Manager Paul Lambert

[villaglint]

I think I am quite close to Richard on this -

 

PL has made mistakes (plenty) this season but getting rid of him isn't going to help. Probably only hinder.

 

If Randy cant see that the squad needs strengthening then god help us. So we haven't got a pot to piss in - so what - they are plenty of players with experience who are free transfers, low wages, loans, whatever it takes to steady the ship.

 

When the standard is so low we don't need to sign Vincent Kompany - to be honest I am struggling to think of many players who wouldn't be a step up from playing Herd or Lowton at centre back.

 

 

---

 

 

One thing I am really struggling with though and not sure if anyone can shed any light on it for me.

 

In my eyes our set piece defending has been diabolical now for three consecutive years.

 

That's three different managers and a range of completely different players.

 

The only common thread is they all represent Aston Villa and they are all garbage at defending set pieces.

[VillaForever1970]

Did he blank Kendrick today ?

No, so everyone can reign in insults they had ready for that...

[VillaCas]

Where the main critique on Lambert is coming from now 'VillaCas' is that he has made a bad situation worse by trying to do too much on a limited budget and not actually supplementing what he already had at the club.

 

He has also compounded that mistake by asking the players to play a system which they are currently not good enough to play.

 

The vast majority of posters realise that Lambert inherited a mess but what you seemingly refuse to acknowledge is that after spending 20m we are actually worse than last season which is substantiated by our current standing in the league and a horrendous run of results.

 

Our second half performances would also suggest that there is a lack of motivation and fight within the team and although you may be able to defend Lambert somewhat on the former points i have made, you certainly can't defend him on the latter. 

 

Morpheus - I appreciate your comments and think that we have a lot of common ground. In truth, I probably do go a little overboard in my support of Lambert (no shit Sherlock) to counter some of the very negative posters on here, many of whom have a negative comment on every thread, about every player

 

Lambert has admittedly made some mistakes, I won't list them again because they have been done to death, but I think for many of the key criticisms there are extenuating circumstances.

 

I think Lambert over-estimated the "talent" that he had at the club - I think he believed that he could get more out of the youngsters and much much more out of the experienced players. Call that his error, but for me that says more about previous managers than it does about PL.

 

I think Lambert signed up to a plan that didn't include Warnock, Collins, Hutton etc and his subsequent actions were a response to that. I also don't think that we would be better with them in the team and we would not be addressing the wage issue

 

I think that Lambert knew that Bent had to be sold and so bought Benteke and built the side to try and work to his strengths. I know many moan about the lack of width but the current trend in football is to play more narrowly and I think for us to try and play wingers without first having a midfield presence to win the ball would have been worse than what we are currently trying

 

I think Lambert knowing that the squad was going to lose players, had to bring in a quite a few within extremely tight budget considerations. For the cost of say Adam, he bought in 6 or 7 new young players. Most of those have been good VFM and those who have not played well yet (Bennett and KEA) still have time to come good. I have sympathy in particular for Bennett who has had little alongside or in front of him and has had to be blooded in a struggling side - with confidence I think he will grow into a well-regarded player

 

I, like many, wonder why Lambert didn't sign a CB or DCM in tthe summer - only PL himself knows the answer to that. Maybe he thought Dunne would be back much sooner (originally he was out for 4 weeks), maybe he thought Baker and Clark were better than they were, maybe he thought we could get through to Janauary when perhaps a better target was available. Probably in hindsight PL would do differently but at the time maybe circumstances meant a gamble was worthwhile

 

Lambert wasn't my first choice - I would have gone for OGS or Poyet because I knew that we need someone who, given the constraints, would take a radical approach and identify lower league or little known foriegn players. That said I think Lambert fits that bill too. In my view, managers like Benetiez or Redknapp would struggle with the budget problems. People asking for Hughes must have forgotten that he spent a fortune taking QPR to the bottom of the Premier League

 

I thought that running up to the Liverpool game we were looking a little better each time out and my expectation was that with more investment in January we would climb to a comfortable mid-table position. That's not going to be the case now - the wheels came off at Chelsea and the ensuant loss of form shows how fragile our confidence is right now

 

Lambert is not perfect - far from it, but he would have had to be spot on, 100% perfect to be doing much better than we are at the moment. When you see teams like QPR, Newcastle and even Reading improving their squads whilst we do nothing it shows that PL has a tougher job than many of us thought. He is very tactiturn and far from the most engaging man and many jump on this as a further stick to beat him with. Personally, I think that he is a very decent guy - he could easily pass most of the blame to the players or to the board or moan constantly about lack of resources but instead I see a man who is giving absolutely everything to move us forward. I admire him for that

 

People who pay good money to turn up a VP are entitled to voice their concerns, absolutely. I think some criticisms are reasoned and constructive but much is destructive, abusive, ill-thought through and in my view undermines what we are trying to do.

 

Lambert is here for a while yet. I hope he is here for years, because that will mean that he has been successful. If we stick with him now, I beleive he can build a side capable of challenging towards the top of the table consistently. It's a shame RL won't loosen the strings to bring in a couple of new faces to help but I live in hope

 

 

I'm sure it would be easy for some to pick the odd line or comment out of the above and criticise but that is the way I see it and I won't be changing my mind on that for a while yet. It might seem like excuses for Lambert but I personally think of them as probable reasons for what has gone on so far.

 

VTID

[drat01]

all we are hearing now whenever anyone question's Lambert is that he has to be given money. A phrase that used to be in football a lot was a "cheque book manager", is that what Lambert basically is then? So he is useless at his job unless he has massive funds given to him?

 

Or is the reality that he is basically useless at his job, end of.

[SquaddieVilla]

Well shock horror, Lambert is still in a job and no players have come in and it is 3.5 days to go before our season goes from bad to worse.

This squad is so low on confidence and ideas that i cannot see us getting 30 points let alone 36. Presently we have not even managed an average of 1 point a game, so going on that, we could maybe manage 32 points if lucky.

If we do not beat Newcastle on tueday night we could be looking at 19th place come Weds night.

Then a trip to Everton leaving us 13 games to get sufficient points to stay up.

I really hope we do beat Newcastle as they have had low confidence lately, but look at the players they have signed, hopefully they will not gel to quickly.............hope, pray, etc.

PL has got to get someone in to instill some sort of confidence.

[Big_John_10]

He finished 15th, 7th and 17th in his first three seasons - very many Everton fans wanted him gone. Ask them today and they are all glad that the board didn't respond to there knee-jerk reactions

 

Lambert has shown elsewhere that he can deliver a decent side and good football under the kind of budget any Villa manager will need to work with going forward.

 

I'm not going to continue the same circular argument about signings, tactics, Bent etc etc. Instead I'm going to watch what happens during the rest of the season and get behind my team and manager and hope that they can get us out of the mess that three years of financial and sporting mis-management have landed us in

Moyes joined Everton in march of the year they finished 15th.

His first proper season in charge he took them into 7th place.

[Shillzz]

 

BBC Sport's Pat Murphy at Aston Villa's news conference ahead of Tuesday's home game to Newcastle United: "Paul Lambert says the message from Aston Villa's owner Randy Lerner is 'keep on fighting'. Lambert said he had another supportive, encouraging phone call from Lerner after Friday's FA Cup exit at Millwall."

 

 

So, this is about villa not you Paul

 

I never said it was about me! 

Edited January 28, 2013 by Shillzz

[Big_John_10]

No, so everyone can reign in insults they had ready for that...

Like maybe calling someone a bit of a tit?

That kind of insult you mean?

[MagicMushroom]

all we are hearing now whenever anyone question's Lambert is that he has to be given money. A phrase that used to be in football a lot was a "cheque book manager", is that what Lambert basically is then? So he is useless at his job unless he has massive funds given to him?

 

Or is the reality that he is basically useless at his job, end of.

 

 

 

The squad is shit. It was shit when he came and its shit now. Jesus Christ couldent do anything with this lot!

 

The only beef i have with Lambert, is bringing in to many young and inexperienced faces in one go. That now seems to have been a big risk that has backfired big time.

 

However, we dont know under what remit he was told to work with when he accepted the job. I guess he was told more cash would be available in January to enable him to bring in experience. I imagine he was told he could use the Bent money when sold. Since then, things have changed, and hes being hung out to dry without a word coming out of the useless fools making the decisions.

 

Lambert has made mistakes, but the buck stops with the owner for me.

Edited January 28, 2013 by MagicMushroom

[peterms]

all we are hearing now whenever anyone question's Lambert is that he has to be given money. A phrase that used to be in football a lot was a "cheque book manager", is that what Lambert basically is then? So he is useless at his job unless he has massive funds given to him?

 

Or is the reality that he is basically useless at his job, end of.

 

That's quite a misrepresentation, Ian.

 

I think we all know, don't we, that his brief was to bring about a big turnover in the squad, in order to bring the wage bill down.

 

Necessarily, that means letting some players go, and trying to loan out others if there's no-one looking to buy them.

 

It also means that the manager has to be given money to buy replacements, unless someone is going to turn up like the fairy godmother and take people like Bent and Ireland off our hands for megabucks.

 

"Chequebook manager" to me means someone whose approach is entirely dependent on buying expensive stars who can come in and perform from day one.  Lambert's approach has been to look for bargains, people who won't command big wages and whose fees won't use up all the transfer budget.  In the summer, he did well at that, in my view.  His biggest buy is now worth perhaps twice what we paid, and the rest represent a respectable effort at filling a lot of positions for not a great outlay.

 

But several of the underperforming high earners remain, and it looks as though it will be hard to shift them.  It also seems that there is less money for fees and wages than Lambert thought, from his interview last week, where he said he knows the fees and wages the club has in mind, but having made several approaches to teams and players, the cost was too high - so either the clubs and players were asking far more than he expected, or else the willingness to spend is less than he thought.

 

He's been given a challenging task, which it seems the board are making harder than it need be.  I think it would be good if there was a bit more recognition of that.

[MagicMushroom]

That's quite a misrepresentation, Ian.

 

I think we all know, don't we, that his brief was to bring about a big turnover in the squad, in order to bring the wage bill down.

 

Necessarily, that means letting some players go, and trying to loan out others if there's no-one looking to buy them.

 

It also means that the manager has to be given money to buy replacements, unless someone is going to turn up like the fairy godmother and take people like Bent and Ireland off our hands for megabucks.

 

"Chequebook manager" to me means someone whose approach is entirely dependent on buying expensive stars who can come in and perform from day one.  Lambert's approach has been to look for bargains, people who won't command big wages and whose fees won't use up all the transfer budget.  In the summer, he did well at that, in my view.  His biggest buy is now worth perhaps twice what we paid, and the rest represent a respectable effort at filling a lot of positions for not a great outlay.

 

But several of the underperforming high earners remain, and it looks as though it will be hard to shift them.  It also seems that there is less money for fees and wages than Lambert thought, from his interview last week, where he said he knows the fees and wages the club has in mind, but having made several approaches to teams and players, the cost was too high - so either the clubs and players were asking far more than he expected, or else the willingness to spend is less than he thought.

 

He's been given a challenging task, which it seems the board are making harder than it need be.  I think it would be good if there was a bit more recognition of that.

 

 

 

 

100% this.

[Richard]

That's quite a misrepresentation, Ian.

 

I think we all know, don't we, that his brief was to bring about a big turnover in the squad, in order to bring the wage bill down.

 

Necessarily, that means letting some players go, and trying to loan out others if there's no-one looking to buy them.

 

It also means that the manager has to be given money to buy replacements, unless someone is going to turn up like the fairy godmother and take people like Bent and Ireland off our hands for megabucks.

