spiezels Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I'm hoping getting Karsa and Culverhouse out may help the squad, if they created as "poisonous" atmosphere as the press are saying it could be the lift the players need. Get them out first and see what happens! Whatever happens Lambert has to stay until the seasons over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sellbydate Posted April 16, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted April 16, 2014 They weren't responsible for this were they they ? Who knows. I've seen this posted a few times and i still am not able to read it even when i zoom in. Anyone a better copy? Guzan - Good, comes through bodies to penalty spot, distributes quickly for counter attacks, will distribute long or to holt and is accurate, frequency he comes of line means hes prone to error and doesnt like physical too much Lowton - Average height, lightweight, poor defender, does not get tight enough. lacks aggression. lacking in confidence. struggles in tight spaces, out of his depth Vlaar - good mobility, quick change of pace, probably best defender, does get caught down the alleys and doesnt particularly like having no protection there, comfortable on the ball. ask questions in this formation Baker - Attacks ball and does OK,struggles with any balls played in, vulnerabe against powerful quick forward "Big Weakness" Clark - lacks mobility, pace and sharpness, vulnerable 1 on 1, loves a pass back to Guzan, lacks confidence in posession Bertrand - athletic, all round defender, good on recovery, plays long under pressure, when confident gets forwardm good crossing quality Westwood - Looks to come deep and take ball from back four, tidy passer of the ball likes to pass and move, defensively does compete, El ahmadi - decent 2 touch passer, does not penetrate with passisng or movement, little attacking threat, not the bravest, poor defender, doesnt get tight and struggles to press Delph - high energy, good engine, covers ground well, wants the ball, flys into tackles and gets booked,often becomes ragged and loses the defensive shape Holt- strong but not grat mobility, if balls arent up to him does not show energy to get the ball, strong and competitive with back to goal. willing worker but effectiveness at this level can be ? if we get on top of him early Agbonlahor - strong quick, played on left but upfront as 2 today. will drop deep when they have the ball at the back but on transition looks to break in behind on the counter, this is when hes most threatening, can cause problems running at defenders, reluctant to do anything out of posession. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pez1974 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Some of the noises coming out of Bodymoor Heath overnight are making me more sympathtic to Lambert, if true. IF Lambert is behind the decision to suspend/sack these 2; and if Lambert has been unhappy for a while and has wanted them out for a while, employment law may have tied his hands somewhat.... You cannot suspend or sack people simply because you aren't happy with them. Similarly, you cannot sacy them because you think they aren't doing a good enough job. You have to gather evidence, consult with them, set them improvement targets, etc. This takes time and would have to be asessed over set periods, and if you don't get this right, you leave yourself open to compensation claims far beyond what their contracts would allow. We could be taking serious money here. You also cannot take duties off them without due process, or you end up in the same situation. If you think someone isn't doing a good enough job, you would need to provide them with suitable assistance and/or training. Getting beaten by Palace and Fulham wouldn't be sufficient grounds in law, because you can't sack someone because someone else can do their job better. All the above protects us in our daily jobs, and applies equally to any employment - so would to Culverhouse and Karsa. As I said at the start, IF this scenario is broadly right, Lambert would have some sympathy from me. BUT, at the end of the day, he is the manger and his job (surely must be) to take overall responsibility, and he should have been dealing with this long before it became so toxic. Perhaps because these 2 have been with him for so long, he was too naive and had a blind spot to them. No excuse though, but not a sackable offence on him either I'm afraid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 To be honest those descriptions there , any fan could, and probably did, write them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) All most all of it is pretty accurate - pretty damning on Lowton actually but Ahmadi - struggles to press?? That is probably his biggest assett and he does that as well as anyone in the league going by the stats and my eyes. I struggle to see how a trained scout would come to that conclusion Edited April 16, 2014 by villaglint 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Well Cardiff had their team leaked before playing Palace so you never know. Coincidence that its palace again? To be honest those descriptions there , any fan could, and probably did, write them Seems like a lot of effort for a fan to go through for no reason. And was this released before or after the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sellbydate Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) I agree (that it's likely fake), and actually the stuff on Lowton feels like a villatalk assessment after we've lost a game Edited April 16, 2014 by sellbydate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Much appreciated sellbydate. Not that they got the teams ability right, but more that worrying the teams formation and players. Wonder if they have dressing room bugged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 To be honest those descriptions there , any fan could, and probably did, write them except Con. we would have known if it was from him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 To be honest those descriptions there , any fan could, and probably did, write them except Con. we would have known if it was from him The players would all be rated on a scale of 1 to Barry Bannan. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw_nuff Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Seems like a lot of effort for a fan to go through for no reason. And was this released before or after the game? I've seen longer posts and more effort just in this thread to be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It isn't fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhan_Zhuang Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 If Culverhouse and Karsa were sent to destroy us maybe they have been leaking information aswell as generally been disruptive. If this is all true then I imagine Lambert feels rather appalled by people he thought he could trust and this gives us an explanation as to why we have been poor this season. Here's hoping this galvanises everyone at the club and we get a much needed and very deserved three points this weekend. UTV 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feidhlim Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It isn't fake. Well, that settles it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It isn't fake. Well, that settles it Glad you agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I still fail to see why Culverhouse and Karsa would both jeopardise an eight year working relationship at the same time. Culverhouse by himself maybe but I don't buy that Karsa would've as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Some of the noises coming out of Bodymoor Heath overnight are making me more sympathtic to Lambert, if true. IF Lambert is behind the decision to suspend/sack these 2; and if Lambert has been unhappy for a while and has wanted them out for a while, employment law may have tied his hands somewhat.... You cannot suspend or sack people simply because you aren't happy with them. Similarly, you cannot sacy them because you think they aren't doing a good enough job. You have to gather evidence, consult with them, set them improvement targets, etc. This takes time and would have to be asessed over set periods, and if you don't get this right, you leave yourself open to compensation claims far beyond what their contracts would allow. We could be taking serious money here. You also cannot take duties off them without due process, or you end up in the same situation. If you think someone isn't doing a good enough job, you would need to provide them with suitable assistance and/or training. Getting beaten by Palace and Fulham wouldn't be sufficient grounds in law, because you can't sack someone because someone else can do their job better. All the above protects us in our daily jobs, and applies equally to any employment - so would to Culverhouse and Karsa. As I said at the start, IF this scenario is broadly right, Lambert would have some sympathy from me. BUT, at the end of the day, he is the manger and his job (surely must be) to take overall responsibility, and he should have been dealing with this long before it became so toxic. Perhaps because these 2 have been with him for so long, he was too naive and had a blind spot to them. No excuse though, but not a sackable offence on him either I'm afraid! Not true. You can sack people for any reason. you may have fight your case in court - but thats how it works. All the processes are to limit your chances of being taken to court - but they aren't mandatory. This sounds like we wanted to sack them - but hadn't quite got the balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TezzRexx Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Nobody knew Bacuna was unfit, yet they got our team down perfectly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I still fail to see why Culverhouse and Karsa would both jeopardise an eight year working relationship at the same time. Culverhouse by himself maybe but I don't buy that Karsa would've as well. It happens - people change and business can be a big factor in that. Maybe Villa was a step too far for them. Plus I'd imagine Lamberts divorce / split would be a difficult scenario around Karsa. A number of factors have probably contributed to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Some of the noises coming out of Bodymoor Heath overnight are making me more sympathtic to Lambert, if true. IF Lambert is behind the decision to suspend/sack these 2; and if Lambert has been unhappy for a while and has wanted them out for a while, employment law may have tied his hands somewhat.... You cannot suspend or sack people simply because you aren't happy with them. Similarly, you cannot sacy them because you think they aren't doing a good enough job. You have to gather evidence, consult with them, set them improvement targets, etc. This takes time and would have to be asessed over set periods, and if you don't get this right, you leave yourself open to compensation claims far beyond what their contracts would allow. We could be taking serious money here. You also cannot take duties off them without due process, or you end up in the same situation. If you think someone isn't doing a good enough job, you would need to provide them with suitable assistance and/or training. Getting beaten by Palace and Fulham wouldn't be sufficient grounds in law, because you can't sack someone because someone else can do their job better. All the above protects us in our daily jobs, and applies equally to any employment - so would to Culverhouse and Karsa. As I said at the start, IF this scenario is broadly right, Lambert would have some sympathy from me. BUT, at the end of the day, he is the manger and his job (surely must be) to take overall responsibility, and he should have been dealing with this long before it became so toxic. Perhaps because these 2 have been with him for so long, he was too naive and had a blind spot to them. No excuse though, but not a sackable offence on him either I'm afraid! Not true. You can sack people for any reason. you may have fight your case in court - but thats how it works. All the processes are to limit your chances of being taken to court - but they aren't mandatory. This sounds like we wanted to sack them - but hadn't quite got the balls. It really isn't. In this day and age you cannot sack anyone just like that. Fact. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts