a m ole Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 It begs the question, we had all day to bid and yet we stick it in at 6/7pm? It's as if the club didn't really want to sign him but we put the bid in to say "look, we are trying" to appease the fans. and then immediately disappoint them? it's always got to be a conspiracy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I don't think it's that, I think if we really did bid for him then we genuinly wanted to sign him. Maybe the bid wasn't as late in the day as the reports might indicate either it's not as if we make a bid and then media hear about it within minutes. Leaving it to the last day seems baffling but I guess that seems to be one of the features of transfer deadline day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KJT123 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I know it sounds silly, but if we were going to do a panic buy, then why didn't we stick the bid in on the night of the Arsenal game, rather than a few hours before the window closes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 (edited) Maybe we bid for him with the money that didn't get used on signing Dele Alli. That's if we were even in for him at all, for all we know the media could have made the whole thing up, or fabricated our interest out of proportion. Edited February 3, 2015 by useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam3773 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Could have been worse. Randy could have put a Tweet up telling us not to go to bed. Something I find myself doing an hour earlier each deadline day. We either do no business or sign Tom Cleverley. I prefer the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Trying to look at the positive, at least the club didn't allow Lambert to shell out £12 m on Cleverly & Lambert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante_Lockhart Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Would have loved for us to have made a run for Tim Cahill after he left the MLS. Just what we need, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Trying to look at the positive, at least the club didn't allow Lambert to shell out £12 m on Cleverly & Lambert What's worrying is they attempted to do it in the first place. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Imagine if the players actually wanted to come, we would have spunked £13m on those two players. I know I said Lambert has been good in the transfer market but this would have changed my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunnski Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 wonder why R. Lambert didn't want to come. Could it be that we dont put any crosses into the box!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This could be a myth as some Stats on MNF which Nevile was reviewing has us something like 6th for number of crosses I think. What we were low on was of course goals and shots on Target. Passing and possession we were right up there in the top 6. Carra and Nevile then gave Benteke a slagging saying he isn't doing enough and compared him to Adeboyar. They said Lambert has built the team around Benteke but he hasn't turned up Yep we were 4th for crosses into the box from open play, and 9th for chances created. If we only we had a striker who could score... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 wonder why R. Lambert didn't want to come. Could it be that we dont put any crosses into the box!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This could be a myth as some Stats on MNF which Nevile was reviewing has us something like 6th for number of crosses I think. What we were low on was of course goals and shots on Target. Passing and possession we were right up there in the top 6. Carra and Nevile then gave Benteke a slagging saying he isn't doing enough and compared him to Adeboyar. They said Lambert has built the team around Benteke but he hasn't turned up Yep we were 4th for crosses into the box from open play, and 9th for chances created. If we only we had a striker who could score... If we only had a manager that could motivate him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 wonder why R. Lambert didn't want to come. Could it be that we dont put any crosses into the box!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This could be a myth as some Stats on MNF which Nevile was reviewing has us something like 6th for number of crosses I think. What we were low on was of course goals and shots on Target. Passing and possession we were right up there in the top 6. Carra and Nevile then gave Benteke a slagging saying he isn't doing enough and compared him to Adeboyar. They said Lambert has built the team around Benteke but he hasn't turned up Yep we were 4th for crosses into the box from open play, and 9th for chances created. If we only we had a striker who could score... If we only had a manager that could motivate him! Disagree. Motivation is obviously part of the game, but it doesn't excuse Benteke at the moment. He's playing atrocious football. If it was genuinely a case of not getting the ball to him then fair enough, but it isn't. Some of our crossing (esp against Arsenal) was terrible so didn't give him a chance but some of the balls in were decent. In the Arsenal game, Christian Benteke had more shots than anyone else on the pitch. Can anyone even remember one of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westholmevillan Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 If anyone believes that we were ever going to sign Rickie Lambert.....then more fool you. Of all the strikers that were NEVER going to move....he was the one! The PR BS cannot fool me. They chose the very man that they knew they couldnt/wouldnt get to try and appease us disillusioned fans. Read between the lines guys.....it was pure and utter BS by a club that treats loyal fans with comtemt and downright lies. Feck off Lerner, the Villa is ours....no more pennypinching, lies and false dawns....feck off now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 3, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 3, 2015 If anyone believes that we were ever going to sign Rickie Lambert.....then more fool you. Of all the strikers that were NEVER going to move....he was the one! The PR BS cannot fool me. They chose the very man that they knew they couldnt/wouldnt get to try and appease us disillusioned fans. Read between the lines guys.....it was pure and utter BS by a club that treats loyal fans with comtemt and downright lies. Feck off Lerner, the Villa is ours....no more pennypinching, lies and false dawns....feck off now! Why would they do this with Ricky Lambert? Surely they'd go for a bigger name? I don't think there's any conspiracy here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 If anyone believes that we were ever going to sign Rickie Lambert.....then more fool you. Of all the strikers that were NEVER going to move....he was the one! The PR BS cannot fool me. They chose the very man that they knew they couldnt/wouldnt get to try and appease us disillusioned fans. Read between the lines guys.....it was pure and utter BS by a