[Archived] Lambert Leaving!

[punerover]

Lambert's defensive record this season had a lot to be desired.

1. Playing Marshall at RB

2. Not bringing in full backs in January transfer window

3. Bringing a center back but not playing him

4. Not getting more out of our existing players. How many have improved under him? Hardly 1 or 2.

5 . Getting wide players when essentially everyone accepts that our CMs have not been adequate enough.

This is clearly backed up by our goals against column. Yes he was better manager than Bowyer, but significantly better? Nope. Only marginally so. So for those who are not bitterly disappointed with him leaving, I would not blame them.

Having said that, he should have been give a pre-season and at least Rhodes money and check next season where we stood in the table. Yes it was a difficult job some would even argue an impossible one, but it would have looked much better on his CV if he could have got us anywhere higher. I am assuming he is getting the Celtic job, if he does not, it would be most unfortunate.

The conditions are difficult no doubt, but to say that no manager can achieve anything here, then why even hire a new manager? By that logic, even if you used Dunn or even Hanley as player manager, we would be none the wiser in the league table since we are destined for "conference" anyway.

PS: I am not a Venky LOVER

PS: Yes the boardroom has to be in place

PS: Yes, a structure is required

PS: The Rhodes money is required to build a better team that is ambitious for promotion

[JBiz]

And another mature response ...keep digging

The fact you got involved says it all. Can you not expand your boycott to here also?

[RevidgeBlue]

I'm sick of reading this "I hate Venkys as much as anyone else but PL deserves some blame too" crap.

The faults are OVERWHELMINGLY WITH THE OWNERS! Like 99%!

Its disingenuous to keep chucking Lambert in as if its 50-50, as if you are being reasonable and even-handed.

We will never prosper under Venkys and it doesn't matter who the manager is. As you will find out.

IF we hire another experienced manager with seemingly impressive credentials and IF they fail miserably you may well prove to be right.

However I've never understood why:

1) Lambert joined us in the first place

2) Lambert joined us without substantial funds to spend immediately in the January window

3) Players were signed on loan when bearing in mind the contractual situation of many of the players the squad needed rebuilding for the long term immediately.

4) Rhodes was sold on the last day of the transfer window when the funds couldn't be reinvested in the squad

5) Lambert was seemingly playing such a dangerous game criticising the owners in public

With the benefit of hindsight it all falls into place. The answer is the same in every case. He had the release clause so probably came in thinking (as I did) he might be able to get a far better tune out of the squad than GB. If things didn't fall into place from the get go, it didn't particularly matter, he had the bail out option.

I wonder what would have been the fans' reaction if on the day he was appointed the official statement read "Blackburn Rovers are delighted to announce the appointment of Paul Lambert on a two and a half year deal. With the manager having a release clause in his contract allowing him to walk out if he chooses at the end of the season". I'm sure the reaction would have been far less euphoric and rather more "Pretty pointless, he'll be gone by summer if we fail to reach the play offs."

I'd say it's been worse than pointless, disappointing results aside, the general player contract situation combined with Lambert's duff transfer dealings has left us looking like the next Blackpool in the making.

[ABBEY]

The fact you got involved says it all. Can you not expand your boycott to here also?

keep digging

[JBiz]

I'm sick of reading this "I hate Venkys as much as anyone else but PL deserves some blame too" crap.

The faults are OVERWHELMINGLY WITH THE OWNERS! Like 99%!

Its disingenuous to keep chucking Lambert in as if its 50-50, as if you are being reasonable and even-handed.

We will never prosper under Venkys and it doesn't matter who the manager is. As you will find out.

Yes, gambling on promotion with Kean is just the same as gambling on it with Lambert!!

I'm sick of reading "Venkys out" on every thread personally but that's life, people have different opinions.

PL is being completely absolved of responsibility for his tenure so far. Whilst I'd agree with anyone who says it was far too early to get a summatavie assessment of his abilities, it's absolutely fair to say he could've done better.

It's also absolutely fair to say that it's a scenario he has got out of for his own reasons. Fair play to him but I see it the way I see it. In ways, I feel let down.

keep digging

Surely this is flaming?

[Blue blood]

It's still an excuse though khod. An excuse that's been trotted out after he initially told us moaning about money isn't acceptable!

It's a bit simplistic to put it all down to lack of money available. I'm sure Lambert would have worked under budget constraints had the rest of the clubs management structure, lines of communication and ultimate ambition not been less professional than a corner shop.

Can I smell a bit of naughtiness from former Bowyer luvvies?

Good response to the above. It was about more than money - it was about no communication AND the management structure too. Money was one facet of the shambles that hampered Lambert, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. I had hoped and expected him to do better but even so 90% of the blame lies with the owners. if they were castigated as much for their faults as Lambert is on here for his, then they'd have a much more uncomfortable time.

Lambert's defensive record this season had a lot to be desired.

1. Playing Marshall at RB

2. Not bringing in full backs in January transfer window

3. Bringing a center back but not playing him

4. Not getting more out of our existing players. How many have improved under him? Hardly 1 or 2.

5 . Getting wide players when essentially everyone accepts that our CMs have not been adequate enough.

This is clearly backed up by our goals against column. Yes he was better manager than Bowyer, but significantly better? Nope. Only marginally so. So for those who are not bitterly disappointed with him leaving, I would not blame them.

Having said that, he should have been give a pre-season and at least Rhodes money and check next season where we stood in the table. Yes it was a difficult job some would even argue an impossible one, but it would have looked much better on his CV if he could have got us anywhere higher. I am assuming he is getting the Celtic job, if he does not, it would be most unfortunate.

The conditions are difficult no doubt, but to say that no manager can achieve anything here, then why even hire a new manager? By that logic, even if you used Dunn or even Hanley as player manager, we would be none the wiser in the league table since we are destined for "conference" anyway.

PS: I am not a Venky LOVER

PS: Yes the boardroom has to be in place

PS: Yes, a structure is required

PS: The Rhodes money is required to build a better team that is ambitious for promotion

Because even under this shower a manager can make a difference - the extent however is limited and undermined by our owners. Also a manager can make a bad situation worse, as we've seen before.

But you're right the bigger issue and difference maker is the owners - now if we could get them to clear off things would be a lot better.

[mustard]

Yes, Lambert could have done better. However, I am sure we can all agree he couldn't have achieved play-offs without time and investment? So what does it matter how we finished the season? We could have come anywhere between 7th and 21st and it wouldn't have made diddly-squat of a difference really. So why bother bickering over it?

Maybe Lambert has his own reasons but with Shaw and Myers bailing followed by the Cheston interview, it's summed up the lack of direction/investment from the club. The blame lies at the feet of the Venky's. No one else.

[JHRover]

IF we hire another experienced manager with seemingly impressive credentials and IF they fail miserably you may well prove to be right.

However I've never understood why:

1) Lambert joined us in the first place

2) Lambert joined us without substantial funds to spend immediately in the January window

3) Players were signed on loan when bearing in mind the contractual situation of many of the players the squad needed rebuilding for the long term immediately.

4) Rhodes was sold on the last day of the transfer window when the funds couldn't be reinvested in the squad

5) Lambert was seemingly playing such a dangerous game criticising the owners in public

With the benefit of hindsight it all falls into place. The answer is the same in every case. He had the release clause so probably came in thinking (as I did) he might be able to get a far better tune out of the squad than GB. If things didn't fall into place from the get go, it didn't particularly matter, he had the bail out option.

I wonder what would have been the fans' reaction if on the day he was appointed the official statement read "Blackburn Rovers are delighted to announce the appointment of Paul Lambert on a two and a half year deal. With the manager having a release clause in his contract allowing him to walk out if he chooses at the end of the season". I'm sure the reaction would have been far less euphoric and rather more "Pretty pointless, he'll be gone by summer if we fail to reach the play offs."

I'd say it's been worse than pointless, disappointing results aside, the general player contract situation combined with Lambert's duff transfer dealings has left us looking like the next Blackpool in the making.

I don't think Lambert can be blamed for the state of the squad come the summer. As manager he had one transfer window in January, at time when most clubs avoid spending big unless promotion is within reach as the consequences of spending heavily and getting it wrong are severe. Concentrating on loans and short term deals was the right policy by and large for us as it was clear by January that we weren't going to be getting into the play offs and the extent of our ambition was to stay up this season. For that purpose it made sense for Lambert to recruit some theoretically quality loans and someone like Jackson on a short term deal who was low risk. Lambert also sanctioned the contract extensions for Corry Evans and Craig Conway, who remain two of our small number of good players for this level, yet I expect at least Evans and possibly Conway to be off this summer. Both could play for any other Championship club if they wanted to.

The time for rebuilding is in the summer window, when an entire new squad can be put together and have time to gel under a new manager's leadership and training programme. I'm not expecting that to happen here though.

As it stands the season finishes tomorrow. Our manager is walking out. Whoever is leading the search for a new manager has already stipulated that the man will have to be able to work with youth and a very limited budget. Rumours also that they want a younger manager with a link to Rovers. The indication appears to be that they aren't concerned by timescales and are still compiling their shortlists. Meanwhile rival clubs are fast at work. If they had left Lambert to get on with it properly then he'd have firm ideas what he was going for and would know exactly which players were going.

So we're on the back foot already for next season and the people running the club are to blame for that. Not Lambert who I'm sure had lots of plans in place but didn't receive the support or communication he expects.

The majority of those out of contract in the summer are dross, and were recruited under the previous manager - Delfouneso, Brown etc. The club has chosen to adopt a policy of low cost shorter term contracts which the better players won't be interested in.

[oldjamfan1]

I had hoped and expected him to do better but even so 90% of the blame lies with the owners. if they were castigated as much for their faults as Lambert is on here for his, then they'd have a much more uncomfortable time.

I don't think they would - they are oblivious to any criticisms that come their way seemingly.

[Stuart]

I think some need to wake up to the fact that PL hasn't walked to help the fans or the club out.

He's walked for his own reasons, and nobody on here can tell me I can't be critical of them. He may have felt that he couldn't work in the environment but that still doesn't explain why he took the job in the first place.

As I've previously said, you'd have to be pretty ignorant coming into our club to think we'd have millions to play with.

It's pretty evident that he was given assurances and took a gamble. It was a calculated one though, hence the clause. I'm not sure what you were hoping for in having a proper manager with a track record of success join the club. Loyalty? It doesn't exist. Not unless you have no prospects elsewhere and are on the best meal ticket of your life. We have had plenty of those this last 5 years.

He may not have intended to but he has exposed just how rotten our club is. We really have been cut adrift and as soon as that happened, Venkys became surplus to requirements. The ONLY thing that Venkys bring to the party is their ability to secure a massive debt and to service loans. Without that we may as well be rid and let somebody else step in and fight for our club.

Yet, despite their supposed financial power, over their time, they have systematically stripped the club bare.

They caused our relegation, enabling player sales which the fans accepted as necessary.

The caused us to go into FFP, enabling player sales, which the fans accepted as necessary.

They brought in a credible manager, under the pretence he would be able to rebuild, allowing them to sell our only player of any value - without the advertised riots - because the fans accepted it as necessary.

Now this is either part of a grand plan (which I doubt) or they are simply incompetent when it comes to running a football club (which is obvious).

The first question is what are the fans going to have be forced to accept next as a direct result of their incompetence? Administration? Well if they did it there wouldn't be any surprise. The second is what we are prepared to do about it.

Yet some still support Venkys and some still blame Lambert!

It's no wonder tempers flare on here at times.

(Oh, and Lambert had ONE January transfer window, NO budget and NO pre-season, with NO support within the club. How on earth was he supposed to be successful?)

[D-side17]

IF we hire another experienced manager with seemingly impressive credentials and IF they fail miserably you may well prove to be right.

However I've never understood why:

1) Lambert joined us in the first place

2) Lambert joined us without substantial funds to spend immediately in the January window

3) Players were signed on loan when bearing in mind the contractual situation of many of the players the squad needed rebuilding for the long term immediately.

