Lambert in or out? Poll reset with majority 'in', 7th May

[PaulWinch again]

It would be nice if someone could ask Lambchop why he bought Sylla, as it seems that it was definitely not for this season... perhaps he is planning ahead! (winky thingy)

I think sadly that looks more and more likely to be exactly what he was doing.

[eastie]

Lambert took a huge gamble not signing a defender - it could be a gamble that costs us tens of millions.

Yes, throwing a couple of hundred thousand at someone like Scharner would probably have been more help than Sylla has been thus far.

But as it looks as though there was very close to bugger all to spend, I'm not sure that in the market we were shopping in it will have made a massive difference.

He was never going to be allowed to do that. After spending the best part of 3 years trying to trim the wage bill we were not going to be able to spend money on expensive, short term fixes who wouldn't come here without the security of a long term contract.

Sharner and upson both went on loan without long term contracts- a player coming here on loan would have had the chance to impress and maybe earn a contract- to say he wouldnt be allowed to sign a player on a short term loan is garbage - lambert even said himself he was looking at the loan market - my guess is he gambled on dunne returning as he was due back in training at the end of the window.

The money spent on dawkins and sylla could easily have been used on a defender.
Lambert didnt say he had no money for a defender - he said he was unable to find one ans wouldnt spend for the sake of it - the failure to sign a defender is lamberts fault , not lerners.

[supertom]

If Lambert would have gone into Randy's office asking for say 5 mill for a seasoned defender. A walk in captain. Potentially someone to organise the defence on the pitch and salvage our season, I cannot see why Randy would say no. There was a bit to spend, it's clear. Nothing major. I just think Lambert's pig headed and it's going to take us down.
It's also probably more likely that he would have been looking at young central defenders. 20 odd, in the lower leagues. One's for the future. Not what we need in the here and now.

I mean signing an unheard of winger in a team that doesn't use wingers? Insanity.

Spending 2 million (or anything close to that) on a French 2nd division player who looks a long way from being a first 11 player for us was also crazy. Lique 2 isn't as strong as the Championship. There's not even a gaurantee this lad will make it next year in the champ.

It's cock up after cock up.

[Chris Smith]

Lambert took a huge gamble not signing a defender - it could be a gamble that costs us tens of millions.

Yes, throwing a couple of hundred thousand at someone like Scharner would probably have been more help than Sylla has been thus far.

But as it looks as though there was very close to bugger all to spend, I'm not sure that in the market we were shopping in it will have made a massive difference.

He was never going to be allowed to do that. After spending the best part of 3 years trying to trim the wage bill we were not going to be able to spend money on expensive, short term fixes who wouldn't come here without the security of a long term contract.

Sharner and upson both went on loan without long term contracts- a player coming here on loan would have had the chance to impress and maybe earn a contract- to say he wouldnt be allowed to sign a player on a short term loan is garbage - lambert even said himself he was looking at the loan market - my guess is he gambled on dunne returning as he was due back in training at the end of the window.

The money spent on dawkins and sylla could easily have been used on a defender.
Lambert didnt say he had no money for a defender - he said he was unable to find one ans wouldnt spend for the sake of it - the failure to sign a defender is lamberts fault , not lerners.

Upson, are you serious?

You're memory is letting you down, he said that he'd enquired about players but that they were out of of our range - presumably he meant in terms of the wages - so wasn't able to proceed.

[PaulWinch again]

Upson is better than our centre halves.

[Clampy]

Lambert was quoted as saying that he enquired about a defender but financially he could'nt do it.

[onje_villa]

What would have been better value for our pennies?

£2m on Sylla to sit on the bench. Or a centre back for the same amount of money?

yep, baffling. Why the fuck he bought him is anyone's guess. One for the Championship?

It's a signing that's got "Salifou" written all over it.

Salifou was just a hopeful punt with a bit of spare change though, not the last throw of the dice to save us from relegation.  Isn't the whole point of the January transfer window to bring in players that can have an impact NOW because you have a glaring deficiency that can't wait till May? Obviously not.

It's only a month-long though Greg, where would you start?

[achilles]

Lambert took a huge gamble not signing a defender - it could be a gamble that costs us tens of millions.

Yes, throwing a couple of hundred thousand at someone like Scharner would probably have been more help than Sylla has been thus far.

But as it looks as though there was very close to bugger all to spend, I'm not sure that in the market we were shopping in it will have made a massive difference.

He was never going to be allowed to do that. After spending the best part of 3 years trying to trim the wage bill we were not going to be able to spend money on expensive, short term fixes who wouldn't come here without the security of a long term contract.

Sharner and upson both went on loan without long term contracts- a player coming here on loan would have had the chance to impress and maybe earn a contract- to say he wouldnt be allowed to sign a player on a short term loan is garbage - lambert even said himself he was looking at the loan market - my guess is he gambled on dunne returning as he was due back in training at the end of the window.

The money spent on dawkins and sylla could easily have been used on a defender.
Lambert didnt say he had no money for a defender - he said he was unable to find one ans wouldnt spend for the sake of it - the failure to sign a defender is lamberts fault , not lerners.

Upson, are you serious?

You're memory is letting you down, he said that he'd enquired about players but that they were out of of our range - presumably he meant in terms of the wages - so wasn't able to proceed.

In the state we currently are Upson would have been a big help but either Lambchop wasn't interetsed or Brighton were prepared to pay more in wages than Villa?

[pauliewalnuts]

Lambert was quoted as saying that he enquired about a defender but financially he could'nt do it.

That is the depressing thing.

The money wasn't there to sign the type of player we obviously desperately needed to strengthen and give us a chance of staying up.

I entirely understand we've got a wage bill problem, but there's no reason to believe the defender in question wanted mega wages - and if he did, we'd have had a fairly good idea prior to the window anyway, so it was probably a waste of time chasing something that was never going to happen.

We had the chance to do something, and for whatever reason, didn't do it. Adding to the wage bill when we didn't want to might have clouded the finances somewhat, but nowhere near as much as getting relegated will do.

[Phil from the upper holte]

What premier league team doesnt have a wage bill problem? All these wankers earn far too much, I simply can't belive that if we didn't sign Sylla and the one from spurs then we couldn't have used that money to sign a defender even if it was on loan for the rest of the season

[PaulWinch again]

Lambert was quoted as saying that he enquired about a defender but financially he could'nt do it.

That is the depressing thing.

The money wasn't there to sign the type of player we obviously desperately needed to strengthen and give us a chance of staying up.

I entirely understand we've got a wage bill problem, but there's no reason to believe the defender in question wanted mega wages - and if he did, we'd have had a fairly good idea prior to the window anyway, so it was probably a waste of time chasing something that was never going to happen.

We had the chance to do something, and for whatever reason, didn't do it. Adding to the wage bill when we didn't want to might have clouded the finances somewhat, but nowhere near as much as getting relegated will do.

Indeed it's a complete false economy. Say we'd brought in a defender on loan for £50,000 a week until May, that's around £1,000,000 until the end of the season. Yes it's an expense, but not doing it looks like it has a very good chance of costing us £60 million in the long run. It's utter utter madness.

[chazvilla]

Sorry if this has already been suggested, but talking experienced CB's - Matthew Upson went on loan to Brighton... surely that would have been worth a punt?  We are crying out for some experience back there...    between the board & Lambert we've committed footballing suicide not sorting that out in January.

[Clampy]

I'm not that big a fan of Upson but bringing in someone like him would have taken the pressure off Clark and Baker.

[PaulWinch again]

The one luxury Lambert had was that our defence is so bad, that any number of options could have improved it. I'm certain there are Championship centre halves better than ours. There's no way they would  have all cost high wages, it was utter negligence not to address our defence.

[eastie]

I'm not that big a fan of Upson but bringing in someone like him would have taken the pressure off Clark and Baker.

Agreed- he went on loan to a lower league club and the money saved on warnocks wage along with dawkins and sylla would have easily covered him or scharner .