Is this what transition looks like?

[sirlordbaltimore]

Ha. I challenge anyone brave enough to sit through either that cup final or Sunday's game again and tell me the former wasn't a better performance

[Monty]

Ha. I challenge anyone brave enough to sit through either that cup final or Sunday's game again and tell me the former wasn't a better performance

You're right, Sunday's defeat was the only game of the season so far.

[sirlordbaltimore]

Eh?

[Richard E]

Also the only player to run like a girl.

JPA was known for that as well...

[Monty]

Eh?

Your contention was that the Cup final was better than watching the games of this season, and then said that it was specifically better than Sunday's performance, an atypical match to choose as it was clearly our worst of the season so far. If you feel the performance at Fulham was representative of this season, I can only conclude that you have forgotten that other matches this season have taken place.

[not3bad]

Ha. I challenge anyone brave enough to sit through either that cup final or Sunday's game again and tell me the former wasn't a better performance

Award for the most pointless argument of the year goes to...

[Toronto Villa]

Ha. I challenge anyone brave enough to sit through either that cup final or Sunday's game again and tell me the former wasn't a better performance

why would anyone want to do that and why the hell does anyone really care? Not even sure what you would be able to prove by doing that other than they were both disappointing games. If you trying to make out that Sunday is the standard of our football under Lambert then you're completely wrong. If you are to suggest it was a bad day and we need to fix a number of things that have crept into our general play in recent weeks then you probably are a lot closer to the truth.

[pauliewalnuts]

Ha. I challenge anyone brave enough to sit through either that cup final or Sunday's game again and tell me the former wasn't a better performance

why would anyone want to do that and why the hell does anyone really care? Not even sure what you would be able to prove by doing that other than they were both disappointing games. If you trying to make out that Sunday is the standard of our football under Lambert then you're completely wrong. If you are to suggest it was a bad day and we need to fix a number of things that have crept into our general play in recent weeks then you probably are a lot closer to the truth.

I'm largely with you in general terms re the transition, but let's be honest, so far this season, more often than not, last Sunday has been a pretty good indicator of the standard of our football.

The results haven't been too bad thus far, but, whilst I understand that "Rome didn't get built in a day" thing, and that whole "we're a mid table club, that's what mid table clubs do" argument, and sympathise with them, it strikes me that Sunday was a pretty decent reflection of the way we've played.

Look at recent games.

fulham - shit performance, shit result
southampton - unconvincing performance enlivened by scoring some good goals, good result
sunderland - shit performance, ok result
albion - half a terrible performance, half a good performance, ok result
cardiff - ok performance, good result
west ham - shit performance, ok result
everton - mediocre performance, poor result
spurs - shit performance, poor result
hull - shit performance, ok result.

There are definite positives - I'd much rather play badly yet get the result, that is one of the obvious ones. However, to counter that, I am not sure what kind of results we'll find ourselves with if we play the rest of the season out in that style. Teams that don't keep the ball, and surrender possession as easy as we do generally find themselves struggling.

We are also defensively way more resilient than last season. That new defence coach has made a difference. That's another positive.

So while I get, and agree with most of, the arguments about why we're playing the way we are, I find it really hard to argue that - first two games of the season apart - Sunday isn't a pretty good reflection of the way we've played this season - by which I mean, a tendency to sit back and hope to counter attack, a failure to keep the ball, an inability to pass very well, an almost total lack of creativity from midfield, deeply unconvincing full backs, that sort of thing.

[Monty]

While this is the case, Paulie, I do think it's unfair to only include what is essentially an odd run of form. We've had plenty of types of form under Lambert, and if this is the equivalent of our drop-off this time last year (perhaps the gashest run of form in the history of professional sport) then that is undeniable progress.

[pauliewalnuts]

While this is the case, Paulie, I do think it's unfair to only include what is essentially an odd run of form. We've had plenty of types of form under Lambert, and if this is the equivalent of our drop-off this time last year (perhaps the gashest run of form in the history of professional sport) then that is undeniable progress.

That's a pretty long spell of time to include for a run of form, though, that's what, nine or ten games listed there?

We've failed to score in 8 of our 15 games. Our home record is still terrible.

I'll carry on supporting Lambert, but when the iffy period (in terms of performances, but not points, before anyone jumps on that) stretches almost the entire length of the season so far, it's not surprising when people raise their eyebrows.

Last season, we had people crucifying Lambert, wanting him sacked etc etc.

Those of us who stood by him, a lot of us did so on the basis that "the results are poor, but you can't just look at it that way, the performances hint at progress being made".

This season it is almost the opposite, the results suggest improvement is being made, but the wider picture, in terms of performances, is far less convincing.

I defended him on the basis of the first scenario last year, I don't think there's any reason to not feel a bit disappointed with him on the basis of the second. It's at least consistent (ie looking beyond just results).

Like I said, though, I do think that Sunday's performance (which wasn't our worst, BTW) has a fair amount in common with quite a few of our matches this season, and wasn't just a particularly bad day at the office.

I totally agree re if this is the equivalent of, say, our post xmas period last season, then it's improvement, and will  see if it turns out that way, but the argument above seemed to me to be that we haven't actually had much of a spell of poor performances, which doesn't really tally with what I've seen, and I consider myself very much pro-Lambert.

[pelty]

Paulie has stated my thoughts perfectly and better than I ever could. I am fairly concerned about our current style of play and think it is not unreasonable to think that if we continue to play this way, we may find that the results begin to go against us and that we will be flirting with danger once more. I am not anti-Lambert, but I am not particularly pro-Lambert, either. The gaping hole that is our midfield has needed addressing for at least two windows thus far and little has been done to solidify it. We can point to the various additions from Westwood to Sylla and so forth, but for whatever reason (about which we could argue), they have not brought the sort of heft necessary to thrive, rather than merely survive, in the league.

[Toronto Villa]

I'm of the position that the current run of form is just temporary as we transition from a team that is a disaster at the back to one that is more responsible. I just don't think Lambert expected it go so horribly wrong with our strikers and I don't think he saw our ability to string passes together diminish to what has become. There's no excuse for that. However picking two games that were shit in our history doesn't make that the norm. It's just how it is right now and I have no reason to believe it will last forever. Also as an exercise it would be meaningless and drive anyone to reach for a rusty blade.

[Monty]

I'm not saying that Lambert's necessarily my favourite manager in the world, certainly in terms of style, but I feel he's a serious manager who thinks carefully about his decisions, rather than the McLeish/Pulis/MON old school which relied largely on old cliches and unconsidered (and often plain wrong) gut instinct. Our defense has improved markedly, not a mean achievement when you consider that two of our defensive signings are injured (the best one out for a very long time) and our first choice right back is going through a quite amazingly bad run of form. Our attacking has suffered thanks to this refocus, but Lambert's certainly earned the right to a little patience, especially considering the turnaround he managed at the end of last season.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm of the position that the current run of form is just temporary as we transition from a team that is a disaster at the back to one that is more responsible. I just don't think Lambert expected it go so horribly wrong with our strikers and I don't think he saw our ability to string passes together diminish to what has become. There's no excuse for that.

You're right, there's no excuse for it, and I don't think for a second that this is the way Lambert wants us to play, but ultimately, this is how we are playing.

Weimann, Westwood (lesser extent), Benteke for me have been awfully off form, but isn't it Lambert's job to fix that? Players being off form is something that seem to get use to explain or justify the team's struggles, but this isn't something nobody can do anything about. He is the manager, he is meant to get them on form. He's also meant to get us passing the ball, too.

I think we probably - as a natural feature of the well of support he still has - start talking about these as if they're things that can't be helped, like bad winters for farmers, for example, but they're not.

Lambert is meant to sort these things out. I hope he does, and am glad that he'll be able to do so from 11th after almost a half of the season rather than 17th, because it's much easier this way, but he has absolutely got to sort it out, because when more and more people start looking at how we are playing and thinking it's not much better than the previous three years, I think he is going to find out that that support is not without limits.

but Lambert's certainly earned the right to a little patience, especially considering the turnaround he managed at the end of last season.

Of course he has. I wouldn't even consider sacking him, not for a second, but he needs to deliver, because it's obvious that the quality this season has not really been there.

[Monty]

It certainly hasn't, and we're too reliant on not having the ball. We seem to be playing as a cliche of ourselves at the minute, too wild and too reckless, and the funny thing about being too wild and too reckless is that you give the ball away a lot and end up being exceptionally boring. In particular, Westwood seems to have bought into that and is no longer playing his patient game of last season. A bit of sense from him would go a long way towards helping the side, but one problem is that we don't really have anyone to bring in to replace him when he's out of form. That is Lambert's fault to some degree (though the arguments about Kozak vs. Hypothetical Playmaker X have been well rehearsed).