Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: neo_Villan on January 25, 2013, 12:08:41 PM
-
It is worth asking given recent developments. Many had hoped that it was a way of making it up to the fans who had been so disappointed with his appointment in the first place. A way of winning back the hearts and minds of Villans who had started to seriously question the Lerner regime for the first time. This idea is backed up by the fact they hired one of the fan's choices to replace him. However, with it confirmed that Lambert will be staying even when (not if) he takes us down (when this happens, he will be as equally unpopular as McLeish, if not more) and the club won't even try to put up a fight in the face of relegation, it looks like our views are still not of any concern to the board. Another theory is that McLeish was sacked to preserve season-ticket sales which presumably would have nose-dived had he stayed. But what do they think will happen to attendences when the club are in the Championship? Yet, they will not invest to give us a fighting chance of avoiding this scenario! Another reason suggested is that he was sacked because we went too close to relegation for comfort. Having told Lambert his job is safe if we go down again dispells this. I have given up trying to understand the decisions taken by this regime if I'm honest. Their words and actions continually contradict one another and I can only assume that they don't have any sort of coherent plan for our club.
-
Because he wasnt good enough - no problem with that .
Why lambert hasnt been sacked is the question , he has been far worse results wise.
-
Tend to agree ,what point of sacking but giving new boss no funds to fix squad especially after all the PR posturing of not letting us get that close to relegation again ?
-
He should have been sacked because was useless and always the wrong appointment. Why he was sacked? who knows with the lack of brains on our board.
-
a) Because he wasn't up to the job
b) Because we the fans didn't want him in the first place (and it was because of where he came from)
-
McLeish was sacked because he wasn't good enough and was hated by the fans. Lambert is safe because Randy thinks we need stability, he can't afford to sack him and, despite rumblings, broadly has the fans support.
-
I know where you're heading with this, but anyway...
He was sacked because he was a bewilderingly poor choice, results and performances were worsening, he'd lost the support of the crowd.
Paul Lambert was appointed because he was deemed - widely deemed - to be a far more capable manager. It was a sensible decision. He was given £25m to spend on revamping the squad in the summer, so he was financially supported, to a degree.
Things haven't worked out this season, obviously. But I still believe the two decisions - McLeish going, Lambert coming in - were right at the time.
-
I'd say the point about the season ticket sales being affected is closest to the mark.
Lambert was appointed because with Norwich he'd took a team of championship standard players and kept them in the Premier League. It was hoped he'd do the same with Villa while hopefully uncovering a gem or two along the way. It's not working but I think Randy has decided that we may need to go down to 'come back stronger'.
-
a) Because he wasn't up to the job
b) Because we the fans didn't want him in the first place (and it was because of where he came from)
Speak for yourself, I would have had Houghton in an instant.
-
McLeish kept us up which will look good on his cv now
-
Agreed, which is a nonsensical plan. I think they're looking at Newcastle, but they might be the only club ever to do that.
-
It's not working but I think Randy has decided that we may need to go down to 'come back stronger'.
If he thinks that, he's a bigger idiot than I'd given him credit for.
-
And West Ham, I guess.
But then there's M'Boro, Leeds, Forest, Wolves (so far), Birmingham, Derby, Sheff Wed, Sheff Utd... decent sized clubs who have really struggled.
-
I'd say the point about the season ticket sales being affected is closest to the mark.
Lambert was appointed because with Norwich he'd took a team of championship standard players and kept them in the Premier League. It was hoped he'd do the same with Villa while hopefully uncovering a gem or two along the way. It's not working but I think Randy has decided that we may need to go down to 'come back stronger'.
Once a big club slides it is hard to stop - i would be amazed if we came back up or got anywhere near the play offs.
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Even if we win tonight, you'd guess that the players who'd make the difference for us would be off in the summer, should we go down.
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Bradford aside it hasn't really struggled in recent league/FA cup games.
-
Just to make clear, I am not claiming he shouldn't have been sacked or he was a good manager. I just don't think him being unpopular had anything to do with it considering they don't give a toss what we think.
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Bradford aside it hasn't really struggled in recent league/FA cup games.
Hasnt struggled in recent league games ?
Six games without a win , 2 points in 18 and 4 wins in 22 games!
If that isnt struggling what the hell is?
-
I think he meant league cup and FA cup games. And he's right.
-
I think he meant league cup and FA cup games. And he's right.
Apart from the cup games against lower league sides which saw narrow wins over ipswich and swindon , we beat a norwich team of 6 changes and man city team with 9 changes .
We saw what happened when we played their 1st choice teams in the league .
-
I think he meant league cup and FA cup games. And he's right.
Apart from the cup games against lower league sides which saw narrow wins over ipswich and swindon , we beat a norwich team of 6 changes and man city team with 9 changes .
We saw what happened when we played their 1st choice teams in the league .
We still beat them though and that Man City cup team stick probably cost something like £200m to put together.
When things are bad, we don't really need to add to it by saying the good things were really bad things as well!
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Bradford aside it hasn't really struggled in recent league/FA cup games.
I'm not sure the cups are and indicator of the lower leagues though. Most lower league teams don't take the cups too seriously.
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Bradford aside it hasn't really struggled in recent league/FA cup games.
I'm not sure the cups are and indicator of the lower leagues though. Most lower league teams don't take the cups too seriously.
Swindon took it pretty seriously, on the other hand we only narrowly beat them.
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
Excellent summation.
-
The Cylons were created by man. They rebelled. They evolved. There are many copies. And they have a plan.
-
Actually looking at the "Villa have accepted relegation" thread, maybe Lerner wanted relegation last year and McLeish was sacked for failing?
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
Excellent summation.
Agreed.
-
We're covering old ground again here, aren't we?
-
Our current squad will really struggle against championship sides, as will be proven tonight.
Bradford aside it hasn't really struggled in recent league/FA cup games.
I'm not sure the cups are and indicator of the lower leagues though. Most lower league teams don't take the cups too seriously.
Swindon took it pretty seriously, on the other hand we only narrowly beat them.
And we only beat them thanks to Benteke, one of the few Prem quality players we still have. We won't have that luxury next year after we go down.
-
McLeish was sacked because he produced dire, boring football and showed no signs of improving the team in any area in either the short or the long term, especially given that the side available to him was quite experienced.
Lambert, while not brilliant, is not yet as bad as McLeish in my mind. I very much doubt that his decision to bring in lots of young players was based solely on football, I'd imagine it was mostly based on bringing in players who would agree to low wages with a view to keeping these low-paid players together as a team for a good few years. I still think Lambert is the man for the long term, but he needs to be able to bring in experienced players in the next week in order to secure our short term status in the Prem. If he fails to do that it will be a reflection of a lack of funds, which indicates failure at board level, and we will almost certainly be relegated.
The conditions that we currently face are not solely of Lambert's making, and I struggle to see how any other manager could come in and do a better job with the players and finances available.
-
We know why mcleish was sacked .
Why didnt barry take the penalty?
-
Why didnt barry take the penalty?
What penalty?
-
The conditions that we currently face are not solely of Lambert's making, and I struggle to see how any other manager could come in and do a better job with the players and finances available.
I agree that a large number of the problems aren't of his making, and I also agree that, long-term, he could turn out well but I think there are plenty of other managers who would've reacted differently to conceding early against Chelsea and not allowed it to lead to a confidence draining battering that we've shown no signs of recovering from. He needs to find a way for us to deal with some pressure that doesn't involve abandoning the midfield and using Benteke as a head on a stick.
-
I prefer to ask 'Why was McLeish appointed?'. I still haven't worked that one out.
-
I prefer to ask 'Why was McLeish appointed?'. I still haven't worked that one out.
He had the best answer for why Barry didn't take the penalty.
-
Why was he appointed a much better question
Sacked - well 4 points from the last 11 games didn't help his cause much did it?
-
McLeish had a better record at this stage last season than PL on less money to spend
-
he should never have been sacked by virtue of the fact that he should never have been appointed
-
I'd imagine if you factor in the wages of Given, Hutton, Jenas & N'Zogbia he spent far more than Lambert has.
-
McLeish had a better record at this stage last season than PL on less money to spend
He also inherited a much better squad than Lambert did.
-
McLeish had a better record at this stage last season than PL on less money to spend
He also inherited a much better squad than Lambert did.
I'm not so sure, other than the injury to Dunne it's largely the same players. The one thing I'd say was that he'd inherited a team with young players in it who'd just had a year, albeit a fairly disruptive one, with GH in which they'd finally been given a little playing time and perhaps the right sort of coaching. For many of them, you have to feel that last season was the last chance for them to develop before we should be expecting more of them, and Eck's 'development' of them was actually terrible.
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
Excellent summation.
Agreed, could not have put it better myself....
-
McLeish had a better record at this stage last season than PL on less money to spend
He also inherited a much better squad than Lambert did.
I'm not so sure, other than the injury to Dunne it's largely the same players. The one thing I'd say was that he'd inherited a team with young players in it who'd just had a year, albeit a fairly disruptive one, with GH in which they'd finally been given a little playing time and perhaps the right sort of coaching. For many of them, you have to feel that last season was the last chance for them to develop before we should be expecting more of them, and Eck's 'development' of them was actually terrible.
Wehn I say that it's largely based on a squad that finished 9th in 2010/2011, compared to one that finished 16th in 2011/2012.
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
Agreed. I've been wondering if Lambert is, like McLeish and MON, stuck in the 90s, just a different one. Whereas the other two were bit British meat-and-two-veg in there approach, Lambert seems a bit like a 90s German team - changing the shape is probably the most important thing, and technique and passing are valued.
The problem is that the way the game has changed has meant passing-and-moving football needs to be a lot more precise, and practiced rigorously (and perhaps imaginatively) on the training ground. Lambert's encouraging his team to move off the ball and so forth will work sometimes, but it seems a little wing-and-a-prayer to be consistent, like Swansea. We're emotional and susceptible to losing our heads, whereas Swansea and Wigan seem to have trained so much to have faith and remain calm in what they do.
Wehn I say that it's largely based on a squad that finished 9th in 2010/2011, compared to one that finished 16th in 2011/2012.
True, though to be fair McLeish had Young and Downing sold without him really having a say in it, and he was allowed to sign only one replacement for two players.
-
The problem is that the way the game has changed has meant passing-and-moving football needs to be a lot more precise, and practiced rigorously (and perhaps imaginatively) on the training ground. Lambert's encouraging his team to move off the ball and so forth will work sometimes, but it seems a little wing-and-a-prayer to be consistent, like Swansea. We're emotional and susceptible to losing our heads, whereas Swansea and Wigan seem to have trained so much to have faith and remain calm in what they do.
Swansea and Wigan also have a system that has been placed for a few seasons now.
-
The problem is that the way the game has changed has meant passing-and-moving football needs to be a lot more precise, and practiced rigorously (and perhaps imaginatively) on the training ground. Lambert's encouraging his team to move off the ball and so forth will work sometimes, but it seems a little wing-and-a-prayer to be consistent, like Swansea. We're emotional and susceptible to losing our heads, whereas Swansea and Wigan seem to have trained so much to have faith and remain calm in what they do.
Swansea and Wigan also have a system that has been placed for a few seasons now.
Very true, that practice is even further ingrained. In both cases, as it happens, the architect has been Roberto Martinez.
-
McLeish was shit and only thought short term.
Lambert is not shit and is thinking long term.
People just can't accept that when you pay the same wages as Wigan, you'll be competing with Wigan.
If we stay up this year, we will be alt stronger next year.
Fuck me, McLeish had Collins, Cuellar, Hutton & Warnock, are we all sure it was Lambert who decided he wouldn't keep and use them? I'm not.
-
The problem is that the way the game has changed has meant passing-and-moving football needs to be a lot more precise, and practiced rigorously (and perhaps imaginatively) on the training ground. Lambert's encouraging his team to move off the ball and so forth will work sometimes, but it seems a little wing-and-a-prayer to be consistent, like Swansea. We're emotional and susceptible to losing our heads, whereas Swansea and Wigan seem to have trained so much to have faith and remain calm in what they do.
Swansea and Wigan also have a system that has been placed for a few seasons now.
Very true, that practice is even further ingrained. In both cases, as it happens, the architect has been Roberto Martinez.
So Martinez is great, yet Wigan are below us in the league.
-
So Martinez is great, yet Wigan are below us in the league.
The size of club and resources of Wigan, they should be below us in the table, and he's done well to keep them in the league so often. They also play a certain brand of football with surprising success over the last few years, and he's shown he can lay long-term foundations at Swansea before as well.
-
So Martinez is great, yet Wigan are below us in the league.
The size of club and resources of Wigan, they should be below us in the table, and he's done well to keep them in the league so often. They also play a certain brand of football with surprising success over the last few years, and he's shown he can lay long-term foundations at Swansea before as well.
There's no way of saying this without being disrespectful, but Swansea and Wigan will have afforded him
more time to lay foundations and build something. Simply because, they haven't got any illusions about top six
being their rightful place in the food chain.
For example if he'd got the Liverpool job, he'd have been hounded out after a year, if they finished 10th or lower.
It seems to be, that the bigger the ambitions of the club, the less time you're afforded.
-
There's no way of saying this without being disrespectful, but Swansea and Wigan will have afforded him
more time to lay foundations and build something. Simply because, they haven't got any illusions about top six
being their rightful place in the food chain.
For example if he'd got the Liverpool job, he'd have been hounded out after a year, if they finished 10th or lower.
It seems to be, that the bigger the ambitions of the club, the less time you're afforded.
That's certainly true, so part of the arsenal of a manager in that sort of position is learning to manage a transition - don't try too much too quickly, balance the short against the long term. I have no idea how well Martinez would do that, to be fair.
-
So Martinez is great, yet Wigan are below us in the league.
The size of club and resources of Wigan, they should be below us in the table, and he's done well to keep them in the league so often. They also play a certain brand of football with surprising success over the last few years, and he's shown he can lay long-term foundations at Swansea before as well.
There's no way of saying this without being disrespectful, but Swansea and Wigan will have afforded him
more time to lay foundations and build something. Simply because, they haven't got any illusions about top six
being their rightful place in the food chain.
For example if he'd got the Liverpool job, he'd have been hounded out after a year, if they finished 10th or lower.
It seems to be, that the bigger the ambitions of the club, the less time you're afforded.
Agreed. Albion haven't been overly bothered about the occasional relegation in their plans.
-
There's no way of saying this without being disrespectful, but Swansea and Wigan will have afforded him
more time to lay foundations and build something. Simply because, they haven't got any illusions about top six
being their rightful place in the food chain.
For example if he'd got the Liverpool job, he'd have been hounded out after a year, if they finished 10th or lower.
It seems to be, that the bigger the ambitions of the club, the less time you're afforded.
That's certainly true, so part of the arsenal of a manager in that sort of position is learning to manage a transition - don't try too much too quickly, balance the short against the long term. I have no idea how well Martinez would do that, to be fair.
It doesn't help us (at all) but, the only guy I remember managing for the short term and long recently was Bobby Robson.
At Newcastle he got as much out of Rob Lee and Kevin Gallagher as he could, before he tried to bring through Jenas, Bellamy, Ambrose, Viana.
oh and David Moyes, although I seem to remember he finished 6th/7th one season and 16th the next. Again at a different club that may have seen him receive a hefty payout and his marching orders.
-
I prefer to ask 'Why was McLeish appointed?'. I still haven't worked that one out.
I'm trying to remember the line that was put out. Because he shared the clubs... something. What was it?
-
I know where you're heading with this, but anyway...
He was sacked because he was a bewilderingly poor choice, results and performances were worsening, he'd lost the support of the crowd.
He never had the support of the crowd so he hadn't lost it.
-
McLeish was shit and only thought short term.
Lambert is not shit and is thinking long term.
People just can't accept that when you pay the same wages as Wigan, you'll be competing with Wigan.
If we stay up this year, we will be alt stronger next year.
Fuck me, McLeish had Collins, Cuellar, Hutton & Warnock, are we all sure it was Lambert who decided he wouldn't keep and use them? I'm not.
Tell me why Lambert isn't shit please.
-
I think he was sacked because they realised it was all a huge mistake in the first place. The football he presented wasn't good to watch, wasn't successful, wasn't progressive and was designed not to lose rather than to try and win. There appeared to be little chance of it ever developing. McLeish simply didn't have the ability, knowledge or imagination do it any other way.
Lambert on the other hand appeared to have a long term strategy that involved modern tactical thinking, developing young players in the right way, and playing an entertaining game based on passing and moving. In theory it was the right call. Up to the Chelsea game things were iffy but looked like they were improving, and I think after the Liverpool game most of us probably thought we would just about be okay this season and then build on it next season when a few more of the higher earners were off the books.
I don't think anyone could have predicted just how spectacularly tits up it would go, but it's hard to see how Lambert is going to turn it around without new players and a long hard look at his "tactics".
Agreed. I've been wondering if Lambert is, like McLeish and MON, stuck in the 90s, just a different one. Whereas the other two were bit British meat-and-two-veg in there approach, Lambert seems a bit like a 90s German team - changing the shape is probably the most important thing, and technique and passing are valued.
The problem is that the way the game has changed has meant passing-and-moving football needs to be a lot more precise, and practiced rigorously (and perhaps imaginatively) on the training ground. Lambert's encouraging his team to move off the ball and so forth will work sometimes, but it seems a little wing-and-a-prayer to be consistent, like Swansea. We're emotional and susceptible to losing our heads, whereas Swansea and Wigan seem to have trained so much to have faith and remain calm in what they do.
Wehn I say that it's largely based on a squad that finished 9th in 2010/2011, compared to one that finished 16th in 2011/2012.
True, though to be fair McLeish had Young and Downing sold without him really having a say in it, and he was allowed to sign only one replacement for two players.
Monty - hasn't it been suggested that Lambert isn't really "hands on" during training and leaves that work to others? I must admit that when photos were released of pre season training, I was a little surprised to see Gary Karsa seemingly involved in the training sessions.
-
Monty - hasn't it been suggested that Lambert isn't really a "hands on" during training and leaves that work to others? I must admit that when photos were released of pre season training, I was a little surprised to see Gary Karsa seemingly involved in the training sessions.
That would be very MON-esque, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.
-
I'd imagine if you factor in the wages of Given, Hutton, Jenas & N'Zogbia he spent far more than Lambert has.
10m in wages is that.
-
McLeish was shit and only thought short term.
Lambert is not shit and is thinking long term.
People just can't accept that when you pay the same wages as Wigan, you'll be competing with Wigan.
If we stay up this year, we will be alt stronger next year.
Fuck me, McLeish had Collins, Cuellar, Hutton & Warnock, are we all sure it was Lambert who decided he wouldn't keep and use them? I'm not.
Tell me why Lambert isn't shit please.
Impossible. He's the shitiest shite manager we've ever had.
-
Lambert is the worst Villa manager I have ever seen. I'm only 23, so not sure about worst in our history...but definitely the worst in my lifetime. How anybody can think he is anything other then shit is beyond me.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
Agreed. Watched the program. So has been said by some who work for Villa, he was a great bloke, got to know everybody very quickly, wanted to be everybody's mate, just not ruthless enough.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
-
All that bad treatment left him with a few millions in his pocket when he left.
-
Used by Villa, to get rid of the shit and some of the high earners. Never given a chance by us? No. But then again, the football was bloody awful.
The Villa owner knew TSM would love a crack at a big English club, yet he screwed it up, bought even more crack, failed to reach 40 points, quite rightly sacked. Nice man though.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
He was still a poor manager regardless.
-
Lambert is the worst Villa manager I have ever seen. I'm only 23, so not sure about worst in our history...but definitely the worst in my lifetime. How anybody can think he is anything other then shit is beyond me.
I'm 52 and he's comfortably in the worst four I have seen. I completely concur with your last sentence. I've given up wondering why people can't see it and have resigned myself to knowing absolutely in my mind he's shit but realising everyone else thinks I'm wrong. I don't have a problem with that
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
-
Used by Villa, to get rid of the shit and some of the high earners.
I don't agree with that for a second.
We gave him a three year contract. Why do that if the main purpose of employing him was to just move a few players on - something which he didn't even do. In fact, he did the opposite, and brought more high earning, shit players in.
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
-
Lambert is the worst Villa manager I have ever seen. I'm only 23, so not sure about worst in our history...but definitely the worst in my lifetime. How anybody can think he is anything other then shit is beyond me.
I'm 52 and he's comfortably in the worst four I have seen. I completely concur with your last sentence. I've given up wondering why people can't see it and have resigned myself to knowing absolutely in my mind he's shit but realising everyone else thinks I'm wrong. I don't have a problem with that
Well I don't think you are wrong, the others being McNeill, Turner and DOL or TSM.
-
Other than the tactics, which were both prehistoric and embarrassing, the thing I disliked most about McLeish was the way he would pass the buck increasingly with every post match interview. Eventually he'd essentially shrug his shoulders and say 'it's not my fault, lots of injuries, young players' which just said to the young players, very impressionable and struggling and doing their best in very tough circumstances and with really poor tactics, 'it's your fault entirely we're as bad as this.' I thought it was terrible.
-
Other than the tactics, which were both prehistoric and embarrassing, the thing I disliked most about McLeish was the way he would pass the buck increasingly with every post match interview. Eventually he'd essentially shrug his shoulders and say 'it's not my fault, lots of injuries, young players' which just said to the young players, very impressionable and struggling and doing their best in very tough circumstances and with really poor tactics, 'it's your fault entirely we're as bad as this.' I thought it was terrible.
I still had my season ticket in the McLeish season, and my abiding memory of that season is waking up on match day morning, thinking "Fuck this, I really don't want to go".
I appreciate things at home aren't good under Lambert, but I will take trying but failing over not trying and failing every single time.
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
Nothing less than would be expected.
-
Lambert is the worst Villa manager I have ever seen. I'm only 23, so not sure about worst in our history...but definitely the worst in my lifetime. How anybody can think he is anything other then shit is beyond me.
I'm 52 and he's comfortably in the worst four I have seen. I completely concur with your last sentence. I've given up wondering why people can't see it and have resigned myself to knowing absolutely in my mind he's shit but realising everyone else thinks I'm wrong. I don't have a problem with that
Well I don't think you are wrong, the others being McNeill, Turner and DOL or TSM.
So it's bottom five, really. Not that it detracts from your point much, just it is bottom five. I think I might have to agree with you, as it happens, although I think Lambert will go on to be a better manager than Gregory or Sir Brian.
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
Nothing less than would be expected.
Quite. Surprised that you agree though.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
Nothing less than would be expected.
Quite. Surprised that you agree though.
No chance.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
Would you care to elucidate what is wrong and why it is? Paulie didn't make that many points there.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I was there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Venglos is an interesting one, because he's probably a better manager overall than JG or BL, but a worse manager for the Villa. I think Lambert will probably have a better managerial career than those last two, but he may turn out to be simply a worse manager for us.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I was there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Venglos is an interesting one, because he's probably a better manager overall than JG or BL, but a worse manager for the Villa. I think Lambert will probably have a better managerial career than those last two, but he may turn out to be simply a worse manager for us.
Venglos wasn't a particularly good manager but if there was such a thing as a professor of management he would have been the best.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I was there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Venglos is an interesting one, because he's probably a better manager overall than JG or BL, but a worse manager for the Villa. I think Lambert will probably have a better managerial career than those last two, but he may turn out to be simply a worse manager for us.
Venglos wasn't a particularly good manager but if there was such a thing as a professor of management he would have been the best.
That's a nice formulation, I like that.
-
Lambert is currently seeing us mid-table, but at least on an upward turn, slow and grinding at times, with every inch attritional- like Ivan clawing hard by yard back from the 6th Army, but it's progress, slow and bloody.
That puts us on a par with at least one season with some of our more successful managers of the past 25 years; 13th under BFR, 11th under O'Neill, who can remember 2000-1 under JG?, SGT dreadful and ill fated second spell, while Little fell off the cliff and didn't get the chance to see us take the plunge or come close. Lambert has different circumstances to work under and different competition to deal with, but only time will tell if he shares O'Neill's destiny of being mid-table but on the up. I think so. 12-10th this term, higher there after.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
Would you care to elucidate what is wrong and why it is? Paulie didn't make that many points there.
The treatment of Alex McLeish by our supporters at Norwich was an utter disgrace. It was wholly because he came from Blues.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
You could always try pointing them out rather than just making a quick one-liner then disappearing until the next time the same thing gets discussed.
I entirely appreciate you believe in what you're saying. I just think you should maybe try to win us over by telling us why you think that way.
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
Would you care to elucidate what is wrong and why it is? Paulie didn't make that many points there.
The treatment of Alex McLeish by our supporters at Norwich was an utter disgrace. It was wholly because he came from Blues.
Yep, entirely - 100 percent - because he came from Blues, and nothing to do with the abysmal season which was finishing that day. Nothing at all.
And that's not even addressing any points I made. It is addressing a new one you've thought of.
-
The treatment of Aston Villa supporters by Alex McLeish at Norwich was a disgrace. A dead rubber, £35 a ticket at a newly promoted side, 146 miles away and he picks 7 defenders with Heskey up top.
-
Lamberts got a long way to go before he can claim to have done a job as good as O Leary. O Leary for all his faults had us top 6 in his first season. We finished joint 5th actually, losing out that Uefa spot on Goal difference IIRC. Granted it all went spectacularly wrong for DOL and turning on the fans was not great, but lets just see how Lambert reacts when he's 3 years into the job and getting a lot of stick. In fairness, Lambo hasn't been without his gaffs. The comments about the FA Cup before the Sheff Utd game, really lost him a lot of backers here, even if they were slightly misconstrued. I just wonder with Lamberts temperament whether his "fickle" moment is going to come at some point, particularly if we struggle again next season.
Lambert is yet to even match O Leary's lowest points tally.
Lambo is in that McLeish, McNeill and Turner ball park certainly.
I do think McLeish was more tactically astute. He almost always had a clear game plan. Of course that game plan was incredibly negative and fell apart when we lost Bent. Lambert hasn't really found a successful plan yet that he can stick too, but at least tries to play positively sometimes. But it's all much the same really. It's two managers who are really championship level, who aren't quite good enough at this level.
-
The treatment of Aston Villa supporters by Alex McLeish at Norwich was a disgrace. A dead rubber, £35 a ticket at a newly promoted side, 146 miles away and he picks 7 defenders with Heskey up top.
For me his worst game. Safety had been guaranteed. Ideal time to finally show a bit of positivity and try and win and finish on something of a high. We were probably as dour as we'd been all season and Norwich won very easily.
I think he knew he was gone by that point and I always feel like that was two fingers up at the club and possibly the fans.
-
McLeish was dour and negative. Surrender is not a game plan. Anybody at White Hart Lane for that game in November knew the quality of the mans tactics and astuteness.
-
Would you care to elucidate what is wrong and why it is? Paulie didn't make that many points there.
The treatment of Alex McLeish by our supporters at Norwich was an utter disgrace. It was wholly because he came from Blues.
I said it at the time and I'll say it again, if we'd taken a good manager from Blues the only affect his former employment would have had on the fans' reaction would have been to make us more pleased. Imagine if Blues unearthed some Messi-like youth prodigy and we signed him from them? The glee would be undisguisable.
No, the reason we didn't like him was because his was the among the worst appointments actually conceivable, let alone made, by any chairman in the top flight in recent years. The selection criteria behind his appointment (the 'Premier League experience' guff which would have ruled out Mourinho or Wenger at one point) betrayed a humiliating lack of football knowledge in our boardroom. The tactics the guy sent us out to execute were utterly supine, his post-match interviews were pusillanimous and writhingly cowardly, his signings were almost completely terrible, the damage done to the development of our younger players deep and perhaps irreparable. That he's a nice guy to have a drink with is kind of heroically irrelevant.
There were some, sure, who flexed the might of their intellects by disliking him because of the Blues connection. But because the press were peddling this line, and because we'd already got a general reputation for fickleness, most gave him way more of a chance than he deserved precisely because we didn't want the media to get the chance to say 'booing him for the Blues connection.' That we held out for as long as we did is near-miraculous.
-
McLeish was dour and negative. Surrender is not a game plan. Anybody at White Hart Lane for that game in November knew the quality of the mans tactics and astuteness.
We were sort of well drilled under him (in a dour, godawful to watch kind of way), though Collins, Warnock and Hutton were always a howler away from making that difficult. We were actually (position wise) going quite well by November under McLeish. Solid, comfortable. It was Jan when we lost Dunney, Stan and Bent in the space of a month that we then went on a horrendous run and almost went down.
In terms of Villa managers I've watched, I don't think anyones excelled in the Headless chickens routine quite like Lambert at times. Sometimes it just looks a complete and utter mess.
-
Stan and Bent were lost in March. McLeish presided over the worst Villa side since 1986. We stayed up via a combination of a Hutton handball, Given having a blinder and the Albion being shit.
That is what Lambert took over, under arguably the most difficult financial situation since 1968. A perfect storm.
He is taking us forward, there is imperial evidence of this. Stylistically, we make little sense from Chelsea to Stoke? How? But another summer will come and we will get stronger.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Lambert has been as bad if not worse than most you've mentioned above. Unless you ignore the last 2 seasons that is.
-
Stan and Bent were lost in March. McLeish presided over the worst Villa side since 1986. We stayed up via a combination of a Hutton handball, Given having a blinder and the Albion being shit.
That is what Lambert took over, under arguably the most difficult financial situation since 1968. A perfect storm.
He is taking us forward, there is imperial evidence of this. Stylistically, we make little sense from Chelsea to Stoke? How? But another summer will come and we will get stronger.
How is Lambert taking us forward?
If this is some sort of saying what GT did PL is now now doing you are living with the broken biscuits at the bottom of the tin.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Lambert has been as bad if not worse than most you've mentioned above. Unless you ignore the last 2 seasons that is.
There's been plenty of crap, but there's also been far more positives in his two seasons than in anything McLeish managed to serve up.
-
That line-up at Norwich.
Given
Warnock
Dunne
Collins
Clark
Cuellar
Lichaj
Ireland
Herd
Heskey
Gabby
After less than 25 mins we were 2 down, so needing goals he brought on Bannan, then Gardner, then Baker. That more than even Spurs away summed him up. It's spectacularly shit at times under Lambert, but i'm never as embarrassed by us as I was under McLeish. I'm sure many will feel differently, but i'd rather lose 8-0 at Chavski by being naive nutters who went for it even when getting battered than lose 2-0 at Spurs having started the match hoping for a 0-0.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Lambert has been as bad if not worse than most you've mentioned above. Unless you ignore the last 2 seasons that is.
There's been plenty of crap, but there's also been far more positives in his two seasons than in anything McLeish managed to serve up. Sorry, DC5, maybe that's disgraceful treatment of your mate too, but it's the truth.
Yes let's just forget the negatives.
-
Fucking hell. 7 (natural) defenders!
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Lambert has been as bad if not worse than most you've mentioned above. Unless you ignore the last 2 seasons that is.
There's been plenty of crap, but there's also been far more positives in his two seasons than in anything McLeish managed to serve up. Sorry, DC5, maybe that's disgraceful treatment of your mate too, but it's the truth.
Yes let's just forget the negatives.
What the hell are you on about?
-
Fucking hell. 7 (natural) defenders!
He didn't give a fuck by then he knew he was gone.
-
Lambert is definitely in the bottom 1. Well, as long as we ignore Turner, McNeil, Venglos, O'Leary and McLeish.
I wish there was a hyperbole button so you could switch off the hyperbole poorly masquerading as considered opinion for a while. It's far too Villa Talk for me.
Lambert has been as bad if not worse than most you've mentioned above. Unless you ignore the last 2 seasons that is.
There's been plenty of crap, but there's also been far more positives in his two seasons than in anything McLeish managed to serve up. Sorry, DC5, maybe that's disgraceful treatment of your mate too, but it's the truth.
Yes let's just forget the negatives.
What the hell are you on about?
What positives are you on about?
-
McLeish on Sky Sports tonight. Obviously a football man of long standing. Just a pity he was treated so badly at Villa Park.
He seemed a decent bloke, but he was a dismal failure as a manager at Villa Park however you decide to look at it.
He was treated horrendously by the fans and given no support from Lerner.
Generally treated well until half a dozen games before the end of a season when everyone expected a damp squib of relegation, when everyone got a bit upset by us losing to a shit Bolton side.
At least he was treated well by those who happened to drink at the same Friday night pub as he did.
He did seem to be a pleasant bloke though. Even though he was a shit football manager.
I agree, he seemed a nice bloke, but this "treated horrendously by the fans" thing is utter nonsense, it really is.
He got plenty of support.
The vast majority of us would give him a go once he got the job. The only thing he could have done to make that support evaporate was revert to type and start playing like he had Blues playing, and that's exactly what he did. That is pretty much exactly the time the crowd turned on him.
He actually got longer than the manager before him did. We turned on Houllier much earlier than McLeish.
I've never been as embarased to be a Villa fan as i was at times under him with the way he sent us out. I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck that he came from Small Heath. Had he been a decent manager rather than a byword for defensive negativity, the fact we'd taken him from them would have been a *bonus* not a stick to beat him with.
He wasn't, though, he was a horribly negative manager who blew his only chance at the big time.
I think to that team he sent out at White Hart Lane and I honestly get more embarrassed than I do when I think back to some of the severe beatings we took in the mid 80s.
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
So many things wrong in one post.
You could always try pointing them out rather than just making a quick one-liner then disappearing until the next time the same thing gets discussed.
I entirely appreciate you believe in what you're saying. I just think you should maybe try to win us over by telling us why you think that way.
"You could always try pointing them out rather than just making a quick one-liner then disappearing until the next time the same thing gets discussed."
In fairness, he's not the only one guilty of that on here over the years.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone one, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
There's no arguing with the truth of this.
-
In fairness, he's not the only one guilty of that on here over the years.
I'm sure we all apologise for the level of our debate not being up to the standards you expect.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
He has done no more than tread water,that is what TSM was asked to do.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
He has done no more than tread water,that is what TSM was asked to do.
For me though the difference is, under McLeish, how many games can you remember for the right reasons? Chavski away, and Norwich maybe Blackburn at home. How many goals do you remember as being 'fuck me' type goals?
Then do the same for Lambert, amongst the dross are games we'll remember for quite a while, and some of the best goals i've seen Villa score.
-
So they're not positives? Or maybe more specifically, even if he is just treading water, do those not mean he's treading it better than mcleish, which was the point i was making?
-
I personally never minded McLeish's character. As others have said, he always came across as a decent enough bloke. The apologism employed after bad results did grate a bit and obviously didn't do him any favours. Although at least he still accepted the faults in the performances even if he did attempt to blame everybody but himself for them. Which in some ways is better than honey-glazing blatantly bad performances by describing them as 'excellent' or 'terrific' as the current manager does.
My feelings of McLeish towards the end were more sympathy than anything else I'd say. Ultimately, every man and his dog knew what sort of manager he was and what brand of football he would serve up before he was even hired. He duely didn't disappoint by just approaching his task here the only way he knew how and the way he had throughout his managerial career. I can't blame a leopard for not being able to change it's spots.
Regarding his treatment by the fans, it wasn't anywhere near as bad as made out by some, especially those in the media. There were of course those who were never going to give him a chance and had settled upon that line of thought before his hiring was even annouced. However the vast majority, although extremely underwhelmed and perhaps unable to generate any real optimism towards his reign, still did give him their backing and some time to alter their preexisting conceptions of him. He was unable to do this for most and any hopes that he could lead the club forward and give us something, anything, to reserve some excitement for were (very slowly) strangled out of us as the season lengthened. Despite this, he was only officially turned on after the Bolton defeat which was the forth last game of the season which is proof enough that fans didn't just use the first possible opportunity to do this as some journalists would have us believe.
I write this as somebody who never even called for McLeish to go, mainly down to the sheer lethargy which I had become engulfed in at the time though.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
He has done no more than tread water,that is what TSM was asked to do.
For me though the difference is, under McLeish, how many games can you remember for the right reasons? Chavski away, and Norwich maybe Blackburn at home. How many goals do you remember as being 'fuck me' type goals?
Then do the same for Lambert, amongst the dross are games we'll remember for quite a while, and some of the best goals i've seen Villa score.
Chelsea away.What was the score again?
It's ok talking about the what he has done well but come on with every positive you have a negative.If he was TSM he would of been long gone.
-
Why do I have to come on? I've said "spectacularly shit at times" and "amongst the dross". I'm hardly ignoring the negatives and lavishing endless praise on Lambert.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
He has done no more than tread water,that is what TSM was asked to do.
For me though the difference is, under McLeish, how many games can you remember for the right reasons? Chavski away, and Norwich maybe Blackburn at home. How many goals do you remember as being 'fuck me' type goals?
Then do the same for Lambert, amongst the dross are games we'll remember for quite a while, and some of the best goals i've seen Villa score.
Chelsea away.What was the score again?
It's ok talking about the what he has done well but come on with every positive you have a negative.If he was TSM he would of been long gone.
The point is that if he was TSM then it would have been extremely unlikely that the positives mentioned would have occurred. It's not a defense of lambert, it's a comparison of him and TSM.
-
Why do I have to come on? I've said "spectacularly shit at times" and "amongst the dross". I'm hardly ignoring the negatives and lavishing endless praise on Lambert.
Time to leave it if your going to be like that.
-
Like what? Pointing out I didn't ignore the negatives?
-
Why do I have to come on? I've said "spectacularly shit at times" and "amongst the dross". I'm hardly ignoring the negatives and lavishing endless praise on Lambert.
Although my confidence in Paul Lambert has been severely tested at times in these past two seasons, I find it hard to condemn him when we are totally in the dark regarding the constraints he is working under.
-
Like what? Pointing out I didn't ignore the negatives?
I think you need to grow up a bit.
-
That's actually made me laugh out loud.
-
Like what? Pointing out I didn't ignore the negatives?
I think you need to grow up a bit.
I love when the person on the wrong side of an argument starts to wag their finger and patronise the person on the right side.
-
Like what? Pointing out I didn't ignore the negatives?
I think you need to grow up a bit.
Yes dad.
-
Like what? Pointing out I didn't ignore the negatives?
I think you need to grow up a bit.
I love when the person on the wrong side of an argument starts to wag their finger and patronise the person on the right side.
It's the way I have been pulled up for saying 'come on'
I have no problem with his Argument,but it is typical PWS.
-
I must say, his objecting to being told to 'come on' seemed pretty reasonable to me. You say 'come on' when someone is, say, claiming the moon landing was hoaxed to cover up Hitler killing JFK, not on a small distinction over Villa performances.
-
I must say, his objecting to being told to 'come on' seemed pretty reasonable to me. You say 'come on' when someone is, say, claiming the moon landing was hoaxed to cover up Hitler killing JFK, not on a small distinction over Villa performances.
First of all the moon landing was real,JFK lives at the bottom of my garden and Bagpuss was real and comes for scraps every day.
Come on is a term used by people every day honest.
-
Thought it seemed a bit patronising and strange, to be honest.
Anyway, has a thread ever had more posts wasted on useless details? I'll restart it: McLeish's main problem was that he was a tactical and managerial coward. Discuss.
-
Thought it seemed a bit patronising and strange, to be honest.
Anyway, has a thread ever had more posts wasted on useless details? I'll restart it: McLeish's main problem was that he was a tactical and managerial coward. Discuss.
It wasn't meant as patronising.Jesus some thin skinned people on tonight.
-
Thought it seemed a bit patronising and strange, to be honest.
Anyway, has a thread ever had more posts wasted on useless details? I'll restart it: McLeish's main problem was that he was a tactical and managerial coward. Discuss.
The one thing I will give him is that at least is that he at least had the courage to give some of the youngsters a chance. Something that cannot be said for his successor.
-
Thought it seemed a bit patronising and strange, to be honest.
Anyway, has a thread ever had more posts wasted on useless details? I'll restart it: McLeish's main problem was that he was a tactical and managerial coward. Discuss.
The one thing I will give him is that at least is that he at least had the courage to give some of the youngsters a chance. Something that cannot be said for his successor.
He had to play them because of injuries, spent every post-match interview blaming them and then pulled them out of the team again as soon as any of the overpaid jobbing pros winched themselves off the treatment table.
-
Thought it seemed a bit patronising and strange, to be honest.
Anyway, has a thread ever had more posts wasted on useless details? I'll restart it: McLeish's main problem was that he was a tactical and managerial coward. Discuss.
The one thing I will give him is that at least is that he at least had the courage to give some of the youngsters a chance. Something that cannot be said for his successor.
He had to play them because of injuries, spent every post-match interview blaming them and then pulled them out of the team again as soon as any of the overpaid jobbing pros winched themselves off the treatment table.
To an extent yes but in comparison we had three centre-backs out when we were to face League One opposition and Lambert still preferred to play a guy who can't even defend properly at right-back to Donacien. We now have both Benteke and Kozak out but you can bet your bottom dollar that he will be going with Grant Holt instead of the likes of Helenius or Robinson.
-
Oh true, Lambert is not anywhere near trusting enough of the younger players. Just McLeish was as untrusting.
-
The celebratory 'fist pump' he made having managed a draw at home to Stoke was one of the most embarrassing and lowest points I can remember while he was here.
I think Alexander Hleb summed him up nicely when he said "The day before a game he would come onto the pitch and show us what to do: 'You stand here, the goalkeeper will give you the ball here, kick it as far as you can and don't pass to anyone nearby. And we all run.'"
I really couldn't give a flying if he was a nice bloke to be honest, is philosophy on football and what he dished up was truly shocking .
-
Oh true, Lambert is not anywhere near trusting enough of the younger players. Just McLeish was as untrusting.
I'd have to disagree. While certain injuries did force McLeish's hand on this issue, it was never at a stage where he had literally no choice but to give opportunities to those he did. Gardner was given his debut in December after a successful loan spell at Coventry. Not down to any particular injury. Weimann was given a run after the winner at Fulham. If Lambert were in charge, he probably would've treated him as he has Callum Robinson and not even given him a chance to impress from the bench in the first place. Not to mention handing Carruthers his debut when we were 1-0 up at Anfield. We both know that is something Lambert wouldn't do in a million years. He wouldn't even bring Robinson on when we were 4-1 up against Norwich for crying out loud.
-
There are absolutely zero redeeming features from McLeish's tenure. Complete and utter unmitigated disaster.
-
yes and we're drowning in a tumult of positive gifts Lambert's bestowed on the club aren't we
-
because he should never have been appointed in the first place.
-
Can I say financial constraints at this point?
-
I felt that McL had lost the crowd completely. It was irreparable. Take for example the crowd singing for Lambert at the end of the season. I'm not sure a club can continue when the disconnect between the manager and the fans is so vast.
If you critically analyse his performance from a neutral performance it was also pretty terrible: derided by the media, awful to watch and signings which now look a complete waste of money (Hutton, Given (whilst pushing Guzan out), Nzogbia and Jenas).
If the real point of the opening post was a dig at Lambert then I do not think he's been anywhere near as bad and ultimately would be leaving the club in a healthier state (lower wage base, some assets which have increased in value and still in the premier league with a young team which the most fans I speak to think quite highly of (in comparison).
-
I think Lamberts doing a fine job, yes the last 2 results have been really bad - but overall with all things considered I wont complain.
At first I thought he shot himself in the foot by refusing to play all the seniors but it's pretty clear over time that he was told to reduce the wages. His signings have been bargain basement and the majority of them have developed really well under his guidance. We've improved results wise from last season and this summer I think he will be only be targeting certain positions so he wont need to spread his budget so thinly.
I say judge him this time next year, and theres absolutely no comparison with McLiesh in my eyes.
-
Is David Cameron a ******? Is Nigel Farage a racist twat? Does 2+2=4? Have we won the European Cup?
This is fun coming up with questions where the answer is blindingly obvious.
-
Is David Cameron a c***? Is Nigel Farage a racist twat? Does 2+2=4? Have we won the European Cup?
This is fun coming up with questions where the answer is blindingly obvious.
Who's been relegated more than any other team? Actually that's a good one as it brings us back round to the subject.
-
Going back to the post that kicked off the OT revival:
He was treated horrendously by the fans ...
- when non-Villa-supporting people ask me about the TSM 'era', I talk about how long-suffering the fans were: it was only at Wigan away (end of Feb) that I first heard anti-TSM chanting. I was surprised it had taken so long ... I think we cut him alot of slack, TBH.
Granted, it got alot worse quickly after that.
.. and given no support from Lerner.
I think that is plain wrong.
He was given a 3 year contract and funds to sign Given, N'Zog and Hutton, all on long contracts and all of whom have proved to be a millstone (Given, TBF, has at least given us some decent performances). N'Zog, for me, was a complete waste and was bought on TSM's vanity as much as anything else (he'd tried desperately to sign him when at the Bloos).
I think TSM was given a good crack of the whip; I just don't think he was up to the job that was required.
-
because he should never have been appointed in the first place.
Is the right answer.
-
He was sacked because he was Fucking Shit.
And the people who recruited him were even Fucking Shitte.
What is worse though, much worse was his appointment - it screamed 'WELCOME TO THE SMALL TIME, VILLA'
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
Try another angle of attack. I am rather bored of that one Dave. There's a good fella.
-
Every time I watched Blose under TSM , it was the worse bloody football I had ever seen.
So why employ him . I will never know.
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
-
^^^^^
this
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
The weird part is that the fan reaction to McLaren appeared to result in Randy closing off that line of enquiry. When the rumours first appeared about McLeish (which right up until it began to look certain, we all thought was a joke) I'm surprised that he didn't listen again. Obviously it's his club, he can do what he wants with it, and you can't always give in to what the fans want, but he seemed to do it regarding MacLaren.
In retrospect we probably should have kept Houllier and McAllister on board, with Houllier taking a DOF role perhaps.
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
The weird part is that the fan reaction to McLaren appeared to result in Randy closing off that line of enquiry. When the rumours first appeared about McLeish (which right up until it began to look certain, we all thought was a joke) I'm surprised that he didn't listen again. Obviously it's his club, he can do what he wants with it, and you can't always give in to what the fans want, but he seemed to do it regarding MacLaren.
In retrospect we probably should have kept Houllier and McAllister on board, with Houllier taking a DOF role perhaps.
McLaren not getting the job had nothing to do with fan reaction and Houllier didn't want to be anything but manager.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
So what, every team in the land however poor they are gets the occasional decent result and performance, and McLeish and Lambert are no different.
They both inflicted pain onto Villa, and one of them is still here as well!
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
The weird part is that the fan reaction to McLaren appeared to result in Randy closing off that line of enquiry. When the rumours first appeared about McLeish (which right up until it began to look certain, we all thought was a joke) I'm surprised that he didn't listen again. Obviously it's his club, he can do what he wants with it, and you can't always give in to what the fans want, but he seemed to do it regarding MacLaren.
In retrospect we probably should have kept Houllier and McAllister on board, with Houllier taking a DOF role perhaps.
McLaren not getting the job had nothing to do with fan reaction and Houllier didn't want to be anything but manager.
I honestly can't remember back to that summer (possibly repressed memories) but did we actually interview Schteeve for the job?
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
The weird part is that the fan reaction to McLaren appeared to result in Randy closing off that line of enquiry. When the rumours first appeared about McLeish (which right up until it began to look certain, we all thought was a joke) I'm surprised that he didn't listen again. Obviously it's his club, he can do what he wants with it, and you can't always give in to what the fans want, but he seemed to do it regarding MacLaren.
In retrospect we probably should have kept Houllier and McAllister on board, with Houllier taking a DOF role perhaps.
McLaren not getting the job had nothing to do with fan reaction and Houllier didn't want to be anything but manager.
I honestly can't remember back to that summer (possibly repressed memories) but did we actually interview Schteeve for the job?
I believe so. I think he talked himself out of contention.
-
At the end of the day, it's not his fault he got job. He was approached by us and must have thought all his Christmases had come at once. He'd have been mad NOT to take it.
The real problem is with the muppet(s) who thought it was a good idea to approach him in the first place.
The weird part is that the fan reaction to McLaren appeared to result in Randy closing off that line of enquiry. When the rumours first appeared about McLeish (which right up until it began to look certain, we all thought was a joke) I'm surprised that he didn't listen again. Obviously it's his club, he can do what he wants with it, and you can't always give in to what the fans want, but he seemed to do it regarding MacLaren.
In retrospect we probably should have kept Houllier and McAllister on board, with Houllier taking a DOF role perhaps.
McLaren not getting the job had nothing to do with fan reaction and Houllier didn't want to be anything but manager.
I honestly can't remember back to that summer (possibly repressed memories) but did we actually interview Schteeve for the job?
I believe so. I think he talked himself out of contention.
Maybe it was his terrible faux brummie accent.
-
He was sacked because we came dangerously close to relegation and the football was awful. We were actually worse than blues the season before when he did get them relegated. Saying it was because he came from blues is just a smokescreen to avoid talking about the football. It was the fans fault the results were so bad? I find that laughable.
-
Wrong person, wrong time, wrong place.
-
Wrong person, wrong time, wrong place.
And everyone knew it, except Randy Lerner of course.
-
Wrong person, wrong time, wrong place.
And everyone knew it, except Randy Lerner of course.
Randy's reasons
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-randy-lerner-believes-165518
-
Wrong person, wrong time, wrong place.
And everyone knew it, except Randy Lerner of course.
Randy's reasons
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-randy-lerner-believes-165518
What a fool that man is.
-
Wrong person, wrong time, wrong place.
And everyone knew it, except Randy Lerner of course.
Randy's reasons
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-randy-lerner-believes-165518
What a fool that man is.
.....Lerner also revealed he was further convinced about the appointment when a letter arrived from Sir Alex Ferguson, the Manchester United manager, praising the decision....
As stated earlier welcome to the small time - old Purple Nose was happy at the appointment of another of his useless Accolytes. Another 6 points guaranteed. He'd have probably wrote a letter if we had hired Mark McGhee
I am flabbergasted that there were 23 worse candidates according to that article. I wonder who they are and what they are doing now.
-
One thing he said there, though, should be noted - Fergie wrote to him after the appointment not before, so this 'on Ferguson's recommendation' stuff is not true.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
So what, every team in the land however poor they are gets the occasional decent result and performance, and McLeish and Lambert are no different.
They both inflicted pain onto Villa, and one of them is still here as well!
The discussion was to do with a comparison of mcleish and lambert. My view is that Lambert has done more in his time here than TSM managed, and the items listed above alone would, imo, back that claim up.
To say that there have been absolutely no positives in Lambert's time is equally as laughable as if someone was to try and argue that everything is brilliant.
-
In fairness, he's not the only one guilty of that on here over the years.
I'm sure we all apologise for the level of our debate not being up to the standards you expect.
I wasn't making a comment about the quality of debate.
-
The fact that there's only one single person on this forum who feels that McLeish was harshly treated says it all really.
To be fair, Dan seems to agree as well, so that's two people. But based on his conspiracy nonsense he does seem to be the suggestible type.
No need to be so dismissive of people who you don't even know.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
So what, every team in the land however poor they are gets the occasional decent result and performance, and McLeish and Lambert are no different.
They both inflicted pain onto Villa, and one of them is still here as well!
The discussion was to do with a comparison of mcleish and lambert. My view is that Lambert has done more in his time here than TSM managed, and the items listed above alone would, imo, back that claim up.
To say that there have been absolutely no positives in Lambert's time is equally as laughable as if someone was to try and argue that everything is brilliant.
Do you still feel the same after today?
-
That line-up at Norwich.
Given
Warnock
Dunne
Collins
Clark
Cuellar
Lichaj
Ireland
Herd
Heskey
Gabby
After less than 25 mins we were 2 down, so needing goals he brought on Bannan, then Gardner, then Baker. That more than even Spurs away summed him up. It's spectacularly shit at times under Lambert, but i'm never as embarrassed by us as I was under McLeish. I'm sure many will feel differently, but i'd rather lose 8-0 at Chavski by being naive nutters who went for it even when getting battered than lose 2-0 at Spurs having started the match hoping for a 0-0.
I'm trying to work out who actually played where in that team. From memory we finished that year with Clark, Warnock and Herd all in midfield essentially just to propect the back 4 even more. I think everyone just accepted it at that point as we were so deep in relegation trouble that was our best bet to just grind out draws. But yeah it does say a lot that the Norwich game we were actually safe and he still played the same ultra defensive teams. Maybe DC5 can ask him why he fielded that team at Norwich when he nexts sees him over the garden hedge in Dorridge?
The funny thing is at the start of that season we actually started the season with CNZ, Gabby, Bent and Heskey in the team so essentially 4 attack minded players. But even those were negative as Heskey was in central midfield for some reasons and CNZ and Gabby were told to protect the full back first and foremost hence why even with those teams we struggle to score and create during the open weeks and why Bent was often isolated.
Alex McLeish was a decent man and certainly respected our club and traditions much more than O'Leary. But he's admitted himself he underestimated the level of vitriol when he moved across Birmingham.
When he was signed we all knew the sort of season we'd get from him aswell, a mid table grind short of excitement which was what it pretty much was until we lost Bent in March and then had a downward spiral.
Paul Lambert got very lucky following McLeish as many of his results have not been better at all.
Conversley Houllier was unlucky he followed MON when fans were still demanding top 6 finishes. If say we'd gone for a bamboozling McLeish type appointment straight after Mon and then appointed Houllier then GH wouldn't have had half as much stick as he received as people were in shock dealing with a relegation battle a year after challenging for a top 4 spot. Now it seems par for the course.
Houllier was the right type as manager (continental, emphasis on youth, possession football, good links abroad) but just the wrong person given he was in semi retirement and had his health issues.
As Paulie always correctly points out it made complete sense we then went after a younger version like Martinez to continue this vision and when he rejected it the board panicked and went back to the British model of counter attacking football and few home wins.
-
McLeish was sacked because he was not good enough.
Lambert is not good enough but they were considering offering him a new contract.
Lambert is no better than McLeish. He might even be worse.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
Jumping about 5 places on the last day of the season helped to paper over the cracks
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
It wasn't the results that ade me feel the way I did about DOL, it was his attitude towards us.
In short, DOL was and is a Cnut who I having nothing but complete contempt for. I'll never feel that way about TSM or PL whatever happens.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
It wasn't the results that ade me feel the way I did about DOL, it was his attitude towards us.
