If Lambert gets the sack from AVFC....

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"][quote user=" Zak Van Cartman"][quote user="City1st"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Herman "]Is that first bit fact or is it opinion?[/quote]Neither.  It''s  fiction.[/quote]So you can state that there was NO falling out between Bowkett and Paul Lambert ?I shan''t ask for evidence just you written statement that there wasn''t[/quote]Are you going to be kind enough to explain what it was that they fell out over please City1 then we can decide for ourselves who was to blame. Did Lambert get driven out??[/quote] I tried asking him that earlier in the thread but City 1st prefers playing " I know a secret you don''t know na na na na nahhh!". So don''t hold your breath.[/quote]At the 2012 AGM Bowkett stated that he cut short a holiday to return to Carrow Road to meet with Lambert when the rumours were doing the rounds that he was about to leave but by the time Bowkett got back to Norwich and these are roughly his words '' his car was already on the Aston Villa car park''. That was the end of what we all thought was a beautiful relationship. Why Lambert upped and left without waiting for Bowkett to return is open to conjecture. [/quote]

Exactly.  We don''t know and maybe never will.   There are always two sides to a story and we don''t know Lambert''s view of things.  He may have been put in an impossible position for all we know.  The club are hardly likely to give us his side of things - they will only put out the side that makes them look hard done by.   So really, we know nothing.   What we can assume is that for whatever reason, Lambert made the decision to go for the right reasons for him personally - and I see nothing wrong with that.  If he felt he was in an impossible situation personally and/or professionally then he did the right thing and the fact that there were other clubs wanting him is no surprise.   The vitriol aimed at Lambert is as pointless as the vitriol aimed at Hughton since he got here.   People have made their minds up that Lambert is the villain (no pun intended) without knowledge of all the facts.  Little better than a lynch mob.    Society  hasn''t changed that much over the years really, has it..............

[TIL 1010 4,748]

Now then Lakey back on page 4 when City1st stated that Bowkett had fallen out with Lambert you said it was fiction. Forgive me but your latest post to me shows you tend to agree that there had been a disagreement between Lambert and Bowkett/McNally/the board but we will/may never know the full facts as there are two sides to every story.

So do you agree there was a fall out or do you maintain it was ''fiction'' ?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

Now then Lakey back on page 4 when City1st stated that Bowkett had fallen out with Lambert you said it was fiction. Forgive me but your latest post to me shows you tend to agree that there had been a disagreement between Lambert and Bowkett/McNally/the board but we will/may never know the full facts as there are two sides to every story.

So do you agree there was a fall out or do you maintain it was ''fiction'' ?

[/quote]

Herman asked the question, "Was it fact or opinion?"  to me it was neither.  We can''t know it as fact, we are only going on what someone else is saying. It can''t be opinion, basically because City 1st was saying it as if it was the truth, not opinion.  The nearest description I could come up with was fiction -  in other words, a story, based on rumour and hearsay.   That Lambert fell out with Bowkett is undoubtedly  true, but he probably fell out with a few people and that may be what made his position untenable. Who knows?   Anyone who comes out with statements like "it was Bowkett" as if it was all his fault, need to back it up, or their supposed knowledge is little better than story telling. 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

Canary On The Wire wrote the following post at 16/12/2013 5:43 PM:

No. Never.

If you want to live in the past, there''s a club down the road

Funnily enough, if the money was right for him, I could just see him taking the manager''s job there. Now that would really set the cat among the canaries.

[Houston Canary 0]

The gutless rationalization for Lambert leaving is sickening. He was denied his right to negotiate with other teams so he left. Utter blind nonsense he was leaving a sinking ship or had his secret of success found out or that he''s only a lower league talent.

In his time at AV, that team has improved from near relegation to midtable. At the same time, Norwich has gone from midtable to not quite midtable. We''ve also gone from fabulously entertaining to boring as watching grass grow and now somewhat entertaining.

Yah, Lambert is out of his depth and spinning his wheels going nowhere fast. Such blind ignorance must be blissful.

You know who COULD thrive under his guise should he part ways with Villa? Scotland!

[The Great Wall Of Tettey 0]

Think you have to look at it from a business point of view and not of a supporters.

Villa have a bigger stadium, a more valuable squad and at the time a bigger budget. Lambert doesn''t really care about a set club, he was offered a promotion essentially. If he didn''t take that and norwich got relegated who knows what may have happened, exactly the same if he had relegated villa. Can''t blame him for leaving. I''m happy with hughton.

[whoareyou? 0]

Paul Lambert''s reputation for falling out with his employers is second to none. He has apparently done it at EVERY club he has managed so far. You can guarantee he will do the same at Villa.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Houston Canary"] We''ve also gone from fabulously entertaining to boring as watching grass grow and now somewhat entertaining.

Yah, Lambert is out of his depth and spinning his wheels going nowhere fast. Such blind ignorance must be blissful.[/quote]

This is really misleading.  There were matches under Lambert I thought we were abject - Sunderland and Blackburn away to name two, the cup game against Leicester, Wigan at home, Newcasrle away and so on.  Equally there were some great results against the odds.   Under Hughton its pretty much the same, some abject performances but some terrific perfomances too.  I thought the first match against Everton this season was a great effort, equally the guts shown against West ham and Crystal Palace, the performances to beat Southampton and Stoke.  We had a series of games last season where we were unbeatable, through guts and good performances.  Even in the famed spell after Christmas where we were supposed to be so terrible there were some good performances - Swansea at home, beating reading at home - away at Sunderland.  But yes we have been poor as well.

This memory of how great things were under Lambert is fine - and it was great on the whole - but the memory tends to be selective, just as the memory of Hughton''s time is selective.  We seem to pick on the things we want to believe in - that everything under Lambert was "fabulously entertaining" and everything under Hughton has been as "boring as watching grass grow" - oh - except apparently all of a sudden we have started to "entertain" a bit. 

What I would like to see is people to forget about Lambert because that is ancient history and focus on what we are now - a developing club with a manager who commands respect and who has brought in some good players on the back of that.  When eventually Hughton moves on to another club (unless he creates a dynasty here and stays for many years) we will get another manager in who will be different again.   But not Lambert.

Sorry to bang on, but to the op the simple answer is - no.

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

He couldn''t come back

1. The relationship with the Board is wrecked

2. He would view it, correctly, as a backwards step

 

But, forgetting all the complications for a second YES I would switch CH for PL in a heart beat.

 

With the millions spent by CH and having now had half the time PL did I don''t think he has moved us forward enough (if at all) ... we finished on less points last year than under PL (benefitting from a freaky final twist in the league table) and we currently have less points now than we did by this stage under PL. To say PL took us as far as he could is just Canary blinkered arrogance ... he left at the start of something extremely special.

 

If PL had the players that CH has I think we would cruise comfortably between 9th-11th throughout the next few seasons at least whereas under CH I think we will forever be in a scrap and one we will lose some season soon. 

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Cantiaci Canary"]He would view it, correctly, as a backwards step[/quote]

??????Why?.  Are we not worthy?

[BigFish 1,987]

Strange

Villa have a single point advantage over us and yet some on here would have us believe that PL is a managerial genius and CH a liability. Not the view on equivalent Villa web fan sites where PL is seen as negative and without a Plan B.

Fact is there is an emotional attachment for PL built on achievements in L1 & Champs that fans at other clubs don''t share. He probably has 18 months at Villa to prove himself and I can''t see him getting another Prem job if he fails.

The suspicion was that this was driven by his ego and the fact he compared himself to Rogers. Rogers was in the frame for a big step up, first at Spurs and then Liverpool. PL, well at best it was only Villa but if he made a fist of it there perhaps he could get a big club. 

Not happening

[Houston Canary 0]

Big fish, my comment was clearly regarding more than the last 3 weeks so not everybody sees 1 point in the current table as earth shattering.

The fact is Villa are better off now, and we''re worse off.

Lake, everyone but you thinks Lambert''s team was far more entertaining than Hughton''s. Yes there have been a few exciting games with him but not nearly as many. Most of your examples were not above average, they were merely not boring. A big part of that was attitude. Under Lambert we didn''t approach games trying to lose by only a few.

And yes, we''re not worthy in the eyes of the football world when comparing which club is a step up. Obviously Villa is bigger, in more lucrative market and with decades more time in the top tier.

[Buh 0]

And the premise of this thread is "WAA I want Lambert back WAAA!"

[BigFish 1,987]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]Big fish, my comment was clearly regarding more than the last 3 weeks so not everybody sees 1 point in the current table as earth shattering. The fact is Villa are better off now, and we''re worse off. Lake, everyone but you thinks Lambert''s team was far more entertaining than Hughton''s. Yes there have been a few exciting games with him but not nearly as many. Most of your examples were not above average, they were merely not boring. A big part of that was attitude. Under Lambert we didn''t approach games trying to lose by only a few. And yes, we''re not worthy in the eyes of the football world when comparing which club is a step up. Obviously Villa is bigger, in more lucrative market and with decades more time in the top tier.[/quote]

The point is my American friend is the difference in the table is marginal but the difference in perception on this message board is enormous.

And if Snoddy hadn''t been an idiot with the pen................

[Beefy is a legend 224]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]The gutless rationalization for Lambert leaving is sickening. He was denied his right to negotiate with other teams so he left. Utter blind nonsense he was leaving a sinking ship or had his secret of success found out or that he''s only a lower league talent.

In his time at AV, that team has improved from near relegation to midtable. At the same time, Norwich has gone from midtable to not quite midtable. We''ve also gone from fabulously entertaining to boring as watching grass grow and now somewhat entertaining.

Yah, Lambert is out of his depth and spinning his wheels going nowhere fast. Such blind ignorance must be blissful.

You know who COULD thrive under his guise should he part ways with Villa? Scotland![/quote]

''midtable to not quite midtable'' - hmm, didn''t we finish higher under CH last season than under PL the season before?

As LDC says, there is a lot of selective memory going on here. The difference between the managers is much smaller than people would care to believe. When CH was a championship manager with Newcastle, his side romped to 1st place with 100 goals, yet people still want to single him out as ''negative''.

Villa have scored fewer goals at home this season than we have - that must be a bit of a head spinner for all those that want to praise the messiah and deride CH.

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Cantiaci Canary"]He would view it, correctly, as a backwards step[/quote]

??????Why?.  Are we not worthy?

[/quote]

We are more than worthy but an ambitious manager wouldn''t move from Villa to Norwich. Only blinkered City fans wouldn''t see Villa as a bigger club.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Cantiaci Canary"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Cantiaci Canary"]He would view it, correctly, as a backwards step[/quote]??????Why?.  Are we not worthy? [/quote]

We are more than worthy but an ambitious manager wouldn''t move from Villa to Norwich. Only blinkered City fans wouldn''t see Villa as a bigger club.[/quote]

LDC on a good day  ------>  because I think we are a bigger club than VillaBigger in heart and spirit and better run with a better manager and better prospects. 

[Trevor Hockey's Beard 527]

Even when Lambert tells "what really happened" how will we know it is the truth? Let''s hope he writes it down, otherwise I, for one, will be none the wiser.

What does appear to be true is Lambert''s huge ambition for himself, and I think that his plan was always to move after one year in the Premiership - it just happened earlier than he anticipated.

His impact at Villa has been such that his career appears to have reached a plateau.

It''s still a NO to the OP.

[Syteanric 1]

I agree we are now a bigger club than Villa. if you want to use past success in league and cup then Bolton and Preston are both bigger than man city.... it isn''t worked out like that.

Lambert took a sideways step to a club of similar size, we are now moving on ahead of villa in terms of league position, how we are run, and the future.. we are a bigger club presently.

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I agree we are now a bigger club than Villa. if you want to use past success in league and cup then Bolton and Preston are both bigger than man city.... it isn''t worked out like that.

Lambert took a sideways step to a club of similar size, we are now moving on ahead of villa in terms of league position, how we are run, and the future.. we are a bigger club presently.

[/quote]

You will not find a single journalist, manager, player or football fan outside Norfolk who would agree with that!

[Buh 0]

He jumped to villa, a nothing club lets face it, because he knewhe wouldn''t be able to keep us up with the budget we have him. I believe coulter described him as "the most impatient man" he''s ever met? He went and bought players with a much higher price tag than we could afford here. The priority was laying off debt that had to be paid because that secures the future of the club. Lambert bailed because he knew he wasn''t up to the job. For that we can thank him. We can also thank the board for getting in another manager that was up to the job, his subsequent reward is a healthy transfer budget and time.

[Buh 0]

Coulter read foulger, phone messaging is hard on here.

[Buh 0]

Oh, and the "real truth" lambert talks about is nothing but bait for those who look back rather than forward. The truth is he wasn''t up to the job that would have been required for him to do, that''s not to say he isn''t excellently qualified elsewhere. I think he''s very good at getting back to back promotions. The fact is he uses the fact that our board won''t talk about the "real truth" to gain a psychological advantage. That makes him cunning, but it also makes him classless. Our board continue to act with class and continue to be accused of being weak and without ambition by the fringes of our support. That''s the real truth. I''m greatful for what lambert did for us but I can''t wait for the day he is truly exorcised from the psyche of the club.

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="Cantiaci Canary"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I agree we are now a bigger club than Villa. if you want to use past success in league and cup then Bolton and Preston are both bigger than man city.... it isn''t worked out like that.

Lambert took a sideways step to a club of similar size, we are now moving on ahead of villa in terms of league position, how we are run, and the future.. we are a bigger club presently.

[/quote]

You will not find a single journalist, manager, player or football fan outside Norfolk who would agree with that![/quote]Nor from most within Norfolk.Anyone who thinks we are a bigger club than Villa must have led a particularly sheltered existence. The may indeed have fallen upon hard times in recent years but they remain the midlands giant that they always were. Your Bolton''s, Preston''s, Huddersfield''s and Blackburn''s have all had league and cup honours in the past but even in their time they were not regarded as "big" clubs.

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Cantiaci Canary"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I agree we are now a bigger club than Villa. if you want to use past success in league and cup then Bolton and Preston are both bigger than man city.... it isn''t worked out like that.

Lambert took a sideways step to a club of similar size, we are now moving on ahead of villa in terms of league position, how we are run, and the future.. we are a bigger club presently.

[/quote]

You will not find a single journalist, manager, player or football fan outside Norfolk who would agree with that![/quote]Nor from most within Norfolk.Anyone who thinks we are a bigger club than Villa must have led a particularly sheltered existence. The may indeed have fallen upon hard times in recent years but they remain the midlands giant that they always were. Your Bolton''s, Preston''s, Huddersfield''s and Blackburn''s have all had league and cup honours in the past but even in their time they were not regarded as "big" clubs.

[/quote]

Couldn''t agree more

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Cantiaci Canary"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Cantiaci Canary"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]I agree we are now a bigger club than Villa. if you want to use past success in league and cup then Bolton and Preston are both bigger than man city.... it isn''t worked out like that. Lambert took a sideways step to a club of similar size, we are now moving on ahead of villa in terms of league position, how we are run, and the future.. we are a bigger club presently. [/quote]

You will not find a single journalist, manager, player or football fan outside Norfolk who would agree with that![/quote]Nor from most within Norfolk. Anyone who thinks we are a bigger club than Villa must have led a particularly sheltered existence. The may indeed have fallen upon hard times in recent years but they remain the midlands giant that they always were. Your Bolton''s, Preston''s, Huddersfield''s and Blackburn''s have all had league and cup honours in the past but even in their time they were not regarded as "big" clubs.[/quote]

Couldn''t agree more[/quote]

I have it on good authority size doesn''t matter anyway (Masters and Johnson). What is more, they intimate that a small club grows in stature when in action, to compensate for being small, thus making all  clubs, in effect, approximately the same size!!!  [:O]

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="lake district canary"]

I have it on good authority size doesn''t matter anyway (Masters and Johnson). What is more, they intimate that a small club grows in stature when in action, to compensate for being small, thus making all  clubs, in effect, approximately the same size!!!  [:O]

[/quote]The problem with that, ldc, as I have pointed out before, is that all the relevant statistics for Norwich City this season show a marked shrinkage compared with last season...