GENTLEMAN Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 When Mcleish left didn't he say he was goin to sign Siggurdson and Douglas? Lambert saying he was close to signing the players listed previously is the same kind of BS surely? Or the same let down for both managers - we need to move on from the manager bashing. If you change a bulb 3 times and the lamp still doesn't work - it isn't the bulb, it's the lamp Great analogy. Are the supporters the plug socket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 When Mcleish left didn't he say he was goin to sign Siggurdson and Douglas? Lambert saying he was close to signing the players listed previously is the same kind of BS surely? Smacks of another gash manager that is looking to lay the blame anywhere but at his own feet. McLeish, arguably the biggest car crash of a manager we have ever had, was sitting on 35 points from 33 games with a -13 goal difference after just 1 season in charge. Lambert is sitting on 34 points from the same number of games with a -14 goal difference after almost 2 seasons in charge. How on earth can anyone say that there has been improvement under Lambert's tenure and claim that there is some project or master plan underway that hasn't shown one iota of improvement in results or performance. There is absolutely nothing visible to suggest that we are getting better and that the seeds of improvement have been sown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villianusa Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I really hope, as I am lead to believe, that a takeover will follow shortly. If not, I fear for the future of our club under this kind of management from the board. The conditions that are in place are not conducive for any manager to succeed. Send it to us in a PM! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He knows nothing all speculation!! Any manager who is losing the plot is going to say I wanted Messi, Ronaldo etc. Everyone makes excuses for there own demise. I remember McLeish saying we didn't have the players to play good football, just before he was sacked!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Its pretty obvious Lambert hasn't been fully backed but that doesn't excuse how awful he's been. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He knows nothing all speculation!! What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 So was it just this one person who saw what Charlie Nicholas said on Soccer Saturday!? Did ANYONE else see the programme yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 That 'leak' to Charlie Nicholas suggests to me that everything is not rosy between Lambert and Lerner. Would love to hear a phone tap of the conversation the two have had after the last couple of games if they do still talk to each other that is. Lambert hasn't done the 'we talk to each other after every game' bit in a while. Really not sure where the blame lies at the moment, but it definitely reminds me of the time someone leaked that there was no money to cover staff expenses for a cup of coffee when travelling, before DOL got the bullet and Ellis sold up. Was it Lee Hendrie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He knows nothing all speculation!! Any manager who is losing the plot is going to say I wanted Messi, Ronaldo etc. Everyone makes excuses for there own demise. I remember McLeish saying we didn't have the players to play good football, just before he was sacked!! Wenger usually comes out once a year after failing to win a title speaking about how he almost signed Ronaldo, Zlatan, Messi... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post romavillan Posted April 14, 2014 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted April 14, 2014 When Mcleish left didn't he say he was goin to sign Siggurdson and Douglas? Lambert saying he was close to signing the players listed previously is the same kind of BS surely? Smacks of another gash manager that is looking to lay the blame anywhere but at his own feet. McLeish, arguably the biggest car crash of a manager we have ever had, was sitting on 35 points from 33 games with a -13 goal difference after just 1 season in charge. Lambert is sitting on 34 points from the same number of games with a -14 goal difference after almost 2 seasons in charge. How on earth can anyone say that there has been improvement under Lambert's tenure and claim that there is some project or master plan underway that hasn't shown one iota of improvement in results or performance. There is absolutely nothing visible to suggest that we are getting better and that the seeds of improvement have been sown. Ok. IMHO the difference is that McLeish did that with an expensively assembled experience squad of players costing the club over £250k a week more in wages with little to no sell on value. He did it by having a great start and then looking worse and worse untill a the end the end of the season was like a mercy killing. Lambert has changed everything about the above, whilst (just) keeping us in the league. The club is now in a good position to either be sold, attract new investment, or for Randy to allow Lambert to invest in 3 or 4 quality players without the need to buy 7 or 8 just to have the numbers in the squad. I'm not defending the football, I'm not defending the form, I'm not saying it's where I expect us to be or want us to be. I am saying that the work done was necessary and the fact we've managed to stay in the top division whilst doing it is impressive. I personally think sacking him now after he's done the dirty work would be counter productive. If we are anywhere near the relegation zone end of december then you could make a case for it, after he's been allowed to strengthen this summer building on the base he's worked on putting in place of a young squad not crippling the clubs finances. Let's not forget that Given, Hutton and Zog need to be moved on still and that will free his hand to pay more wages for new signings too. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Its pretty obvious Lambert hasn't been fully backed but that doesn't excuse how awful he's been. It does. It will be the same for the next guy in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Its pretty obvious Lambert hasn't been fully backed but that doesn't excuse how awful he's been. It does. It will be the same for the next guy in charge. So, this takeover information then? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Breaking news! Lambert is awful because he hasn't been backed. You heard it on here first from an ITK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Lambert is the right man to lead Villa forward (IMO), but the restrictions placed upon him from above are an anchor that will see us sink with time. I am thankful for a lot of what Randy did for the club, but right now, unless he digs deep, we will struggle to survive in the future. We will not be relegated this year, but the current model will not last in its current state. We need the board to invest in players that will benefit the first-team not just the squad. In the space of two seasons the man has masterminded the loss of an entire season's worth of home games (19). He has masterminded cup exits against lower league teams who have literally outplayed us. VT is in complete hope mode at the moment. Those who wish for regime change are jumping on the slightest rumour of takeover, and trying to turn it into more than just a rumour. And those who support Lambert are clinging on to the bullshit mutterings of an ex-footballer with a doss Saturday afternoon job, who just happens to be Lambert's mate. Or did Lambert really try to sign an expensive striker while the side was screaming out for strength in midfield? If you support Lambert and haven't been to VP lately, please make the effort to come on Saturday, and see how you feel about him after 90 minutes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 When Mcleish left didn't he say he was goin to sign Siggurdson and Douglas? Lambert saying he was close to signing the players listed previously is the same kind of BS surely? Smacks of another gash manager that is looking to lay the blame anywhere but at his own feet. McLeish, arguably the biggest car crash of a manager we have ever had, was sitting on 35 points from 33 games with a -13 goal difference after just 1 season in charge. Lambert is sitting on 34 points from the same number of games with a -14 goal difference after almost 2 seasons in charge. How on earth can anyone say that there has been improvement under Lambert's tenure and claim that there is some project or master plan underway that hasn't shown one iota of improvement in results or performance. There is absolutely nothing visible to suggest that we are getting better and that the seeds of improvement have been sown. Ok. IMHO the difference is that McLeish did that with an expensively assembled experience squad of players costing the club over £250k a week more in wages with little to no sell on value. He did it by having a great start and then looking worse and worse untill a the end the end of the season was like a mercy killing.Lambert has changed everything about the above, whilst (just) keeping us in the league. The club is now in a good position to either be sold, attract new investment, or for Randy to allow Lambert to invest in 3 or 4 quality players without the need to buy 7 or 8 just to have the numbers in the squad. I'm not defending the football, I'm not defending the form, I'm not saying it's where I expect us to be or want us to be. I am saying that the work done was necessary and the fact we've managed to stay in the top division whilst doing it is impressive. I personally think sacking him now after he's done the dirty work would be counter productive. If we are anywhere near the relegation zone end of december then you could make a case for it, after he's been allowed to strengthen this summer building on the base he's worked on putting in place of a young squad not crippling the clubs finances. Let's not forget that Given, Hutton and Zog need to be moved on still and that will free his hand to pay more wages for new signings too. Aren't the two in bold contradicting each other? He still has expensive players, experienced players (I'd add bent into that list as well) who are costing the club a fortune, he just doesn't want to use any of them. As I said prior, yes Hutton is a poor player, but have Lambert's rb's been consistently better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I fail to see why the nowadays very frugal Lerner would suddenly give bigger funds to Lambert in the summer and at the same time only give him untill the new year to sort it out. That could lead to a scenario of a new manager coming in having little or no funds and a squad full of newly bought players he doesn't wan't. Either they believe in Lamber or they don't. Why would he give big funds to a manager halfway out the door? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post GarethRDR Posted April 14, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 14, 2014 He is managing with one hand tied behind his back. Very true, but that he's taken to slapping himself in the face with the other hand isn't helping any. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limvillian Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) Troll says what? When will they learn. Learn what? You have come on here multible times spouting BS that has never come true and you expect to be believed when you claim to be ITK then?? Just ignore him. He cannot NEVER back up any of the silly claims he makes to being ITK. He just has twitter and believes everything he sees on there and then comes on here making nudge and wink comments. Then when people question him he acts all hurt and hard done by. Same every time. I pity him really. Oh I have seen the routine a few times alright. Edited April 14, 2014 by limvillian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I doubt those names for numerous reasons. Lukaku: I wonder what wasn't sanctioned? Because Lambert could have spent the Kozak money on a loan? Or not? Let's say, however, that a loan move wasn't sanctioned, it's not like he went without being able to sign anyone - he was given money to go and buy Libor. Barry: Paul has been quite insistent on his "young and hungry" approach. I don't believe we were ever in for him. Coutinho: Big doubts on this one. Firstly the rumour was that he wanted to play for Pottechino again. Secondly, there's no way we'd have got him given Liverpool's interest anyway. I know the agent said we made an "inquiry", but also said there had been nothing concrete. Hotlby: Spurs put him on something ridiculous like 70K p/w and made it clear they wanted anyone loaning him to cover most/all that. That 'enquiry' would have fallen down very early on. So that leaves Sissoko, but I doubt we had any chance with him as I'd assume he was keen to join up with with the French contingent down at SJP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted April 14, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) Aren't the two in bold contradicting each other? He still has expensive players, experienced players (I'd add bent into that list as well) who are costing the club a fortune, he just doesn't want to use any of them. As I said prior, yes Hutton is a poor player, but have Lambert's rb's been consistently better? Well, yes and no No because Bent, Given, Hutton and Zog don't play and won't play and are not part of the project. Yes, because they are still on the payroll I suppose. So, I think it doesn't detract from the size of the task he's managed to pull off so far in terms of player turnover, and it means there is still a lot of weekly wage to free up (hopefully for this summer's activity). Edited April 14, 2014 by romavillan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts