Con Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 (edited) Being half scottish I have been a supporter of Bannan for a while. However, I have come to think this year that he is missing the pace needed to make up for his stature. I'm just saying this because I have read your posts (and I want to say this with it understood I would love it if Bannan did well) but the only logical explanation for your stance is that you're his mother or his gran or something. Bannan was not superb against Bradford. I had him down as a massive weak link in that game. He gave the ball away numerous times and was a non-entity in midfield. How can you say anyone was superb against Bradford? It was a terrible game. If the strikers scored three of 5 good chances, and he had bagged three assists, would you say he had a superb game? I think so. Bannan doing well is important because it means we are attacking. Bannan is an attacking player, I want an attacking team, so I want Bannan to play. When Lambert doesn't play Bannan I feel he is being too defensive. Bannan is mainly a home game player, where we want to take the game to the opposition. Away from home, there is less need if we have Agbonlahor and N'Zogbia who give us a counter-attack option. If not, we need to play Bannan - or someone like him - at away games too, in order to create enough chances to win. With Agbonlahor and N'Zog the sit back and counter-attack becomes a strategy. Technical playmakers are also extremely expensive to buy. If we don't bring one through our youth system then we're never going to get one worth having. Bannan has an important role in the future of the squad IMO. Lambert hasn't started him recently but I now think that is much to do with the return of Agbonlahor and N'Zog which enables the sit-back and counter-attack strategy. Edited January 20, 2013 by Con Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted January 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted January 20, 2013 When Lambert doesn't play Bannan I feel he is being too defensive. Yet you say Lambert got it wrong bringing Bannan on against WBA because we needed a defensive midfielder.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 (edited) The 'Paul Lambert' thread now merged with the 'Barry Bannan' thread and even the Mods are joining in the confusion! Edited January 20, 2013 by pacbuddies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 The 'Paul Lambert' thread now merged with the 'Barry Bannan' thread and even the Mods are joining in the confusion! Lambert is public enemy number 1 and Bannan is his accomplice. It's a valid merge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaGoMarching Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 As a manager, you get judged on the players you buy, and what you do with the players you have inherited. For me, yday proved 2 points.PL is a good manager, and the "academy" players aren't quite good enough. Benteke, is as good a foward as i've seen at VP, and he cost £7m, absolute bargain.On top of that Westwood looks a very prospect, what a pass for the 2nd goal, and Ron Vlaar looks a snip at £3m.Bennett will prove to be a bargain, and Lowton, will be at the least , a good squad player.So that's HIS signings. N'Zog, had probably his best game yday, playing as a floating player behind Benteke, and has shown a good attitude since coming back.good management, or coincidence? Gabby has shown hes a good squad player at the least, Weimann has developed into a 1st teamer.Guzan has been given a chance, and his performances have justified it, again good management. We are not far off. Great analysis, agree with a lot of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 He cost £2m so he didn't blow the budget on him, you do post some utter crap. Had he done so I think he might have signed another midfielder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted January 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted January 20, 2013 The 'Paul Lambert' thread now merged with the 'Barry Bannan' thread and even the Mods are joining in the confusion! You appear to be the only one confused. I'm discussing a decision by Lambert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 You appear to be the only one confused. I'm discussing a decision by Lambert. I was never confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaGoMarching Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I think Lamberts decision to play Bannan is related to TINA. Saying that, after the Wigan game he seems to have no faith in Stephen Ireland now, in any capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Why why why why why did he take off N'Zog??? Gabby was completely toothless second half and squandered a chance to play in N'Zog to kill the game off. Why did you take off N'Zog, Lambert? It beggars belief... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Why why why why why did he take off N'Zog??? Gabby was completely toothless second half and squandered a chance to play in N'Zog to kill the game off. Why did you take off N'Zog, Lambert? It beggars belief... Maybe he was knackered since he's only come back to being match fit recently? Maybe he thought it was job done and he wanted to keep him fresh for other games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Maybe he was knackered since he's only come back to being match fit recently? Maybe he thought it was job done and he wanted to keep him fresh for other games? Or maybe he **** up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Or maybe he **** up! What do you think went through his mind when he took him off? Do you reckon it was one of the two things I suggested, or do you reckon it was "I'll take Charlie off now so that we can fall apart and throw away points"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Maybe he thought it was job done He or the players should NEVER think this in our position until the full time whistle has gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 (edited) What do you think went through his mind when he took him off? Do you reckon it was one of the two things I suggested, or do you reckon it was "I'll take Charlie off now so that we can fall apart and throw away points"? Making a poor decision doesn't have to be a deliberate act of sabotage as you suggest it just means he made a poor decision. The sort of poor decision that should not be made by a manager with his alleged level of competence and ability. Granted everyone makes mistakes but this decision was wrong as a league game against Albion is far more important than a 2nd leg home semi final against a team from League 2. Edited January 20, 2013 by pacbuddies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Yet you say Lambert got it wrong bringing Bannan on against WBA because we needed a defensive midfielder.... Yes, I want our team to play attacking football to win matches. But I do recognise different circumstances call for different tactics. We were 1 - 2 up away from home from two counter-attacking goals and had just gone a goal down at the start of the second half. In this situation do you weaken your side defensively to make it stronger offensively? I would not. I would weaken defensively to make stronger offensively 1. at home in starting line up when we have the advantage of the crowd 2. always against weaker teams 3. when the score is a draw so that we can push for the win 4. when we need to chase the game because we are behind. 5. when we are 2 goals or more up, not many minutes remaining, and we want to rest players/give subs a run out I would never ever weaken the team defensively to make stronger offensively 1. Against a team that had just got a goal back against us while we are still winning by 1 goal. This is what Lambert just did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Making a poor decision doesn't have to be a deliberate act of sabotage as you suggest it just means he made a poor decision. The sort of poor decision that should not be made by a manager with his alleged level of competence and ability. Granted everyone makes mistakes but this decision was wrong as a league game against Albion is far more important than a 2nd leg home semi final against a team from League 2. If he thought NZogbia was too tired to continue do you not think that he was right to take him off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 If he thought NZogbia was too tired to continue do you not think that he was right to take him off? Forgive me while I weep but running around a football pitch for an hour or so (and even then he would spend plenty of time walking) should not, no I'll go as far as to say will not, tire out a fit Premier League footballer in his 20's. To suggest otherwise is really being naive to the extreme. These players have the best fitness and medical attention that a PL club can buy and they are kept at the peak of physical fitness (unless injured of course) so I cannot agree with you even slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted January 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted January 20, 2013 I would weaken defensively to make stronger offensively I would never ever weaken the team defensively to make stronger offensively Now you are contradicting yourself within the same post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo69 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 (edited) I can't believe there are several pages discussing Lamberts substitutions from yesterday's game. There are much bigger issues than a couple of in game decisions that we have no idea whether would or wouldnt have had a bearing on the scoreline. If this is the biggest thing we can find to moan about maybe Lambert isn't doing so bad after all. Edited January 20, 2013 by Amo69 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts