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

[supertom]

There's most definitely a dearth of alternate options out there. As we've seen, despite all that clamour for OGS, he's been shite in England. Likewise many looked on with jealously when Magath ended up at Fulham, and he's turned out to be shite. The previous year we were struggling and despite the animosity, some felt Redknapp would be a good fit here, but he's past it and coasting on what he did at Spurs where his squad and budget gave him access to players you'd be abjectly failing with not to at least get top 6. He's not always been this great champion of free flowing football, played in the glorious way intended. At Portsmouth and Southampton he played a lot of long ball. At QPR he's bought vast amounts of attack minded players but been a very dour and negative manager, and played a lot of hoofball. A few people may say Moyes, but Everton was a long process and it may have been a case of the right club for the right manager. He might have been severely damaged by his time at Utd. He could just as conceivably be a disaster for a club like ourselves, than a Everton-esque success.

If there's one thing we can say for Lambert, despite all his faults, he's not relegated us and he's not taken it as close as McLeish did either (in part because of how atrocious the bottom 3 were last year).

There's so few feasible, safe options out there. The managers who would come here would all be a huge gamble. You don't know which way it would go. We're not in a position as we were in 2006 where we were on the verge of a takeover and we could attract a manager like Martin O Neill, which at the time was a brilliant coup for the club.

I'm quite happy to go for the stability route with how things are and see what Lambert can do with his hands free. If we still scrape our way to survival with the experience we have in the squad, then he should be moved on. As it is, I think he'll see us to glorious mid-table obscurity. Importantly I think he can set us on an upward motion with this squad. It was nigh on impossible with a squad heavy on punts like Sylla, Tonev, Bowery etc. In retrospect, and given the level many of those punts are now playing at (mostly on loan), I think we did fairly well to survive really. It was an experiment. Equal parts brave and foolish. The main orchestrator of which I guess we'll never know.

I'd really like to see us building something over the next four years. Looking up as opposed to down. Building our squad up gradually so the youngsters are eased in with plenty of experience around them rather than all chucked in together with cheap oversea players out of their depth. There's a lot of potential in the side with Grealish, Okore, Bacuna and Westwood. We've also got players like Delphy coming into what should be their prime.

Can Lambert do it? We'll see. He's got as much, if not more chance than anyone else we could attract to the hot-seat as things stand.

[ez]

Stability.

Just a measure of Lerner rewarding a loyal lieutenant I'd say - if nothing else he's just guaranteed Lambert gets a bigger pay-off should he decide to sell any time soon.

Yes. Lerner isn't interested in getting a better manager in.

Given that we're second in the league, we're still at least technically up for sale and you'd sack a manager who has given us our best start for years, who then would want to replace him?

Kind of agreeing with me apart from I didn't say sack him.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

[FrankyH]

Just waiting for the General to start posting again now !

[Marlon's Hairy Wood]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

So you're moaning because Lerner didn't sack him in May, despite him being right not to as we're now doing extremely well and the club's in a healthy place?

Christ.

[Ian.]

Ok not quite £30m... but over £40m on the bench.

That is skewed by two players who were signed under previous managers.

True, but he's kept them unlike the majority of the players he's signed over the past two years before the U-turn.u

Yes who were lower league players bought at very little cost. We have not kissed any money on these. Buying like this is a shot in the dark. It's very rare to find that hidden gem. Westwood is looking like one though.

 

[Villafirst]

Lambert has done very well on such a tight budget. To get to any decent level in the Premier League takes big bucks.

[andyh]

Would he have got a new contract yet had we not made start that we have?
Surely he hasn't been given more 4 years on the back of 4 results?

[pauliewalnuts]

Lambert has done very well on such a tight budget. To get to any decent level in the Premier League takes big bucks.

That'll be great when we get to a decent level, then.

Don't get me wrong, I am not particularly bothered if he's got a new contract or not, but if you look at his record over the last two years, there's not really very much to admire. We've finished 15th and 16th. That's poor.

[Whiney MacWhineface]

He's lost getting on for half the games Villa have played under him, and his Premier League win % is 28. Much of the football has been utterly dismal.

I accept that the new contract doesn't make him less sackable, and I'm chuffed with the four whole games we haven't lost (let's not talk about Orient, eh?) but he's a lucky bloke.

Let's hope the whole thing keeps going well....

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

So you're moaning because Lerner didn't sack him in May, despite him being right not to as we're now doing extremely well and the club's in a healthy place?

Christ.

You didn't read my post, did you?

[Ger Regan]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

So you're moaning because Lerner didn't sack him in May, despite him being right not to as we're now doing extremely well and the club's in a healthy place?

Christ.

You didn't read my post, did you?

I'm not against this contract in the slightest, but we have achieved absolutely nothing yet, so it's a bit stupid to be claiming Lerner to be right after 4 games of the new season.

[peter w]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

We could quite easily lose the next 3 or 4. What chance of a positive to middling reaction to a contract extension then. We need stability throughout the club and getting the manager tied down to a long-term deal certainly stops uncertainty relating to players that Lambert might want to sign, or even existing ones being offered new contracts.

[pauliewalnuts]

Lambert's played a blinder getting this new contract. Why the need to renew after 4 games, if we ignore the humiliation in the cup, I have no idea. Under almost any other circumstances he would have been sacked back in May, if not earlier back in January.

Like the appointment of McLeish, Lerner has a very personal way of judging his managers. Lambert has tactically played Lerner superbly. A fool and his money..

As for stability..I guess it really depends on the type of stability you're looking for. It's certainly no longer a club that functions as a meritocracy, quite the opposite in fact. Still, well done, Paul. Money for old rope.

We could quite easily lose the next 3 or 4. What chance of a positive to middling reaction to a contract extension then. We need stability throughout the club and getting the manager tied down to a long-term deal certainly stops uncertainty relating to players that Lambert might want to sign, or even existing ones being offered new contracts.

I agree re the importance of stability, but it looks like in the reference to the next 3 or 4 games, you're suggesting that we'd best give him a new deal now, in case he loses the next few matches?

[PaulWinch again]

I think the club has a better balance about it now than it has had in the last couple of years, so hopefully we'll be more stable. Fox's comments about building long term and getting Villa back to where we should be are encouraging.