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

[ROBBO]

As m,uch as i want hime gone i do worry that we are in a position where no-one decent would dare take us on.

[tomd2103]

Personally I think sacking Lambert after the Chelsea 8-0 would have been ridiculous and unjustified. If he'd have got the boot after being knocked out of the cup by Sheff Utd, he couldn't have had too many complaints.

It was the Wigan, Southampton, Bradford and Millwall performances and results that were more deserving of the sack than the Chelsea result.  To be fair to him, he did turn things around towards the end of that season and there was a bit of hope.   

[saunders_heroes]

It wasn't just the 0-8 though it was the following 0-4 then 0-3 then Millwall and Bradford in a week that should have seen him fired.

That's the point. Some people (well, one person) is saying that he should have been fired after the Chelsea game. Not after all the others.

Firing him after that sequence of results would be hard to have argued against, but before that sequence of results is just a tad nutty.

What's nutty is to sweep a record defeat under the carpet.
Yeah I'd have sacked him there and then, and I think I'd have been proven right as well.

[saunders_heroes]

As m,uch as i want hime gone i do worry that we are in a position where no-one decent would dare take us on.

That's a fair point.  What decent manager would take on the Villa job knowing we have a chairman who really couldn't care less about the club?  Sadly I think we're stuck with the pair of muppets till Lerner finds a buyer.

[Clampy]

It wasn't just the 0-8 though it was the following 0-4 then 0-3 then Millwall and Bradford in a week that should have seen him fired.

Strangely, I didn't mind the Chelsea and Millwall defeats so much. When I say I didn't mind, they came across as one off's at the time. No-one saw the 8-0 coming and I was at Millwall and it was a bloody hard game on and off the pitch, although we didn't do ourselves justice on the field. The Bradford exit was horrible though and the fact that we've lost to lower league opposition again twice since then have made people's minds up that he's not good enough which is fair enough. Sacking him after the Chelsea defeat would have been harsh at the time I think.

[Malandro]

I think the fair thing would be to look at his reign over the entire period and I don't understand how he can be defended when you do that.

The ownership issue has caused significant unrest but Randy has provided funds that should have seen us being more competitive. I think most accept we don't have the budget to play like Arsenal but I don't see any attempt to build a team that is difficult to beat.

The norm in the Lambert era has been poor defending, poor possession and now this season poor goal scoring.  At least he's consistent with the results.

[aj2k77]

Personally I think sacking Lambert after the Chelsea 8-0 would have been ridiculous and unjustified. If he'd have got the boot after being knocked out of the cup by Sheff Utd, he couldn't have had too many complaints.

It was the Wigan, Southampton, Bradford and Millwall performances and results that were more deserving of the sack than the Chelsea result.  To be fair to him, he did turn things around towards the end of that season and there was a bit of hope.   

It was after the Newcastle loss at home, from memory I think they'd been playing

It wasn't just the 0-8 though it was the following 0-4 then 0-3 then Millwall and Bradford in a week that should have seen him fired.

That's the point. Some people (well, one person) is saying that he should have been fired after the Chelsea game. Not after all the others.

Firing him after that sequence of results would be hard to have argued against, but before that sequence of results is just a tad nutty.

What's nutty is to sweep a record defeat under the carpet.
Yeah I'd have sacked him there and then, and I think I'd have been proven right as well.

I don't think there would have been much support for Lerner or the club sacking him so soon, it would have gone down as another barmy decision but results and performances since have shown that giving him more time has achieved only balancing the books and the stability of being perennial relegation battlers.

That might be mission accomplished as far as Lerner is concerned though.

[joe_c]

It wasn't just the 0-8 though it was the following 0-4 then 0-3 then Millwall and Bradford in a week that should have seen him fired.

That's the point. Some people (well, one person) is saying that he should have been fired after the Chelsea game. Not after all the others.

Firing him after that sequence of results would be hard to have argued against, but before that sequence of results is just a tad nutty.

What's nutty is to sweep a record defeat under the carpet.
Yeah I'd have sacked him there and then, and I think I'd have been proven right as well.

How?

[Malandro]

I also think Randy is acutely aware that he has made some bizarre decisions and is therefore reluctant to sack somebody that he has just given a new contract to.

[Toronto Villa]

As m,uch as i want hime gone i do worry that we are in a position where no-one decent would dare take us on.

That's a fair point.  What decent manager would take on the Villa job knowing we have a chairman who really couldn't care less about the club?  Sadly I think we're stuck with the pair of muppets till Lerner finds a buyer.

yes because there would be no decent manager that would want to run a massive football club, capable of attracting 35-40k gates with any hint of success, in arguably the most high profile, cash rich league in the world.

[gpbarr]

I think the fair thing would be to look at his reign over the entire period and I don't understand how he can be defended when you do that.

The ownership issue has caused significant unrest but Randy has provided funds that should have seen us being more competitive. I think most accept we don't have the budget to play like Arsenal but I don't see any attempt to build a team that is difficult to beat.

The norm in the Lambert era has been poor defending, poor possession and now this season poor goal scoring.  At least he's consistent with the results.

Its called money. And we dont have it. Here end'eth the lesson.

[Clampy]

As m,uch as i want hime gone i do worry that we are in a position where no-one decent would dare take us on.

That's a fair point.  What decent manager would take on the Villa job knowing we have a chairman who really couldn't care less about the club?  Sadly I think we're stuck with the pair of muppets till Lerner finds a buyer.

yes because there would be no decent manager that would want to run a massive football club, capable of attracting 35-40k gates with any hint of success, in arguably the most high profile, cash rich league in the world.

Quite.

[brian green]

Toronto your posts are usually right on target but the big deterrent to any manager, good bad or indifferent coming to us is the uncertainty which surrounds the club.   All the other things you describe are big positives but without a known owner in place it is like Curiousorange said on another thread in a perfect little aphorism "we have a future without a time frame".   Wish I had said that.

[JUAN PABLO]

I hold lambert wholly responsible for the WBA debacle .
Poor team selection and crap tactics. Responsibility is firmly his here.

It wasn't a 'debacle'. Playing with 10 men for 70 minutes would have been tough whoever we were playing. It was a combination of a lot of things on the day.

One shot on goal all game ?? In a local derby. As for Richardson , he should never have been selected.
And the tactic of passing backwards from goal kicks - genius that one !

Richardson should be at reading or wigan

[Toronto Villa]

Toronto your posts are usually right on target but the big deterrent to any manager, good bad or indifferent coming to us is the uncertainty which surrounds the club.   All the other things you describe are big positives but without a known owner in place it is like Curiousorange said on another thread in a perfect little aphorism "we have a future without a time frame".   Wish I had said that.

Thank you Brian. I might contend though that the uncertainty didn't stop a very promising executive leave Arsenal to join us. And as we all know with managers, they can always jump at the chance of managing a major club and if it doesn't work out for whatever reason get fired and paid out. I don't think the uncertainty of the club would really deter that many managers to be honest who would view the opportunity as a step up or forward in their own careers. Other than the guys at the top of the managerial food chain, IMO most would see Aston Villa as a great career move.