Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
YellowNets1901

Triple change on 57 minutes

Recommended Posts

No doubt this has been mentioned a lot since last night.

It doesn''t take a genius to spot that with Villa 2-0 down, Lambert''s changes made all the difference. He took a risk, it paid off. That won''t always happen, but at least he had the guts to do it.

Compare that to us on Saturday. Elmander was brought on beside Hooper but we wait until the 88th minute to make our "game changing" double substitution.

Like Villa last night, at 2-0 down in a game, you don''t hold anything, you don''t possess anything, no goals, no points. Sure, teams can open you up if you attack and go for it, but surely that''s worth the risk. The alternative is to mount the odd attack which comes to nothing, with one eye on your back line and most likely the game ends in defeat.

Villa''s attitude was to bring on 3 players, all of whom were not 100% fit because they weren''t protecting anything, they held nothing in the game. They decided to go for it. It got them a point. Maybe a crucial one.

Our attitude is so different. If the score is 2-0 to the other team, or 2-1, we defend it, like we have something to hold on to. I know we mounted attacks against Newcastle, but our mentality is totally different to a team like Aston Villa''s. We defend losing positions like we have points to protect. We offer the league nothing.

The saddest part of Saturday''s game at Newcastle is that when I woke up on Saturday morning, I knew we''d lose. I was convinced we would lose. I had no faith that the WH game would have any bearing on the outcome of our visit to Newcastle. I was proved right. Some fans will say ''oh you should believe in the team more''. That''s hard to do when you have a manager and coaching staff who protect defeats like they are 5-0 wins.

It''s a joke. I think the club are prepared to get relegated with Hughton in charge. I really do. I don''t think they have any plans whatsoever to sack him, at any point this season. A shame, because we clearly have the wrong man in charge. That couldn''t be more clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spot on, unfortunately the opinions of the people that matter just don''t seem to see it, so we continue to go from one pathetic shambles to the next with Hughton seemingly handing out an unlimited supply of sticks for us to beat him with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Considering how much better the messiah is than Hughton, I wonder how CH has a better home record with us than PL does with Villa this season?

Villa fans have been moaning about their style and tactics for much of the season, and Villa have actually scored only 13 goals from 12 PL games, and less home goals than us.

The guy was great for us but he isn''t pulling up trees at the Villa and a 2-2 draw last night doesn''t change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
I agree Beefy, but people will pick and choose the events that suit them to make their point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

      

 Lambert cost his team last night, all three points were there for the taking against a poor WBA side, his poorly setup team gifted WBA two goals by their sloppy defending (they probably need to employ a defensive coach to make up for the deficiencies in the management team) and everyone could see that after 15 minutes the system wasn''t working but Lamberts indecision let this drift until the 57 minute mark before making a change, if he had acted sooner Villa would have come away with all three points. Under Lambert they will always be a ''top of the bottom half'' team in the Premier League, the Villa board won''t put up with that kind of failure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact is, Lambert has strengths and weaknesses, still on show today and clear throughout his time at City.

 

A weakness is his teams are poor at defending.

 

A strength is that he''s good at changing things and rolling the dice, especially making courageous substitutions early on when his team is losing.

 

Another weakness is that his teams often go behind in games, so he is often in the position when he has to make changes to try to rescue something from the game.

 

As has been pointed out, the Prem records of Lambert at Villa and Hughton at City are almost identical, although Villa clearly have had a stronger squad over the period than we have.  This desperate hankering for Lambert by many on here is just looking at things selectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could argue he should have started them players. I do miss his ballsy attitude though. At 2 nil down, you always felt that Lambert would try and fix things, he was by no means perfect, and perhaps lacks the sensible side that Hughton shows sometimes, but I do agree that Hughton needs to get better with his substitutions when we are losing already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A weakness is his teams are poor at defending"

You win games by scoring more goals than you concede, not by preventing the opposition from scoring.

We had a better goal difference under Lambert than we did Hughton in their two full seasons.

That is despite Hughton buying pretty much an whole new defence and a defensive midfielder, and playing a 5 man midfield..... we conceeded 8 less goals under Hughton, at the expense of 11 goals scored.

We scored 11 less, conceded 8 less. Attack is the best form of defence.

This season Villa have conceded 14 goals in 12 league games.

We have conceded 23 goals in 12 league games, second worst in the division.

Villa have a goal difference of -1.

We have a goal difference of -13.

So is a poor defense a Lambert weakness? Or is it a Hughton weakness?

Villa have conceded less than Man Utd this season in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were 2-0 down after 11 minutes, the system wasn''t working, why wait another 46 minutes to change things, it should''ve been done much earlier and they would''ve won.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m reading a lot about Lamberts strengths and weaknesses here but that doesn''t affect us now, it''s all about Hughton''s strengths and weaknesses and as far as i can see his one strength has deserted him this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
''Failing him'' yet apparently last time I checked we were outside the bottom 3 and probably only about 3 points off where we might ''expect'' to be at this stage. Fulham and Sunderland have far more resources than us, as do West Ham, yet we are above them all. On wage bill, McNally said we are likely to be 19th in the league in terms of player wages. It is unrealistic to suggest that we should be doing so much better. We are not in the crisis that many posters want to portray we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. A weakness is his teams are poor at defending.2. A strength is

that he''s good at changing things and rolling the dice, especially

making courageous substitutions early on when his team is losing.3. Another weakness is that his teams often go behind in games, so he is often in the position when he has to make changes to try to rescue something from the game.
1. So is ours, in fact we''re considerably worse at defending than Villa are2. Unfortunately, none of this applies to Hughton3. In case you haven''t noticed, we often go behind in games so surely Hughton is in the same position when he has to make changes - only trouble is, he doesn''t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"So Lambert is a better manager than Hughton. Ok. How exactly does that help us now?"

It provides a benchmark from which we can determine that his replacement is not adequate, which should lead to a decision where we decide to replace the replacement with somebody who may prove adequate or much closer to adequate when measured against the predetermined benchmark (that being Paul Lambert).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if all that is true Making Plans, unless we are going to replace Hughton with Lambert, the only response is......so what?

I can give you five reason that Wenger is a better manager than Hughton....so what?

I really don''t get the point of all this Hughton Lambert comparison. Unless Lambert is available to become our manager, what does it matter how he compares to Hughton?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Le Juge"]"So Lambert is a better manager than Hughton. Ok. How exactly does that help us now?"

It provides a benchmark from which we can determine that his replacement is not adequate, which should lead to a decision where we decide to replace the replacement with somebody who may prove adequate or much closer to adequate when measured against the predetermined benchmark (that being Paul Lambert).[/quote]

Rubbish.

First you would need to identify how good Lambert is in the overall picture. Moyes is not as good as Ferguson but well equipped to manage us. If Lambert is a good a manager as most of us believe then his replacement need not be as good to be good enough. If we think Lambert is a clown then we should be looking for better but few believe that.

Secondly, this is hardly an objective exercise. You are looking at just a few of the many skills a manager needs. There are others by which Hughton would leave Lambert standing.

Thirdly, if Lambert is your benchmark then you would exclude many good managers. Wenger, Moyes and Ancellotti can''t do what Lambert does. Are you saying that you don''t want tehem?

This is like saying that because your best ever girlfriend was a tall blond who dumped you, you''ll only go out with tall blondes. Watch Annie Hall to see the futility of that approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of this tripe is barking! Seriously!!

 

Hughton''s Norwich P50 55pts

Lambert''s Villa   P50 56pts

 

The suprior tactician has just a one point advantage out of 150 played for. All you guys are doing is isolating good results for Lambert against bad results for Hughton. Last month Lambert lost at home to Newcastle. Earlier this season Lambert''s Villa failed to score at home to Everton and lost 2-0. We could go on forever but their respective records in the same league over the same period of time are pretty much identical. If Hughton is as poor as you guys try to make out then what does that say about Lambert....

 

The truth is that he''s disliked by a lot of Norwich fans. They resent the good results he gets choosing to credit everyone and his dog before Hughton but dine out for weeks on a poor result. This will go on until he leaves but at least try and be honest about it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both managers have strengths and weaknesses. I can''t help but feel should our away form be even half decent we''d all be saying how great our current manager is. The big problem is it stinks and it never looks like getting better.

To add to the frustration making a change after 57 mins seems totally logical when your losing 2-0. You''ve given it 10 mins for the half time talk to have work, so you change. The problem with not changing it is it makes the manager look afraid and cowardly and no fan wants their team tagged with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet another irony in all this is that when Hughton took Tettey off for Hoolahan against Arsenal, he was lambasted for his "recklessness" and his "negligence".

He is criticised for not being like Lambert and also criticised for the most Lambertesque thing he has done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="CambridgeCanary"]Even if all that is true Making Plans, unless we are going to replace Hughton with Lambert, the only response is......so what? [/quote]Well firstly, it is all true and just about everyone knows it. Secondly I''m not advocating that we replace Hughton with Lambert because that is very unlikely to happen. However, there are plenty of other capable managers out there who would be better than Hughton (if only on the basis that they couldn''t be any worse) and would love to manage Norwich City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right Nutty Nigel, now look at the equivalent statistics for the last 6 months.

