Brumstopdogs Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 We will not be in a relegation fight this season. If we had Benteke fit we wouldn't have had the problem last year either. He was injured twice and it took him ages to refind his form after his injury suffered against Newcastle. We've more quality in midfield and defence this season. We can see how vastly improved the defence is. We are in no real danger of a relegation fight. Win over Leicester and you'll get double figure odds on us being relegated. Just have a bit of faith everyone. Watch this new team grow a style of play now we've Benteke back. I'm looking for a 3rd consecutive game where we have the majority of the possession. Although looking at the group of defenders I can see an improvement I should just point out that after 14 games last season we had conceded 16 goals. At the same stage last season we had a zero goal difference and this season it is -10. Against the same opposition? No, that would be very unlikely. 14 premier league games none the less and we've scored half as many (8 less), conceded 2 more goals, are 2 places lower in the league table and got 3 less points! Sounds like progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 Only there are elements of improvement as has been pointed out several times even if it isn't as much as we would all want but they are there. Better defence, better like for like results year on year, better win percentage as well I believe. So saying 'no progress' is another criticism without substance. But what right do we have to expect progress on last season without key players and having spent £10m in the summer which was I believe in the bottom 3 net spends? Because we are Aston Villa? Because we founded the league or because we are bigger than Swansea etc? The Prem is a financial arms race and Lerner is giving Lambert pennies to compete with its surprising we've stayed in the league these last two years and will again. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Please name like for like value players that Lambert could have bought (try to do same with wages too!). If you can pick and choose a first XI from any teams in the Premiership I'll be quite surprised, if you can do it from just one or two teams I'd be shocked! I'll even let us assume they of course want to play for the mighty Aston Villa without hesitation. Genuine challenge - base it on our team against Crystal Palace: Guzan (I'll be nice and say £1m even though for Lambert he was a free) Clark (free) Okore (£4m) Hutton (£4m - although not a Lambert signing) Cissokho (£2m) Westwood (£2m) Sanchez (£4m) Cleverley (any player on loan of similar wages/value) Weimann (free) Agbonlahor (free) Benteke (£10m) Complete fantasy football with all the benefits of hindsight but I think if you try it you'll really struggle to make a better first XI with £27m. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 At least you seem to now admit that your previous claim of a lack of back up options had no foundation. I conceded it was an assumption in my original response and a reasonable one to make I believe. I'm assuming it on the basis that we didn't sign or even reportedly bid for another midfielder after being priced out of a move for Kiyotake. As I say, the issue of whether he had alternatives drawn up is secondary to the actual reality that no other midfielder was signed. Fair play, I respect that. On the second point it isn't really if it's being levelled at Lambert alone because that isn't something entirely in his hands. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 He's clearly incapable of setting up a midfield What's the most he's been allowed to spend on a midfielder? I don't understand the relevance. It is his job, no matter the abilities of the players in question, to get them to play as some kind of cohesive unit. It is my opinion that given the players he has at his disposal that he should be able to do that. The problem is the huge gap between midfield and attack. Early on in the season he played Richardson there, a limited player granted but it at least allowed us an out ball. With Delphs injury and a hard run of fixtures he dropped that system, only bringing it back when Cole became available. When Cole went off injured on Tuesday, rather than bring on say Grealish to provide the out ball, to close the gap and get Palace on the back foot once in a while, or even Richardson to run beyond them, a tactic that worked early on this very season to good effect, instead he bought on Sanchez. A player I happen to rate, but not the right player. We won the game, but the gap was as obvious as ever. Keep putting the back 5/6 under that kind of pressure and they will eventually fold as they have done time and time again. It was a tactical mistake, a poor decision and one he never seems to learn from. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 We will not be in a relegation fight this season. If we had Benteke fit we wouldn't have had the problem last year either. He was injured twice and it took him ages to refind his form after his injury suffered against Newcastle. We've more quality in midfield and defence this season. We can see how vastly improved the defence is. We are in no real danger of a relegation fight. Win over Leicester and you'll get double figure odds on us being relegated. Just have a bit of faith everyone. Watch this new team grow a style of play now we've Benteke back. I'm looking for a 3rd consecutive game where we have the majority of the possession. Although looking at the group of defenders I can see an improvement I should just point out that after 14 games last season we had conceded 16 goals. At the same stage last season we had a zero goal difference and this season it is -10. Against the same opposition? No, that would be very unlikely. 14 premier league games none the less and we've scored half as many (8 less), conceded 2 more goals, are 2 places lower in the league table and got 3 less points! Sounds like progress. Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 (edited) FWIW I think he has done a fantastic job in the transfer market. My issue with him is tactical. I think the players he has bought in are capable of better than this. Edited December 5, 2014 by dont_do_it_doug. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 His transfer record has been mostly not very good at all KEA - hopeless [yeah, I was expecting Zidane for that fee, but he was mediocre at worst, hard working, and pretty good at his best] Sylla - terrible [cost peanuts, so don't let it bother you too much] Lowton - rubbish [in defence, arguably. Also cost peanuts and does very well in attack when brought on] Bennett - dismal [cost peanuts; does have some talent, which hasn't developed as much as we had a right to hope] Luna - worse than Bennett [cost peanuts] Tonev - George Weah's cousin [cost peanuts] Bowery - pub player [bought for the price of a pint] Cissokho - crap [you're taking the piss now] Vlaar - always injured [but still worth more than we paid] Bacuna - average at best [cost peanuts] Joe Cole - elderly [free] Helenius - another flop [cost peanuts, looked promising, failed for reasons nobody really knows] There's only about 25 million spent there, and we could get most of it back. Overall it's pretty obvious that funds have been a problem. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 We know he wanted better players. Couldn't every manager outside of the top 5/6 say this? If he'd had more money to spend and brought in these players we'd expect more. But he hasn't so our expectations are lowered. Its these low expectations that he's struggling to match that see so many wanting him replaced. I don't see what players he wanted and couldn't get changing that I'm really struggling to understand how you don't understand!! Surely if you're accepting that Lambert might have preferred better players than he's been able to get due to financial constraints (whether transfer fee or wages) then you are acknowledging that it is Lerner not Lambert who is the MAIN problem. Most of the Lambert sympathisers (not necessarily pro) suggest he couldn't have done much better in the transfer market than he has done. Yes one or two haven't worked out like all managers and others have. His record is fine really, above average I'd say. But you seem to be blaming him for Lerner not providing competitive transfer fees or wages! His transfer record has been mostly not very good at all: KEA - hopeless Sylla - terrible Lowton - rubbish Bennett - dismal Luna - worse than Bennett Tonev - George Weah's cousin Bowery - pub player Cissokho - crap Vlaar - always injured Bacuna - average at best Joe Cole - elderly Helenius - another flop How to answer this ridiculous post politely.... You have picked out 12 players from all his transfers. You name Vlaar as bad value (doesn't even need a comment), You say Cissokho is crap (very few would agree with that at this stage), You say Cole is elderly (we've been crying out for experience as a fan base) you say Lowton is rubbish (not the common consensus just a season or two ago) Furthermore the players you have named are generally under £2m, Bowery ended up costing us £0.25m! EVERY manager will have some bad signings. It's Champ manager thinking that ruins modern football... "should have bought x from Kazakhstan...." 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. Comparing the 19 game mark across two seasons gives a better means for comparison. 14 games could include or, similarly, exclude playing, for example; Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal, Man Utd and Liverpool. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So he's given peanuts to spend in comparison to other clubs. He has to reshape an entire squad. He spends roughly 2M per player. he is expected to get his first choices for that and then when that fails for his second choices to be as good as his first choices. Then when some of the signings he makes or has had to take a chance on do not turn out to be world beaters and so described as "crap" (lets face it when you are spending peanuts then it is a gamble) he is criticised ? If you could get world beaters for 2M then Man citeh and Chelsea would not be spending 30MPlus on players and Manure would not be spending 350M assembling a squad of players. Sorry but thats the game we are in these days 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. I realised you wouldnt. It's relevant because to see if we have progressed it is fairer to compare our like for like performances . If you are going to say our defemce is weaker in the games played then to be fair you have to look at how that defence performed in the same games last year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. Engage brain, substitute a promoted side from last season for QPR, job done. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. So what we can't lose to promoted teams tell that to Man Utd who lost to Leicester. And no it doesn't give a better means because it takes no notice of opposition but it suits your arguement. As for a comparison on the first 14 games there are 3 points in it which given the fixtures is nothing and not quite as bad as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. Engage brain, substitute a promoted side from last season for QPR, job done. Or for even more accuracy play off winner for play off winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Any team with Beneke in wouldn't get relegated as IMO he is that good a player. The problem though lies when he isn't fit who will nick the goal for us to hang on to? Who will be our outlet to hold the ball or make defences sit deeper as they are worried about him? You can throw all the stats you like about win/loss like for like etc but for me I don't care about them what I do care about is enjoying watching us play. On this front Lambert is letting us down massively. He has turned into a negative manager. Against Burnley we had a go then either through confidence or managerial instruction we got deeper and deeper. Gabby who should be our outlet was deeper than grealish on countless occasions. Now that's got to be Lamberts idea as Gabby seems to drop at the first opportunity. We then robbed Palace who would have put past us if they had Benteke. I fully supported Lambert as I thought he'd have a go every game but it seems as soon as we score he craps himself and tries to hang on no matter how long is left. I fully expect us to score first on Sunday and then we will see whether Lambert has any real attacking intent as Leicester are there to be spanked if he doesn't and sits back regardless of the result he should go as the job IMO is too big for him and he's lost his mojo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juteface Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Lambo has been in Munich this week. Said he was watching training, had a few meetings. Seemed really happy about it - trying to hide a smile. Wonder what that is about? Any sources or is this just makey upey logic? Lambo has been in Munich this week. Said he was watching training, had a few meetings. Seemed really happy about it - trying to hide a smile. Wonder what that is about? Any sources or is this just makey upey logic? My source is Paul Lambert! He mentioned it at his press conference today. Said he had been over in Munich for a couple of days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 (edited) 14 games played conceded 8 more, scored 2 less, lower in the league and got less points. They are the facts! I suppose you could add in we beat Rotherham in the league cup last season but this season we got beaten by Leyton Orient but that might be rubbing salt in the wound! Edited December 5, 2014 by Brumstopdogs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Only there are elements of improvement as has been pointed out several times even if it isn't as much as we would all want but they are there. Better defence, better like for like results year on year, better win percentage as well I believe. So saying 'no progress' is another criticism without substance. But what right do we have to expect progress on last season without key players and having spent £10m in the summer which was I believe in the bottom 3 net spends? Because we are Aston Villa? Because we founded the league or because we are bigger than Swansea etc? The Prem is a financial arms race and Lerner is giving Lambert pennies to compete with its surprising we've stayed in the league these last two years and will again. Better defence but worst attack. So balanced out no progress. Picking like for like games last season to somehow show progress seems to be clutching at straws. In simple terms are our performances better than when he first took over? Are the results better than when he first took over? I'd say no on both parts. After 3 years performances are on a par with the way mcleish used to play and 2 years on i'd be surprised if we beat the 42 points lambert got in his first year. So you may be able to pick minor details to argue some sort of progress and improvement but on the whole it's lead to very little. What right do we have? Well he has still spent money, and isn't the argument for giving managers time that the more time they have the more they can put their ideas and plans in place, the more they can work with their players? What have we got to show for 3 years? The amount of money spent doesn't always show the whole picture as well. It ignores the players he inherited. Also i used this example before, spurs spent £30 million on Soldado and we got benteke for £7 million, who got the better player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts