Manager Paul Lambert

[Morpheus]

 

 

Because there would be holes elsewhere in the squad? Kozak was a necessary purchase as we have no backup for Benteke. Tonev was a necessity, no two ways about it. We needed a wide player. That leaves us with Helenius, who cost around 1M. Guess you can say he was a bit of a luxury buy. Still not enough to get an AM I'd reckon.

Kozak wasn't a 'necessary purchase.' We had Bent and while Bent didn't fill the Benteke roll neither does Kozak so how was Kozak 'a necessary purchase?

 

I'm also not sure we needed a wide player either when our manager was playing Gabby and Weimann off Benteke. You could argue i suppose that if we'd kept Bent to utilise his attributes we would have needed a wide player but has Tonev shown anything better than players already at the club who could have fulfilled that role?

 

Helenius no doubt was a luxury we couldn't afford when the manager had already purchased Bowery but at least the manager has had enough confidence in Bowery to play him albeit not in his correct position.

 

For me it has been poor allocation of a limited budget when we could have improved the first team in positions conspicuous by their obvious weakness. 

 

 

Just because Kozak hasn't performed to your liking after 3/4 games (gasp!), doesn't mean he doesn't fit into our style of play as a back-up for Benteke. The 2 notions are mutually exclusive. Why are you bringing up Bent? He was shipped out precisely because he can't play as the lone striker in our system (or any other position for that matter). Also, we didn't need a wide player because we had Gabby and Weimann, a whopping 2 players? What happens if one of them got injured? And they don't play just off Benteke like you say, but as wide forwards. Sure they don't hug the touchline like old-fashioned wingers, but they are still very wide, and Tonev was an astute purchase as he now gives us more options in those areas. An attacking midfielder was one of our lowest priorities. Yes we most likely would have benefited from one, but let me put it like this. If instead of Tonev and Kozak we got an AM midfielder instead, I really doubt we'd be better off.

 

Its not really that Kozak hasn't performed, its more his style of play i'm referring to but as you say he could with coaching develop into something we haven't seen yet.

 

The reason for mentioning Bent is that we already had a striker at the club who wasn't suited to our system so why bring in another?

 

Concerning your point on wide players we also had Albrighton and before you shout from the mountain top that he isn't good enough has Tonev shown more than Albrighton?

 

I cannot believe that you actually think that an AM was one of our lowest priorities but each to our own.

[Rovers13]

So what exactly do people think Lambert's style of football is? We had some talk about 'Dortmund' style football when he arrived and I don't really think it's coming to fruition. He seems to favour physical attributes, either in terms of size, strength, pace or work-rate over smaller, technical players and we've generally done quite well as a counter-attacking side as a result. Personally, I don't mind this style and I'd like to see it be successful but there's no escaping we look like a bad side at home when the opposition concedes territory and gives our players time on the ball.

It pains me to say it because I'm no fan of 'tippy-tappy' football but I look at what Southampton, Swansea and Everton are doing with their continental managers and they really seem to dominate at home especially against weaker teams. These are teams that we should be competing with theoretically at least. I suppose they have spent money these teams but it's also a question of managerial style. I mean Martinez was committed to playing the same way at Wigan with much worse players than he has now whilst Moyes has moved to Man Utd and would rather play a big hulking player like Fellaini than play a small technical player like Kagawa.

I'm still not sure Lambert has a distinctive style, maybe he's too young a manager to have a clear idea of what he wants to do yet. I'm starting to wonder if the way we're playing can ever be that successful though. I'm very interested in what's going on at Southampton, the change from Adkins to Pochetinno seems to have made a huge difference to their style of play and even at the end of last season with the same players as Adkins he made a big difference. Maybe a more continental-minded manager is needed, they don't necessarily have to be foreign, Brendan Rodgers bangs on relentlessly about his football 'philosophy' and I just don't get similar vibes from Lambert.

Swansea only won one more home game than Villa last year. And Southampton actually had the same points average under Adkins as under pochettino last year

[Risso]

 

I haven't written Kozak off, I just think that with the striking options we have, the money would have been better spent on our pathetic midfield.

You said it was spent badly, but if Kozak turns out to be a good player then how can that be money badly spent?

 

 

Because we have better players in his position already, and relatively speaking the midfield is a lot weaker than the forward department.

[Mantis]

 

 

I haven't written Kozak off, I just think that with the striking options we have, the money would have been better spent on our pathetic midfield.

You said it was spent badly, but if Kozak turns out to be a good player then how can that be money badly spent?

 

 

Because we have better players in his position already, and relatively speaking the midfield is a lot weaker than the forward department.

 

Yes we do but that doesn't mean the money was spent badly exactly. I agree about midfield but to be honest I think our midfield looks pretty solid with Sylla in it instead of Westwood/KEA. Probably my biggest gripe with Lambert right now is the lack of game time Sylla is getting.

Edited October 30, 2013 by Mantis

[smetrov]

 

 

 

I haven't written Kozak off, I just think that with the striking options we have, the money would have been better spent on our pathetic midfield.

You said it was spent badly, but if Kozak turns out to be a good player then how can that be money badly spent?

 

 

Because we have better players in his position already, and relatively speaking the midfield is a lot weaker than the forward department.

 

Yes we do but that doesn't mean the money was spent badly exactly. I agree about midfield but to be honest I think our midfield looks pretty solid with Sylla in it instead of Westwood/KEA. Probably my biggest gripe with Lambert right now is the lack of game time Sylla is getting.

 

 

Its sort of like buying a set of Alloys when your gearbox is making a funny noise

[1974Centenary]

 

 

So what exactly do people think Lambert's style of football is? We had some talk about 'Dortmund' style football when he arrived and I don't really think it's coming to fruition. He seems to favour physical attributes, either in terms of size, strength, pace or work-rate over smaller, technical players and we've generally done quite well as a counter-attacking side as a result. Personally, I don't mind this style and I'd like to see it be successful but there's no escaping we look like a bad side at home when the opposition concedes territory and gives our players time on the ball. 

 

It pains me to say it because I'm no fan of 'tippy-tappy' football but I look at what Southampton, Swansea and Everton are doing with their continental managers and they really seem to dominate at home especially against weaker teams. These are teams that we should be competing with theoretically at least. I suppose they have spent money these teams but it's also a question of managerial style. I mean Martinez was committed to playing the same way at Wigan with much worse players than he has now whilst Moyes has moved to Man Utd and would rather play a big hulking player like Fellaini than play a small technical player like Kagawa. 

 

I'm still not sure Lambert has a distinctive style, maybe he's too young a manager to have a clear idea of what he wants to do yet. I'm starting to wonder if the way we're playing can ever be that successful though. I'm very interested in what's going on at Southampton, the change from Adkins to Pochetinno seems to have made a huge difference to their style of play and even at the end of last season with the same players as Adkins he made a big difference. Maybe a more continental-minded manager is needed, they don't necessarily have to be foreign, Brendan Rodgers bangs on relentlessly about his football 'philosophy' and I just don't get similar vibes from Lambert. 

Counter attack. Similar to O Neill. 

 

 

It's not really like ONeill. 

 

MON liked wingers. Our counter attacks under him were about getting the ball out to the channels quickly, then the wide player would put in crosses to the striker. 

 

We don't play with wingers or put in crosses under Lambert. 

 

Is Lamberts style counter attack or not?Wingers or no wingers its counterattack!

[Robbie09]

As Lambert has pointed out he's only a year or so into an extensive rebuilding process so I'm happy to reserve judgement at this point. We've been guilty in recent history of resorting to quick fixes so unless something drastic happens like relegation then I'm happy to let him take the time he believes it will take to take our club forward.

[Shaw_nuff]

Is Lamberts style counter attack or not?Wingers or no wingers its counterattack!

