Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
limpid

Paul Lambert

Recommended Posts

 

He's still done a good job. Comparing him to other Villa managers is meaningless, because they all came into better situations. The lack of money and the awful squad he inherited is why villa aren't better now. No, his tactics aren't perfect and some of the transfers have been poor, but every manager messes lots of transfers up. Like Brendan Rodgers, Roberto Martinez and Pochettino. With the budget he's had, to have Villa where they are, is better than most would've done.

 

We're in the top half of the league for transfer expenditure in the last two seasons.

 

 

Transfer expenditure that was spent on 16 players, not on 5 or 6. But 16 which works out to about 2.7million per player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gabby missed Everton game we could have went with Albrighton or Tonev or that lad from the Next Gen Robinson maybe who have pace 

 

so why start Holt?

None of them are anywhere near as effective as Gabby.

 

Holt actually worked in the first half. Lambert's line-up for that game was spot on, it was not adapting to the changes Martinez made where he fell short.

 

 

Just because we were winning in that first half does not mean his tactics were spot on. We were under pressure or at least in our own half nearly the entire game and Martinez just upped the ante by making even more positive changes. 

 

Had he kept continuity from the previous two games we may even have scored more than one goal which btw was our only shot on target that entire game. That is not exactly a tactic that will win you games.

 

Holt did almost nothing in that game so I dont know why you think he 'worked'

Edited by Houlston
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The relegation 'issue' isn't even that big a deal for myself, Simply for me we're playing abhorrent clueless football and we seemingly have a manager in charge who's showing no signs of trying to improve it. On top of that we have a fanbase whose enthusiasm is dwindling week by week.

 

 

worst part for me is when he has changed it, it has worked and then he changed it back to negative crap which surprise surprise failed

 

The formation vs West Ham wasn't negative.  The main reason we were shit was the 2 strikers up top played as bad as I've ever seen either of them play, Gabby barely broke a sweat and Benteke looked like Ian Dowie on a bad day. Kinda hard to make anything happen when our 2 most important players are playing shit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Gabby missed Everton game we could have went with Albrighton or Tonev or that lad from the Next Gen Robinson maybe who have pace 

 

so why start Holt?

None of them are anywhere near as effective as Gabby.

 

Holt actually worked in the first half. Lambert's line-up for that game was spot on, it was not adapting to the changes Martinez made where he fell short.

 

 

Just because we were winning in that first half does not mean his tactics were spot on. We were under pressure or at least in our own half nearly the entire game and Martinez just upped the ante by making even more positive changes. 

 

Had he kept continuity from the previous two games we may even have scored more than one goal which btw was our only shot on target that entire game. That is not exactly a tactic that will win you games.

 

Holt did almost nothing in that game so I dont know why you think he 'worked'

 

Equally, we could've been completely overrun and behind if we had used the same tactics. Everton play a completely different way to Liverpool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Benteke looked like Ian Dowie on a bad day

 

nobody could be that ugly

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gabby missed Everton game we could have went with Albrighton or Tonev or that lad from the Next Gen Robinson maybe who have pace 

 

so why start Holt?

None of them are anywhere near as effective as Gabby.

 

Holt actually worked in the first half. Lambert's line-up for that game was spot on, it was not adapting to the changes Martinez made where he fell short.

 

Just because we were winning in that first half does not mean his tactics were spot on. We were under pressure or at least in our own half nearly the entire game and Martinez just upped the ante by making even more positive changes. 

 

Had he kept continuity from the previous two games we may even have scored more than one goal which btw was our only shot on target that entire game. That is not exactly a tactic that will win you games.

 

Holt did almost nothing in that game so I dont know why you think he 'worked'

Equally, we could've been completely overrun and behind if we had used the same tactics. Everton play a completely different way to Liverpool.

It's a game of calculated risk and lambert just seems to want to defend the nil nil and try and sneak a goal, just not a viable long term strategy in my opinion.

Everton were struggling with absences and had no real recognised striker would have liked us to be a lot more positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equally, we could've been completely overrun and behind if we had used the same tactics. Everton play a completely different way to Liverpool.

 

 

This is very true Mantis but sitting back and attacking on occasion and having 1 shot on goal is more than likely not going to win you a game, its McLeish-esque.

 

And yes Everton do play a different way to Liverpool they have more of the ball so yes I can see why he might have set up to counter attack but this is then completely negated by having Holt on the pitch. Also this was by no means a full strength Everton side and one that may have been susceptible to a team that was more positive in its thinking a team similar to the one that beat West Brom a team on a high and one that could carry continuity. Its all very well arguing but at the end of the day it was changed and we lost two games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's still done a good job. Comparing him to other Villa managers is meaningless, because they all came into better situations. The lack of money and the awful squad he inherited is why villa aren't better now. No, his tactics aren't perfect and some of the transfers have been poor, but every manager messes lots of transfers up. Like Brendan Rodgers, Roberto Martinez and Pochettino. With the budget he's had, to have Villa where they are, is better than most would've done.

We're in the top half of the league for transfer expenditure in the last two seasons.

Look at average spend per player rather than the overall amount. Such a stupid argument.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much money do you think he'd need to make us a top 10 side? How about top 6? Top 4?

 

 

 

Top 10, another £25m in the summer. Top 6 probably £60m, Top 4 £125m or more. Unless we are taken over by an oil billionaire we will never be a top four side, ever. Football's a game where you buy success. There is no chance we will ever be a top four side. Following the Everton model of being 8th/7th every season is all we can aim for.

Edited by villa89
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Following the Everton model of being 8th/7th every season is all we can aim for.

 

And that takes longer than 18 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How much money do you think he'd need to make us a top 10 side? How about top 6? Top 4?

 

 

 

Top 10, another £25m in the summer. Top 6 probably £60m, Top 4 £125m or more. Unless we are taken over by an oil billionaire we will never be a top four side, ever. Football's a game where you buy success. There is no chance we will ever be a top four side. Following the Everton model of being 8th/7th every season is all we can aim for.

 

It will be closer to 40m in the summer if we sell Benteke

 

We will need to replace him as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

his football is awful

 

His football is inconsistent, we show glimpses of being great and then long spells of being poor. 

 

 

'Inconsistent' flatters us. Between Liverpool at home in August and Liverpool away in January we've been pretty consistent.

 

"his football is awful" - that is an overreaction. We are in a better position in the table than last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

his football is awful

 

His football is inconsistent, we show glimpses of being great and then long spells of being poor. 

 

 

'Inconsistent' flatters us. Between Liverpool at home in August and Liverpool away in January we've been pretty consistent.

 

"his football is awful" - that is an overreaction. We are in a better position in the table than last year.

 

the football on the whole is dire apart from the odd patch here and there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

worst part for me is when he has changed it, it has worked and then he changed it back to negative crap which surprise surprise failed

 

Picture-55.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

his football is awful

 

His football is inconsistent, we show glimpses of being great and then long spells of being poor. 

 

 

'Inconsistent' flatters us. Between Liverpool at home in August and Liverpool away in January we've been pretty consistent.

 

"his football is awful" - that is an overreaction. We are in a better position in the table than last year.

 

 

Which is why I said his football is awful. His results are below average which is better than awful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is why I said his football is awful. His results are below average which is better than awful.

 

Awful? I give up, I really do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He's still done a good job. Comparing him to other Villa managers is meaningless, because they all came into better situations. The lack of money and the awful squad he inherited is why villa aren't better now. No, his tactics aren't perfect and some of the transfers have been poor, but every manager messes lots of transfers up. Like Brendan Rodgers, Roberto Martinez and Pochettino. With the budget he's had, to have Villa where they are, is better than most would've done.

Don't think many people see the bigger picture because of some of the results and football we've played imo, you just cant keep losing at home and expect to keep the fans onside. His record is not even close to being good enough.

He has the same or a better record than many clubs in the prem. it's not what villa as a club are used to, but what exactly is good enough on his budget? Survival is tough to achieve with the current financial restrictions compared to other clubs. It's not ideal, but the blame shouldn't lie at the feet of Lambert.

 

 

 

This money thing for me is turning in to a bit of a red herring....Look before I start I know you need money, but cast your mind back to our other managers who havn't had it.

 

nearly ALL the best players you can think of, that we have had, have not cost much money.

 

There are still may examples in the Prem Like Kompany,Hernandez and Matic ( 1st time) that have not cost fortunes....there must be many more.

 

YOU HAVE TO BE CANNY.....being minted just makes it a little easier and a lot quicker to do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say Kompany and Hernandez were "cheap" but they cost £6m each and were probably put on wages in excess of what Lambert has been able to offer so far.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...
Â