Lambert Out?

[dave.woodhall]

So how does this mean someone was "for it"?

[Rip Van We Go Again]

So how does this mean someone was "for it"?

It was suggesting that he might get some criticism for having a go at the ownership of the club.

Are we clear?

[dave.woodhall]

So how does this mean someone was "for it"?

It was suggesting that he might get some criticism for having a go at the ownership of the club.

Are we clear?

If by criticism you mean disagreement, then we are.

[glasses]

All this talk of Bent not getting a chance overlooks one thing, he's featured 11 times this season.

Benteke has out-performed him and is in the side on merit. The system we set up with doesn't really allow the two of them to play together and Bowery is a more like for like replacement to cover for injuries etc.

We can either change the system to try to accommodate Bent or we can cash in and use the money to buy players that fit the system we play. It's harsh but that's football.   

What are you basing that Bowery comment on Chris?

Fair comment, I should have put something about "the manager sees him as...". The main point though is that he doesn't think Bent fits with the way he wants to play and it's his job to make those decisions.

I don't think the question is whether bent should be playing ahead of benteke- it's whether bent should be playing alongside benteke or at least on the bench.

Nobody I've seen has any gripe about benteke starting. I see no reason why bent and n benteke can't both start, we need goals and gabby has one league goal in 30 games .

It's clear Bent possesses a higher goal threat than Gabby and Weimann, but the thinking in the system Lambert is playing is that Weimann and Gabby will make more space for Benteke to score goals. It's a bit 'all eggs in one basket' mind

[eastie]

All this talk of Bent not getting a chance overlooks one thing, he's featured 11 times this season.

Benteke has out-performed him and is in the side on merit. The system we set up with doesn't really allow the two of them to play together and Bowery is a more like for like replacement to cover for injuries etc.

We can either change the system to try to accommodate Bent or we can cash in and use the money to buy players that fit the system we play. It's harsh but that's football.   

What are you basing that Bowery comment on Chris?

Fair comment, I should have put something about "the manager sees him as...". The main point though is that he doesn't think Bent fits with the way he wants to play and it's his job to make those decisions.

I don't think the question is whether bent should be playing ahead of benteke- it's whether bent should be playing alongside benteke or at least on the bench.

Nobody I've seen has any gripe about benteke starting. I see no reason why bent and n benteke can't both start, we need goals and gabby has one league goal in 30 games .

It's clear Bent possesses a higher goal threat than Gabby and Weimann, but the thinking in the system Lambert is playing is that Weimann and Gabby will make more space for Benteke to score goals. It's a bit 'all eggs in one basket' mind

True glasses, but results and our goal tally suggest its not working.

[Chipsticks]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

[eastie]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

Not in league games he hasn't. That must be including games against lowly tranmere and Swindon.
His win percentage in league games is about 22.5%.

Would be interested in their various league win percentages .

[Archbishop Herbert Cockthrottle]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

Not in league games he hasn't. That must be including games against lowly tranmere and Swindon.

Oh in that case, Lambert out!

[Chipsticks]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

Not in league games he hasn't. That must be including games against lowly tranmere and Swindon.
His win percentage in league games is about 22.5%.

Would be interested in their various league win percentages .

It also includes the win away at Man City, or are they too lowly? A win is a win.

[supertom]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

Not in league games he hasn't. That must be including games against lowly tranmere and Swindon.
His win percentage in league games is about 22.5%.

Would be interested in their various league win percentages .

It also includes the win away at Man City, or are they too lowly? A win is a win.

Martin O Neill won a lot more games than he lost. I'd also guess he drew more games than he won or lost here. Doesn't Gregory have the highest win % from the 90's onwards? Stats like that can be a tad misleading though as Gregory never achieved the points hauls O Neill managed. He managed 60, 63 and then 64 points if I recall. As for little his win % wasn't helped by his first half season or last half season here but you'd have to say he achieved a lot of success with us.

There's very little point bringing that stat in just yet though. We'll see again in 2-3 years, if Lambert is still in charge that is.

[Chipsticks]

Was just browsing his Wikipedia page and noticed he has win percentage of 35.29% with us so far. Not bad at all.

For reference, McLeish had 21.43%, and O'Neill had 42.11%.

Not in league games he hasn't. That must be including games against lowly tranmere and Swindon.
His win percentage in league games is about 22.5%.

Would be interested in their various league win percentages .

It also includes the win away at Man City, or are they too lowly? A win is a win.

Martin O Neill won a lot more games than he lost. I'd also guess he drew more games than he won or lost here. Doesn't Gregory have the highest win % from the 90's onwards? Stats like that can be a tad misleading though as Gregory never achieved the points hauls O Neill managed. He managed 60, 63 and then 64 points if I recall. As for little his win % wasn't helped by his first half season or last half season here but you'd have to say he achieved a lot of success with us.

There's very little point bringing that stat in just yet though. We'll see again in 2-3 years, if Lambert is still in charge that is.

Yeah, I know it's a tad early I just thought it was interesting, if not surprising.

[supertom]

I almost forget sometimes we're in the LC still. Largely because we tend to be out at this point, especially in seasons we're struggling in the league. Hopefully that'll provide a bit of joy. It's not unwinnable given who's left.

[ozzjim]

Is that a round about way of blaming McLeish for how shit we've been this season? Oh come on!
The reason we're shite is because Lerner in his wisdom decided to sell practically all the best players and replace them with infererior ones, nothing to do with the previous manager. We're doing things on the cheap now, and having a poorer team is one of the consequences.

Oh dear.
Now you're for it!

And why might that be? Of the two final sentences, parts of the first are arguable and the second fairly self-evident. There's really no reason for anyone to be "for it."

Didn't Ozzjim describe the comments made about Blandy (by Saunders amongst others)  in the Match thread as 'scandalous' ?

I have no idea. Is Ozzjim not allowed to disagree with anyone?

By all means, but i'd hardly describe criticism of the sleeping Yank 'scandalous.'

I would like to interject here. I never typed scandalous.

I said it descended into the usual snore fest of bashing the owner for not being interested of which there is no proof and appears to be trotted out by certain posters when they run out of other things to have a good moan about, which is simply disagreeing with the posts made on the match thread. I also described it as poisonous, the thread itself, as I felt it was way over the top with people rinsing their hands at a performance that was poor but nothing we had not seen from any of the last 3 managers, the difference being we nicked it on the night.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

The match thread was 'Poisonous'

[ozzjim]

It was. It got more and more out of perspective as grown men lost all control of their perspective, and then for some reason, became about the owner... again.


It amazes me that despite being the overwhelming choice for the job this summer, and despite being backed with 23 million quid give or take, higher than most clubs in the league, the minute something goes wrong it is Lambert out and Randy is the worst owner in the history of mankind with some people. Villa have been a car since the summer MON left, but there are many things that have contributed to that, not just the actions of Lerner and Faulkner who have got plenty wrong, and some things right.