Ghosts!

[lake district canary 4,531]

I have felt all along the problems we have had since Lambert left was down to the hangover of his success.   The players that have come in have come in to a club where the fans had been used to unrivalled success.   Hughton''s approach did not work.  He could have had a bit more luck in terms of injuries this season and done better if we had been able to play something approaching our best team more often, but that''s history, but the ghost of Lambert is still there.

Adams coming in has made a lot of people suddenly positive - and that is good - and as people know I have been saying for years that the club needs to be one that has everyone positive and pulling in the same direction.  But this is not a return to the Lambert times.  We still have the same players with the same qualities - and the same faults.   There is a chance we can lay the ghost of Lambert but only if we accept that time has moved on and accept that a less dramatic era is going to happen.   If we don''t accept that, no manager is going to get a fair crack of the whip.   Trying to replace Worthington who had limited success with us was very difficult.  Trying to replace Lambert, who was much more successful, has proved the same.    I hope Adams will be given the opportunity to have a good long term go at managing the team.   My big fear would that be as soon as we start having a bad patch, fans will lose patience and go on about inexperience etc etc. 

It appears that some fans will never be happy - because they had Lambert and success and want that back.  Well, success is what we all want, but we need to have patience and give whoever is in charge the time to build things.  Hughton had enough time, but the task was ultimately beyond him, for whatever reason.  Adams may grow into the job - I hope so.   But the slippery slope is there for all to see - just be careful what you wish for, otherwise that spectacular bounce we had with Lambert up the leagues may see us come back to earth with a bump.  If Adams keeps the job, he will need every bit of support he can get - support that was noticeably missing for Hughton in some quarters, right from the beginning of his tenure.

"Support whatever" not "I will only support if I feel like it". 

That way we may get success again - and lay that ghost in the process.

[ron obvious 1,502]

Ah! So it was syphilis all along .........

[Tetteys Jig 830]

As much as I thought at the time Hughton''s appointment was a decent one (he made us more solid) he went too far away from the excellent mold Lambert created. We literally forgot how to score this season and last. He gambled by spending all his money on the wrong type of striker in the hope they would do his job for him while he focused on defence and ball retention and he got it badly wrong.

The board should have realised this irretrievable error by January and changed things up.

Swansea replaced Martinez with a similar style manager and it made the transition easier.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Ah! So it was syphilis all along .........[/quote]

[:D]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="lake district canary"]I have felt all along[/quote]Only had to read the first word to discover what this thread would be about. [;)]

[The Great Mass Debater 1,089]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]As much as I thought at the time Hughton''s appointment was a decent one (he made us more solid) he went too far away from the excellent mold Lambert created. We literally forgot how to score this season and last. He gambled by spending all his money on the wrong type of striker in the hope they would do his job for him while he focused on defence and ball retention and he got it badly wrong. The board should have realised this irretrievable error by January and changed things up. Swansea replaced Martinez with a similar style manager and it made the transition easier.[/quote]

 

When Lambert left I felt the bubble was at real risk of bursting. So much of our success seemed to course directly from Lamberts influence. Remove the active ingredient, the catalyst, and suddenly the reaction doesnt work. I felt when Lambert left the best thing we could have done would have been to appoint Culverhouse as our manager. We needed evolution, not revolution.

The board appointed somebody with a completely different philosophy on the game, why I have no idea, as the players Hughton inherited were not at all suited to Hughtons approach to the game. I thought that was the reason for the frustrating football in his first season, and accepted it was a transition period as Lamberts players struggled to adapt to Hughtons approach. This season would be better I thought as the team was then essentially the players Hughton had picked to play his way. Though if anything we looked even more ineffective than the previous season.

Big mistake to appoint someone with such a radically different belief system, who would necessarily have to overhaul the playing staff - and ultimately, paradoxically end up with a team that seemingly were less able to make the Hughton masterplan work. The response in the last few games suggests these players were never the right fit for the Hughton way and are much more responsive to Adams'' style, which is much closer to how Lambert played the team. Difficult to know where the responsibility lies for such player recruitment, but they''re clearly happier under Neil

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]As much as I thought at the time Hughton''s appointment was a decent one (he made us more solid) he went too far away from the excellent mold Lambert created. We literally forgot how to score this season and last. He gambled by spending all his money on the wrong type of striker in the hope they would do his job for him while he focused on defence and ball retention and he got it badly wrong. The board should have realised this irretrievable error by January and changed things up. Swansea replaced Martinez with a similar style manager and it made the transition easier.[/quote]

 

When Lambert left I felt the bubble was at real risk of bursting. So much of our success seemed to course directly from Lamberts influence. Remove the active ingredient, the catalyst, and suddenly the reaction doesnt work. I felt when Lambert left the best thing we could have done would have been to appoint Culverhouse as our manager. We needed evolution, not revolution.

The board appointed somebody with a completely different philosophy on the game, why I have no idea, as the players Hughton inherited were not at all suited to Hughtons approach to the game. I thought that was the reason for the frustrating football in his first season, and accepted it was a transition period as Lamberts players struggled to adapt to Hughtons approach. This season would be better I thought as the team was then essentially the players Hughton had picked to play his way. Though if anything we looked even more ineffective than the previous season.

Big mistake to appoint someone with such a radically different belief system, who would necessarily have to overhaul the playing staff - and ultimately, paradoxically end up with a team that seemingly were less able to make the Hughton masterplan work. The response in the last few games suggests these players were never the right fit for the Hughton way and are much more responsive to Adams'' style, which is much closer to how Lambert played the team. Difficult to know where the responsibility lies for such player recruitment, but they''re clearly happier under Neil

[/quote]

I would agree with a lot of that.  Appointing someone like Culverhouse would have been a logical step. But I do think that whoever had been appointed would have struggled.  Whoever it was - was not Lambert - and whoever brought in would have wanted to get new players in too. 

The different philosophy is a harder one to fathom - but in a wider context it was logical in terms of getting someone in with a plan to get a more balanced and cohesive plan.  It didn''t work and patience ran out - but at its best a Hughton team did look very good.  Its just that we didn''t see it often enough - for whatever reason. 

Clearly happier under Neil?  Maybe, or clearly happier because the whole place has been given a boost by the manager change?  A feel good factor throughout - and we have to make sure we keep that feeling.  Now Hughton has gone, the players may start to be the ones that are blamed if things don''t go well -  but if we can keep the positivity we can be sure of a good run in to the end of the season and give it a good go.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

''Mirror image'' recruitment can be disastrous - for a fine example look at Sir Alex''s recommendation for his replacement. Not worked out too well there has it?