In fact, why not create a graph which shows monthly points per game for each month since the start of their reigns.

You will see a steep upward curve for Lambert, a downward projectory for Hughton.

We see Lambert build a squad at Villa which is improving, and Hughton build one which takes us backwards.

One is close to the sack, the other is not. For good reason.

Why not calculate the exact same for the year 2013, you can even wait until 1st January if you like and do the full calender year. For 2013 so far....

It is you who is relying on things which happened almost a year ago, you who is relying on what happened in 2012 to present those figures. Look at the date mate, almost 2014.

2013

Aston Villa 30 games 40 points

Norwich City 30 games 31 points

That is a huge difference in the first 11 months of this calender year. One is pretty much relegation form and one is mid-table form.

That''s the equivalent of 1 win every 10 games MORE than us (9 extra points every 30 games).

That''s a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Making Plans"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]Even if all that is true Making Plans, unless we are going to replace Hughton with Lambert, the only response is......so what? [/quote]Well firstly, it is all true and just about everyone knows it. Secondly I''m not advocating that we replace Hughton with Lambert because that is very unlikely to happen. However, there are plenty of other capable managers out there who would be better than Hughton (if only on the basis that they couldn''t be any worse) and would love to manage Norwich City. [/quote]

In which case let us compare Hughton with those managers and consider which would serve City better. There is a point to that.

Comparing Lambert to Hughton does not take that important debate any further and is a silly distraction.

Except that it does show what really matters to many posters which is that Hughton is not Lambert. Until we can accept that and bury the argument, we are not going to move forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don''t see it as comparing Hughton to Lambert. More comparing us and our tactics with a team who I expect to be around us come May time. I could have picked another team of course, but Villa were on Sky on Monday night and their manager made decisions which got them something. A key feature that we lack.

Had it been Stoke or Fulham, I would''ve probably commented on those teams, but the fact remains is that it was Villa and the subs their manager made changed the game and got them a point. Ok, he started off with the wrong tactics and saw it through to 57 minutes whereby it was then clear Villa were going nowhere, so he acted - with three subs. Villa got a point.

I think it was TCCANARY who pointed out that had Lambert started with those players, Villa might have won. Maybe, but those three subs players were not 100% fit, hence why they were subs.

Some fans will always excuse certain things a manager does or clamber to his defence when there is no real defence. It''s just the way some fans are. Some are scared to voice a negative view. That''s fine. Had we made three subs on 57 minutes at Newcastle, we might have been beaten 3-0/4-0/5-0. We may also have drawn 2-2, won 3-2, 4-2.

The fact is, our man didn''t have the guts to take the risk. He was protecting a losing position and that''s something I can''t abide. We protect losing positions like they are narrow wins. It sickens me. We offer the league nothing. Hughton offers us nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="YellowNets1901"]I think it was TCCANARY who pointed out that had Lambert started with those players, Villa might have won.[/quote]This is the post you refer to - Lambert cost his team last night, all three points were there for the

taking against a poor WBA side, his poorly setup team gifted WBA two

goals by their sloppy defending (they probably need to employ a

defensive coach to make up for the deficiencies in the management team)

andeveryone could see that after 15 minutes the system wasn''t working

but Lamberts indecision let this drift until the 57 minute mark before

making a change, if he had acted sooner Villa would have come away with

all three points.
This was my response, changes highlighted Hughton cost his team on Saturday, all three points were there for the

taking against a poor Newcastle side, his poorly setup team gifted

Newcastle goals by their sloppy defending (they probably need to employ a

defensive coach to make up for the deficiencies in the management team)

and everyone could see that after 15 minutes the system wasn''t working

but Hughton''s indecision let this drift until the 88 minute mark before

making a change, if he had acted sooner Norwich would have come away

with

all three points (or at least one).See that''s the difference (31 minutes) - they got a point, we didn''t.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just looking at that Villa team, I noticed that Lambert had started with 3 primarily defensive midfielders. Westwood is technical, but not particularly creative, and both Ahmadi and Sylla are known for their combative mindsets. Seems to me that Lambert left his entire attacking contingent to three players, Tonev, Kozak and Benteke. Strange really, the final 11 on the pitch is usually the way Villa set up, wonder why he changed what''s been a relatively successful system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...