club that treats loyal fans with comtemt and downright lies. Feck off Lerner, the Villa is ours....no more pennypinching, lies and false dawns....feck off now! It's all a conspiracy!!! Trying to appease the masses by going for a massive name...one up there with the greats, Van Nistelrooy, Shearer, Henry, Cole, Lineker, Fowler...Lambert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westholmevillan Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 If anyone believes that we were ever going to sign Rickie Lambert.....then more fool you. Of all the strikers that were NEVER going to move....he was the one! The PR BS cannot fool me. They chose the very man that they knew they couldnt/wouldnt get to try and appease us disillusioned fans. Read between the lines guys.....it was pure and utter BS by a club that treats loyal fans with comtemt and downright lies. Feck off Lerner, the Villa is ours....no more pennypinching, lies and false dawns....feck off now! Why would they do this with Ricky Lambert? Surely they'd go for a bigger name? I don't think there's any conspiracy here. As I said to appease the fans. Just think about it......out of all the other strikers on the planet why choose to name the one that they knew would never happen. Moreover, where has the 5m been all through Jan when we hadnt scored a single PL goal. Why wait until 7pm on deadline day. I know Lambert is dumb but FFS we all knew we needed a striker for months....plent of time to scour the leagues to find one IMO. As far as I'm concerned it was purely to appease the fans. With 5m we could have got Defoe for example! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Trying to look at the positive, at least the club didn't allow Lambert to shell out £12 m on Cleverly & Lambert Two things On cleverley the club struck a deal to sign him if we wanted. If the manager had wanted to sign cleverley on a permanent deal we would have signed him. So IMO you are utterly wrong to suggest they didnt allow him to shell out on that player On Lambert the club bid for him, the club wanted him and the manager wanted him. Lambert (Rickie) was in a difficult position as he wants regular football and he doesnt have too much longer left to get it. He had to balance that against playing for his club, his family and how settled he is. In the end he chose family over career, cant blame him for that. So again you are, IMO, utterly wrong to suggest the club did not allow Paul Lambert to shell out on that player as if Rickie L had decided differently then this morning he would be at Bodymoor training with his new colleagues What you can be critical of, and quite rightly here imo, is the timeliness of the bid and why we waited until Monday afternoon to make it but again that may have depended upon business Liverpool were making or signals from them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 If anyone believes that we were ever going to sign Rickie Lambert.....then more fool you. Of all the strikers that were NEVER going to move....he was the one! The PR BS cannot fool me. They chose the very man that they knew they couldnt/wouldnt get to try and appease us disillusioned fans. Read between the lines guys.....it was pure and utter BS by a club that treats loyal fans with comtemt and downright lies. Feck off Lerner, the Villa is ours....no more pennypinching, lies and false dawns....feck off now! Why would they do this with Ricky Lambert? Surely they'd go for a bigger name? I don't think there's any conspiracy here. As I said to appease the fans. Just think about it......out of all the other strikers on the planet why choose to name the one that they knew would never happen. Moreover, where has the 5m been all through Jan when we hadnt scored a single PL goal. Why wait until 7pm on deadline day. I know Lambert is dumb but FFS we all knew we needed a striker for months....plent of time to scour the leagues to find one IMO. As far as I'm concerned it was purely to appease the fans. With 5m we could have got Defoe for example! Pretty sure Defoe is on about £20k/wk, too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Trying to look at the positive, at least the club didn't allow Lambert to shell out £12 m on Cleverly & Lambert Two things On cleverley the club struck a deal to sign him if we wanted. If the manager had wanted to sign cleverley on a permanent deal we would have signed him. So IMO you are utterly wrong to suggest they didnt allow him to shell out on that player On Lambert the club bid for him, the club wanted him and the manager wanted him. Lambert (Rickie) was in a difficult position as he wants regular football and he doesnt have too much longer left to get it. He had to balance that against playing for his club, his family and how settled he is. In the end he chose family over career, cant blame him for that. So again you are, IMO, utterly wrong to suggest the club did not allow Paul Lambert to shell out on that player as if Rickie L had decided differently then this morning he would be at Bodymoor training with his new colleagues What you can be critical of, and quite rightly here imo, is the timeliness of the bid and why we waited until Monday afternoon to make it but again that may have depended upon business Liverpool were making or signals from them Or it is when Randy actually gave them the go ahead. On Rickie Lambert, people can sit there and say we would of wasted money but one thing we lack is a leader, just watch the game on Saturday and see it was like the blind leading the blind, no-one getting angry at their performance. Listening to Taylor and Ross, losing 5-0 to Arsenal can happen however to do in the manner we did, at least give them a few bruises for their victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Trying to look at the positive, at least the club didn't allow Lambert to shell out £12 m on Cleverly & Lambert Two things On cleverley the club struck a deal to sign him if we wanted. If the manager had wanted to sign cleverley on a permanent deal we would have signed him. So IMO you are utterly wrong to suggest they didnt allow him to shell out on that player On Lambert the club bid for him, the club wanted him and the manager wanted him. Lambert (Rickie) was in a difficult position as he wants regular football and he doesnt have too much longer left to get it. He had to balance that against playing for his club, his family and how settled he is. In the end he chose family over career, cant blame him for that. So again you are, IMO, utterly wrong to suggest the club did not allow Paul Lambert to shell out on that player as if Rickie L had decided differently then this morning he would be at Bodymoor training with his new colleagues What you can be critical of, and quite rightly here imo, is the timeliness of the bid and why we waited until Monday afternoon to make it but again that may have depended upon business Liverpool were making or signals from them What im critical about (among many other things) is that someone, most likelly Lambert at any time thought that Cleverly would solve our midfield problems and that Rickie Lambert would solve our attacking problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts