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

[ChicagoLion]

I think todays result was because of 1 player, not Lambert.

What a depressing attitude to have. Praise should be given when it's due, as well as criticism.

Yesterday's result was because of 13 players, not Lambert. How can you not realise that?

He's just trying extra hard to find something wrong. A need to be contrary and controversial in a bid to be noticed. It's likely a remnant of a childhood devoid of attention and not getting enough of his mothers bussom.

In fairness, ChicagoLion was posting on March 3rd, so unless he's got amazing powers of vision, it's probably safe to assume he wasn't talking about yesterday's match.

I stand by my point based on his entire history when posting about Lambert.

Well, you were replying to someone who made a point specifically about yesterday's match, hence my pointing it out. Which I just noticed Dave had already done, but even so..

I am nothing like as down on Lambert as he is, but let's be honest, it's not as if there's been nothing to be down about. I don't see the point in resurrecting an argument with someone on a post made two weeks ago.

Yes, fine, which I am sure you'll also take up with Tom and PWS once you're done with me. Fair?

Actually I think raising a post from 2 weeks ago to make an attack I think in boxing terms is called a cheap shot. Yes I have been down on Lambert as have others. He got it right yesterday in every way. I am surprised but even more delighted. I am happy to have a debate about Lambert if any one wants to without resorting to playground stuff.
I have really enjoyed this weekend, because 1 I am a Villa Fan and 2 I absolutely despise Chavski. I wont be letting this pettiness get in the way of that. UTV

[Dave Clark Five]

I'm sitting in the corner thinking long and hard about what I've done.

Following the euphoria of Saturday, you still had time to go back through a 13 day old post to stir the shit.

[Mister E]

There are decent players in several of Lambert's purchases. Leaving aside the obvious one, CB (and he wasn't as cheap as others), Bacuna, Westwood, KEA, Kozak have all proved they can play (yes I include KEA as he's been really good in the last two games). Having almost written off Bennett (and after Newcastle he deserved to be) he proved he can be a good player for us yesterday. Lowton was almost player of the season last season and will come good again I'm sure. Guzan we know about but tend to forget Lambert got him back in. That leaves Tonev, Sylla, Helenius, Bowery, (have I forgotten anybody?) as potential duds, although i'm sure there's a player in Tonev somewhere. I don't think we can complain considering the money he has spent on all that lot if they continue to gel.

and I'd add that of the duds you mention Helenius is the one that has least game time. Is that because he really is a dud or for some other reason.
From the little I've seen he has some skills that might benefit the team ....

[Tom_Mc9?]

I'm sitting in the corner thinking long and hard about what I've done.

Following the euphoria of Saturday, you still had time to go back through a 13 day old post to stir the shit.

Nonsense. I got it wrong - I have better things to do with my time. I also didn't anticipate it would cause that argument!

[Can Gana Be Bettered!?!?]

Anyone else noticed we play much better against teams who don't play with wide men? Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool for example all seem to play this more modern way.

The lower teams still tend to play with wide men, and this is when we tend to have two opposition wide players attacking our one full-back, which we don't cope with as well.

Maybe a change of tactics against these teams would be worth considering?

[Dave Clark Five]

I'm sitting in the corner thinking long and hard about what I've done.

Following the euphoria of Saturday, you still had time to go back through a 13 day old post to stir the shit.

Nonsense. I got it wrong - I have better things to do with my time. I also didn't anticipate it would cause that argument!

It was always going to cause an argument, regardless of which game it was referring to.

[Tom_Mc9?]

Well then, I'm very sorry. Regardless of the game though, my point still stands - credit should be given when it's deserved, just like criticism. I didn't actually say anything too controversial...!

[Matt Collins]

Anyone else noticed we play much better against teams who don't play with wide men? Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool for example all seem to play this more modern way.

The lower teams still tend to play with wide men, and this is when we tend to have two opposition wide players attacking our one full-back, which we don't cope with as well.

Maybe a change of tactics against these teams would be worth considering?

Ah. An interesting point anongst the squabbling. I think there might be something in this. It's also that a lack of width is more suited to playing on the break, denying the team with more of the ball space and time

In theory, we should be able to get our full backs fwd when we have the ball and release them with quick passing between players in the middle. We just don't have enough technically good players to do that often enough.

[MoetVillan]

Voted consistently to keep him.  We have a manager that really wants us to give it a go against the big teams, which means a lot.  We have a manager that is getting results against the big teams which means even more (The so called top four have all dropped points to Villa).  Thats not all down to luck, it means that on a fraction of the budget, he has assembled a team that can compete.  If he can start getting more consistent results against mid tables and lower team chaff, thats what will make us fly up the table.  We have had some dross, but we are slowly improving.  Sacking him would have been incredibly stupid, look at the teams around that have switched, and how much better they have performed.  Palace is about the only success story.  And who would we have brought in?  Ole?

[Ads]

Three wins needed to beat the home form of when we last finished 6th.

Hull, Fulham, Stoke? Doable? Based on the two previous home games I think so.

[danlanza]

Three wins needed to beat the home form of when we last finished 6th.

Hull, Fulham, Stoke? Doable? Based on the two previous home games I think so.

I think we will get more than 3 more wins Ads. I am going for 5.

[GordonCowansisthegreatest]

5 out of 4 is going to take some doing!

[danlanza]

5 out of 4 is going to take some doing!

Just noticed the "Home" bit. Doh.
Ii meant in total, sorry. I think i need glasses.

[Dave Clark Five]

Voted consistently to keep him.  We have a manager that really wants us to give it a go against the big teams, which means a lot.  We have a manager that is getting results against the big teams which means even more (The so called top four have all dropped points to Villa).  Thats not all down to luck, it means that on a fraction of the budget, he has assembled a team that can compete.  If he can start getting more consistent results against mid tables and lower team chaff, thats what will make us fly up the table.  We have had some dross, but we are slowly improving.  Sacking him would have been incredibly stupid, look at the teams around that have switched, and how much better they have performed.  Palace is about the only success story.  And who would we have brought in?  Ole?

I voted consistently to sack him but am happy to be proved wrong. That Chelsea game will be an inspiration to the younger supporters who have never seen any glory and just hear us older fans droning on about it. Long may it continue.

[eastie]

5 out of 4 is going to take some doing!

Just noticed the "Home" bit. Doh.
Ii meant in total, sorry. I think i need glasses.

Our esteemed poster glasses will be online soon .