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

[saunders_heroes]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

[Boz]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

Fair enough, but not having signed a new contract and a big payoff

[eastie]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

If lambert does get the push then that would be 3 appointments made by faulkner which had not worked - would you trust him to make a 4th?

[Monty]

I think it's pretty generous to give him too much more, but it's a generosity born of caution I think, at least from the POV of the chairman. Lambert is clearly ambitious in terms of his career but his football is lacking in innovation and flair. Lerner's and Faulkner's lack of football understanding means that they seem to fail to see this dissonance, but there we are.

[bertlambshank]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

If lambert does get the push then that would be 3 appointments made by faulkner which had not worked - would you trust him to make a 4th?

Faulkner does what he is told.

[Clampy]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

In Houiller's defence, he had a horrendous injury list to contend with early on in the season.

[bobdylan]

He also had quality like Young and Downing available and £30mill to spend in Jan.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

I disagree. We finished the season under Houllier not only winning but playing some great football. Some of the goals in those last few matches involved some of the most fluid football seen by a Villa side since Sir Brian. Whilst the 9th place finish flattered us you could see that the team were finally starting to play some great football and why it was complete lunacy to bring in McCleish.

I'm hoping like Clampy we put a good run together between now and the end of the season. On paper we've got some very winnable games, especially at home. The ball is firmly in Lambert's court and it's his to prove he actually deserves to be the manager of Aston Villa.

[Legion]

We also had a lot of winnable games on paper since Christmas and did not do particularly well.

[eastie]

We also had a lot of winnable games on paper since Christmas and did not do particularly well.

Exactly , there are no easy games in this league - we took one point at home to palace , sunderland and west ham .

[Rudy Can't Fail]

We also had a lot of winnable games on paper since Christmas and did not do particularly well.

Indeed and something needs to change, especially at Villa Park. I couldn't see how any chairman could support a manager with currently the worst home record in over 40 years. Fortunately he still has time to rectify the record. Will he? I've no idea as there's very little to base an opinion on one way or the other.

[Concrete John]

If lambert does get the push then that would be 3 appointments made by faulkner which had not worked - would you trust him to make a 4th?

It depends on what your criteria is for 'worked'.  Houllier was doing OK until medical issues got in the way, so from a footballing perspective I think it was a decent appointment.  TSM less said the better and Lambert splits opinion right now.

If a manager has to get us back to where we are under MON in order to be regarded as a success, then that take sone of two things:- money or patience.  And quite probably both.  So unless we start investing heavily in the team again and allow the wagebill to go back up, the likelihood is that those wanting shot of Lambert will also want shot of the new guy before long.   

[OCD]

We seem to make a decision to sack a manager and then look around at what managers we might be able to get. Instead, why don't we draw up a specification of what exactly we want and then start sounding them out. If they're interested, then do the deed. It might not be the most ethical approach to talk to managers when we still have one but everyone else does it and we're not in a position to take a moral high ground in something that is so accepted. For me, I would want someone who would build a possession football model throughout the club.

[Clampy]

Unless we go down, I'd let him take us into next season. If next season we're still losing home games and  struggling to beat lower league sides in the cup, then he can't have too many complaints if he's replaced.

I can understand that view even if I think it's bordering on the very generous.

Would you offer him now a new extended contract, Clampy?

I'm not sure i'd call it very generous. For me, he'd be out on his ear if we went down but there's also a possibility we could have a good run and finish a comfortable 10th. So to answer your question, no I wouldn't.

That would paper over the cracks though. Just like it did in Houllier's season when we had a good run at the end and finished 9th, and last season when we won a few games at the tail end of the season. There's something fundamentally wrong at Villa and it needs to be addressed.

The ball is firmly in Lambert's court and it's his to prove he actually deserves to be the manager of Aston Villa.

This sums it up for me. I don't think he's done well enough to earn himself a new contract, but at the same i'm glad we haven't gone down the silly sacking route like some other clubs have.

[Concrete John]

We seem to make a decision to sack a manager and then look around at what managers we might be able to get. Instead, why don't we draw up a specification of what exactly we want and then start sounding them out. If they're interested, then do the deed. It might not be the most ethical approach to talk to managers when we still have one but everyone else does it and we're not in a position to take a moral high ground in something that is so accepted. For me, I would want someone who would build a possession football model throughout the club.

Tony Mowbray?