Paul Lambert

[penguin]

Adebayor is a grade A nobhead so I would put zero value to whatever shite comes out of his mouth.

Problem I have with this 'the fans are partly to blame argument' is booing/not turning up behaviours you mentioned were first bought about due to the continually shite football, so it's hard to argue the fan's should shoulder some of the blame when it was happening anyway.

[Richard]

I read on a Villa blog that there's talk of Lambert having lost the dressing room. Anyone else hearing this?

No chance.

[sexbelowsound]

Did anyone see the interview with Guzan in the Metro today? Basically he said its the player fault and that we should lay off Lambert.

 

I know some will say he has to say stuff like that but make of it what you will.

Edited November 12, 2014 by sexbelowsound

[ozvillafan]

 

But they started off in 16th because McLeish did such a terrible job. If 16th was a fair position for that squad then why did we want McLeish sacked? Also if 3 years on we're now supposed to not blame the manager for where we currently are, again why did we want McLeish sacked?

 

Because he's an ex-Blue.  We wanted McLeish sacked before he even came to the club.

 

 

I'm saddened by just how true this is (despite honestly believing it was because he got us playing horrible football).

 

- We hated Houllier for some supposed slight in calling us "mid table" and his obvious affection for Liverpool.

- We hated McLeish because he was an ex-blue.

- But, despite breaking all sorts of unwanted records on his way to worse results than his predecessors, we tolerate Lambert.

 

I honestly feel that sometimes we get what we deserve.

[DelboyVilla]

Adebayor is a grade A nobhead so I would put zero value to whatever shite comes out of his mouth.

Problem I have with this 'the fans are partly to blame argument' is booing/not turning up behaviours you mentioned were first bought about due to the continually shite football, so it's hard to argue the fan's should shoulder some of the blame when it was happening anyway.

 

 

To put it simply as the players need to give the fans something the cheer or get behind them? As fans we tend to react to the goings on on the pitch? If the players were seen to be having a real go then from my experience the crowd tends to rise to that. If they look disinterested, don't chase lost causes or are sloppy in their play then the crowd will get on the players backs.

 

It's a two way thing.

 

And Adebayor has also been very quick to back track on what 'he really meant' by his comments in todays news? Surprise, surprise!

[Richard]

I can't believe people are still defending him, he is the worst Premier League manager we have every had.

His record speaks for itself, he has lost 46% of the games he has managed.

PL loss ratios: Taylor(combined)34% Venglos37% Atkinson31% Little31% Gregory29% O'Leary37% O'Neill26% Houllier39% Eke38% Lambert46%!

Not to mention all the records he has broken, the next one being relegation from the Premier League for the first time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Why is it important to you that all fans should want the manager out?

 

I do not think it is right to replace him I do not want him sacked but it is not important to me that all fans should also think this

[bobzy]

Adebayor is a grade A nobhead so I would put zero value to whatever shite comes out of his mouth.

Problem I have with this 'the fans are partly to blame argument' is booing/not turning up behaviours you mentioned were first bought about due to the continually shite football, so it's hard to argue the fan's should shoulder some of the blame when it was happening anyway.

 

Yes, of course.  It's a vicious cycle of "poor results = fan frustration = low morale = poor results".  If everything is going badly at a club, it can produce a completely toxic atmosphere whereby players struggle to produce anything of note - particularly at home (a good example being our friendly, Small Heath-based neighbours).

 

The fans are obviously less of an issue than the players/manager/owners because the direct effect they have is relatively small.  However, as per a famous supermarket motto, every little helps.

[Stevo985]

 

 

But they started off in 16th because McLeish did such a terrible job. If 16th was a fair position for that squad then why did we want McLeish sacked? Also if 3 years on we're now supposed to not blame the manager for where we currently are, again why did we want McLeish sacked?

 

Because he's an ex-Blue.  We wanted McLeish sacked before he even came to the club.

 

 

I'm saddened by just how true this is (despite honestly believing it was because he got us playing horrible football).

 

- We hated Houllier for some supposed slight in calling us "mid table" and his obvious affection for Liverpool.

- We hated McLeish because he was an ex-blue.

- But, despite breaking all sorts of unwanted records on his way to worse results than his predecessors, we tolerate Lambert.

 

I honestly feel that sometimes we get what we deserve.

 

I take issue with the bit in bold.

And I took issue with it at the time.

 

If McLeish was anything close to a good manager, then we'd have had no problem taking him from Blues.

 

Do you think if he'd just got Blues into the Champions league or something we'd have protested against having him here? Of course not. We'd have relished it.

 

Being ex blues didn't help, but the overwhelming reason we wanted McLeish out before he even got here is because he is a terrible terrible football manager. He'd been relegated in 2 of his 3 seasons in english football and had shown absolutely nothing to prove he was up to the job.

 

Yes, maybe we gave him less of a chance because he was from Blues. But that is absolutely NOT the main reason we didn't want him.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Stevo985

[sexbelowsound]

I can't believe people are still defending him, he is the worst Premier League manager we have every had.

His record speaks for itself, he has lost 46% of the games he has managed.

PL loss ratios: Taylor(combined)34% Venglos37% Atkinson31% Little31% Gregory29% O'Leary37% O'Neill26% Houllier39% Eke38% Lambert46%!

Not to mention all the records he has broken, the next one being relegation from the Premier League for the first time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

Stats like that to me are irrelevant. Different eras, different times, different challenges. I think if you stuck a Champions League caliber manager in at the club under the current regime his loss ratio wouldn't look great either. 

 

Can you not see that the managers with the worst loss ratios are the ones that have worked under Lerner? Also you can see that the loss ratios incline in keeping with the decline of Lerner's interest. It also shows the challenges that Aston Villa face in the current footballing era.

Edited November 12, 2014 by sexbelowsound

[ozvillafan]

 

I take issue with the bit in bold.

And I took issue with it at the time.

 

If McLeish was anything close to a good manager, then we'd have had no problem taking him from Blues.

 

Do you think if he'd just got Blues into the Champions league or something we'd have protested against having him here? Of course not. We'd have relished it.

 

Being ex blues didn't help, but the overwhelming reason we wanted McLeish out before he even got here is because he is a terrible terrible football manager. He'd been relegated in 2 of his 3 seasons in english football and had shown absolutely nothing to prove he was up to the job.

 

Yes, maybe we gave him less of a chance because he was from Blues. But that is absolutely NOT the main reason we didn't want him.

 

 

I used to think that way. But lets face it - his record is still superior to Lamberts

 

- Promoted twice

- Won the League Cup

- Placed higher in his only season here than Lambert has yet to achieve

 

It's true that Lambert has not been relegated while McLeish has - but boy! He's cutting it damn close.

 

I no longer believe we wanted rid "because he was a terrible football manager"....

 

... simply due to the fact we tolerate a worse one now.

[ermie123]

 

I read on a Villa blog that there's talk of Lambert having lost the dressing room. Anyone else hearing this?

No chance.

 

He would have to find it first!!!

[djdabush]

 

I can't believe people are still defending him, he is the worst Premier League manager we have every had.

His record speaks for itself, he has lost 46% of the games he has managed.

PL loss ratios: Taylor(combined)34% Venglos37% Atkinson31% Little31% Gregory29% O'Leary37% O'Neill26% Houllier39% Eke38% Lambert46%!

Not to mention all the records he has broken, the next one being relegation from the Premier League for the first time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

Stats like that to me are irrelevant. Different eras, different times, different challenges. I think if you stuck a Champions League caliber manager in at the club under the current regime his loss ratio wouldn't look great either. 

 

Can you not see that the managers with the worst loss ratios are the ones that have worked under Lerner? Also you can see that the loss ratios incline in keeping with the decline of Lerner's interest. It also shows that the challenges that Aston Villa face in the current footballing era.

 

 

 

It would also suggest that MON was our best ever premier league manager. I'd be shocked if that was the general consensus of Villa fans.

[George Curtis]

What always interested me with the feelings towards McLeish was how many people had such an intimate knowledge of his style of management. I am sure that many people look closely at other clubs but there is no doubt that many others just jump on any bandwagon that they feeel like jumping on, being more comfortable in numbers, with their mob mentality. Another example is the slating that Hutton got on all manner of forums, FB etc. I am quite sure that a lot of these never saw him play.

I have to keep checking that I am not falling for this myself with Lambert. It is not usual for me to side with the pack. I usually give the underdog some support. However, there is nothing that I can do about the status of Lambert's employment. It remains a question of going from week to week, raising hopes and having them dashed, sounding off then calming down. 'Twas ever thus.

[DCJonah]

I find it hard to believe fans wanted McLeish out just because he was blues manager. There were a group who didn't want here in the first place but once he came he was given a chance.

The huge protests came because of the football player and results. Two things that now aren't as much of an issue for some.

[Stevo985]

 

 

I take issue with the bit in bold.

And I took issue with it at the time.

 

If McLeish was anything close to a good manager, then we'd have had no problem taking him from Blues.

 

Do you think if he'd just got Blues into the Champions league or something we'd have protested against having him here? Of course not. We'd have relished it.

 

Being ex blues didn't help, but the overwhelming reason we wanted McLeish out before he even got here is because he is a terrible terrible football manager. He'd been relegated in 2 of his 3 seasons in english football and had shown absolutely nothing to prove he was up to the job.

 

Yes, maybe we gave him less of a chance because he was from Blues. But that is absolutely NOT the main reason we didn't want him.

 

 

I used to think that way. But lets face it - his record is still superior to Lamberts

 

- Promoted twice

- Won the League Cup

- Placed higher in his only season here than Lambert has yet to achieve

 

It's true that Lambert has not been relegated while McLeish has - but boy! He's cutting it damn close.

 

I no longer believe we wanted rid "because he was a terrible football manager"....

 

... simply due to the fact we tolerate a worse one now.

 

Firstly, two promotions isn't much of an achievement when it was he who relegated them in the first place. Lambert has two promotions, back to back from League 1. So if we're handing out achievements for that then Lambert deserves that too.

League cup, no argument. Good achievement. But I'm not sure AT THE TIME whether one league cup amongst his otherwise dire record would have been enough to suddenly make us think he was the solution. Which is kind of my point.

Placed higher than Lambert has here? Nope that's not true, and regardless wouldn't have any bearing on our thoughts before we hired McLeish so it has no relevance to this point.

 

The rest of your post doesn't work either. The club was in a different place at the time.

 

We'd just finished 9th, after 3 seasons in 6th. And we were faced with a manager who had one decent finish coupled with 2 relegations. Yes he'd won a league cup, and deserves credit, but he was way WAY lower in status and achievement than our club was at the time.

 

Just because we tolerate a worse (in your opinion)* manager now does not mean we suddenly didn't like McLeish purely because he was from Blues. That logic just doesn't work whatsoever.

 

Look at McLaren. At the time we didn't want him, but now I'm sure most of us would be fine with him taking over. Does that suddenly mean we just didn't like him because of some intangible reason to do with where he was coming from?

 

Or was it because the club was at a much better standing at that point than it is now? You can say the same about Pulis or even Moyes. A lot of us would be ok with them now, but we weren't at the time. That doesn't suddenly mean we just didn't want them because of where they came from.

 

 

*this phrase in itself doesn't make sense. Nobody tolerates a worse manager now. Those who are ok with Lambert do not think he is worse than McLeish. Those who do think he is worse than mcLeish want him out and so aren't tolerating him. Not a single fan is sitting here thinking "wellll he's worse than McLeish but I want him to stay"

Edited November 12, 2014 by Stevo985

[regular_john]

I was at McLeish's first home game (vs Blackburn) and he got a very warm reception from the fans. We never chanted his name but he was still given a chance, the fans only turned on him when relegation became a real possibility (following the Bolton game)

[Ghost_of_Pongo_Waring]

 

 

I take issue with the bit in bold.

And I took issue with it at the time.

 

If McLeish was anything close to a good manager, then we'd have had no problem taking him from Blues.

 

Do you think if he'd just got Blues into the Champions league or something we'd have protested against having him here? Of course not. We'd have relished it.

 

Being ex blues didn't help, but the overwhelming reason we wanted McLeish out before he even got here is because he is a terrible terrible football manager. He'd been relegated in 2 of his 3 seasons in english football and had shown absolutely nothing to prove he was up to the job.

 

Yes, maybe we gave him less of a chance because he was from Blues. But that is absolutely NOT the main reason we didn't want him.

 

 

I used to think that way. But lets face it - his record is still superior to Lamberts

 

- Promoted twice

- Won the League Cup

- Placed higher in his only season here than Lambert has yet to achieve

 

It's true that Lambert has not been relegated while McLeish has - but boy! He's cutting it damn close.

 

I no longer believe we wanted rid "because he was a terrible football manager"....

 

... simply due to the fact we tolerate a worse one now.

 

 

We finished 16th under McLeish, with a more experienced squad than Lambert has had to work with. We've finished 15th twice with Lambert so the part in bold is totally incorrect.

 

Lambert has also achieved promotions, back to back promotions with Norwich.

[markavfc40]

 

Mark, he has had 46 mill net spend?...and this is what we have.

 

 

Don't forget what the squad was like when he got here.

 

18 of that 46 million has been injured for about a year, leaving 28 million, which is nine million per season, for a side starting off in 16th.

 

 

I don’t think he has been dealt a good hand in terms of finances both to spend in fees and perhaps more importantly on wages. However as you rightly point out he inherited a squad that finished 16^th, , has spent a net 46 mill and completely overhauled it . Whilst I think the squad is now better than what he inherited in terms of what matters, results and performances, we are no further forward.

 

The bare facts are this. McLeish was sacked for underachieving. This a guy who had a net spend of minus 20mill and hand injuries to key players in Dunne, Petrov and Bent. Now 2 and a half years down the line and 46 mill spent we have had two almost identical seasons to the one McLeish presided over both in terms of points and league position. In addition the football produced certainly last season and for much of this has in the main been just as dire as under McLeish. I know expectations have had to drop and we have to be realistic but if it wasn't good enough under McLeish who had one season then surely two and half seasons under Lambert of pretty much the same crap can’t be tolerated any longer.

Edited November 12, 2014 by markavfc40

[DCJonah]

but if it wasn't good enough under McLeish who had one season then surely two and half seasons under Lambert of pretty much the same crap can’t be tolerated any longer.

Have to agree with this.

[Shaw_nuff]

McLeish wasn't wanted 'cos he was/is rubbish. We all knew he was rubbish before a ball was kicked. If we were getting Mourinho from blues we would have been rubbing their blue-noses in it. As it urned out they (the majority of their fans) were laughing at us.
 
It was another terrible decision by Lerner just because he won a cup before getting blues relegated. It just goes to show the depth of Lerner's football knowledge.
 
This is Villa fro Christ's sake, not a pub team. Mcleish shoud have been beaten out with a shitty stick for even messing up our steps.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Shaw_nuff