Manager Paul Lambert

[Isa]

Its so hard to criticise a 3 goal away win at Southampton and coming back to lead at all times.

 

and so easy to criticise a non scoring home draw with Sunderland with us having less of the chances.

 

Thats our problem right now.... I guess we are just scrapping for results/points now, rather than leaving it until the end of the season.

Against Sunderland we had 13 shots off target, 4 on.

Sunderland had 7 off, 1 on.

A effort on target isn't necessarily a chance.

[Raymond]

 

So we could come 8th (which is mid table) and you'd want him gone? Completely wacko logic.

 

 

Back to this, don't forget we came 9th under Houllier and MANY wanted him out before he walked (or was pushed)

 

 

So their insanity validates yours?  Interesting argument.  

 

You have made several outlandish and unsubstantiated claims the last couple posts.  Let's examine a few in your trademarked fashion.

 

1. It has not only been "established" that we will not bring any bigger players - it hasn't - but also that Randy will pocket most of the money from the sale of the bigger players.  Exactly where has that been established?  Almost all the Young/Milner/Downing money was spent.  It was not spent well, but it was spent. 

 

2. Lambert chose to buy 16 players instead of 5.  I do not know if you are aware, but you need more than 11 players at a football club.  It would be nice if we could turn the injury setting to off in real life.

 

3. You have "plenty of patience?" You are demanding a kind of football that takes years to develop and that we have not played at Villa Park for quite some time.  People conveniently forget the type of football they are moaning about right now is the exact football that propelled us to sixth under MON.  In 09/10 we only had 47% possession on average and had an even more dire 72.4% pass success rate.  You cannot change that culture overnight with no money.  It just cannot be done.

 

4. Lambert has shown "very few signs he has the capability or nous" to improve the football?  I would refer you to the end of last season.  We can all act like it did not happen if we want, but we saw what this team can be we it is all working correctly.  It just has not worked correctly yet this season. 

[Keyblade]

I want to disagree with Ulver, but I can't as he's named after one of the greatest bands ever 

[Skruff]

 

 

So we could come 8th (which is mid table) and you'd want him gone? Completely wacko logic.

 

It's a results business. The higher we come, the more chance we have of attracting better players. Lambert clearly wanted a no10 (which would make our style of football better) but he couldn't get one.

Why did people want McLeish gone then?

 

 

What? That is no way comparable and you know that. We were in a relegation battle for that whole season and scraped safety with a minute number of games to go. We don't look like being in a relegation battle this year and the original assertion was 'even if we're mid table then I want him sacked'.

 

Regarding Houllier, we were in a relegation battle for much of the season and 2 wins at the back end don't hide that. Also Houllier disrespected the fans on more than one occasion.

 

We finally have something in place worth building and people would get rid of that so nonchalantly. It's baffling.

 

I just always thought style of play was one of the biggest reason for people wanting McLeish out, even before we were in the relegation battle. At times we're just a soulless and boring to watch as we were under McLeish, if not worse. The biggest difference is that we're picking up 3 points instead of 1, mainly due to great individual performances.

When that's said, I don't want Lambert out and I fully support him. That doesn't make the football we're playing entertaining to watch though. We look out of ideas at home, and that worries me. However, Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe you need to organize and make your team solid defensively before you can obtain a more attractive attacking style of play, it need to be in the backbone of the team. It's also easier and takes less time to organize a team defensively even if your team consist of players with limited skills. Just look at most lower table teams. Even with the right players at your disposal it takes time to build a good attacking side and it's not done in one season, just look at how Swansea did it over the years, or how tottenham struggles the second season of AVB reign, even though they have some great(and new) players at their disposal. I will remain patient, and I also expect we'll see more entertaining football comes second half of the season.

[villan_007]

 

 

 

So we could come 8th (which is mid table) and you'd want him gone? Completely wacko logic.

 

It's a results business. The higher we come, the more chance we have of attracting better players. Lambert clearly wanted a no10 (which would make our style of football better) but he couldn't get one.

Why did people want McLeish gone then?

 

 

What? That is no way comparable and you know that. We were in a relegation battle for that whole season and scraped safety with a minute number of games to go. We don't look like being in a relegation battle this year and the original assertion was 'even if we're mid table then I want him sacked'.

 

Regarding Houllier, we were in a relegation battle for much of the season and 2 wins at the back end don't hide that. Also Houllier disrespected the fans on more than one occasion.

 

We finally have something in place worth building and people would get rid of that so nonchalantly. It's baffling.

 

I just always thought style of play was one of the biggest reason for people wanting McLeish out, even before we were in the relegation battle. At times we're just a soulless and boring to watch as we were under McLeish, if not worse. The biggest difference is that we're picking up 3 points instead of 1, mainly due to great individual performances.

When that's said, I don't want Lambert out and I fully support him. That doesn't make the football we're playing entertaining to watch though. We look out of ideas at home, and that worries me. However, Rome wasn't built in a day. I believe you need to organize and make your team solid defensively before you can obtain a more attractive attacking style of play, it need to be in the backbone of the team. It's also easier and takes less time to organize a team defensively even if your team consist of players with limited skills. Just look at most lower table teams. Even with the right players at your disposal it takes time to build a good attacking side and it's not done in one season, just look at how Swansea did it over the years, or how tottenham struggles the second season of AVB reign, even though they have some great(and new) players at their disposal. I will remain patient, and I also expect we'll see more entertaining football comes second half of the season.

 

 

Souless and boring are two things we most certainly aren't. I honestly find it so so baffling how people can get into their heads that the two sides are even remotely similar. Nothing, nothing on this planet is the same as the utter shit Mcleish served up, nothing.

[StefanAVFC]

It wasn't just that. It was the fact that there was no signs of anything moving forward. We started off okay under McLeish and got worse and worse.

[MackHaakon]

I think our current problems on the pitch is down to the players (lack of) ability/ form compared to the opposition, more than the tactic Lambert and his staff try to implement.

 

It sounds obvious, but if our players were better, we would play better. Poor technical ability (compared to opposition) and lack of footballing intelligence can wreck even the best laid plans.

 

The players can develop and become better of course, as can team cohesiveness and understanding. We have a very young and inexperienced squad, and this has been Lamberts choice and strategy - which he has had to implement with limited finance.

 

And given our financial retraints, it's probably our best shot at becoming a real contender for the top positions in the long run. I think our chance is that several players reach their peaks at approx the same time, and have played together for a period of time to develop a good understanding on the pitch. That would make us less vulnerable to the inevitable sale of the occasional "star player".

[Ulver]

 

 

So we could come 8th (which is mid table) and you'd want him gone? Completely wacko logic.

 

 

Back to this, don't forget we came 9th under Houllier and MANY wanted him out before he walked (or was pushed)

 

 

So their insanity validates yours?  Interesting argument.  

 

You have made several outlandish and unsubstantiated claims the last couple posts.  Let's examine a few in your trademarked fashion.

 

1. It has not only been "established" that we will not bring any bigger players - it hasn't - but also that Randy will pocket most of the money from the sale of the bigger players.  Exactly where has that been established?  Almost all the Young/Milner/Downing money was spent.  It was not spent well, but it was spent. 

 

2. Lambert chose to buy 16 players instead of 5.  I do not know if you are aware, but you need more than 11 players at a football club.  It would be nice if we could turn the injury setting to off in real life.

 

3. You have "plenty of patience?" You are demanding a kind of football that takes years to develop and that we have not played at Villa Park for quite some time.  People conveniently forget the type of football they are moaning about right now is the exact football that propelled us to sixth under MON.  In 09/10 we only had 47% possession on average and had an even more dire 72.4% pass success rate.  You cannot change that culture overnight with no money.  It just cannot be done.

 

4. Lambert has shown "very few signs he has the capability or nous" to improve the football?  I would refer you to the end of last season.  We can all act like it did not happen if we want, but we saw what this team can be we it is all working correctly.  It just has not worked correctly yet this season. 

