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

[SoccerHQ]

Stoke finished 9th.

Do Stoke and Newcastle have significantly superior squads to us that they should be finishing 9th and 10th each season with 50 + points while we flounder in 15th not even reaching 40 points?

We're miles away from the top 8 but I don't accept we should be a good ten points off those two.

[Ads]

They played 36 other games and finished 9th deservedly. Whether we should be closer to them isn't the point, but rather Stoke are starting from a significantly higher position than we are. We spend £7 million to try and bridge the gap to upper mid-table. And people, with a straight face, are suggesting the financial constraints point is bollocks.

[hilts_coolerking]

If we can't afford to bring in the better players we desperately need then we should hire a manager who can get the most out of the players we have.  It seems plain to me that Lambert is failing to do that.

[paul_e]

They played 36 other games and finished 9th deservedly. Whether we should be closer to them isn't the point, but rather Stoke are starting from a significantly higher position than we are. We spend £7 million to try and bridge the gap to upper mid-table. And people, with a straight face, are suggesting the financial constraints point is bollocks.

It's not bollocks but it is overstated and used a shield to hide what he's done badly.  Aside from that there were enough rumours in the summer that it's reasonable to suggest that the finances might not be as tight as Lambert would have us believe, largely because if he does spend 25-30m he loses his main excuse.  To sum it up better, we had at least 8m more to spend in the summer an Lambert thought the best use of that money was Tom Cleverley rather than looking for the winger/inside forward that we're desperately crying out for in the formation he chooses to play.

I do think he's generally bought good players when he's spent decent money but I don't think his transfer 'plan' is good enough.

[eamonn]

His one saving grace is his ability in the non-UK transfer market. It marks him out as more than a shit MON in one way, but possibly the only way.

And no matter how crap a lot of our players are - and I don't believe they're any worse than half of the division, his coaching of them and tactics employed surely mark him out as someone who is not good enough for this league.

[Matt Collins]

We could have afforded an arnoutovic (less than Tonev), diouf (free), bojan (also lesss than Tonev) and that's the position Lambert has never recruited successfully in. The three behind the striker. We need a minimum of two new players to play there

[PeterWithesShin]

Both Bojan and Arnoutovic could well have cost more than Tonev, depending on what site you look at. And while they've done better than Tonev I don't think either have done enough to leave me gutted we didn't sign either of them.

[Dave]

We could have afforded an arnoutovic (less than Tonev), diouf (free), bojan (also lesss than Tonev) and that's the position Lambert has never recruited successfully in. The three behind the striker. We need a minimum of two new players to play there

True, but compare good signings to bad signings from any club and one can prove any point. Stoke could have bought Benteke for the same as they spent on Kenwyne Jones.

They could have bought Vlaar and Okore for what they spent on Wilson Palacios.

[SamTheMouse]

I don't care about the money situation, to be honest. He hasn't got bags to spend, but has signed reasonably well. And he hasn't led us to relegation yet, so fair enough on that. Well done, Paul.

The problem I have with him is that his tactics are utterly woeful, and his team consistently play eye-bleedingly, pancreas-shreddingly shit football. And two and a half years into his tenure, and with probably his strongest eleven available, his team STILL plays shit football.

Maybe in 2042 he'll put together a side containing players who can actually pass a fucking football to each other with some regularity, and pose some sort of attacking threat that doesn't involve a full-back straight out of 1976 having to create every single one of our fucking chances.

But I don't imagine anyone of us really fancies waiting that long, so he can piss off now.

[Des Little]

If the worst happened on Sunday, would/could Lambert's time be up?

[PeterWithesShin]

If the worst happened on Sunday, would/could Lambert's time be up?

I'd say he should be sacked if we lost. But I doubt he would be. We'll win any way.

[Dave]

The problem I have with him is that his tactics are utterly woeful, and his team consistently play eye-bleedingly, pancreas-shreddingly shit football. And two and a half years into his tenure, and with probably his strongest eleven available, his team STILL plays shit football.

I agree, but it's sort of the only thing that means that 1% of me thinks that he might still make it work. The huge problems that we've had have bit-by-bit been sorted out.

The other year, when every cross, free-kick or corner meant we conceded a goal. Remember cornalties? Sorted. I'm pretty confident that we could concede a dozen corners in succession now and we'll happily clear them all. That would have been unthinkable 18 months ago.

Lowest possession in the league? Stoke City turn up and get more than 50% possession in a match for the first time ever in their half decade in the Premier League? Fine, let's turn 30% ball possession into 70% ball possession.

This is the frustrating thing - eventually a problem is sorted, but it's at the expense of all the other stuff. Whack one mole and another pops it's head up. He'll probably work out a way to sort of the goalscoring like the other problems that he's managed to sort out. But it'll be at the expense of something else and we'll all get angry about a new set of records that said new problem brings about.

[walsall villain]

If the worst happened on Sunday, would/could Lambert's time be up?

I'd say he should be sacked if we lost. But I doubt he would be. We'll win any way.

Blackpool are in such a mess, to lose this one doesn't seem very likely. They have scored 18 and only won twice, high scoring game not too likely!

[silhillvilla]

There can be no hiding place if we don't win.

[IAmTheOneIanOlney]

The problem I have with him is that his tactics are utterly woeful, and his team consistently play eye-bleedingly, pancreas-shreddingly shit football. And two and a half years into his tenure, and with probably his strongest eleven available, his team STILL plays shit football.

I agree, but it's sort of the only thing that means that 1% of me thinks that he might still make it work. The huge problems that we've had have bit-by-bit been sorted out.

The other year, when every cross, free-kick or corner meant we conceded a goal. Remember cornalties? Sorted. I'm pretty confident that we could concede a dozen corners in succession now and we'll happily clear them all. That would have been unthinkable 18 months ago.

Lowest possession in the league? Stoke City turn up and get more than 50% possession in a match for the first time ever in their half decade in the Premier League? Fine, let's turn 30% ball possession into 70% ball possession.

This is the frustrating thing - eventually a problem is sorted, but it's at the expense of all the other stuff. Whack one mole and another pops it's head up. He'll probably work out a way to sort of the goalscoring like the other problems that he's managed to sort out. But it'll be at the expense of something else and we'll all get angry about a new set of records that said new problem brings about.

That is an excellent summation and one that leaves you thinking he could eventually be the manager we want him to be. Sadly, it would also require even more patience from the supporters and also from the players, some of whom most likely won't want to risk their careers stagnating or will be tempted away while we wait for the changes to take effect.