Perhaps it's a new style: Counterintuitiveattack

[VillanousOne]

As Lambert has pointed out he's only a year or so into an extensive rebuilding process so I'm happy to reserve judgement at this point. We've been guilty in recent history of resorting to quick fixes so unless something drastic happens like relegation then I'm happy to let him take the time he believes it will take to take our club forward

when does the rebuilding officially end? We've had O'Neill, Houllier, McCleish and now Lambert all rebuilding the club, plenty of money spent and yet........... we ar in the worse sustained era of this club since we were relegated.

Edited October 30, 2013 by VillanousOne

[VillanousOne]

 

how many years of 'transition' do we have to go through before we can just be considered as just 'not very good' without the excuses to go with it.

 

we have now established ourselves firmly as a bottom half of the table side and this season have started going backwards in terms of our forward line.

we need a strong performance and win to push us back in the right direction and give us a platform to start improving again, so far that hasn't happened and if anything we have got worse as this season has progressed.

 

not saying we haven't got more potential in the side now, just stating where we are now.

Decoded: "When we win I'm happy. When we lose I'm sad. Why can't we be good NOW!?" 

 

What genius you know me better than I do, they should send you to Syria to sort things out there.... as you're so damn intuitive.

If the basis of me being a Villa fan was because i wanted to be happy when we win, then jesus i chose the wrong team 25 years ago. I am used to us losing, it is the way we have been losing for years now that troubles me.

 

We had better players under Houllier but he never seemed to get the best out of them, now we have a much weaker squad but a more capable manager. Maybe the long term strategy is what we should all be looking at, Lambert needs time to shape and build things. But there are such glaring inadequacies in the quality of our squad and the way we play that there is no reason myself or any other Villa fan should not loudly state what those are for fear of upsetting the optimists and blind followers of the Lambert cause.

 

[KjParton]

What do you propose we do then?

[Rovers13]

I'm kind of frustrated with lambert this season in his tactics. His transfer policy has been very good throughout his career, and even at VIlla personally I think he's done a great job, and it's very progressive and Dortmund like in how it's done. Obviously it's hard to replicate their success, but his philosophy and even the results have worked out very well over his career. He's also very good at getting the most out of players at his clubs. However, unlike the Norwegian manager I posted about in other football and the Klopps of the world, he's unwilling to maybe sacrifice a few results in the short term in order to develop players and really help the club in the long term. 

 

I'm still a big Lambert fan, and his Norwich side actually did play pretty decent football, not posession based but they were constantly attacking and were really thrilling to watch a lot of the time. He hasn't gotten that style at Villa yet, and I find that frustrating.

[Kwan]

Maybe we should see how we play against smaller sides this season first?

Hull is the only smaller side we've really played and they held Spurs to a cheap penalty.

[Rovers13]

Maybe we should see how we play against smaller sides this season first?

Hull is the only smaller side we've really played and they held Spurs to a cheap penalty.

Oh I'm gonna be very patient with Lambert, but I'm saying I think it would've been better to allow the side to play more quick passing soccer against the big sides even if results were sacrified. I still think he'll get it right though, just wish he'd let the team keep it on the ground more.

[Skruff]

 

 

 

I haven't written Kozak off, I just think that with the striking options we have, the money would have been better spent on our pathetic midfield.

You said it was spent badly, but if Kozak turns out to be a good player then how can that be money badly spent?

 

 

Because we have better players in his position already, and relatively speaking the midfield is a lot weaker than the forward department.

 

Yes we do but that doesn't mean the money was spent badly exactly. I agree about midfield but to be honest I think our midfield looks pretty solid with Sylla in it instead of Westwood/KEA. Probably my biggest gripe with Lambert right now is the lack of game time Sylla is getting.

 

If you could have spent your money better somewhere else and didn't, you spent them badly. Simple as.

[villan_007]

 

Was reading on another site from a poster who thinks he's one of the worst managers we've had, that he has signed 17 players, spending £37mill. Now I disagree with all of it, but can anyone confirm that these are not facts and just ignorant bull??

 

He's spent more than that.  £22m in year 1, £20m this.  Other than Benteke, hard to point at a player who has been an out and out success, and he's spent a fair bit quite badly, e.g. £7m on Kozak.

 

 

Hmmm I've a sneaky suspicion you are pulling those figures out your arse. Hasn't it been proven that we only spent 11mill?? and you are still convinced we spent 7 of that on Kozak? doesn't add up.

 

Anyone know for sure?? as I know Risso hates everything about the Villa at the mo so will only give a negtive view on it.

[Mantis]

If you could have spent your money better somewhere else and didn't, you spent them badly. Simple as.

 

 

Saying we could've spent our money better is just blind speculation.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Mantis

[Risso]

 

 

Was reading on another site from a poster who thinks he's one of the worst managers we've had, that he has signed 17 players, spending £37mill. Now I disagree with all of it, but can anyone confirm that these are not facts and just ignorant bull??

 

He's spent more than that.  £22m in year 1, £20m this.  Other than Benteke, hard to point at a player who has been an out and out success, and he's spent a fair bit quite badly, e.g. £7m on Kozak.

 

 

Hmmm I've a sneaky suspicion you are pulling those figures out your arse. Hasn't it been proven that we only spent 11mill?? and you are still convinced we spent 7 of that on Kozak? doesn't add up.

 

Anyone know for sure?? as I know Risso hates everything about the Villa at the mo so will only give a negtive view on it.

 

 

The only thing I hate about Villa are certain other fans who appear to be village idiots.  Not you though, you're great.

 

Well, last year Lambert spent £21.7m.  That's pulled out of the audited accounts, not my arse.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Risso

[Risso]

I'm kind of frustrated with lambert this season in his tactics. His transfer policy has been very good throughout his career, and even at VIlla personally I think he's done a great job, and it's very progressive and Dortmund like in how it's done. Obviously it's hard to replicate their success, but his philosophy and even the results have worked out very well over his career. He's also very good at getting the most out of players at his clubs. However, unlike the Norwegian manager I posted about in other football and the Klopps of the world, he's unwilling to maybe sacrifice a few results in the short term in order to develop players and really help the club in the long term. 

 

I'm still a big Lambert fan, and his Norwich side actually did play pretty decent football, not posession based but they were constantly attacking and were really thrilling to watch a lot of the time. He hasn't gotten that style at Villa yet, and I find that frustrating.

 

Is he great at getting the best out of his players?  I haven't seen much evidence of that so far at Villa.  Even if you take the likes of Bent out of the equation, lots of players like Weimann, Westwood and Gabby are having rotten seasons so far this year.

[VillaCas]

 

Was reading on another site from a poster who thinks he's one of the worst managers we've had, that he has signed 17 players, spending £37mill. Now I disagree with all of it, but can anyone confirm that these are not facts and just ignorant bull??

 

He's spent more than that.  £22m in year 1, £20m this.  Other than Benteke, hard to point at a player who has been an out and out success, and he's spent a fair bit quite badly, e.g. £7m on Kozak.

 

 

By my reckoning he's bought 16 players in and shifted 18 players out, spending around £37m net. Around £2m a player - not much in modern terms. He's also cut the wage bill substainially

 

I think PL has bought extremely well given the constrictions imposed on him. Many of his signings I suspect are stop-gaps or prospects to get us through the short-term until PLs real targets begin to arrive (Benteke, Okore-type players). Now he has a foundation to build on I think he will start to bring in more player like Kiyotake who we were chasing in the summer. I also doubt we would lose any money on PLs transfer activity so far

 

There is much talk about what PL style of football is - I would say that he is employing one style now to maintain Premiership football in the short term but longer term we will see a completely different style appear as more talented players are available to him.

 

We improved as the year went on last year, we are 4 points better off this year than the same fixtures last year so decent progress. We will rid the club of the final high salary players this season and then can look forward to further progress. I'm expecting PL to get us near to Europa League positions next season and any progress after that will depend on Lerners ambition and support. As PL has said himself, patience is needed

 

 

Nice to see "fans" writing off Kozak in the same way Benteke was written off last year