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

[KevinGage]

With a few exceptions, this season has largely been arse biscuits.

We could do without the instability of another new manager hunt, but -being honest-  I don't see how another year of this benefits anyone; ourselves, Lambert or the players.   

There would have been enough signs by now that he's on to something, were that actually the case.   All I can see happening next year is that we execute his ( deeply limited) plans with a bit more effectiveness, maybe scratch out an extra 2/3 wins.   And even that would depend on keeping Benteke and doing good business in the summer.

It's a bit of a stretch to think that a team so dire in possession for two years are suddenly going to undergo a Damascus-like conversion and shoot up the table, playing stylish, swashbuckling football on the way.

[Irish villain]

I think we will Lambert buy the players of quality to allow us to play the way he envisaged back in 2012.

Well, fingers crossed you are right. All any of us wants is the best for the club even if we might disagree along the way.

[caster troy]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Because those same players played excellently against all the teams currently making up the top four in the Premier League.

It is a conundrum so it is

Our record against the top 4 : P7 W3 D 1 L3

Arsenal away was a bit of a fluke, we caught them cold on the opening day and got two penalties and a breakaway goal when they had no defence at the end. Man City and Chelsea I will give you, good performances, but they are teams that come to Villa Park and try desperately to win, which plays into our hands. Lambert has had 2 years to figure out a way to beat the lesser teams at home and I can't see any difference between our dismal attempt v Stoke last week and our efforts against WBA/Norwich/Everton in his first few games in charge. He still just chucks on more strikers, plays with no width and essentially goes 'hit and hope.' It isn't good enough.

[Toronto Villa]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

[London Villan]

We have become world class at that in the last couple of years...

[saunders_heroes]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

It happens more often to Villa than it does to most other PL clubs though. That's the worrying part.

[Monty]

We're just good at the counterattack. Doesn't matter who it is - different teams have different players but everyone has the same space, and we're good at exploiting that space on the break. We aren't really good at anything else though.

[caster troy]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

My point is Lambert already has better players than a lot of teams he can't beat, so giving him more quality players probably won't make any difference.

In F1 if a driver has a better car than half the field but still keeps losing to drivers in slower cars, giving him an even faster car won't necessarily solve the problem, because it might be that he is just a poor driver in the first place.

[Chris Smith]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

My point is Lambert already has better players than a lot of teams he can't beat, so giving him more quality players probably won't make any difference.

In F1 if a driver has a better car than half the field but still keeps losing to drivers in slower cars, giving him an even faster car won't necessarily solve the problem, because it might be that he is just a poor driver in the first place.

It all gets analysed to the nth degree but we have a mid table squad and we have spent all season in mid table as you would expect. I'll take that given what went on in the couple of years before.

[villa `cross the mersey]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

My point is Lambert already has better players than a lot of teams he can't beat, so giving him more quality players probably won't make any difference.

In F1 if a driver has a better car than half the field but still keeps losing to drivers in slower cars, giving him an even faster car won't necessarily solve the problem, because it might be that he is just a poor driver in the first place.

It all gets analysed to the nth degree but we have a mid table squad and we have spent all season in mid table as you would expect. I'll take that given what went on in the couple of years before.

Including watching us get beaten 9 times at home? Hardly good for season ticket sales .

[Archie]

100% agree with Caster Troy. Puzzled that someone  does not agree with his obvious and wise statements.
For the 1st time in my life I am not sure to understand the thought of some fellow Villa fans. What else should Lambert do to convince them that is not the right man for the job, after humiliating our great old tradition?

[Monty]

Without wishing to take away from the points we've earned from our matches against the better sides, it does seem to me a risky strategy indeed to rely on these games for the points which keep us out of relegation trouble, given that beating these sides necessarily involves more luck than beating any others as they are quite a lot better than us.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'll wait and see where we finish before proclaiming us to be mid table, to be honest. I'm far from convinced of our ability to get results between now and the end of the season.

We're currently 12th at a time when 11th and 16th are separated by three points. I am not suggesting we're about go get relegated, and I hope we put in a final 6 or 7 games as we did last season, but it's far from impossible to envisage us finishing up exactly where we were last year - especially if the last two matches are anything to go by.

This season has been horrible. As pointed out above, nine home losses in the league and we still have three to go. Christ, that is truly awful.

[pauliewalnuts]

Without wishing to take away from the points we've earned from our matches against the better sides, it does seem to me a risky strategy indeed to rely on these games for the points which keep us out of relegation trouble, given that beating these sides necessarily involves more luck than beating any others as they are quite a lot better than us.

And given that the vast majority of clubs aren't actually top sides at all. Those are the sides we need to start beating. Or at least drawing against more often, rather than losing to them.

[caster troy]

We already have more quality than Bradford, Sheff Utd, Palace, Swansea, Fulham etc but couldn't beat them. What evidence is there to suggest that if we give Lambert more money for 'better' players that we would see any improvement?

Man City, a team worth the GDP of Africa couldn't beat Wigan a team from the Championship in two successive FA Cup games. Not sure what your point is. All teams lose to teams they should beat and will continue to do so for ever and ever.

My point is Lambert already has better players than a lot of teams he can't beat, so giving him more quality players probably won't make any difference.

In F1 if a driver has a better car than half the field but still keeps losing to drivers in slower cars, giving him an even faster car won't necessarily solve the problem, because it might be that he is just a poor driver in the first place.

It all gets analysed to the nth degree but we have a mid table squad and we have spent all season in mid table as you would expect. I'll take that given what went on in the couple of years before.

Fair comment. I am more negative personally because I only go to home games, and I make us third from bottom on home results only. Even Cardiff who are pretty awful and have had to cope with a ludicrous managerial change and fan protests have managed 2 more points than us at home.