 

"Chequebook manager" to me means someone whose approach is entirely dependent on buying expensive stars who can come in and perform from day one.  Lambert's approach has been to look for bargains, people who won't command big wages and whose fees won't use up all the transfer budget.  In the summer, he did well at that, in my view.  His biggest buy is now worth perhaps twice what we paid, and the rest represent a respectable effort at filling a lot of positions for not a great outlay.

 

But several of the underperforming high earners remain, and it looks as though it will be hard to shift them.  It also seems that there is less money for fees and wages than Lambert thought, from his interview last week, where he said he knows the fees and wages the club has in mind, but having made several approaches to teams and players, the cost was too high - so either the clubs and players were asking far more than he expected, or else the willingness to spend is less than he thought.

 

He's been given a challenging task, which it seems the board are making harder than it need be.  I think it would be good if there was a bit more recognition of that.

Again agree with that,  football posts it seems are more encouraging for us

 

On your last line,  this really comes down to a point I have made a few times.  I think for me the big frustration with regards to some reactions to our manager is a failure to look at things on their own merits . It just seems that several sticks are used to beat him up with and that then means that no recognition of job difficulties or changes  can be made.  It does no favours at all to other criticisms that may even be justified. 

[drat01]

It's just all the confusion that surrounds the myth that is Lambert though Peter. A quick trawl through this and similar threads and those that defend him at any cost seem to indicate that given sufficient funds he would be doing brilliantly. The point is this, is Lambert not good enough to manage a side, improve them, stop the silly errors, make them adaptable for the circumstances - e.g. have a plan B, or does that only happen if he buys players?

 

We all know the job that Lerner et al are doing and the constraints that they are now imposing, the role of the manager, one that Lambert is constantly failing at, depends on many factors but most of all the ability to manage. There is little / no evidence that has the ability to do that faced with the challenges that Villa have at the moment. He looks, sounds and most likely is totally out of his depth and if people were to remove the Claret and Blue glasses just for a moment then they would realise that, IMO. I really do not feel confident that if he were given massive amounts of money that he could actually do the job required.

[peterms]

It's just all the confusion that surrounds the myth that is Lambert though Peter. A quick trawl through this and similar threads and those that defend him at any cost seem to indicate that given sufficient funds he would be doing brilliantly. The point is this, is Lambert not good enough to manage a side, improve them, stop the silly errors, make them adaptable for the circumstances - e.g. have a plan B, or does that only happen if he buys players?

 

We all know the job that Lerner et al are doing and the constraints that they are now imposing, the role of the manager, one that Lambert is constantly failing at, depends on many factors but most of all the ability to manage. There is little / no evidence that has the ability to do that faced with the challenges that Villa have at the moment. He looks, sounds and most likely is totally out of his depth and if people were to remove the Claret and Blue glasses just for a moment then they would realise that, IMO. I really do not feel confident that if he were given massive amounts of money that he could actually do the job required.

 

Perhaps, though I think it's more a case of wanting to see him get to the position where he can do the job.  At the moment he's not just steering the ship, he's also patching the holes, baling out the water, and trying to change the crew.

 

It would be good to see Lerner give him some money immediately, recognising that it will take longer than hoped to shift some of the unwanted players, and also front up some media stuff instead of acting like a pathologically shy person who's lost the power of speech.

[VillaCas]

 those that defend him at any cost seem to indicate that given sufficient funds he would be doing brilliantly. The point is this, is Lambert not good enough to manage a side, improve them, stop the silly errors, make them adaptable for the circumstances - e.g. have a plan B, or does that only happen if he buys players?

What a half-baked post!

 

- It would take £200m to be doing "brilliantly" - if by brilliantly you mean challenging for EC places perhaps

- 99% of fans and media would agree that we need further signings in January, so no Lambert has not been given "sufficient" funds

- Lambert was good enough to manage a bargain basement Norwich side to two promotions and mid-table in the Premier League on a shoestring, so he has not become a bad manager overnight

- Yes, he would be helped by more players. All he currently has are academy players, misfits and some good value bargains that he recruited himself

 

Lambert is a good manager trying to correct a very bad situation

[danceoftheshamen]

I agree with a lot of what villacas & drat 01 are saying here.

 

I too believe that Lambert arrived with the brief to lower wages which included not using Warnock, Hutton & one or 2 others etc. I wonder if Bent was also discussed & Lambert was told that he had "x" amount of games to decide whether he wanted to keep him or sell him to raise funds prior to us activating an "appearance clause" in his contract or something along those lines?

 

Regarding the 20m kitty he got, i think it is highly relevant that he had also lost the services of Cuellar, Collins, Heskey, Petrov & a few others. If you look at it he signed Vlaar, Lowton, Westwood, Benteke, Bennett & Bowery & had Holman already incoming through no choice of his own of course.

 

So really it was a case of trying to just replace the players we lost from last seasons squad.. something like this:

 

Warnock - - Bennett

Hutton - - Lowton

Collins - - Vlaar

Petrov - - KEA

Heskey - - Bowery?

Bent - -  Benteke??

 

Plus Holman, who was AMC's signing anyway & maybe Paul though he could be a back up option to Steven Ireland or something.

I guess he also thought that Clark & or Baker were sufficient to cover the departure of Cuellar

 

So i think he did pretty well to replace that lot with only 20m but to just stand still every one of those signings had to at least match the impact/performance level of the player he replaced & this was where it was a risky plan.

 

Sadly i feel Bennett has been no better than Warnock & indeed on form Warnock is surely better than what we have seen from Bennett or indeed Stevens & Lichaj. You can understand why Lambert would have thought he was well covered in that position though.

 

It is touch & go as to whether Vlaar has outperformed Collins & with Dunne being injured all season this has put too much pressure on Clark & Baker to cover him & Cuellar.

 

Dunne, Collins & Cuellar v Vlaar, Clark & Baker?

 

I do think Clark & Baker will be good players in time but they have been exposed for me this season.. & Kea is no Petrov yet either... so this for me is why we have been weaker than last season... A mixture of too much too soon & a bit of bad luck with injuries in key positions.. It is no coincidence that we are weak in defence & DCM primarily..

 

We needed KEA to work as Petrov was a very important player for us & captain don't forget. We also needed Dunne back being our only truly experienced premier League defender left.

 

So with Dunne hopefully coming back soon & Kea now back from ACN this will hopefully help for the run in. Our season could rest on how these two perform from now on in though i fear.

Edited January 28, 2013 by danceoftheshamen

[Grievemeister]

Moyes joined Everton in march of the year they finished 15th.

His first proper season in charge he took them into 7th place.

 

I can guaruntee that I know many Everton fans that wanted Moyes gone just a few seasons ago, saying is tactics were totally inept and the style of football is rubbish. 11 years on and this is his best squad, yes, its taken 11 years! Lambert for me is still the man, relegated or not, he will come good. The onus for me is the Chairman, Lambert needs a little help and Lerner has come out in the kindest way and said 'keep fighting'.

[VillaCas]

So really it was a case of trying to just replace the players we lost from last seasons squad.. something like this:

 

Warnock - - Bennett

Hutton - - Lowton

Collins - - Vlaar

Petrov - - KEA

Heskey - - Bowery?

Bent - -  Benteke??

Effectively replacing around £300k a week in wages with well less than £100k a week

Edited January 28, 2013 by VillaCas

[pacbuddies]

A low league finish is not the sole reason I've know changed my mind about Lambert.

If I was an Everton fan I would have looked at what the team where like before Moyes and looked at any improvements he'd made. I'd also be looking at the results, the way we played and the signings he made.

Didn't Everton have a good season under Moyes before those low finishes? Moyes had shown the fans something to give them hope that over time things would be good.

Everton are not owned by a bloke as rich as Lerner therefore the expectations of the fans for financially supporting the team would mirror that fact surely!

[brummybloke]

ooops wrong thread

Edited January 28, 2013 by brummybloke