 

 

 

1. we've sold players for big money, spent a bit/sat on the rest then spent it during a later transfer window making it look like we've invested new money into the side rather than just put back in what came in from sales. FACT

 

2. we had plenty of players, he decided he didn't want/need them. that is NOT the same as HAVING to rebuild a side from scratch is it ?

 

3. rubbish. Martinez for one has changed the way Everton play within 4 months! nevermind one and a half seasons. i'm still not sure Lambert knows what style of football he wants us to play. hence him seemingly buying players randomly that even his supporters now claim maybe aren't good enough to play better football. and by better i mean at the very basic level of being able to keep possession of the ball, not turn into Brazil '82

 

4. the end of last season was a huge improvement on the start/middle. but don't pretend it was some sort of footballing masterclass  and surely the worry for you is how it's now gone backwards to the previous caveman style of slop

I want to disagree with Ulver, but I can't as he's named after one of the greatest bands ever 

 

Noted.

[Skruff]

 

Souless and boring are two things we most certainly aren't. I honestly find it so so baffling how people can get into their heads that the two sides are even remotely similar. Nothing, nothing on this planet is the same as the utter shit Mcleish served up, nothing.

 

Soulless was a clumsy choice of wording as I'm far more affectionate towards our current team, and they show a lot more of passion and fighting spirit. I think "look out of ideas" would be more suiting in hindsight. 

But we're painfully dire to watch except for the goals we somehow manage to score away from home. If you can't see the similarities to how we looked under McLeish to how we've looked so far during _this season_ would you mind explaining the differences? I'm mainly thinking about our defensive setup, 5 defenders, 3 rather defensive midfielders who sit very deep, strikers isolated, not being able to string passes together, the amount of hoofing, low possession and few chances created.

Edited December 7, 2013 by Skruff

[Ulver]

How can anyone claim with a straight face that we can't be BORING ?

 

Were you at any of the recent home games ? West Ham away with our 8-0-2 formation ?

 

I've had more enjoyment at a pantomime

[StefanAVFC]

After the last few years, I'd rather have a boring, unremarkable season and have no relegation drama. Just for once.

[romavillan]

How can anyone claim with a straight face that we can't be BORING ?

 

Were you at any of the recent home games ? West Ham away with our 8-0-2 formation ?

 

I've had more enjoyment at a pantomime

 

 

oh no you haven't

Edited December 7, 2013 by romavillan

[Morpheus]

Slightly off topic but when we faced Birmingham with Mcleish as their manager i don't recall them being as defensive as we were under him? 

[Raymond]

 

 

 

So we could come 8th (which is mid table) and you'd want him gone? Completely wacko logic.

 

 

Back to this, don't forget we came 9th under Houllier and MANY wanted him out before he walked (or was pushed)

 

 

So their insanity validates yours?  Interesting argument.  

 

You have made several outlandish and unsubstantiated claims the last couple posts.  Let's examine a few in your trademarked fashion.

 

1. It has not only been "established" that we will not bring any bigger players - it hasn't - but also that Randy will pocket most of the money from the sale of the bigger players.  Exactly where has that been established?  Almost all the Young/Milner/Downing money was spent.  It was not spent well, but it was spent. 

 

2. Lambert chose to buy 16 players instead of 5.  I do not know if you are aware, but you need more than 11 players at a football club.  It would be nice if we could turn the injury setting to off in real life.

 

3. You have "plenty of patience?" You are demanding a kind of football that takes years to develop and that we have not played at Villa Park for quite some time.  People conveniently forget the type of football they are moaning about right now is the exact football that propelled us to sixth under MON.  In 09/10 we only had 47% possession on average and had an even more dire 72.4% pass success rate.  You cannot change that culture overnight with no money.  It just cannot be done.

 

4. Lambert has shown "very few signs he has the capability or nous" to improve the football?  I would refer you to the end of last season.  We can all act like it did not happen if we want, but we saw what this team can be we it is all working correctly.  It just has not worked correctly yet this season. 

 

 

 

1. we've sold players for big money, spent a bit/sat on the rest then spent it during a later transfer window making it look like we've invested new money into the side rather than just put back in what came in from sales. FACT

 

2. we had plenty of players, he decided he didn't want/need them. that is NOT the same as HAVING to rebuild a side from scratch is it ?

 

3. rubbish. Martinez for one has changed the way Everton play within 4 months! nevermind one and a half seasons. i'm still not sure Lambert knows what style of football he wants us to play. hence him seemingly buying players randomly that even his supporters now claim maybe aren't good enough to play better football. and by better i mean at the very basic level of being able to keep possession of the ball, not turn into Brazil '82

 

4. the end of last season was a huge improvement on the start/middle. but don't pretend it was some sort of footballing masterclass  and surely the worry for you is how it's now gone backwards to the previous caveman style of slop

I want to disagree with Ulver, but I can't as he's named after one of the greatest bands ever 

 

Noted.

 

 

1. How is that "Randy pocketing the money" then?

 

2. Where did these plenty of players go?  We only lost four first team players before last season, and we were still struggling over the Christmas period to field a squad.

 

3.Everton have 3% more possession this season than last.  What a monumental difference.  We should of course completely disregard the ten years of thoughtful squad building that occurred before Martinez arrived at Everton because it, obviously, gets in the way of your ridiculous argument. We should also disregard the fact that they spent 22 million on McCarthy and Kone alone and had the wages to pay Barry and Lukaku.  Why would we want facts to get in the way?

 

4.I never said i was not worried.  You have just taken it to a ridiculous level and used nonsense to support your "argument." 

[TRO]

Ulver

 

What you are saying, can't be dismissed as a the rantings of a madman...you make some interesting points and ones to ponder.

 

The football is boring particularly at home for the obvious reason that the onus should be on us to take the game to them and many cases it is contrary.

 

The away style is a lesser case as counter-attacking is a customary style to play, subsequently possession is less expected.

 

Your case, is going to be more difficult to argue, when you get superb wins against Arsenal, Southampton and an away style win at home against Man City.

 

while PL is getting results, we have to let him get on with it....He has come out in the Birmingham Mail tonight and "turned his nose up" at some of the possession arguments...I guess he has to protect his staff and himself.

 

Unfortunately, you can't say what you want when you want to say it....to get an agreeing audience, timing is essential...that's not to say I want to see us fall on our arse to prove a point. far from it.

 

Right now, Results like the one at St Mary's will allow criticise to fall on deaf ears....only when, we are losing consistently and playing boring football, will anyone listen, sad, but true.

 

I can't speak for you, but my stance possession is similar to yours, but that to one side, my feelings of that result had left me ecstatic.

 

 

Ps  they could play 1-10 for me if they won every game and entertained me.

[TRO]

I am still behind Paul Lambert and do feel we need to let him get on with the JOB.

 

However, if he fails/avoids to address the issue of winning with a bit of swagger/possession in the medium to long term...He will end up with a similar fate to Tony Pulis.

 

I have no opinion, either way, unless I had the privilege to listen to him personally at close quarters, I will have to form my opinion, based on what I see and scrapes that I hear.

 

If we are still having the same conversation in 4 years of his stewardship assuming he has been given money and spent it and results wise we are still mediocre....and we still can't keep control of the ball or pass it... I guess he will have a bit of answering to do and his reaction to possession in the Birmingham Mail may not have the same authority about it.

[Mantis]

People need some patience IMO. It's a long term project.

[Big_John_10]

People need some patience IMO. It's a long term project.

Yet you didn't think that way last year.

[Raymond]

People need some patience IMO. It's a long term project.

Yet you didn't think that way last year.

And saw the error of his ways? People can change opinions. It is called growth. You should attempt it sometime.

[P3te]

 

1. we've sold players for big money, spent a bit/sat on the rest then spent it during a later transfer window making it look like we've invested new money into the side rather than just put back in what came in from sales. FACT

Where do you think the money to pay the wages comes from? The money from sales was put into keeping the club afloat. There's more expense to a football club than transfer fees