Just when you think that things couldn't get any worse....

[TheSandman]

Okay, we sack Lambert and we approach Easter Island Head. What tells his backers he is going to run out on West Ham mid season when they are a decent sized club who are six points better off? He won't. If the Fat Dudleyonite came at any time it would be at the end of the season. And I don't think there is any chance of him doing so if we're in the Championship which just so happens to be where many of the same people who are talking him up believe we will be.

I've always had this weird belief that we should appoint the right man for Aston Villa rather than the first doomed lifeboat off a sinking ship. If we sack Lambert, I'd like us to go and get that guy, not Samuel 'Long Ball' Allardyce. Especially when the idea of him joining is a downright unlikely flight of fantasy invented by the supporters of his current team more in hope than expectation.

[eamonn]

It was widely accepted that we underperformed last year, due to the conservative nature of the manager. 

We could (and probably should) have been well clear of any notions of relegation long before we lost Petrov at the tail end of the campaign. And -as unpopular as this might be- was he really a key influence for us by that stage? 

There were post many match threads advocating we needed better than Stan as far back as 2010/11, that he tired quickly, was slowing down (not that he was ever particularly quick) and was a yard or two off the pace.

Regardless, if his absence left such a huge void, the current manager had the funds to address that.  He failed to do so. 

We underperformed in 11-12 because we lost Young/Downing and host of other talented players that saw us plummet to 16th. Not because TSM was a completely useless tool. You suggest the influence of Petrov wasn't that big of a deal. That facts of the run in suggest otherwise. I think I'd prefer to side with those over your opinion. You also say the manager had the funds to address the squad? Are you saying you know how much room he had to deal with on the wage bill? The way that Hutton (who came out and said he was rejected for financial reasons) and Warnock were dealt with certainly seems to suggests there was very little room for manoeuvre on this front. Or are you basing this view solely on transfer fees?

So you think that sacking McLeish was harsh? 16th was as good as we could have hoped for? Like when it happened with O'Dreary, I would argue we under-achieved and that's why both managers were given the heave-ho.

As you stated, Young and Downing were sold in summer 2011. McLeish chose to sign N'Zogbia as one replacement and failed to get the best out of him while Albrighton, after a fine season under Houllier, was meant to mitigate the loss of the other winger. Presumably there was also hope that Stephen Ireland would be brought back into the fold and that this would further lessen the impact of Young and Downing's departures. Challenging tasks, but ones McLeish believed he was cut out for. As with Zog, McLeish failed to get any consistency from Albrighton or Ireland.

The only other "host of talented players" we lost in summer 2011 were Friedel and L Young. Replaced by Given and Hutton respectively - like N'Zogbia, two more resounding successes and still chewing off the wage bill (Given for another three and a quarter years). Reo-Coker left too, but Delph was emerging and Jenas was also brought in despite his horrendous injury record. So, I'd say, largely by virtue of his dour football, failure to get the most from key and emerging players and dodgy transfer decisions, McLeish failed.

I do agree that Petrov's absence was and is a big blow. As Dave mentioned, he was beginning to add goals to his game last season and his presence over the last 12 months would have won us a fair few more points, I'm quite sure.

Finally, regarding Lambert's budget last summer - while we don't know for sure, Fulham's acceptance of our bid for Clint Dempsey and this money being separate to the funds earmarked for the subsequent purchase of Benteke (don't have a quote for that but Lambert said as much according to posts I've read on here) suggests that there was more to play with than the manager spent. Conflicting reports that this money, or  approx 5m-7m, was available in January but not spent as opposed to the only hard evidence that saw us bring in two more wannabee top flight players on deadline day will mean different people will believe different things to suit their stance.

Personally, I have a bad feeling that Lambert might be far more comfortable coaching young, unproven talents and shies away from players who have more PL experience than him. The instant jettisoning of Warnock and Hutton, his difficulties involving Bent and now Ireland (some of those players you might argue are now unmanageable) and there's been enough comments from him completely downplaying the importance of experience at this level to suggest that there might be something in that.

[eastie]

Having just read the last  few pages its clear that the pro and anti lambert brigade have made up their mind and are unlikely to be convinced by the other side .

My stance is that lambert has not bought badly but my problem with him has been team selections, formation and tactics rather than his signings, he has taken over 20 games to settle on his best formation and best team and even now im not sure he knows - his motivational skills also seem questionable .

There have been signs in the last couple of games that we have improved but lets see how the next 12 games pan out - i hope for all our sakes that he gets it right and turns things around .

[LeeB]

I'll tell you what, it makes a fucking change in the modern game to have a manager trying to sort the club out for the long term, a long term that he probably won't feature in or get credit for.

[Dave]

Having just read the last  few pages its clear that the pro and anti lambert brigade have made up their mind and are unlikely to be convinced by the other side .

Of course people are going to change their mind. Opinions change as the evidence changes. I'm pretty sure that if we win every game between now and the end of the season to finish eighth then you'll probably change your mind about wanting him fired.

If he loses every game and we finish bottom then I expect a lot more people will begin to want him sacked.

[LeeB]

Having just read the last  few pages its clear that the pro and anti lambert brigade have made up their mind and are unlikely to be convinced by the other side .

My stance is that lambert has not bought badly but my problem with him has been team selections, formation and tactics rather than his signings, he has taken over 20 games to settle on his best formation and best team and even now im not sure he knows - his motivational skills also seem questionable .

There have been signs in the last couple of games that we have improved but lets see how the next 12 games pan out - i hope for all our sakes that he gets it right and turns things around .

I haven't made up my mind to be pro or anti anything, I'm just applying reason.

Things can change.

[Dave]

Okay, we sack Lambert and we approach Easter Island Head. What tells his backers he is going to run out on West Ham mid season when they are a decent sized club who are six points better off? He won't. If the Fat Dudleyonite came at any time it would be at the end of the season. And I don't think there is any chance of him doing so if we're in the Championship which just so happens to be where many of the same people who are talking him up believe we will be.

To be honest, I'd assumed that this is when the rumour is referring to.

As sendo has pointed out, Allardyce is out of contract at the end of the season and at the moment this looks very much like a tactic by his agent to see a new contract put in front of him.

However, we get relegated, Lambert is moved on, Allardyce is out of a job, Faulkner sees a manager to whom he doesn't need to pay compensation with recent experience of getting a recently relegated side promoted.

I don't think it's particularly far-fetched.

[Clampy]

I think the time to really worry is when a manager loses the dressing room and i've not seen any sign of that with Lambert as yet.

I said after the Everton game that i felt we were turning the corner slowly, especially away from home. Not many teams go to Goodison and score 3 goals. We know where the main problem lies though so if we can sort that out, then hopefully we should be ok.

[eastie]

Can i ask your opinion on lambert and his reign so far dave , or are you reserving judgement?

[eastie]

I think the time to really worry is when a manager loses the dressing room and i've not seen any sign of that with Lambert as yet.

I said after the Everton game that i felt we were turning the corner slowly, especially away from home. Not many teams go to Goodison and score 3 goals. We know where the main problem lies though so if we can sort that out, then hopefully we should be ok.

We have been here before though clamps, after liverpool away we thought we had turned the corner , after swansea at home we saw good signs , lets hope this time we continue to show good signs - arsenal and man city may not be ideal games but both are in a bad run and it may suit us playing them now.

I think if we could put 2 or 3 good results together we would see confidence rise - heads drop quickly and with confidence flowing the team may be much better.

It is sad that we have lost the lead in the dying minutes at swansea , albion and everton - a couple of wins there would have really lifted everyone.

[Dave]

Can i ask your opinion on lambert and his reign so far dave , or are you reserving judgement?

Very disappointing but not without promise. At least he seems to have ideas about what he wants to do, even if he's not been very good at implementing them. For me that's better than not having the ideas in the first place (like the last bloke).

If the decision was taken to fire him then I don't think he can have too many complaints, but I would be very worried about who would be next in the door. It's like not like the people making the decision have shown much aptitude for it so far.

[eastie]

Can i ask your opinion on lambert and his reign so far dave , or are you reserving judgement?

Very disappointing but not without promise. At least he seems to have ideas about what he wants to do, even if he's not been very good at implementing them. For me that's better than not having the ideas in the first place (like the last bloke).

If the decision was taken to fire him then I don't think he can have too many complaints, but I would be very worried about who would be next in the door. It's like not like the people making the decision have shown much aptitude for it so far.

A fair assessment .

[Clampy]

I'm with Dave on his assessment of Lambert. It's a bit like the Houiller season. He's made huge gaffes, his tactics at times are questionable to say the least and some of the results have been embarrasing. Like Houiller though, he does seem to be looking to the future and he's trying to get us playing football worth watching again.

The players he has brought in have been on the whole ok. It's just that whilst his transfer dealings have been meant for the long term, he forgot about the short term and that's been his main downfall.

[Ads]

Noble's stats show he's scored 4 goals to Westwood's 0, and makes nearly twice as many passes and tackles a game.

If you're giving the ball away more by hacking it up field, then you're going to need to make more tackles.

[eastie]

Im not against his new signings as they all shown promise although kea has been disappointing and bennett has potential maybe more as a left midfielder- for me its more the tactics and formation that have worried me, we have seen at times the team can play very well even against the likes of man utd, liverpool, everton but i find that he got so little from them against much lesser teams very disappointing.

To play so well at anfield and so poorly against wigan for example- lets hope things have turned the corner this time.