Paul Lambert

[PaulC]

and there has to be question marks about our youth development. We have had plenty of good 17/18 year olds but very few have come through and made it in the first team. Is that Lambert's fault?

[Dodgyknees]

and there has to be question marks about our youth development. We have had plenty of good 17/18 year olds but very few have come through and made it in the first team. Is that Lambert's fault?

 

I think our youth is over-rated. Ellis used it as an excuse, I think Lerner does too.

 

As for Lambert, there are a few he could play instead of Gabby, N'Zogbia, Robinson and Grealish for starters.

[Stevo985]

I think I would have more respect for Lambert if he had of stuck to his guns with the likes of Bent and Hutton but the fact he has re-introduced them makes me think he doesn't really know what he's doing. I was all for the young hungry players policy, because I thought there was a chance of progress season by season but now whats left. 

The interview that Hutton gave since being reintroduced really made it sound as if it wasn't Lambert's choice.

 

I have no idea if that's the truth or not, but that's how it sounded to me.

[Dodgyknees]

Yep, Hutton said the decision came 'from the top', and all he could do was keep working hard.

[HeyAnty]

Not being relegated in his first two seasons, with a shit team and a shit budget (both transfers and more so wages) is good enough for me.

We will always be fighting relegation under the current regime and id rather stick with someone who proved he can keep us in the league two seasons running.

You 'Lambert out brigade' who want the club to be great again have to look at the way the club is run. Yes we may need a better manager to make that push, but with the current structures, id rather keep a manager who has a proven track record of keeping us in the league than someone who doesnt. Felix Magath anyone?

Not really sure I get this. Surely 3 years down the line you expect more than just surviving. Its the total lack of any improvement or progress that see many wanting him gone. To show no real improvement on McLeish (who we all wanted rid of) after this long is incredibly poor.

I really dont expect anymore than surviving every year and after 6 years id say the same. There are 20 clubs in the premiership. 10 of them aren't trying to survive each year. The other 10 are, unfortunately we are one of them.

Out of them top 10 teams, tell me a team who hasnt spent serious money and large wages at their disposal. Football as it stands is fundamentally flawed, bit like the housing crash in 2008.

Until we either get an owner who is a bottomless pit such as City or Chelsea, or an owner who is reckless such as Risdale was at Leeds then we are treading water for the foreseeable future. Sad i know but thats the reality of it.

I disagree. There's plenty of clubs trying to improve and push on who aren't owned by the richest men in the world.

We've done nothing to improve under Lambert.

Out of interest, who are these teams out of last years bottom 10, keeping in mind money being spent on new players and wages. West-ham are only side i can see and look what they spent. Edited November 5, 2014 by HeyAnty

[HeyAnty]

Yep, Hutton said the decision came 'from the top', and all he could do was keep working hard.

Yeah Faulkner, maintained it when he was here and since he left its no coincidence its gone.

[George Curtis]

I think I would have more respect for Lambert if he had of stuck to his guns with the likes of Bent and Hutton but the fact he has re-introduced them makes me think he doesn't really know what he's doing. I was all for the young hungry players policy, because I thought there was a chance of progress season by season but now whats left.

The interview that Hutton gave since being reintroduced really made it sound as if it wasn't Lambert's choice.

I have no idea if that's the truth or not, but that's how it sounded to me.

Lambert was told that the club could not continue to have a wage bill of £x while the players available only had a wage bill of £y.

[Isa]

I have been on holiday so haven’t posted since pre QPR.

 

I think to sum up my mood now is one of huge disappointment. I have stated numerous times that I was over the moon when Lambert arrived as he was one of my top choices to manage us as far back as when Houllier was here. It has therefore always been with a heavy heart when I have criticized him and I have always had a nagging feeling that just maybe he is still the man who can, even on a limited budget, do well here.

[snip]

Another excellent post Mark.

[Shaw_nuff]

and there has to be question marks about our youth development. We have had plenty of good 17/18 year olds but very few have come through and made it in the first team. Is that Lambert's fault?

You should have a football philosophy running through all the club's structure to help with this.

 

I doubt very much that this is the case at Villa.

[bobzy]

From the BBC gossip section:

"Talks between Real Sociedad and David Moyes about the La Liga club's vacant coaching position have hit a snag, with the former Everton and Manchester United manager's wage demands considered too high."

 

Granted, the source is "Goal", but still... would Moyes come to Aston Villa?

[romavillan]

He'd be a fool to. Sociedad all day long if you weren't a Villa fan IMO. If Moyes wants to return to Champions League level club management then he needs to show he can do it, there are no platforms in the Premier League at the moment better than the one he left at Everton so he should look abroad. Apart from that he will broaden his linguistic, coaching and management skills by working in Spain, Italy or Germany. Just a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. 

