The Paul Lambert thread - poll reset after our capitulation to Hull

[dave.woodhall]

Damn right I would. It wasn't just one bad result, it was arguably the most humiliating result in our history. I wanted him out there and then and I haven't changed my mind since. He's been nothing but a disaster for Villa stumbling from one embarrassing season to another. I'll raise a glass of something special the day he and Lerner clear off from our club.

One result and you'd sack a manager.

It wasn't just any old defeat, it was 8-0, and he's continued to humiliate us ever since.  Eight bloody nil.

Previous managers have lost in the FA Cup to a fourth division team, gone a season without winning away, got one point in nine games and been bottom of division two.

I don't remember many previous managers lose a game 8-0 though. And by the way Lambert has made a habit of humiliating Villa like no manager I can ever remember in all my years.

But presumably you do remember all those things from managers who didn't get sacked.

[saunders_heroes]

Damn right I would. It wasn't just one bad result, it was arguably the most humiliating result in our history. I wanted him out there and then and I haven't changed my mind since. He's been nothing but a disaster for Villa stumbling from one embarrassing season to another. I'll raise a glass of something special the day he and Lerner clear off from our club.

One result and you'd sack a manager.

It wasn't just any old defeat, it was 8-0, and he's continued to humiliate us ever since.  Eight bloody nil.

Previous managers have lost in the FA Cup to a fourth division team, gone a season without winning away, got one point in nine games and been bottom of division two.

I don't remember many previous managers lose a game 8-0 though. And by the way Lambert has made a habit of humiliating Villa like no manager I can ever remember in all my years.

But presumably you do remember all those things from managers who didn't get sacked.

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

[dave.woodhall]

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

Yet the principle still stands. You can sack him and it might have been for the best, yet sacking the others certainly wouldn't have been.

[PeterWithesShin]

I guess the point is though at the time of the 8-0 it was his first shocker. We had no idea what some of the joys in store were. At the time he'd just taken us into the LC semi-final and we had lost 3 in 12, to the Manc clubs and Chavski. Why sack him him after 1 shocker? As an example, would you have sacked SGT1 after losing 5-0 at home to Bradford? Which is on a par with the Chavski result to me.

[saunders_heroes]

I guess the point is though at the time of the 8-0 it was his first shocker. We had no idea what some of the joys in store were. At the time he'd just taken us into the LC semi-final and we had lost 3 in 12, to the Manc clubs and Chavski. Why sack him him after 1 shocker? As an example, would you have sacked SGT1 after losing 5-0 at home to Bradford? Which is on a par with the Chavski result to me.

Because we lost 8-0 that's why. He should have been sacked the morning after, perhaps then we'd have avoided some of the many humiliations he's inflicted on us since.
And 5-0 will never be as bad as 8-0 no matter how much you try and dress it up.

[saunders_heroes]

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

Yet the principle still stands. You can sack him and it might have been for the best, yet sacking the others certainly wouldn't have been.

You go with your gut feeling. Nothing good will ever come of Lambert, in my opinion.

[dave.woodhall]

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

Yet the principle still stands. You can sack him and it might have been for the best, yet sacking the others certainly wouldn't have been.

You go with your gut feeling. Nothing good will ever come of Lambert, in my opinion.

You would be surprised how many of our supporters were criticising Vic Crowe even midway through 1971-72. Sir Graham got the same every season he was here. You can't sack a manager because of one result.

[PeterWithesShin]

I guess the point is though at the time of the 8-0 it was his first shocker. We had no idea what some of the joys in store were. At the time he'd just taken us into the LC semi-final and we had lost 3 in 12, to the Manc clubs and Chavski. Why sack him him after 1 shocker? As an example, would you have sacked SGT1 after losing 5-0 at home to Bradford? Which is on a par with the Chavski result to me.

Because we lost 8-0 that's why. He should have been sacked the morning after, perhaps then we'd have avoided some of the many humiliations he's inflicted on us since.
And 5-0 will never be as bad as 8-0 no matter how much you try and dress it up.

Here we go as usual, apparently thinking losing 5-0 at home to Bradford is as shit as 8-0 at Chavski is me dressing it up. It really is pointless trying to have a sensible debate with you isn't it.

[ChicagoLion]

I don't like the comments about him being clueless, mumbling or stupid that appear on here with some frequency.  They make the argument against him look a bit 'playground'.

I don't think he's a terrible manager, his record before he came to us is too good for him to be as useless as some believe.

I don't think he's worse than the likes of Pulis, Allerdyce, Pardew, etc.  To me they're all cut from the same cloth and offer similar quality and similar limitations.

I think he is a decent judge of a player.  He realised early on that Bent was a spent force and Given was a reserve at best, he's signed Benteke, Okore, Sanchez, Westwood, Vlaar, Senderos and Bacuna (and resigned Guzan) who all look good enough for 7-10 in the league which is where we're targeting for the time being.  He's also tried to give Robinson and Grealish an exposure to the first team, which is very much the right thing to do.

I think he comes across as a decent guy who genuinely wants what's best for the club and fans and genuinely thinks he can bring that about.  He's also, apparently, very honest in his appraisals of where we're at and what's going wrong.

Add all of that together and I can see the appeal to board in keeping him and why some fans are willing to defend him to the hilt, he's not like Pardew who was struggling for results and was a complete areshole.

The problem as I see it is that it just hasn't worked out every time he seems to get us on the right track something knocks us off again and it's now got the point where pretty much everyone is waiting for the storm after the calm.  The team are a bag of nerves, the manager is scared to make proactive changes in case they backfire, the fans see a 1-0 lead as something to be afraid of and become more and more tense as the games go on.  Once a club is that gripped by fear of failure it becomes almost inevitable and after almost exactly 2 years since it started it's pretty clear that Lambert can't work out how to break free of it.  That's why we retreat into our shells, that's why we play keep ball in our own half, that's why players don't want the ball with an opponent in the same postcode, that's why everything gets snatched at and rushed and looks so disorganised.

It's because of the fear around the club that Lambert needs to go, it's nothing personal about him and once he goes I'll wish him well (within reason) but something needs to change and changing the figurehead is the cheapest, simplest and likely most effective option open to us.

Excellent post, and yes I have used some of those adjective, mainly out of frustration with his decisions and from his post match interviews where he does come across as all of the above and often disingenuous.  You are right though, he has gone past the point where he could turn it around.

[saunders_heroes]

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

Yet the principle still stands. You can sack him and it might have been for the best, yet sacking the others certainly wouldn't have been.

You go with your gut feeling. Nothing good will ever come of Lambert, in my opinion.

You would be surprised how many of our supporters were criticising Vic Crowe even midway through 1971-72. Sir Graham got the same every season he was here. You can't sack a manager because of one result.

It was 8-0, Dave. There are embarrassing defeats and then there are arguably the most humiliating defeats in our history. The 8-0 was the latter.  That's why I wanted him out, and looking back on what's happened since I think I was right. By the way I'm not for one minute saying it's all his fault (that would be our esteemed Chairman), but boy has he played his part.

[saunders_heroes]

I guess the point is though at the time of the 8-0 it was his first shocker. We had no idea what some of the joys in store were. At the time he'd just taken us into the LC semi-final and we had lost 3 in 12, to the Manc clubs and Chavski. Why sack him him after 1 shocker? As an example, would you have sacked SGT1 after losing 5-0 at home to Bradford? Which is on a par with the Chavski result to me.

Because we lost 8-0 that's why. He should have been sacked the morning after, perhaps then we'd have avoided some of the many humiliations he's inflicted on us since.
And 5-0 will never be as bad as 8-0 no matter how much you try and dress it up.

Here we go as usual, apparently thinking losing 5-0 at home to Bradford is as shit as 8-0 at Chavski is me dressing it up. It really is pointless trying to have a sensible debate with you isn't it.

Losing a game by 5 goals isn't as bad as losing one by 8. That's the sensible way of looking at it.

[dave.woodhall]

Indeed, but as I've said before, no manager has humiliated us as much as Lambert has and got away with it.

Yet the principle still stands. You can sack him and it might have been for the best, yet sacking the others certainly wouldn't have been.

You go with your gut feeling. Nothing good will ever come of Lambert, in my opinion.

You would be surprised how many of our supporters were criticising Vic Crowe even midway through 1971-72. Sir Graham got the same every season he was here. You can't sack a manager because of one result.

It was 8-0, Dave. There are embarrassing defeats and then there are arguably the most humiliating defeats in our history. The 8-0 was the latter.  That's why I wanted him out, and looking back on what's happened since I think I was right. By the way I'm not for one minute saying it's all his fault (that would be our esteemed Chairman), but boy has he played his part.

After one match.

[PeterWithesShin]

It depends if you take other factors into account. Losing 7-1 at Chavski under MON was, imo, worse than the 8-0 when you consider our line-ups both times. 5-0 at home to Bradford is as bad, again imo, as 8-0 away at the Chavski team.
Probably the most unacceptable result in my time as a Villa fan was the 3-0 at Doncaster. Because we were completely and totally outplayed that night. Both the 3 and the 0 flattered us.

I'd even say the 3-0 at home to Wigan at the end of the hell week was more humiliating than the 8-0. It was Wigan. At home. Handing us our arses.

[Ger Regan]

We lost 7-1 to Chelsea under O'Neill, which is a similar type of margin to the 8-0 game. Are you saying O'Neill (as much as I dislike him) deserved to go after that?

EDIT: Gah, PWS pips me to the post

[Ger Regan]

I guess the point is though at the time of the 8-0 it was his first shocker. We had no idea what some of the joys in store were. At the time he'd just taken us into the LC semi-final and we had lost 3 in 12, to the Manc clubs and Chavski. Why sack him him after 1 shocker? As an example, would you have sacked SGT1 after losing 5-0 at home to Bradford? Which is on a par with the Chavski result to me.

Because we lost 8-0 that's why. He should have been sacked the morning after, perhaps then we'd have avoided some of the many humiliations he's inflicted on us since.
And 5-0 will never be as bad as 8-0 no matter how much you try and dress it up.

Here we go as usual, apparently thinking losing 5-0 at home to Bradford is as shit as 8-0 at Chavski is me dressing it up. It really is pointless trying to have a sensible debate with you isn't it.

Losing a game by 5 goals isn't as bad as losing one by 8. That's the sensible way of looking at it.

It really isn't.