Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 If you were enjoying the season before the previous 2 games then good for you. I wasn't. We averaged a point a game and were having a record low home form season. No surprise you're back now because before the last 2 games you had little evidence to back up your opinion. I'll see how the season ends, hopefully it continues like the last two games. And if it doesn't, what? You get to come on here and type a big fat 'I told you all so', well done you.That's more than a bit harsh. All the guy is doing is putting forward his opinion. We have been brilliant over the last two games but not so good before that and he's only stating the truth. Except we were fantastic against Liverpool, entertained against West Brom... What annoys me is that whenever these bursts of good form happen certain people talk as though it is the first time it has happened, not only this season but under this manager. Then the next time we lose, as we may do next week, it's back to square one with them. The fans are as inconsistent as the team. People acknowledged both those games you mentioned. The issue was that instead of building on it we went ultra defensive with Holt upfront against an Everton team there for the taking. That's been the issue, we haven't attempted to play the way we have in these good results and performances enough. Those of us unhappy with the manager wanted and expected better, while others told us to lower our expectations even when things were record breaking shit. And oh look, things can be better than losing and playing shit. The last two games are what we should be doing more. Who is moaning about the last 2 games? You kept on going on about us having 28 points from 27 games and I was pointing out that that's no longer the case. Well yes that's obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I can't believe people think it's a simple as just flicking a switch and playing the same way every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I can't believe people think it's a simple as just flicking a switch and playing the same way every game. I don't think its simple. I do believe a manager can set out how he wants his team to play and too often we've relied on hoofing the ball long and failing to keep possession. The Everton game is the perfect example of why your above point is rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted March 17, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted March 17, 2014 I would take 10th before the start of this season. But still, i would say Southampton still are miles above us in terms of quality. Southampton have more quality than us in certain positions but if the rumours about Shaw, Lallana etc being off at the end of the season are true they will quickly return to obscurity. AVFC were in exactly the same boat when we had the likes of Milner, Young etc Frankly I think it will be very difficult for the likes of AVFC to ever do much better than 6-8 under the current system. We like Southampton are feeder clubs for those above us. If any of our players break through and are seen to have real talent they will be poached. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) I can't believe people think it's a simple as just flicking a switch and playing the same way every game. I don't think its simple. I do believe a manager can set out how he wants his team to play and too often we've relied on hoofing the ball long and failing to keep possession. The Everton game is the perfect example of why your above point is rubbish. How is it rubbish? There have been a lot of comments on here in the last few months which give off the message that Lambert somehow has the option of replicating performances like against Liverpool or West Brom but for some reason decides that he wants us to play poor, ineffective football. Edited March 17, 2014 by Mantis 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I can't believe people think it's a simple as just flicking a switch and playing the same way every game. I don't think its simple. I do believe a manager can set out how he wants his team to play and too often we've relied on hoofing the ball long and failing to keep possession. The Everton game is the perfect example of why your above point is rubbish. How is it rubbish? There have been a lot of comments on here in the last few months which give off the message that Lambert somehow has the option of replicating performances like against Liverpool or West Brom but for some reason decides that he wants us to play poor, ineffective football. He does have the option of choosing how this team plays. He's the manager. It won't always work and it won't always be brilliant but he can choose if we are going to keep the ball on the floor and attack or if we're going to defend and hit benteke in the air the minute we get the ball. Like I said the Everton game was a perfect example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm not disputing that he'll sometimes set us up to play more direct (that isn't always a bad thing though) but it seems as if some people think that replicating excellent performances is something easy that can be done every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm not disputing that he'll sometimes set us up to play more direct (that isn't always a bad thing though) but it seems as if some people think that replicating excellent performances is something easy that can be done every week. I doubt anyone thinks that. The frustration is seeing how well we can play and then in other games seeing us set up in such a negative way. The Chelsea game at the start of the season was a loss but I was delighted with the approach to the game and how we played. We lost a 2 goal lead against Liverpool but again I was delighted with how we approached the game and how we played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bannedfromHandV Posted March 17, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 17, 2014 If you were enjoying the season before the previous 2 games then good for you. I wasn't. We averaged a point a game and were having a record low home form season. No surprise you're back now because before the last 2 games you had little evidence to back up your opinion. I'll see how the season ends, hopefully it continues like the last two games. And if it doesn't, what? You get to come on here and type a big fat 'I told you all so', well done you. That's more than a bit harsh. All the guy is doing is putting forward his opinion. We have been brilliant over the last two games but not so good before that and he's only stating the truth. Except we were fantastic against Liverpool, entertained against West Brom... What annoys me is that whenever these bursts of good form happen certain people talk as though it is the first time it has happened, not only this season but under this manager. Then the next time we lose, as we may do next week, it's back to square one with them. The fans are as inconsistent as the team. People acknowledged both those games you mentioned. The issue was that instead of building on it we went ultra defensive with Holt upfront against an Everton team there for the taking. That's been the issue, we haven't attempted to play the way we have in these good results and performances enough. Those of us unhappy with the manager wanted and expected better, while others told us to lower our expectations even when things were record breaking shit. And oh look, things can be better than losing and playing shit. The last two games are what we should be doing more. Who is moaning about the last 2 games? You kept on going on about us having 28 points from 27 games and I was pointing out that that's no longer the case. Well yes that's obvious. So what you're saying is that we should be winning matches and playing well? As opposed to when Lambert sends the team out to play really poorly and draw or lose? You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGregor1888 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It was a brilliant result for the club, fans and team against Chelsea and that can't be denied by anyone with any sense but by the same token it is not neanderthal thinking to suggest that the manager's record is currently much less than superb. Those who have criticised him have as must right to do that as those who now awash him with praise. I don't think fans who are praising him "now" are doing it on the back of one result, there's been pretty consistent voices around here who can see the bigger picture and the context of our performances. Of course, people have the right to be critical, but my point is that even when presented with evidence that quite clearly shows we are progressing there are people who will say otherwise. Yes, there have been times when the team has struggled this season but some people are willing to put such performances into context and not allow such growing pains to derail the whole project. This is the Premier League's youngest squad and we had five (or was it six?) academy lads in our squad on Saturday. What we are doing is not easy and not a quick fix - there are going to be days that try our patience but, at the end of the day, you have to show some faith in what is going on and not panic over the slightest setback. Overall Lambert is doing a fantastic job: he's bombed out the trouble-makers and deadwood, he has reduced our wage bill, he has scouted and signed some players who will be worth far more than what we paid for them, he has brought stability AND he is moving us back up that table. Yes, we've taken some real kickings along the way but that has to happen. We could lose to Stoke in our next match (touch wood we won't) but it still won't derail the progress we are clearly making. I said at the start of this season that I was looking for an 8th-13th finish and, all being well we'll get it. Next season I'll be looking for us to kick on again and aim for something from 5th to 9th. We are getting there. Lambert is ambitious - hopefully Lerner and PF have the ambition to match. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it.You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm not disputing that he'll sometimes set us up to play more direct (that isn't always a bad thing though) but it seems as if some people think that replicating excellent performances is something easy that can be done every week. I doubt anyone thinks that. The frustration is seeing how well we can play and then in other games seeing us set up in such a negative way. The Chelsea game at the start of the season was a loss but I was delighted with the approach to the game and how we played. We lost a 2 goal lead against Liverpool but again I was delighted with how we approached the game and how we played. That's how it comes across. People seem to think football is a simple game whereby a good performance against one team can be easily replicated against the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it. You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. Comparing him to McLeish is what gets me? They are two totally different managers and if you can't see that then, there's really no point debating it otherwise. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it. You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. But either tactic could win the game, it's only hindsight that proves absolute so what the hell is your point? As for the McLeish reference no, I didn't, because having sat through each and every shit match that season it was painstakingly obvious that whatever he was trying to do was not working, even when we won. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 But either tactic could win the game, it's only hindsight that proves absolute so what the hell is your point? So we have to be happy with any approach to the game because it could have worked? Seems a strange way to view things. Basically a way to excuse anything you want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it. You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. Comparing him to McLeish is what gets me? They are two totally different managers and if you can't see that then, there's really no point debating it otherwise. Thanks for pointing that out. My point was why does McLeish get hammered for bad tactics but lambert is excused as being only human? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it. You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. Comparing him to McLeish is what gets me? They are two totally different managers and if you can't see that then, there's really no point debating it otherwise. Thanks for pointing that out. My point was why does McLeish get hammered for bad tactics but lambert is excused as being only human? Pretty sure Lambert has been hammered for poor tactics too. I don't know why people can't criticise Lambert but just not as heavily as they did McLeish - there's more to the world than black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Sometimes our tactics work and sometimes they don't - reason being? Paul Lambert is a human being, he's not infallable. Great. Did you throw this line out for McLeish? I doubt it. You make out like Lambert's picking and choosing which games to do well in, it's laughable really. The manager picks how the team are going to play and the approach the team take. If we're defensive and direct that's because the manager chose to play like that. If we attack and try to keep the ball on the floor its because the manager chose to play like that. Comparing him to McLeish is what gets me? They are two totally different managers and if you can't see that then, there's really no point debating it otherwise. Thanks for pointing that out. My point was why does McLeish get hammered for bad tactics but lambert is excused as being only human? No McLeish got hammered for a lot of things as has Lambert. Just read this topic and people have hammered Lambert, or is it you only mean when a bedsheet is displayed in the Holte as hammering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I can't believe people think it's a simple as just flicking a switch and playing the same way every game. I don't think its simple. I do believe a manager can set out how he wants his team to play and too often we've relied on hoofing the ball long and failing to keep possession. The Everton game is the perfect example of why your above point is rubbish. How is it rubbish? There have been a lot of comments on here in the last few months which give off the message that Lambert somehow has the option of replicating performances like against Liverpool or West Brom but for some reason decides that he wants us to play poor, ineffective football. He does have the option of choosing how this team plays. He's the manager. It won't always work and it won't always be brilliant but he can choose if we are going to keep the ball on the floor and attack or if we're going to defend and hit benteke in the air the minute we get the ball. Like I said the Everton game was a perfect example. I agree with BJ. We tend to play with a greater freedom against top teams, because there is very little expectation on Villa. Yet against more ordinary teams we play frustrating hoof ball because we fear losing, when we know that we should be taking points from the game. It's Lambert's decision and too often this season he's got it wrong. We can play football, if and when the manager allows us to. Our players aren't the best, but too often our tactics make them look a lot worse than they actually are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 But either tactic could win the game, it's only hindsight that proves absolute so what the hell is your point? So we have to be happy with any approach to the game because it could have worked? Seems a strange way to view things. Basically a way to excuse anything you want to. We have to be happy with whatever approach our then Manager takes as guess what? You can't do shit about it and for all you know as much as you may disagree with tactic prior to completion of the match it could be the winning tactic. It's only once the 90 minutes are up that we and the Manager will know if it worked or not. Perhaps you'd be happier if Mystic Meg was managing us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts