Paul Lambert

[Rob182]

Hutton is a strange one, nobody knows what happened there plus its very difficult to get a left back spot on when you are having to split your funds across many areas. Admittedly left back is his weakest transfer area but you can't expect him to get every transfer spot on.

The splitting of funds across so many areas was a problem partly created by Lambert though. Shipping out Hutton might have been the right decision, but had he not done that, he wouldn't have had to spend money on Lowton (and possibly Bacuna).

Hindsight is great obviously, but many people have said that we didn't necessarily need to ship in and out so many players in his first season.

Without spending a penny, he could have had a back five of Guzan, Hutton, Collins, Baker and Clark (LB).

It's not the most inspiring of defences, but it's also not far from what we have now, a whole 3 seasons later.

I'm a fan of Lambert, and am willing to give him some time (despite his many flaws), but saying that he has now massively improved our defence is a weak positive, considering that he's ripped it apart 2 or 3 times in 3 seasons.

[Kingman]

IMO he has got 3 games and a transfer window to win some of the fans back over.

 

The annual cup exit from 2nd or 3rd division minnow's is now very much a real thing (Blackpool)

 

Spunking 8m on a very-very average Cleverley with 6 months on his existing deal is not good practice and certainly not what we need.  

 

Failure to win or even score a few against the likes of Palace and Leicester will only make the Liverpool home game on the 17th A Hissing Python Park!

[sexbelowsound]

 

 

 

We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story.

A big part of our improved defence is bringing back a player he had since day one and signing a decent lb the 3rd time of trying.

I don't think he's shown some sort of managerial brilliance to improve a record breaking defence he created.

Hutton is a strange one, nobody knows what happened there plus its very difficult to get a left back spot on when you are having to split your funds across many areas. Admittedly left back is his weakest transfer area but you can't expect him to get every transfer spot on.

No I agree but then at the same time I'm reluctant to base confidence on him sorting out the attack because our defence looks stronger this season.

 

 

Would you agree that our attack has once shown potential before though? Specifically the back end of the first season? I honestly think, and this might sound far too simplistic, that if he is given the sort of money he was given for Benteke or Sanchez to spend on an attacking midfielder then we could potentially have balance. I agree its taken too long and believe me i'm frustrated as well its just one of those things where I think we are almost there. A massive turning point for me will be though if he goes and signs Cleverley and there isn't any money left for other players. That is inexcusable. 

 

If we got an attacking midfielder I would line up like this. Obvious problem with this formation is the lack of a proper winger on the left but I think we can all agree the most expensive positions are those front 4 so we may have to wait.

 

                    Guzan

 

 

Hutton   Okore    Clark     Cissokho

 

 

       Sanchez     Westwood

 

 

Grealish         AM            Gabby

 

 

                  Benteke

[DCJonah]

Its like our new style. Why has it taken 2 and a half years to try and pass the ball? Our defence is much better but it was record breaking bad partly because of Lambert. Now we're on course for a new record low in goals scored.

Things seem to get extreme lows with Lambert before we're able to do anything about it. I don't think that's what good managers do.

[sexbelowsound]

 

Hutton is a strange one, nobody knows what happened there plus its very difficult to get a left back spot on when you are having to split your funds across many areas. Admittedly left back is his weakest transfer area but you can't expect him to get every transfer spot on.

The splitting of funds across so many areas was a problem partly created by Lambert though. Shipping out Hutton might have been the right decision, but had he not done that, he wouldn't have had to spend money on Lowton (and possibly Bacuna).

Hindsight is great obviously, but many people have said that we didn't necessarily need to ship in and out so many players in his first season.

Without spending a penny, he could have had a back five of Guzan, Hutton, Collins, Baker and Clark (LB).

It's not the most inspiring of defences, but it's also not far from what we have now, a whole 3 seasons later.

I'm a fan of Lambert, and am willing to give him some time (despite his many flaws), but saying that he has now massively improved our defence is a weak positive, considering that he's ripped it apart 2 or 3 times in 3 seasons.

 

 

I'm with you on that. I think he was probably told to ship out the high earners though. Plus remember, Baker and Clark in his first season were liabilities at times. I feel like I need to defend myself at times because I'm seen to post a lot in the "pro Lambert" corner I guess but I don't see myself being in that corner. I just don't necessarily agree that it is completely his fault.

Edited December 30, 2014 by sexbelowsound

[DCJonah]

I honestly think, and this might sound far too simplistic, that if he is given the sort of money he was given for Benteke or Sanchez to spend on an attacking midfielder then we could potentially have balance.

But he did have that money for cleverley in the summer.

I'm also not sure one player is going to completely change the team. An am will make a difference but our movement and ideas surely must also come from coaching on the training ground.

[Guest]

 

Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters!

 

And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!).

 

 

And yet people keep mentioning Everton who have Barkley, Eto'o, Naismith, Barry, Baines, Coleman, Jagielka and other first team players who cost peanuts. They may have signed Lukaku for a lot, but the value is based on what the players are worth today when the argument is brought that Everton spend more than us.

[sexbelowsound]

 

I honestly think, and this might sound far too simplistic, that if he is given the sort of money he was given for Benteke or Sanchez to spend on an attacking midfielder then we could potentially have balance.

But he did have that money for cleverley in the summer.

I'm also not sure one player is going to completely change the team. An am will make a difference but our movement and ideas surely must also come from coaching on the training ground.

 

 

Of course it won't, but it would make a massive difference. Even in the first half with Joe Cole we looked a lot better movement wise. Now that could have been a false dawn but imagine if Cole had stayed fit, we could be saying different things now.

[Kingman]

Its like our new style. Why has it taken 2 and a half years to try and pass the ball? Our defence is much better but it was record breaking bad partly because of Lambert. Now we're on course for a new record low in goals scored.

Things seem to get extreme lows with Lambert before we're able to do anything about it. I don't think that's what good managers do.

 

What is this you speak of O'master?.. 

 

Im intrigued! 

[TrentVilla]

 

 

Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters!

 

And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!).

 

 

And yet people keep mentioning Everton who have Barkley, Eto'o, Naismith, Barry, Baines, Coleman, Jagielka and other first team players who cost peanuts. They may have signed Lukaku for a lot, but the value is based on what the players are worth today when the argument is brought that Everton spend more than us.

 

 

It isn't just about fee's though is it, the likes of Barry Baines and Eto'o are on the sort of wages we just can't match at this moment in time.

 

Oh and on the topic of fee's, Baines cost £6m in 2007 so he wasn't peanuts by any stretch of the imagination.

[Guest]

 

 

 

Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters!

 

And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!).

 

 

And yet people keep mentioning Everton who have Barkley, Eto'o, Naismith, Barry, Baines, Coleman, Jagielka and other first team players who cost peanuts. They may have signed Lukaku for a lot, but the value is based on what the players are worth today when the argument is brought that Everton spend more than us.

 

 

It isn't just about fee's though is it, the likes of Barry Baines and Eto'o are on the sort of wages we just can't match at this moment in time.

 

Oh and on the topic of fee's, Baines cost £6m in 2007 so he wasn't peanuts by any stretch of the imagination.

 

 

Just because they are on higher wages, it doesn't mean they are worth more. I'm pretty sure Westwood is more valuable than N'Zogbia and Benteke more than Bent.

[Guest]

And I am a little confused at how spending less means we have to have the worst ratio for shots and goals in the league. It doesn't cost £30m to get players to pass the ball or get shots in on goal. It also doesn't have to cost millions to set up a team to get the best out of those on the pitch. The money situation is an issue, but any manager worth his wage would be able to get a lot more out of this talented bunch. Lambert, great scout but poor manager.

[Keyblade]

 

We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story.

A big part of our improved defence is bringing back a player he had since day one and signing a decent lb the 3rd time of trying.

I don't think he's shown some sort of managerial brilliance to improve a record breaking defence he created.

 

 

Cuz I obviously said he's shown managerial brilliance in doing so. I'm just saying he's improved something, how he's done it is irrelevant. He signed a decent LB after spending a combined whopping 3M on the previous two. Okay, but I'm not sure how that negates the fact that he improved the defence. My point is that he can conceivably similarly improve other aspects of our play, and that maybe we should give him time to do so. I'm sure he knows as well as any of us that we're not scoring, and I'm sure he also has a plan on how to rectify it. What that plan entails we're soon to find out. My money's on after easing in Grealish, using him as our creative midfielder or by some stroke of luck Joe Cole remains fit for a good portion of the second half of the season.

[foreveryoung]

Coaching an tactics are the issues, nearly 3 seasons in and we still struggle like a team that has hardly played together. Also, I don't really think Lambert has the discipline to control 20 million plus players even if he had the funds, he seems to have problems with controlling the squad we have.

[sharkyvilla]

Its like our new style. Why has it taken 2 and a half years to try and pass the ball? Our defence is much better but it was record breaking bad partly because of Lambert. Now we're on course for a new record low in goals scored.

Things seem to get extreme lows with Lambert before we're able to do anything about it. I don't think that's what good managers do.

I think there were times where Lambert tried it but had to ditch it quickly when we went through injury troubles. At the moment we are pretty much at full strength for the first time I can remember, bar Westwood. Of course we keep ballsing it up by players getting 3 match bans for utter stupidity and playing matches we should be winning with 10 men for 40 minutes. Whether Lambert is too soft and it's no coincidence it's happened since Keane left, I'm not sure. In general, it seems a lot easier to pass from the back when you have Okore playing than Baker.

[DCJonah]

I wasn't saying you said that I was just pointing out that I don't think its some sort of achievement (again I'm not saying you do)

I'm sure he can improve our attack, its on course to be the worst in our history, the question is what will that improvement lead to? Because no matter what we seem to do the end result looks the same.

I'm sure grealish will be used more, he should be and again its an idea that comes when we're reaching lows. Why isn't the manager trying new things before it reaches that point? He's that sort of manager, it will keep us in the league but I can't see us progressing much under him.

[Keyblade]

 

 

 

Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters!

 

And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!).

 

 

And yet people keep mentioning Everton who have Barkley, Eto'o, Naismith, Barry, Baines, Coleman, Jagielka and other first team players who cost peanuts. They may have signed Lukaku for a lot, but the value is based on what the players are worth today when the argument is brought that Everton spend more than us.

 

 

It isn't just about fee's though is it, the likes of Barry Baines and Eto'o are on the sort of wages we just can't match at this moment in time.

 

Oh and on the topic of fee's, Baines cost £6m in 2007 so he wasn't peanuts by any stretch of the imagination.

 

 

It costs a fair bit to keep those players at the club for sure. But anyway, since when do we compare spending based on how much a squad's value appreciated or depreciated? I think that's just very convenient. Nobody looks at Liverpool's massive spending for example and then go "well those players aren't worth much in the market now so they haven't really spent all that much".

 

 

I wasn't saying you said that I was just pointing out that I don't think its some sort of achievement (again I'm not saying you do)

I'm sure he can improve our attack, its on course to be the worst in our history, the question is what will that improvement lead to? Because no matter what we seem to do the end result looks the same.

I'm sure grealish will be used more, he should be and again its an idea that comes when we're reaching lows. Why isn't the manager trying new things before it reaches that point? He's that sort of manager, it will keep us in the league but I can't see us progressing much under him.

 

I agree, but you touched on the exact reason. Above all, staying in the league is his main goal. For one, that's really all his job description entails under Randy Lerner but also because of the very fine line between midtable and relegation in the PL. I don't blame him for being cautious. While I do think he takes it a bit too slow, I'd rather that then risk relegation by experimenting too much. Besides, I'm not sure how much we expect to progress nowadays further than staying in the league. That can mean anything from 11th - 17 really, and the margins are really fine. I've always wondered this, but should we really be expecting more than that under Randy Lerner? I'm not so sure.

[romavillan]

Its like our new style. Why has it taken 2 and a half years to try and pass the ball? Our defence is much better but it was record breaking bad partly because of Lambert. Now we're on course for a new record low in goals scored.

Things seem to get extreme lows with Lambert before we're able to do anything about it. I don't think that's what good managers do.

 

Overly simplistic answer is probably that he felt that now the team had a much more solid defense he could rely on that as a base to play some football out from the back.

[DCJonah]

I've always wondered this, but should we really be expecting more than that under Randy Lerner? I'm not so sure.

Its a fair question and certainly one that has to be considered when evaluating Lambert.

I don't think we can expect too much. I don't think finishing 9/10th is too unrealistic an expectation to have to aim for.

The thing is we're not progressing at all. Performing better after 3 years is really not unrealistic, I'd say getting better surely is the bare minimum we should see.

Edited December 30, 2014 by DCJonah

[StefanAVFC]

Also, I don't really think Lambert has the discipline to control 20 million plus players even if he had the funds, he seems to have problems with controlling the squad we have.

 

You're just making things up now.