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

[Duncan Shaw]

How many sights are there more depressing in football than a fat Darren Bent coming on, strolling around like he just doesn't give a fuck and doesn't care who knows it?

I noticed in the first half when Benteke hit the bar, the whole bench jumped up then pu their hands in their collective heads with an oooh, apart from Bent, who just sat there, emotionless.

[David_Nab]

With Pardew turning things around at Newcastle , Lambert must surely be in the firing line in the media now.He seems to have gotten off quite lightly to this point but the record of the last 6 months is shocking.

[Jimbo]

The most ridiculous thing is that I think that Lambert is probably the most bomb proof manager in the league. I genuinely believe Mourinho has a better chance of being sacked than Lambert.

Of course he does. Any of the big clubs' managers would be gone after six consecutive defeats, never mind around three years of abject failure.

Lambert's cosily bedded into his comfort zone, which means no pressure, which means no improvement. Lerner is thinking only in terms of loyalty, 'stability', not results. He doesn't understand the game, doesn't want to pay off Lambert and doesn't have the stomach for another farcical manager search. He is so detached from reality he doesn't understand the damage he is doing to our club and his investment. And there's hardly any pressure on him, from the fans or the pathetic local media. It's a recipe for disaster.

[Monty]

I do think that, of the six (six!) consecutive defeats, only the QPR match was a really unforgivably poor performance. We might have been poor against, say, Everton, but they can be really good when they want to and better teams than us will be as bad as that, while against Arsenal and City we looked pretty good before their billions of quality really suckered us. Yesterday was a real smack in the cojones - we really were unlucky. Only the performance against QPR really struck me as without any justification, a completely pathetic capitulation to a very, very poor side.

I don't want Lambert, I should make that clear, but if, in future years, people look at the six-in-a-row, five without scoring, they will look at the fixture list and think 'well, that explains it'.

[PaulWinch again]

I do think that, of the six (six!) consecutive defeats, only the QPR match was a really unforgivably poor performance. We might have been poor against, say, Everton, but they can be really good when they want to and better teams than us will be as bad as that, while against Arsenal and City we looked pretty good before their billions of quality really suckered us. Yesterday was a real smack in the cojones - we really were unlucky. Only the performance against QPR really struck me as without any justification, a completely pathetic capitulation to a very, very poor side.

I don't want Lambert, I should make that clear, but if, in future years, people look at the six-in-a-row, five without scoring, they will look at the fixture list and think 'well, that explains it'.

I'm sorry but scoring 1 goal in six games regardless of who the opposition are is unacceptable. West Ham beat Man Citeh, Hull drew with Arsenal, QPR pushed Chelsea. We produce barely anything in nearly all our games and it's pathetic.

[Hillbilly]

The super-apathy field he generates protects him. The media just can't be arsed. Looking at the comments sections of national newspapers, we barely register and when we do, it's to ask what Aston Villa are actually for. Lambert is an atmosphere hoover.

[Monty]

It's really not, though. We have to have perspective. If those six results were mixed up with our opening four, instead of following exactly after them (say, we played Stoke, then Arsenal, then Newcastle, then City, then Hull etc) there's no way people would be as harsh. Consecutiveness doesn't really matter with these sorts of games, it's a fallacy which makes it look worse than it is. It would be nice if we could have got something from these matches - and, by the way, we did by beating Liverpool - but the neutrally-expected result occurred, and that's how it goes sometimes. Only QPR was really unacceptable.

[PaulWinch again]

Having 2 shots on target or less on a concsistent basis regardless of the opposition is unacceptable.

[Ads]

It's really not, though. We have to have perspective. If those six results were mixed up with our opening four, instead of following exactly after them (say, we played Stoke, then Arsenal, then Newcastle, then City, then Hull etc) there's no way people would be as harsh. Consecutiveness doesn't really matter with these sorts of games, it's a fallacy which makes it look worse than it is. It would be nice if we could have got something from these matches - and, by the way, we did by beating Liverpool - but the neutrally-expected result occurred, and that's how it goes sometimes. Only QPR was really unacceptable.

There is something in that. The six consecutive games we have now are pretty kind, as I don't feel West Ham or Southampton are anywhere near as good as Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City or Everton.

Doing something daft like winning a good chunk of them or going unbeaten etc won't alter any of the long term problems. It would make us feel pretty good though.

[Monty]

Our 'style' is defensive, and it was working very well in the opening four matches. If you take it when it works you have to take it when it fails. Against better teams, we couldn't break through like we had done before. I'm not saying I'm happy with the manager or his way of playing football, but every time I hear the supposedly damning statistics I can't help but think "yeah, well...".

I agree, Ads. For that reason, only the QPR match really annoyed me (yesterday was a whack in the guts). If we can get on a run against those teams, the horror of this run will be somewhat lessened.

[HolteEnder96]

If we lose to the hammers and the saints in the next two matches, then surely he has to be sacked?! any manager anywhere else in the country surely would? Come on Randy do us all a favour!

[PaulWinch again]

"I thought we were excellent throughout the game," he said. "OK, we lost but the red card changed the game. There were so many positives today but one disappointment.''

See it's bollocks that we were excellent, we were alright. Also the 'one disappointment' is a pretty big one.

[andyh]

I do think that, of the six (six!) consecutive defeats, only the QPR match was a really unforgivably poor performance. We might have been poor against, say, Everton, but they can be really good when they want to and better teams than us will be as bad as that, while against Arsenal and City we looked pretty good before their billions of quality really suckered us. Yesterday was a real smack in the cojones - we really were unlucky. Only the performance against QPR really struck me as without any justification, a completely pathetic capitulation to a very, very poor side.

I don't want Lambert, I should make that clear, but if, in future years, people look at the six-in-a-row, five without scoring, they will look at the fixture list and think 'well, that explains it'.

I'm sorry mate but I cant agree with any of this.
To me it summaries everything that's wrong with our continued acceptance of defeat.
To coin a phrase and with no malice intended, 'your expectations have been well and truly managed'.

[PaulWinch again]

Our 'style' is defensive, and it was working very well in the opening four matches. If you take it when it works you have to take it when it fails. Against better teams, we couldn't break through like we had done before. I'm not saying I'm happy with the manager or his way of playing football, but every time I hear the supposedly damning statistics I can't help but think "yeah, well...".

I agree, Ads. For that reason, only the QPR match really annoyed me (yesterday was a whack in the guts). If we can get on a run against those teams, the horror of this run will be somewhat lessened.

Yes but you can't look at the first 4 games and say that's what we're normally like defensively. In fact if you look back over the last couple of seasons and then skip to the last 6 games, I'd say those 4 games were probably an anomaly rather than the rule. I don't think a decent defensive team would have conceded 15 goals in 6 games regardless of who they are playing.

[Monty]

My expectations are managed by the relative budgets of the teams. You go on in the fantasy world where we should be challenging the top six again, and I'll pay attention to the reality. Villa are one of those clubs who feel that, if we're not competing, it must be completely our fault. Certainly the club has buggered up, but the state of the game somewhat prohibits teams from entering the top tier without some form of gigantic upheaval, and that's not our fault.

Paul, I don't look at before this season because three out of the four players were different! It's a new defence! Roma and Brazil are good defensive teams, but they conceded fourteen goals between them in one game each against the Germans. Nobody can really defend these days, and we're really not as bad as all that.