Jump to content

Paul Lambert


Pilchard

Recommended Posts

I know you can't read too much into these things, but these are the win percentages of our last 4 managers. Quite interesting to see:

Martin O'Neill 42.1%

Gerard Houllier 38.89%

He Who Must Not Be Named 21.43%

Paul Lambert 31.25%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't remember draws being viewed as such a success last year. Wasn't it a big part of us having such a low points total?

It was and to be fair I get the point you are making.

A few point though I would raise in retort;

1. There is a vast difference from playing for a draw as we did most of last season and being happy when you get one from a potentially awkward away game.

2. I think any result needs to be viewed in context. In the circumstances of Saturdays game a point isn't a great result but it is a decent result. Had we drawn with Reading at home the other night people wouldn't have viewed a draw in the same way.

3. A draw away from home in the PL when you are struggling for points shouldn't really be seen as a bad result unless you are at the stage of the season when a win is essential. We aren't at that stage.

4. Yes too many draws were in part responsible for our low points total last season, they may well be this season. But having taken 5 points from Arsenal, Reading and QPR (especially in the circumstances) I personally don't think that is grounds for complaint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't remember draws being viewed as such a success last year. Wasn't it a big part of us having such a low points total?

One could argue that we drew jsust enough games to stay up...... however, we arent drawing as much this year are we? Can you not see a draw as being a good result sometimes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we really debating whether Alex nil nil draw mcgraw is a better manager than disco lambo?

No I don't think anyone thinks that, if anyone does feel free to say.....

I think the point people are driving at is that last season people (myself included) were calling for McLeish's head at this stage of the season yet we are worse off points wise this season yet people aren't attacking Lambert and to some extent are defending him (again myself included).

I can see what some are getting at, I can appreciate their points of view I just don't personally agree with them even if the points total supports their stance.

It has nothing to do with where McLeish came from either, there are just a number of reasons why I view their respective tenures at this stage very differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I don't think anyone thinks that, if anyone does feel free to say.....

I think the point people are driving at is that last season people (myself included) were calling for McLeish's head at this stage of the season yet we are worse off points wise this season yet people aren't attacking Lambert and to some extent are defending him (again myself included).

I can see what some are getting at, I can appreciate their points of view I just don't personally agree with them even if the points total supports their stance.

It has nothing to do with where McLeish came from either, there are just a number of reasons why I view their respective tenures at this stage very differently.

Is it because their respective tenures are entirely different? :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed again Trent. It was obvious what McLeish wast about from the beginning - dire, negative hoofball. Same old failed transfer policy of buying overrated players from the Premier League for big fees and sticking them on lucrative contracts. The approach that favours experience. If you were experienced in a McLeish team you would have a place regardless of how good you were actually playing. Lambert is very different from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree but it runs deeper than that for me.

It is their whole respective approaches, I certainly prefer Lambert's transfer policy compared to McLeish's. I said that Given, Jenas, Hutton and N'Zogbia were bad signings at the time and so it proved and it was to me at least obvious that they would fail. The jury is out on Lambert's but at least there is a possibility they will be better for the club in the long term as well as the short.

It is more than just the signings though, it is the entire ethos and mentality of the two that is in great contrast. For instance we tried to beat Man Utd compared to the abomination that was our approach away at Spurs last season.

Yes we are on less points than last season but overall I'm happier with the direction we are heading or trying to head. We are a club trying to improve again rather than one simply trying to survive.

Sometimes you go backwards to go forward, perhaps that is the case in terms of our current points or perhaps we've just had harder fixtures who knows.

I just know I've more faith, belief, hope, expectation for the remainder of the season and beyond than I did this time last season.

I don't think anyone thinks Lambert is doing a remarkable job, far from it but a few odd decisions apart such as Bannan in midfield against Fellaini I'm struggling to be overly critical of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed again Trent. It was obvious what McLeish wast about from the beginning - dire, negative hoofball. Same old failed transfer policy of buying overrated players from the Premier League for big fees and sticking them on lucrative contracts. The approach that favours experience. If you were experienced in a McLeish team you would have a place regardless of how good you were actually playing. Lambert is very different from that.

The thing is, amc didn't at all set us like like that at the start, if you look back at our first 7 games yes we were hard to beat and break down but we also hit on the counter and tried to win games, it was onlywhen city beat us and we lost a few games that he decided to switch from the 4231 formation to the 451 that nearly took us down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A point away from home when youre at this end of the table is almost always a good result. Under the circumstances, first home game for their new manager and the crowd really being up for it, the second half battering we took, I think a draw is a really good result under those circumstances. Many people on here were predicting we'd get mullahed so presumably those people are very happy with the draw? I also dont think the performance was *that* bad, first half it was pretty decent - its the first half of football we've had more than 50^ possession away form home all season I'd imagine.Second half, yeah we were outplayed, but, and its a MASSIVE but, we didnt concede, and even as recently as a couple of weeks ago we'd have crumbled under that kind of pressure. We have needed all season to start getting better at holding onto things, and the last 3 games we have shown real progress in that department. So there are positives to be found. We are getting there. The kids are adjusting to the League, we are getting harder to beat, our second halfs are improving. Yes, we need to get better, of course we do, but we are showing signs that we are doing exactly that

Some sense at last

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, amc didn't at all set us like like that at the start, if you look back at our first 7 games yes we were hard to beat and break down but we also hit on the counter and tried to win games, it was onlywhen city beat us and we lost a few games that he decided to switch from the 4231 formation to the 451 that nearly took us down.

I disagree. We were still negative even before the City game. Two of his first three games were 0-0s.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. We were still negative even before the City game. Two of his first three games were 0-0s.

I said we were hard to break down which was evident in our opening results but there was a definate downgrade in how we played after we lost a couple of games, we went from a formation set up to hit on the break to a team set up just not to lose which is why he failed miserablely here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of old toss!

I've never sat in amongst a group of fans who didn't discuss transfers and who they would like to see in their respective teams.

That explains a lot about you. If you have spent years with people doing that I see why you do it all the time on here.

As for it being toss - I can state as a matter of actual fact that in many years of going to football I have never had that conversation.

As I said, people with vastly inferior knowledge of all the factors I stated whineing or whinging that we don't have such and such a player is not debate, it is mindless tedious prattling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you can't read too much into these things, but these are the win percentages of our last 4 managers. Quite interesting to see:

Martin O'Neill 42.1%

Gerard Houllier 38.89%

He Who Must Not Be Named 21.43%

Paul Lambert 31.25%

In all seriousness, Lambert's figure can't be considered reliable given such a small sample size

I'm confident that over time Lambert will better all of those named

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â