In short, DOL was and is a Cnut who I having nothing but complete contempt for. I'll never feel that way about TSM or PL whatever happens.
Completely agree with every word of that. I have never and don't think I ever could ever again despise a manager as much as I did O'Leary by the end of his stay.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
Jumping about 5 places on the last day of the season helped to paper over the cracks
It helped that every single result went for us on the last day.
Psycologically the most important one for some Villa fans with Blosers getting relegated.
Then again who was laughing (even harder) 6 weeks later.
-
That line-up at Norwich.
Given
Warnock
Dunne
Collins
Clark
Cuellar
Lichaj
Ireland
Herd
Heskey
Gabby
After less than 25 mins we were 2 down, so needing goals he brought on Bannan, then Gardner, then Baker. That more than even Spurs away summed him up. It's spectacularly shit at times under Lambert, but i'm never as embarrassed by us as I was under McLeish. I'm sure many will feel differently, but i'd rather lose 8-0 at Chavski by being naive nutters who went for it even when getting battered than lose 2-0 at Spurs having started the match hoping for a 0-0.
This.
Just the grinding, soul destroying knowledge that when Villa went behind our main aim would be to limit the damage. Villa's darkest season while I've supported them. Extenuating circumstances? Yes. Nice guy? I've no reason to doubt it. We gave him a hard time because he came from the Blues? Utter, utter bollocks.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Anyone see Lerner's comments in that blog?
-
I've only ever hated one Villa manager. I've disliked some, I've hated their time in charge of us and been delighted when they left etc. But outright hated them, only Mr Fickle.
Although if we appointed Alan Pardew it would become two.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
It wasn't the results that ade me feel the way I did about DOL, it was his attitude towards us.
In short, DOL was and is a Cnut who I having nothing but complete contempt for. I'll never feel that way about TSM or PL whatever happens.
Completely agree with every word of that. I have never and don't think I ever could ever again despise a manager as much as I did O'Leary by the end of his stay.
True but I just wonder if, the longer Lambert stays and the more we start getting on his back, whether his "fickle" moment is going to happen. He's a stubborn guy and headstrong, and he's probably got it in him. O Leary did 3 years, Lamberts just coming up to finishing his second. Whether he gets a third, and the opportunity to spectacularly lose the fans, remains to be seen. For his sake and ours, he needs turfing out in the summer.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
It wasn't the results that ade me feel the way I did about DOL, it was his attitude towards us.
In short, DOL was and is a Cnut who I having nothing but complete contempt for. I'll never feel that way about TSM or PL whatever happens.
Completely agree with every word of that. I have never and don't think I ever could ever again despise a manager as much as I did O'Leary by the end of his stay.
True but I just wonder if, the longer Lambert stays and the more we start getting on his back, whether his "fickle" moment is going to happen. He's a stubborn guy and headstrong, and he's probably got it in him. O Leary did 3 years, Lamberts just coming up to finishing his second. Whether he gets a third, and the opportunity to spectacularly lose the fans, remains to be seen. For his sake and ours, he needs turfing out in the summer.
Oh it wasn't just the fickle comments. If only it were.
His non stop banging on about Leeds.
His gushing over Arsenal and whose almost werent worthy to share the pitch with them.
His flippant comments about our support- constantly.
His comments comparing us unfavorably to Charlton.
His total lack of knowledge about our history and traditions- have Villa won the FA Cup!
His finding more passion to pursuing bar maids than he could mulster for managing our club.
Need I go on!
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/may/14/alex-mcleish-sacking-aston-villa
Yes and some people look back on the Houllier / Mcallister reign with fondness.
To be honest, right now I'm looking back at the O Leary reign with a lot more fondness.
That's quite depressing to say that. Not even just his first season but an average second, and poor third season, the latter of which was better than the last 3 years to be honest. DOL buggered off having finished on 42 points. I can't see Lambert even "achieving" that. Very sad state of affairs.
Plus as bad as Doncaster was, it was a footballing masterclass compared to Bradford.
It wasn't the results that ade me feel the way I did about DOL, it was his attitude towards us.
In short, DOL was and is a Cnut who I having nothing but complete contempt for. I'll never feel that way about TSM or PL whatever happens.
Completely agree with every word of that. I have never and don't think I ever could ever again despise a manager as much as I did O'Leary by the end of his stay.
True but I just wonder if, the longer Lambert stays and the more we start getting on his back, whether his "fickle" moment is going to happen. He's a stubborn guy and headstrong, and he's probably got it in him. O Leary did 3 years, Lamberts just coming up to finishing his second. Whether he gets a third, and the opportunity to spectacularly lose the fans, remains to be seen. For his sake and ours, he needs turfing out in the summer.
Oh it wasn't just the fickle comments. If only it were.
His non stop banging on about Leeds.
His gushing over Arsenal and whose almost werent worthy to share the pitch with them.
His flippant comments about our support- constantly.
His comments comparing us unfavorably to Charlton.
His total lack of knowledge about our history and traditions- have Villa won the FA Cup!
His finding more passion to pursuing bar maids than he could mulster for managing our club.
Need I go on!
Still...42 points. That's not to be sniffed at! ;)
No, he was a prize cock. I'm not denying that. But in managerial terms he had a level of competence that Lambert has yet to manage and we played some cracking stuff in his first season.
That said I'm far from getting misty eyed over his regime.
-
The first season of O'Leary we went on a really good run startig just after Christmas when we beat Blackburn 2-0 at Ewood Park. The 93rd minute winner at Boro was a good result with ten men too.
We saw what O'Leary could do without money though, which was struggle.
O'Leary, like Grogory and O'Neill had an advantage in that they were inheriting squads that had the likes of Yorke, Southgate, Taylor, Barry, Mellberg, JPA, Laursen in them, it gives you something to start with.
-
The first season of O'Leary we went on a really good run startig just after Christmas when we beat Blackburn 2-0 at Ewood Park. The 93rd minute winner at Boro was a good result with ten men too.
We saw what O'Leary could do without money though, which was struggle.
O'Leary, like Grogory and O'Neill had an advantage in that they were inheriting squads that had the likes of Yorke, Southgate, Taylor, Barry, Mellberg, JPA, Laursen in them, it gives you something to start with.
Funnily enough it was only when O Leary got a fair(ish) wedge to spend in his final summer, that things went really bad for him. Baros did okay, albeit was inconsistent, and perhaps like Phillips, scoring against the Blose probably put a positive spin on an otherwise mediocre season, but of course it didn't work out with Berger or Bouma (initially). The less said about Bakke the better. Granted only a loan but we'd have been forking out a fair bit on his wages.
-
I remember thinking we could make Europe, top six at the least and then boom, Marelin Harewood scored a hatrick to set the note for the season. It also soured England winning the Ashes.
-
O'Leary never got us and was always going on about Leeds and small squads and sugarbags and some other random stuff, he always had an agenda going on.
In fairness for the first 18 months he got us playing some really decent football and we were top 6 in the league.
The less said about the second half of his reign the better. 05/06 was what we get pretty much nowadays, embarrassing cup defeats and a relegation battle.
-
What's more annoying?:
"Honest bunch of lads"
or
"We go again"
-
Lambert talks about how big a club this is and the need to meet the expectations of the fans. O'Leary would say that we cannot compete with the Charlton's of this world.
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
-
Well off the top of my head there's chelsea at home this season, liverpool away (twice), arsenal away, sunderland at home last season, some excellent football and brilliant goals scored. I'm not denying the shit that has also gone on, but what I've listed alone is better than anything that mcleish did.
So what, every team in the land however poor they are gets the occasional decent result and performance, and McLeish and Lambert are no different.
They both inflicted pain onto Villa, and one of them is still here as well!
The discussion was to do with a comparison of mcleish and lambert. My view is that Lambert has done more in his time here than TSM managed, and the items listed above alone would, imo, back that claim up.
To say that there have been absolutely no positives in Lambert's time is equally as laughable as if someone was to try and argue that everything is brilliant.
Do you still feel the same after today?
Yes I do, as a matter of fact. Another negative (to add to the many he's accumulated) doesn't mean that previous positives have been erased from history. And for clarity, this isn't a defense of lambert, or wishing he's kept on as manager. It's simply acknowledging that it hasn't been *all* bad.
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and say youre tongue is firmly planted in your cheek.
If not then i Couldn't disagree more. Our attendances considering we've won something like 15 home wins out of the last 60 is excellent. Average similar to Everton who are pushing for Champions League again.
If y want to see shit support, support that halves in 3 years I humbly suggest you look across the City.
Home support didn't turn n TSM until penultimate home game, another defeat to fellow strugglers and eventual relegated side Bolton . PL has had virtually no crowd discontent. Maybe it's stirring as I really wouldn't blame anybody after yesterday's game anymore.
Oh, have I mentioned that DOL was a complete wanker.
-
I'm starting to forget how bad things were under Mcleish
-
Well, it certainly didn't include losing 3 successive games by an aggregate of 15-0, Cup exits to sides from all 3 lower divisions, one of them over two legs, and a minimum of 12 home defeats in one season.
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Big deal. All football fans are fickle. It goes with the territory.
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Big deal. All football fans are fickle. It goes with the territory.
Yep, I'm amazed anyone brings it up. Arsenal fans going on about wanting Wenger sacked and then going quiet when they win a few games and go top of the league is proof surely?
All Villa fans ask for from what I can see is some good football, more home wins than we get and a top half finish, that's surely not an unrealistic expectation?
-
Well, it certainly didn't include losing 3 successive games by an aggregate of 15-0, Cup exits to sides from all 3 lower divisions, one of them over two legs, and a minimum of 12 home defeats in one season.
you just don't see the long term plan
-
Can we rename this thread as "Why was Mcleish appointed in the first place".
-
Can we rename this thread as "Why was Mcleish appointed in the first place".
I don't think we'll ever find that out. That will be one of villa's mysteries along with Who stole the fa cup.
-
I'm starting to forget how bad things were under Mcleish
allow me to use the win % statistic to remind you. In the history of Aston Villa there have been 4 managers who have achieved a win % of less than 30%.
The first was Tommy Cummings with 29.03% followed by Tommy Docherty with 28.26% these were completely eclipsed by the worst (IMO) manager we have ever had Billy McNeill with 21.95%.
However TSM managed to eclipse even that with a magnificent 21.43%.
That is how bad it was!
-
How does Lambert's record stand up against that list of dross?
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Big deal. All football fans are fickle. It goes with the territory.
for me, O'Leary's fickle comments should be filed with Lambert's comments about the FA Cup. Both are true, neither should be discussed or admitted openly.
-
How does Lambert's record stand up against that list of dross?
Around 32%. The thing with Lambert is we either win or lose.
-
Another interesting statistic is the points per game assuming 3points for a win
Billy McNeill 1.02
TSM 1.05
Cummings 1.10
GT MkII 1.18
Lambert 1.19
Tommy Doc 1.20
Top of the list is of course one
G.Ramsey 1.80
WJ Smith 1.63
GT Mk I 1.62
Ron Saunders 1.61
Vic Crowe 1.60
-
Another interesting statistic is the points per game assuming 3points for a win
Billy McNeill 1.02
TSM 1.05
Cummings 1.10
GT MkII 1.18
Lambert 1.19
Tommy Doc 1.20
Top of the list is of course one
G.Ramsey 1.80
WJ Smith 1.63
GT Mk I 1.62
Ron Saunders 1.61
Vic Crowe 1.60
That's very interesting. Good ol' SGT making both lists.
-
Another interesting statistic is the points per game assuming 3points for a win
Billy McNeill 1.02
TSM 1.05
Cummings 1.10
GT MkII 1.18
Lambert 1.19
Tommy Doc 1.20
Top of the list is of course one
G.Ramsey 1.80
WJ Smith 1.63
GT Mk I 1.62
Ron Saunders 1.61
Vic Crowe 1.60
That's very interesting. Good ol' SGT making both lists.
Which I guess is why it's not always obvious who will make a good manager.
Just one other point on the worst 5 managers above they all lasted approx 1 year with 1 notable exception.
-
Another interesting statistic is the points per game assuming 3points for a win
Billy McNeill 1.02
TSM 1.05
Cummings 1.10
GT MkII 1.18
Lambert 1.19
Tommy Doc 1.20
Top of the list is of course one
G.Ramsey 1.80
WJ Smith 1.63
GT Mk I 1.62
Ron Saunders 1.61
Vic Crowe 1.60
That's very interesting. Good ol' SGT making both lists.
And the top two weren't managers.
-
Another interesting statistic is the points per game assuming 3points for a win
Billy McNeill 1.02
TSM 1.05
Cummings 1.10
GT MkII 1.18
Lambert 1.19
Tommy Doc 1.20
Top of the list is of course one
G.Ramsey 1.80
WJ Smith 1.63
GT Mk I 1.62
Ron Saunders 1.61
Vic Crowe 1.60
That's very interesting. Good ol' SGT making both lists.
And the top two weren't managers.
Absolutely but they were the secretary of the committee which chose the team. Perhaps we should go back to that method it did us well for 50 years
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Big deal. All football fans are fickle. It goes with the territory.
Be that as it may, it doesn't negate O'Leary's statement.
-
The first season of O'Leary we went on a really good run startig just after Christmas when we beat Blackburn 2-0 at Ewood Park. The 93rd minute winner at Boro was a good result with ten men too.
We saw what O'Leary could do without money though, which was struggle.
O'Leary, like Grogory and O'Neill had an advantage in that they were inheriting squads that had the likes of Yorke, Southgate, Taylor, Barry, Mellberg, JPA, Laursen in them, it gives you something to start with.
O'Leary bought Bouma, Laursen, Sorenson. But yes, he inherited a good squad. He also left behind a decent squad full of internationals.
He, like Ellis, is being made to look much better than we was and is because things have been allowed to get so bad the past number of years.
-
Our fans are totally fickle though. O'Leary was completely right.
Big deal. All football fans are fickle. It goes with the territory.
Be that as it may, it doesn't negate O'Leary's statement.
O'Leary was talking out his arse. He was calling me fickle, as I was one of the hundred or so that were moving to the drinks bar, which as anybody who has been to Adam's Park knows is on the right hand side by the turnstiles.
I objected to being called fickle to be honest, as I am sure the majority of the supporters nipping off to get in the queue would too, especially as we had travelled in good numbers on a mid-week for a second round tie.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
As I have stated before I can't be bothered to want him out(Lambert) as the liklihood with this board we will manage to hire someone worse.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
i remember reading that Lerner was shocked by the reaction of the crowd after the Bolton game, there has not been that type of reaction yet to Lambert. Perhaps there might be if we lose and play badly against Southampton?
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
i remember reading that Lerner was shocked by the reaction of the crowd after the Bolton game, there has not been that type of reaction yet to Lambert. Perhaps there might be if we lose and play badly against Southampton?
Was Randy at the Bolton game in person? That may be a small part of what swayed him.
How many games as he seen at VP this season, in the ground? Sometimes you have to be there to see it. And honestly, do we think he sits in America watching every game on TV or his computer? I'm not sure. It's hard to watch at times. I can imagine he may simply opt for highlights some times.
You can't really fully appreciate the atmosphere inside a ground, without being in the ground. The fact we never see him really doesn't help do anything but give the impression he's only interested in the business aspects now, and his hearts not really into it any deeper. The first few years he came to most of the games.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
i remember reading that Lerner was shocked by the reaction of the crowd after the Bolton game, there has not been that type of reaction yet to Lambert. Perhaps there might be if we lose and play badly against Southampton?
Was Randy at the Bolton game in person? That may be a small part of what swayed him.
How many games as he seen at VP this season, in the ground? Sometimes you have to be there to see it. And honestly, do we think he sits in America watching every game on TV or his computer? I'm not sure. It's hard to watch at times. I can imagine he may simply opt for highlights some times.
You can't really fully appreciate the atmosphere inside a ground, without being in the ground. The fact we never see him really doesn't help do anything but give the impression he's only interested in the business aspects now, and his hearts not really into it any deeper. The first few years he came to most of the games.
He was at the Bolton game. I have little doubt that was the nail in the coffin.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
Mcleish was never wanted by the fans - Lambert was the fans choice.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
Mcleish was never wanted by the fans - Lambert was the fans choice.
McL lost it for my with the statement that a draw against a team of L'Pool's calibre went down as a win in his book!! Pule were less than good at the rime!
-
The reaction after most games is to boo, there has not been a reaction like the one against Bolton.
I suspect if we lost to Southampton that might make a diffrence but if Lerner is not there then perhaps it won't.
Imagine if Mcl had done some of the things Lambert has?
Gone out to Bradford, lost 8-0 at Chelsea and lost 10 at VP.
-
We would have run out of bed-sheets!
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
i remember reading that Lerner was shocked by the reaction of the crowd after the Bolton game, there has not been that type of reaction yet to Lambert. Perhaps there might be if we lose and play badly against Southampton?
Was Randy at the Bolton game in person? That may be a small part of what swayed him.
How many games as he seen at VP this season, in the ground? Sometimes you have to be there to see it. And honestly, do we think he sits in America watching every game on TV or his computer? I'm not sure. It's hard to watch at times. I can imagine he may simply opt for highlights some times.
You can't really fully appreciate the atmosphere inside a ground, without being in the ground. The fact we never see him really doesn't help do anything but give the impression he's only interested in the business aspects now, and his hearts not really into it any deeper. The first few years he came to most of the games.
He was at the Bolton game. I have little doubt that was the nail in the coffin.
I just wonder if Randy's keeping his head in the sand a little bit this season. He knows it's shit but at the same time I'm quite sure as long as we survive that will be good enough for the books.
I don't think Randy wants to pay off another manager. I also think in hiring Lambert he may think he's got a manager on board who, if the worst came to it, could be trusted to bring the club back up if we got relegated.
I don't see Lambert going anywhere.
It'd be nice though if Randy came out to remind us that he's even alive. And as a football club owner, sometimes you have to stick your head through the hole so the spectators can throw wet sponges at you. Randy sightings will soon become akin to bigfoot.
-
McLeish was sacked because his position was untenable once the fans turned on him after the Bolton game. I am surprised this hasn't happened already with Lambert.
Mcleish was never wanted by the fans - Lambert was the fans choice.
Not for me. I found the singing aimed at him at Carrow rd nauseating and almost walked out
Crap manager who should never have got the job