Lambert Out?

[Ad@m]

I don't think it would have meant O'Neill admitting he was wrong so much as him having to face the prospect of slipping backwards and the image he'd built for himself as the New Clough slipping - and that was never going to happen. A pity in a way, because it would have been interesting to see whether he could have worked under restrictions and more importantly whether he could have got Milner, Young & Barry to stay for longer.

Milner had already decided to go hadn't he?

It all got a bit confusing from what I remember. Didn't O'Neill say something about him wanting a move then Milner denied it, or similar?

I think Milner did deny it, but then wasn't the fact that O'Neill wanted all the Milner money to spend and Lerner saying no the major tipping point?

The only one who knows is MON but that's how I understood it.  It also stacks up that MON then argued Lerner had made his position untenable by not giving him the money and that was how MON got a payoff from the tribunal.

That would surely not have amounted to a sum anywhere near what he is rumoured to have got. Is it not just possible that he was sacked?

He was on a rolling 12 month contract and the rumoured settlement was approximately a year's salary so not entirely unreasonable.

As for being sacked, it's possible but highly unlikely.  The current trend for potentially controversial sackings is to say the manager has left 'by mutual consent'.  There was none of this here - the club were very clear in their statement that MON had resigned and they've been publicly consistent with that view ever since.  No one has ever mentioned a sacking.

[hawkeye]

I don't think it would have meant O'Neill admitting he was wrong so much as him having to face the prospect of slipping backwards and the image he'd built for himself as the New Clough slipping - and that was never going to happen. A pity in a way, because it would have been interesting to see whether he could have worked under restrictions and more importantly whether he could have got Milner, Young & Barry to stay for longer.

Milner had already decided to go hadn't he?

It all got a bit confusing from what I remember. Didn't O'Neill say something about him wanting a move then Milner denied it, or similar?

I think Milner did deny it, but then wasn't the fact that O'Neill wanted all the Milner money to spend and Lerner saying no the major tipping point?

The only one who knows is MON but that's how I understood it.  It also stacks up that MON then argued Lerner had made his position untenable by not giving him the money and that was how MON got a payoff from the tribunal.

That would surely not have amounted to a sum anywhere near what he is rumoured to have got. Is it not just possible that he was sacked?

it is pretty simple, one side kept meticulous notes of every conversation, the other side did not,

[Dave Clark Five]

At least in the old days we could have established how much the payoff was. Was it a year's salary or was it £9 million?
Anyway, regarding the current manager, it is a pity that our home attendances have not lived up to expectations right from the start of the season until now.

[Eigentor]

A sacking doesn't seem plausible.

What seems pretty clear is that there was a meeting between Randy, Faulkner and MON. After the meeting Randy went back to the US. A couple of days later MON resigned. It seems likely that neither Randy nor Faulkner expected this to happen.

What happened in the meeting was probably the reason why MON resigned. Because he had stated earlier, in public, that he would stay as manager even if he didn't get much money to spend. Or, and this is not unlikely either, he changed is mind and realised that he wouldn't be able to develop the team without yet another £x million to spend on another set of defenders. Even if it meant going back on what he had said publicly. This could explain why MON has been so keen on keeping the reason for his departure undisclosed: he left for reasons that he had said earlier wouldn't make him leave.

[not3bad]

this is the first managerial choice that Lerner has made which has coincided with the choice of at least a few of the club's supporters.

More than a few I think.

On the day TSM was sacked a statement was issued by the club that was written by Randy in which he basically admitted he'd got it wrong for the last two years.  At the time most people gave him credit for this admission, and said it was the first step to putting things right.  Since then the decisions made for Aston Villa seem pretty solid.

Now things are going badly are we to ignore this admission, and the things that have been done since, and put him on trail all over again?

[tomd2103]

this is the first managerial choice that Lerner has made which has coincided with the choice of at least a few of the club's supporters.

More than a few I think.

On the day TSM was sacked a statement was issued by the club that was written by Randy in which he basically admitted he'd got it wrong for the last two years.  At the time most people gave him credit for this admission, and said it was the first step to putting things right.  Since then the decisions made for Aston Villa seem pretty solid.

Now things are going badly are we to ignore this admission, and the things that have been done since, and put him on trail all over again?

I genuinely don't think that is the case.  Maybe what many supporters underestimated was the effect the last two years have had on the club and just how difficult it is going to be to turn it round. 

As for the question about sacking Paul Lambert, I couldn't disagree more.  I don't think it will happen, but if the worst comes to the worst and we do go down, I still think we should stick with him  as I feel he will get it right given time.

[KevinGage]

Why would he be sacked on the eve of a campaign and not earlier in the summer? 

I can see why some might interpret enforcing a new set of working conditions as 'effectively' sacking him. 

But that's not the same as actually sacking him.

What we know: 

-He was told about getting the wage bill down as far back as April 2010  - maybe even earlier than that.  April was when it first got mentioned in the press, with a list of players who were for the chop circulated. 

-RL (and the General) confirmed the wage bill issue at the end of the season-  but still said money would be available when players were moved on (or sell to buy, as Nuresy and co repeated ad nauseam that summer and beyond).

-The Milner deal was mooted early in the summer - and MON confirmed the player wanted out soon after the start of pre season training.  There was no suggestion -at this point- that the loss of Milner would make MON walk

-Luke Young and NRC both turned down moves late into pre season.  Fulham's move for Sidwell broke down once Hodgson left. No deals were on the table for Shorey, Davies and Harewood

This part- I accept- is speculation, but was widely reported: 

He wanted Keane, Parker and McGeady.  But with only Milner going out and Ireland coming in, the wage bill issue was no closer to being addressed :  indeed it's possible it would actually be increasing. 

MON- getting desperate-  tried to lean on RL.  He might have had some success with this tactic before.  But RL -determined to get tough for once-  said "speak to the Chief Exec." 

MON doesn't get exactly what he wants = MON walks. 

[Ad@m]

I think it was even simpler than that:

-  Randy was sick of the losses and lack of success so told MON he had to get the wage bill down and that he was pretty much on a sell-to-buy policy;
-  MON ignored the wage bill issue (or just couldn't shift players on silly contracts he'd signed them on) and just assumed he'd be able to spend the Milner money;
-  Randy told him that as the wage bill hadn't been addressed he was going to use the Milner money to balance the books;
-  MON spat his dummy out and quit, before suing the club for constructive dismissal or breach of contract on the grounds he didn't have full control over footballing matters.

Anyway, that's all ancient history now.

Sack Lambert?   You must be joking!!!

[Pat McMahon]

We need to give Paul Lambert our full backing.

Long term I am convinced he can do a good job for us. The short term looks like it will be a shaky ride.

[eastie]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/why-paul-lamberts-norwich-template-for-success-1394262

Not sure which thread is best for this but a very interesting read.

[Mister E]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/why-paul-lamberts-norwich-template-for-success-1394262

Not sure which thread is best for this but a very interesting read.

Good summation of several of the current threads here.
A victory on Saturday may be all it takes to get the team / squad in a more positive and assertive frame of mind ...

[silhillvilla]

We need to give Paul Lambert our full backing.

I will again use the Long Haul flight analogy. We've hit some turbulence 10 mins into the flight. What you don't do is throw the pilot out of the plane.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

MON- getting desperate-  tried to lean on RL.  He might have had some success with this tactic before.  But RL -determined to get tough for once-  said "speak to the Chief Exec." 

MON doesn't get exactly what he wants = MON walks. 

At Celtic, O'Neill regularly gave pronouncements to the Scottish press that he was 'considering his future' whenever he couldn't get his way.
This was highlighted in Archie MacPherson's 'Flower of Scotland' book.

[danlanza]

We need to give Paul Lambert our full backing.

I will again use the Long Haul flight analogy. We've hit some turbulence 10 mins into the flight. What you don't do is throw the pilot out of the plane.

And quite right to. Our club was dragged to the point of no return last season and Lambert has to be given time to work on it. This is not a crisis, just the start of a transitional period and i for one, although a little dissapointed at the moment, am full of confidence for us with Lambert in charge. If we can give the TSM 3/4 of a season before we went mental then Lambert deserves more before we start talking about stuff like this.

[Risso]

We need to give Paul Lambert our full backing.

I will again use the Long Haul flight analogy. We've hit some turbulence 10 mins into the flight. What you don't do is throw the pilot out of the plane.

As long as he pulls out of the nosedive before we hit the ground......