If Lerner had just got here and was about to throw the MON money at it again, then it is a great opportunity for a manager to try and break the top 4 and get a really top job off the back of that. He hasn't, that money is gone and we are up shit street.

[ozvillafan]

 

Yep, Hutton said the decision came 'from the top', and all he could do was keep working hard.

Yeah Faulkner, maintained it when he was here and since he left its no coincidence its gone.

 

 

Let's just think this through, shall we?

 

Lerner definitely does not want to keep paying those non-performers on high wages and wants rid. There can be no doubt that he said as much to Lambert.

 

However, If Randy put them on the bomb-squad and refused to play them then that means:

 

- He picks the team.

- He takes them out of the "shop window".

 

Not only is the first effort impressive given he hardly attended a game, the second is the complete opposite of what he wanted. He wanted rid quickly but removing them from the public eye meant he couldn't offload them and had to continue to pay them.

 

Despite what Hutton heard Lambert say to him - as if Lambert would fess up to a player he all but abandoned - there is precious little sense in the whole "Randy masterminded the bomb squad" theory - even given Randy's penchant for poor football decisions

 

Given the shenanigans of Culverhouse and Karsa, our horrid record-breaking football and some baffling transfer strategies ("young & hungry" to "experience or bust" within 1 season/2 windows) the whole bomb-squad saga seems far more likely a decision of the man behind these screw ups: Lambert.

[bobzy]

 

Given the shenanigans of Culverhouse and Karsa, our horrid record-breaking football and some baffling transfer strategies ("young & hungry" to "experience or bust" within 1 season/2 windows) the whole bomb-squad saga seems far more likely a decision of the man behind these screw ups: Lambert.

 

 

Fair points on most of your post, but surely you'd rather the manager changed things up if they weren't working?  (I'm not saying they're working now btw ).  He went "young and hungry", realised the squad was far too inconsistent/naive and brought in more experienced players to compliment the youth.  That's the kind of change I'd want, to be honest.

[Dodgyknees]

Even if there is evidence (Hutton, Faulkner) to suggest otherwise. I want Lambert out, but I lay the wage trimming firmly at Lerner's door.

[Isa]

From all that Moyes has said since leaving United, I'm almost certain that he wouldn't come to a club like us at all. He's already been there and got the t-shirt from his time at Everton and it's clear he wants a fresh challenge. It's why I always said that his next job will likely be abroad. Sociedad would be a good fit, he should accept it.

[itdoesntmatterwhatthissay]

and there has to be question marks about our youth development. We have had plenty of good 17/18 year olds but very few have come through and made it in the first team. Is that Lambert's fault?

 

In part, but I think that's a British philosophy to young players. Whether players were good enough or not you don't motivate them to improve (though they should do this themselves) by not playing them and you don't write them off too young, plenty of players have shown their character in their early 20's but in Britain we consider them past reaching their potential if they're not stars by 20. I actually think Lambert has done an okay job with trusting the younger players but my gripe is so few have come from the Villa development squad.

Are they good enough? Perhaps not, but from I've seen from those bought and others struggling they can't be any worse. If you consider many have played together for a while at least if they do play together they have some sort of intrinsic connection.

 

You need to back players, young or old, by playing games, we trust foreign stars to struggle for a year, why can't we trust young players too.

[markavfc40]

 

 

Point is surely at some point the teams 11 and below have at least flirted with places lower than that during the season?

 

There is flirting with the relegation places and being stuck deep in or around them for the vast majority of the season which has sadly been the case for almost all of our time under Lambert. There is also the means of how you end up there. With us it has involved some of the longest runs of poor results I can ever remember. Last season at various stages we went 6, 5, 4, 4 games without winning. The previous season 6 and 4 games without winning. Last season also saw us lose 7 of our final 9 games winning just 1.

 

As I said previously I put a lot of these extended runs of poor results down to us having a lack of experience and nous in the side which meant we had an inability to grind out a result. That isn't the case this season though yet we now find ourselves on a six game losing streak and I fear that run will be extended by at least another two games.

 

Lambert seems incapable of quickly turning things around when things go wrong and it has been shown on numerous occasions. I am under no illusions that this poor run of results will eventually end but I am also not kidding myself that it is likely to happen again. If it does then that makes the likelihood of us again being down amongst the bottom 5 for most of the season more likely.

 

This for me just can’t go on and it is time for a change. Like you though I do respect the opposing side of the argument. Bottom line is we all want what is best for our great club.

Edited November 5, 2014 by markavfc40

[Isa]

Given the shenanigans of Culverhouse and Karsa, our horrid record-breaking football and some baffling transfer strategies ("young & hungry" to "experience or bust" within 1 season/2 windows) the whole bomb-squad saga seems far more likely a decision of the man behind these screw ups: Lambert.

 

Fair points on most of your post, but surely you'd rather the manager changed things up if they weren't working?  (I'm not saying they're working now btw ).  He went "young and hungry", realised the squad was far too inconsistent/naive and brought in more experienced players to compliment the youth.  That's the kind of change I'd want, to be honest.

I think the entire change from one to the other was just a face saving exercise and a way to push the blame on something other than himself. In principle, there was nothing wrong with the 'young and hungry' policy. It certainly wasn't doomed to failure as has been subsequently suggested. This is what Lambert said when we were struggling badly in his first season:

“People say the current position is because the players are young – it’s nothing to do with it. This club has been in the same situation for three years with really top (i.e. experienced) players.”

I agree with this and it's why Lambert used to garner a lot more support in what was doing. He used to have a clear plan and direction in his head, something which gave us hope for the long-term during the short-term hardships. Now he doesn't and is quite simply making it up as he goes along. Of all the many reasons why he has deserved to get the chop, there are none bigger than his complete abandonment of his original blueprint. It just smacks of a man who has no belief in himself.

[bobzy]

 

 

Given the shenanigans of Culverhouse and Karsa, our horrid record-breaking football and some baffling transfer strategies ("young & hungry" to "experience or bust" within 1 season/2 windows) the whole bomb-squad saga seems far more likely a decision of the man behind these screw ups: Lambert.

 

Fair points on most of your post, but surely you'd rather the manager changed things up if they weren't working?  (I'm not saying they're working now btw ).  He went "young and hungry", realised the squad was far too inconsistent/naive and brought in more experienced players to compliment the youth.  That's the kind of change I'd want, to be honest.

I think the entire change from one to the other was just a face saving exercise and a way to push the blame on something other than himself. In principle, there was nothing wrong with the 'young and hungry' policy. It certainly wasn't doomed to failure as has been subsequently suggested. This is what Lambert said when we were struggling badly in his first season:

“People say the current position is because the players are young – it’s nothing to do with it. This club has been in the same situation for three years with really top (i.e. experienced) players.”

I agree with this and it's why Lambert used to garner a lot more support in what was doing. He used to have a clear plan and direction in his head, something which gave us hope for the long-term during the short-term hardships. Now he doesn't and is quite simply making it up as he goes along. Of all the many reasons why he has deserved to get the chop, there are none bigger than his complete abandonment of his original blueprint. It just smacks of a man who has no belief in himself.

 

 

In fairness to him, the fans (and the vast, overwhelming majority on here) were crying out for experienced players.  He could've ignored them/he could've accepted their viewpoint - either way he'd be in a lose/lose situation right now (i.e: signs experience = spineless, poor manager.  Does not sign experience = clueless, poor manager).

 

I agree that it's why Lambert garnered more support (I certainly thought it was the way forward/still do), but I think going this way is potentially caving in to fan pressure a bit.

 

He probably is lacking some self-belief - but we do nothing to encourage it.

[Isa]

In fairness to him, the fans (and the vast, overwhelming majority on here) were crying out for experienced players. He could've ignored them/he could've accepted their viewpoint - either way he'd be in a lose/lose situation right now (i.e: signs experience = spineless, poor manager. Does not sign experience = clueless, poor manager).

I agree that it's why Lambert garnered more support (I certainly thought it was the way forward/still do), but I think going this way is potentially caving in to fan pressure a bit.

Not that I personally ever agreed with the idea that experience equates to quality but even if he did want to placate the fans, he could've bought in a couple of experienced heads without making that the prerequisite for every signing he makes as he has done this summer. In fact, doing such wouldn't have contridicted the original policy anyway as he did clearly believe in supplementing the younger players with the odd experienced player which I'd imagine is why he signed Vlaar and El-Ahmadi.

He probably is lacking some self-belief - but we do nothing to encourage it.

I disagree. Paul Lambert has been given more support and leeway than any other manager that I can think of. He has had the luxury of succeeding Alex McLeish who set the bar so low that it was barely off the ground. Not to mention the shield that has been provided by the scrutiny that has [rightly] been directed at Lerner.

The fact that he has still somehow managed to lose the fans (twice!) in the midst of all of that only serves to highlight what a piss-poor job he has done in my opinion.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Isa