peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I'm a journalist so cause I follow the news and alright then explain why he signs Dawkins instead of a CB?? Come again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Oh, right. We should have instructed Scharner to join us, and it would have happened, or any other target who took your eye. Play much computer football games? No. I was just stating that even though 'we couldn't afford a CB', there were affordable options out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Maybe it would have helped if he didn't sign kids that have the physical strength of a frail old woman. We're a pathetic defensive team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 And I know what's coming. 'We don't know what Wigan are paying him'. If we can't keep up with Wigan financially then we're even more screwed than we thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 If you've been following the news, you will know that he said he tried to sign more players but couldn't do so within budget. Explain why he signed Dawkins instead of a CB then?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz316 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Lambert is NOT the man no matter how much time he's give. The budget restraints would have been hard for any manager yes but the tactics, players used, player management and sibstution management has proved he is not up to it and is losing the plot. In games we are losing he throws everyone up front without reealising that any balls headed out of the box by the opposition will not fall to a villa man as they are all in the box already, this surrendering position, i.e Bradford (both legs) When winning he brings all his defenders on, plays far too deep and gives us no outlet to get out of trouble, even in games when we don't appear to be in too much trouble, hence giving up so many leads. Then theres the players he uses and where he uses them. He must use the smallest midfielders in the league and we are unable to win headers in the middle of the park, it also becomes a problem at corners as the lack of height is highlighted more. This is not a budget issue as Lambert has cleary preferred to use smaller players so far, Westwood, Bennett and Lowton are not big lads, he seems to prefer these smaller players. It may work in Spain with excellent, intelligent, athletic footballers but using tiny, nervous, weak players in the Premier League is a recipe for disaster, particularly in midfield. Im not big myself so wish it wasn't the case but you need big athletic men for the most part in your team, with the odd small flair player, you cannot have a team as weak and small as ours and expect to control play. His rotation is unbelieveable as well, have you noticed how some players seem to play one game then miss 3 or 4, then come back again for no reason. I know he seems to enjoy rotating the squad but when it's so obvious we play better with Weimann, Gabby etc on the pitch and with Bannan and Bennett no where near the team it would be great to see him stick with one team for a while and see how we get on. I actually miss the days of MON and the one team he played, at least they got time to learn each others styles and gel together. Finally, he has not recognised our faults, corners are still a problem and there is still no pattern to our play. He does not seem to recognise that Benteke and Bent would appreciate service from wings and Gabby showed that in the second half against Newcastle that it may be our only way to put the oppoisiiton on the back foot. He has also not noticed that he has an excellent footballer in Ciaren Clarke who can control a ball, pass, make space for himself, tackle and head a ball. Instead of realising we are lacking that type of player in the middle of the park he has decided to play him in a position he is clearly not comfortable in and has not worked. Baker is a better, more physical defender and with Clarke in front of them maybe even Bennett could cope as the pressure would certainly be eased by having such a good footballing player as a holding midfielder. Thats it really, I know moneys tight but that team could improve so much if Lambert had any sort of plan and recognised where we struggled. He hasn't been able to beat lower league opposition and that isn't down to money, it was the tactics he employed. That shows he isn't up to it and I DO NOT want him managing my team in this division or any other. I feel we are going to get relegated and Lambert will stay as the majority will say "he's the man to keep us up" He isn't and if we keep him we gone for a while, Curbishley would do a better job in the championship I guarantee you. This is hurting but I'm more worried about what happens next season because I think this MON lite will still be here and ruining us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 No. I was just stating that even though 'we couldn't afford a CB', there were affordable options out there. Yes, but they have to agree to come here. Lambert agreed some time ago that he wanted to strengthen a couple of key positions, I think including CB but definitely including defence; he said that we had made approaches; he said that the reason some approaches didn't work was because of transfer fees and wages. I take from that, that he tried to sign a CB, but couldn't get one at an affordable price whose club would let him go, who wanted to come here, and who would have been better than no signing. And since we had no idea that the two just signed were being pursued, it's a safe bet that other possible signings were also not known, despite the ITK bollocks. So yes, there possibly were affordable options, depending how you define affordable (ie affordable within the new wage structure, not "cheaper than the people they replace"); but despite the manager wanting to get someone in that position, and having the importance of that reinforced by Dunne's injury, it couldn't be achieved. I very much doubt it was for want of trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Explain why he signed Dawkins instead of a CB then?? I suppose he was following several possible signings, like all managers do, and that some worked and some didn't. I imagine the signings which are made don't always reflect a manager's prioritised wishlist, but will be the ones where a deal could be made to happen. And I don't imagine it was a case of choosing to sign Dawkins or a CB, and plumping for Dawkins instead of a CB. But if you think it was, then it would be interesting to hear why you think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Yes, but they have to agree to come here. Lambert agreed some time ago that he wanted to strengthen a couple of key positions, I think including CB but definitely including defence; he said that we had made approaches; he said that the reason some approaches didn't work was because of transfer fees and wages. I take from that, that he tried to sign a CB, but couldn't get one at an affordable price whose club would let him go, who wanted to come here, and who would have been better than no signing. And since we had no idea that the two just signed were being pursued, it's a safe bet that other possible signings were also not known, despite the ITK bollocks. So yes, there possibly were affordable options, depending how you define affordable (ie affordable within the new wage structure, not "cheaper than the people they replace"); but despite the manager wanting to get someone in that position, and having the importance of that reinforced by Dunne's injury, it couldn't be achieved. I very much doubt it was for want of trying. Then, and I might be being unreasonable, he didn't try bloody hard enough. He has a reputation of palming things off onto other people (Blaming the players for Newcastle, blaming the finances) so I don't know what to believe anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Explain why he signed Dawkins instead of a CB then?? dawkins is probably making about £4000 a week that probably explains it. i doubt it was dawkins OR a defender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I suppose he was following several possible signings, like all managers do, and that some worked and some didn't. I imagine the signings which are made don't always reflect a manager's prioritised wishlist, but will be the ones where a deal could be made to happen. And I don't imagine it was a case of choosing to sign Dawkins or a CB, and plumping for Dawkins instead of a CB. But if you think it was, then it would be interesting to hear why you think that. I honestly think it was Dawkins or a CB. My reasoning that Lambert hasn't got a clue as manager of this club. We are conceding goals left, right and centre and he decides to when knowing fully Dunne was injured again he had to sign a replacement experienced CB incase Vlaar got injured again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Then, and I might be being unreasonable, he didn't try bloody hard enough. He has a reputation of palming things off onto other people (Blaming the players for Newcastle, blaming the finances) so I don't know what to believe anymore. If he offers an honest assessment, it's "blaming others". If he doesn't, it's "spin and fantasy". I don't have a problem with the comments he's made, given that he has to say something in reply to what are often pretty stupid and repetitive questions. Yes, often the players have been at fault, and to make out that players failing to mark their man at corners is somehow to do with coaching is just nonsense. And there are strict financial limits in place. Should he pretend otherwise, and let it be disclosed by players and agents, or be up front and honest about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I honestly think it was Dawkins or a CB. My reasoning that Lambert hasn't got a clue as manager of this club. We are conceding goals left, right and centre and he decides to when knowing fully Dunne was injured again he had to sign a replacement experienced CB incase Vlaar got injured again. So you think he had a choice between Dawkins and a CB, and your evidence for this is your opinion that he's not a good manager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 If he offers an honest assessment, it's "blaming others". If he doesn't, it's "spin and fantasy". I don't have a problem with the comments he's made, given that he has to say something in reply to what are often pretty stupid and repetitive questions. Yes, often the players have been at fault, and to make out that players failing to mark their man at corners is somehow to do with coaching is just nonsense. And there are strict financial limits in place. Should he pretend otherwise, and let it be disclosed by players and agents, or be up front and honest about it? Tuesday night was not honest. He straight up said 'it wasn't the system', when it 100% was. Every man and his dog could see that. We changed system and played well. He refuses to talk to journalists, he tonight answered petulantly again. He is a stubborn, arrogant fool so it's not that wild to think that after his squad quality being questioned, he's sticking with it. He could have got a CB in. I'm sorry, he just could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 So you think he had a choice between Dawkins and a CB, and your evidence for this is your opinion that he's not a good manager? Well I've just said it about 4 times so yes I do think it was, showing how clueless Lambert is as our manager signing something other than a CB which we obviously need Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) We could have signed a championship defender with some presence. Now I don't follow the championship but surely there is a player like this out there. They didn't have to be good but just an extra body with some physical presence. The fact he didn't go out and do this is criminal and no fault of anyone else. Edited February 2, 2013 by West Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 He could have got a CB in. I'm sorry, he just could have. Who exactly, at what transfer fee and wage rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Ba from Porto on loan and Carragher from Liverpool on loan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Who exactly, at what transfer fee and wage rate? A loanee from the MLS. They're on nothing wages. A Championship defender doing well. Defence is a position where there are some great players in the lower leagues, because you can be technically awful and be amazing. I'm surprised that he didn't look to the lower leagues for a CB in the summer. Some great ones down there who won't get a chance up here like Peter Clarke or someone in the same vein. A free agent (a la Scharner). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Well I've just said it about 4 times so yes I do think it was, showing how clueless Lambert is as our manager signing something other than a CB which we obviously need Let me explain more clearly what I'm saying. You have stated as a matter of fact that we could have got a CB, but Lambert chose instead to get Dawkins. When asked about your evidence for this claim, you say it's that you think he's a poor manager. This is what we call a circular definition. It's your pre-existing belief that he's a bad manager that makes you disposed to think he had such a choice. Relying on this to ask others to share your belief that there was a suitable CB itching to join us, is just daft. And saying it 4 times, or as often as you like, doesn't actually strengthen your argument, or provide any more supporting evidence. You're basically saying you don't like Lambert, but adding in things about decisions not to sign available players in order to get other people to share your view, but it's just something you made up, in your own head. Sorry if I wasn't clear before. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts