swimming in job offers already

It's less than 3 months since he left Palace.

No managers in the league have left or been sacked since he left Palace?

 

How is he supposed to be swimming in offers if there have been no jobs available?

 

 

People have been speaking of him as if he'd guarantee survival. I think you even stated yourself that with him we wouldn't be relegated. If that were true then surely a club would have made their move already.

 

Are you serious?

It's the first week of November. It's not long enough for any of the teams to have made a decision as to whether their manager will keep them up. Again, he's only been out of his job for barely 2 months.

 

Were Sunderland/QPR/Burnley etc to sack their manager now you can guarantee that Pulis would be one of the first names on the list as a possible replacement.

 

 

What do you mean am I serious? I'm not the one saying that Pulis would guarantee survival. All I'm saying is if that were true he'd have been given a job already, with the money involved there's no doubt about that.

 

 Nobody said he'd guarantee survival. Just that he'd probably keep us up given what he did at Stoke and Palace.

"there's no doubt about that". That's your opinion, but there is a HUGE amount of doubt about that. Like I said, if the clubs near the bottom of the league were looking for a manager, then I imagine Pulis would probably be top of the list

I'm sure he'd be a candidate for the Sunderland/QPR/Burnley jobs but as I keep saying he wouldn't guarantee survival, which is something people keep suggesting when bringing his name up as a possibility for the next Villa manager.

Surely this completely contradicts your complaint that he'd be offered a job if he was so good?

if there was a job going, he'd be in the running for sure.

 

And as I said also what does leaving Palace because they wouldn't give him the money he wanted to spend say about his confidence to work with what he had? He'd have similar financial constraints here too.

That's a completely separate point that has nothign to do with what I posted.

FWIW, Pulis wouldn't be my first choice. I'm not saying we should employ him. I'm merely saying that IF we sacked Lambert (which imo would only be if we were threatened with relegation) then I don't think we'd be in a position to turn our noses up at Pulis because we don't like his brand of football because I think he'd keep us up.

 

 

The argument that if he was that good, he'd have been "swimming in job offers", when there hasn't been a single sacking since he left his Palace post (barely 2 months ago) is nonsense.

 

 

All I've really done is dispute the idea that Pulis would ensure our survival, you say that people haven't said this, but I've seen plenty of posts to the affect of we 'wouldn't go down with Pulis in charge'.

 

My agreeing with you that he'd be a contender for the Sunderland/QPR/Burnley etc jobs doesn't contradict any of what I've said at all. As what I've said (repeatedly) is that if he could guarantee survival then he'd have been given a job already but obviously he doesn't guarantee this and no other manager could either, I'm not saying he isn't affective.

 

I mentioned about Pulis walking out on Palace over budgets constraints because It backs up my suggestion that Pulis wouldn't guarantee survival, i,e he couldn't have had that much confidence in his own ability to well at Palace this year with what he had to work with and he'd be under similar restrictions at this club.

 

The argument that if he was that good, he'd have been "swimming in job offers", when there hasn't been a single sacking since he left his Palace post (barely 2 months ago) is nonsense.

 

I'm repeating myself yet again here but all I've said if he could guarantee survival then he'd have been given a job already. In that scenario a club would have made space for him, not sure what's nonsense about that. I agree that the phrase 'swimming in job offers' might have been over the top.

 

Anyway this is a strange series of posts as it seems you agree with me that Pulis wouldn't ensure our survival and I agree with you that he's an affective manager for a club fighting relegation. Maybe the confusion stems from how I'd written out my original post.

 

[Stevo985]

But nobody has said he would GUARANTEE SURVIVAL. They've just said "he'd keep us up". That's their opinion, they're not guaranteeing it.

 

The clubs currently in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time. They've earned that. 

Using the fact that none of them have so far offered Pulis a job as an argument against Pulis is mad.

[thejoker]

I see no point in giving Lambert until Xmas (as some have suggested), he's already had 2 1/2 years (5 transfer windows) and we are still no better off - probably worse off. He's not suddenly going to become a tactical genius in the next 7 weeks. We've got to get rid now and give someone else a chance to assess things before January.

[useless]

But nobody has said he would GUARANTEE SURVIVAL. They've just said "he'd keep us up". That's their opinion, they're not guaranteeing it.

 

The clubs currently in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time. They've earned that. 

Using the fact that none of them have so far offered Pulis a job as an argument against Pulis is mad.

 

I'm not using the fact that no one has offered a job to Pulis as an argument against him at all though. Of course the clubs in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time, that really backs up what I've been saying that Pulis doesn't guarantee survival. And yes people have been saying it, it doesn't matter how they phrase or that it's just their opinion, that's what I'm disputing.

 

I think is happening is that your misunderstanding what I'm saying

Edited November 4, 2014 by useless

[jayEm]

We're definitely better than last season. Going on performances this season, I make it 5 good ones (Stoke, Hull, Liverpool, Man City (I think?) and Spurs), 1 average one (Newcastle) and 4 poor ones (Arsenal (where we were battling illness), Chelsea (possibly an average performance), Everton and QPR (which were both admittedly inexcusable).

 

What remains to be seen is whether the Spurs performance was actually the start of an upward trend, or just a blip- we normally play well against the big teams.

[villa89]

Oh and Tony Pulis??? Have we fallen that far?

[DCJonah]

We're definitely better than last season. Going on performances this season, I make it 5 good ones (Stoke, Hull, Liverpool, Man City (I think?) and Spurs), 1 average one (Newcastle) and 4 poor ones (Arsenal (where we were battling illness), Chelsea (possibly an average performance), Everton and QPR (which were both admittedly inexcusable).

What remains to be seen is whether the Spurs performance was actually the start of an upward trend, or just a blip- we normally play well against the big teams.

Has our first 10 games been much different to our first 10 last year.

I don't think you can definitely say we're better.

I think we've made little progress since McLeish and have gone backwards since his first season.

[Stevo985]

 

But nobody has said he would GUARANTEE SURVIVAL. They've just said "he'd keep us up". That's their opinion, they're not guaranteeing it.

 

The clubs currently in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time. They've earned that. 

Using the fact that none of them have so far offered Pulis a job as an argument against Pulis is mad.

 

I'm not using the fact that no one has offered a job to Pulis as an argument against him at all though. Of course the clubs in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time, that really backs up what I've been saying that Pulis doesn't guarantee survival. And yes people have been saying it, it doesn't matter how they phrase or that it's just their opinion, that's what I'm disputing.

 

I think is happening is that your misunderstanding what I'm saying

 

So basically your argument is that Tony Pulis wouldn't be a statistical certainty of keeping any team up?

 

Well I think we can all agree on that. But it's a pretty meaningless point to make.

Jose Mourinho wouldn't be a guarantee of survival either if you're going to take it completely literally.

[rodders0223]

Amazes me how many people's opinions of Pulis are taken from the media's intepretation of him rather from actually watching his teams

Last season i didnt see Palace hoofing balls left right and centre i saw players like Puncheon and Bolasie running at people trying to make things happen

Sam Allardyce is also labelled with the same tag, would we not be happy playing the way West Ham are this season??

Pulis in 2 months made Palace a better side then Lambert has made us in over 2 years

For what he's achieved in the prem Pulis deserves a go at a bigger club and we should give him that chance

If we dont get him soon 1 of our relegation rivals will and that team will probably end up finishing above us

 

 Tony Pulis spent the best part of £30m on Kenwyne Jones, Peter Crouch, Dave Kitson, Cameron Jerome.

He is Martin O'Neill, even if he got a job at a bigger club, he would still spunk millions on absolute dross. The job he did at Stoke was par for the course considering the funds he was given, infact it was over par considering the shite he served up there on a regular basis.

 

 

As for your Sam Allardyce comment, yes, there are playing well, better than us infact, but it must be quite easy for Sam when he has spent close to £75m the past three seasons. Figures Lambert could only dream of.

It is not difficult to play football when you are given £75,000 to pay a former Arsenal and Barcelona midfielder just entering his prime age.

Edited November 4, 2014 by rodders0223

[DCJonah]

I don't think many stoke fans would say pullis did a poor job. He just wasn't able to push them on after getting them up and keeping them stable.

We're not looking for a man to push us into the top half. We're looking for a man who will improve us and keep us stable. Perfect candidate for me.

[useless]

 

 

But nobody has said he would GUARANTEE SURVIVAL. They've just said "he'd keep us up". That's their opinion, they're not guaranteeing it.

 

The clubs currently in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time. They've earned that. 

Using the fact that none of them have so far offered Pulis a job as an argument against Pulis is mad.

 

I'm not using the fact that no one has offered a job to Pulis as an argument against him at all though. Of course the clubs in the relegation zone are giving their manager's time, that really backs up what I've been saying that Pulis doesn't guarantee survival. And yes people have been saying it, it doesn't matter how they phrase or that it's just their opinion, that's what I'm disputing.

 

I think is happening is that your misunderstanding what I'm saying

 

So basically your argument is that Tony Pulis wouldn't be a statistical certainty of keeping any team up?

 

Well I think we can all agree on that. But it's a pretty meaningless point to make.

Jose Mourinho wouldn't be a guarantee of survival either if you're going to take it completely literally.

 

 

It would be meaningless point to make if I were making it randomly, but I'm not, I was making it in responce to comments like 'we wouldn't go down with Pulis in charge' and the idea that he'd guarantee survival that seems to pervade a lot of posts advocating him as our next manager.

[villalad21]

I see no point in giving Lambert until Xmas (as some have suggested), he's already had 2 1/2 years (5 transfer windows) and we are still no better off - probably worse off. He's not suddenly going to become a tactical genius in the next 7 weeks. We've got to get rid now and give someone else a chance to assess things before January.

I agree. He's just had too much time,and we still see no progression in the play style and the team performances. We've been consistant under him though, consistantly bad.

[lapal_fan]

The thing with Pulis is, is that he did a great job with Palace last year, when they were on their knees.  However, and people who are calling for him might be forgetting that towards the end of his Stoke career, in 2013, they were nearly relegated.

 

Wiki

 

However Stoke made a poor start to 2013 picking up just a point in January and a frustrating transfer window saw just two new arrivals American winger Brek Shea and England 'keeper Jack Butland. Performances and results remained poor in February and Pulis came under heavy criticism from supporters after a uninspiring home defeat against West Ham United.^[68] Victories against Queens Park Rangers and Norwich City saw Stoke avoid the threat of relegation and they finished the 2012–13 season in 13th position.^[69] It was a season of little progress at Stoke and Pulis left the club on 21 May 2013 after a meeting with Chairman Peter Coates.^[70] Speaking after his departure Pulis revealed that he was disappointed by Coates' decision but accepts his reasons.^[71][72] He was replaced by another Welsh manager, Mark Hughes.

Could he have done a great job with Palace because the players bought into the statistic that he’d never been relegated?  You could almost argue his appointment was a placebo for their performances.

Just something else to think about before pulling a cocked trigger.

[DCJonah]

He won manager of the year because he did a good job, I don't think you can dismiss that and take the credit away from him.

He had some poor times with stoke because he's not an amazing manager.

He's a step up on what we've got and would be a good short term boost while we wait for the club to be sold.

[Dr_Pangloss]

The fact that Tony Pulis is a step up shows what a sad state of affairs this club is in. Pulis is an average manager who excels in dull, plodding football. 

[F-87]

Facebook cover for the "Out" camp (or whatever use, as you see fit)

 

[HanoiVillan]

I would be happy with the appointment of Pulis, if that were to happen. I'd be thrilled for us to be awkward opponents who were difficult to beat, instead of obliging hosts who roll over and have their tummies tickled at home. 

 

He was manager of the year last year because he saved a team who seemed to be beyond redemption, and above saving them, nearly got them to the top half of the table. It really is a myth that all their football was terrible last year, they often played well. The reality is that when a team wins as often as Palace did in the second half of last season, it isn't terrible to watch. God knows it's better than watching us lose 6, conceding 15 and scoring 1. 

[Stevo985]

Facebook cover for the "Out" camp (or whatever use, as you see fit)

 

[The Fun Factory]

Good god no for Pullis. I want to see passing football at Villa which hasn't happened for years- getting old baseball cap head in would just about finish me off.

[Isa]

I don't agree with the tendency to view the mythical four game run at the beginning of the season as the rule rather than the exception. If we take a step back and consider that within the context of our results over the last year then it becomes clear that there is little basis to assume that we will now start getting favourable results against all the [so called] lesser sides.

In fact, we've so far faced two of the poorest (at the time of facing them) teams in the division and underwhelmed against both. I know some will argue to the contrary but I take few positives from a game in which we created practically nothing against a Newcastle side who were a complete shambles at the time. Obviously I needn't say any more about the QPR display.

Going back to my initial point, I don't view this as an isolated bad run. Rather I see it as a continuation of what has transpired over the last year. Our league record since beating Southampton on the 4th December reads as follows (average per game in brackets):

Played: 34

Points: 29 (0.85)

Goals for: 28 (0.82)

Goals against: 61 (1.8)

Goal difference: -33

Now that's relegation form whichever way you look at it and it's difficult to envisage many other managers surviving that. Despite many disliking it when he is mentioned, it has to be said that Alex McLeish would've been lynched by now had he overseen anything like that and no amount of 'mitigating factors' would've been used in his defence.

Beyond results, I still don't really see any improvement in our approach to games. QPR was the perfect example of how we are still completely clueless when we have time on the ball and given that we are not even an effective counter attacking side anymore, that bodes badly. This is purely down to the reactive mindset of our manager and was epitomised by his decision to favour industry rather than creativity with his big summer signing.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Isa