4) Rhodes was sold on the last day of the transfer window when the funds couldn't be reinvested in the squad

5) Lambert was seemingly playing such a dangerous game criticising the owners in public

In answer to your queries (adopting the same numbering):

1) Because he wanted to recommence his managerial career and saw Rovers as a good opportunity (having been assured that he would be given funds in the summer to build a squad and push for promotion in 2016/17).

2) Because he was assured that he would be given funds in the summer to build a squad and to push for promotion in 2016/17 (and was confident that he could keep us up in the meantime with a few loans and cheap acquisitions)

3) Because he had been told that significant funds were not available in January but would be available in the summer when he expected to be able to begin rebuilding the squad for the long term.

4) Because he was assured that he would be given the sale proceeds in the summer to push for promotion in 2016/17 (and was confident that he could keep us up in the meantime by replacing Rhodes with Graham)

5) Because the owners were clearly beginning to show signs of reneging on assurances previously given (see above) and Lambert was prepared neither to bob along in the Championship, trying to avoid relegation to League One (as he had made clear throughout), nor was he prepared to work for owners who renege on promises. Lambert was also aware that, as an experienced, capable manager, he would be able to secure a managerial position elsewhere (unlike some of the other “managers” of Rovers over the last 6 years who were quite happy to be messed about/ignored by the owners whilst clinging on to the job for dear life, knowing that they’d probably never again be able to secure a managerial position at a club of the size, history and prestige of Rovers).

Hope this helps.

[punerover]

Its too harsh/extreme to say people support Venky's and blame Lambert.

I did not seen any "Lambert OUT" thread here despite poor performances.

I have not seen a "Venky's are the best thing to happen to Blackburn" thread as well.

They are just different opinions which we should respect whether we agree to them or not.

[Stuart]

Its too harsh/extreme to say people support Venky's and blame Lambert.

I did not seen any "Lambert OUT" thread here despite poor performances.

I have not seen a "Venky's are the best thing to happen to Blackburn" thread as well.

They are just different opinions which we should respect whether we agree to them or not.

Where's Jbizzle with his black-and-white dictum when you need him.

Seriously though, you need to have a read of the LT comments section from time to time. Maybe even speak to human being in person to appreciate that there are indeed people who support Venkys (and shout down naysayers) and blame Lambert. You only need to properly read some of the posts on here.

[punerover]

Where's Jbizzle with his black-and-white dictum when you need him.

Seriously though, you need to have a read of the LT comments section from time to time. Maybe even speak to human being in person to appreciate that there are indeed people who support Venkys (and shout down naysayers) and blame Lambert. You only need to properly read some of the posts on here.

A small minority or I should start following threads more frequently, probably missed someone

[JBiz]

Yet some still support Venkys and some still blame Lambert!

Nobody here sees the scenario as such so stop saying it. I hate quoting one line, especially from a post I agree a lot with but why throw this in?

Let me make this clear - I don't blame PL for our decline. The Raos are responsible ultimately, regardless of the criminal negligence below.

Am I 100% in support of PL? How can I be? His walk puts MY club back into the scenario I've hated from day one with these muppets - hiring quality.

Do I blame him for leaving? Probably not. Do I think he should've been this open and at least stuck it out for a year regardless of the scenario? Probably yes.

The crux is - he walks away because he knew the difficulties he was facing. I'm in no doubt that somethings changed since he was hired but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know we'd be cutting our cloth to the extreme.

He walks away with money in his pocket (because he didn't resign when he knew he was going) and his reputation more or less intact. Do I blame him for it? No, but as a fan I'm critical of any professional who puts their own career in front of what's best for MY club. Remember, that's the priority. Some call it principal, I initially called it spineless; on reflection it's not that extreme.

So I'm not having it. There isn't anyone posting "leave the Venkys alone they aren't to blame" yet a few seem to think anyone critical of PL is putting the blame on him.

[Stuart]

I guess things have to be explicit for some people.

As an aside, how come you've not waded in against Ewood Spark, by the way, who called me 'an enemy of the club' for wanting rid of Venkys?

[West Yorks Rover]

I don't blame him one iota for looking after himself, If I was him I wouldn't allow those shysters in Pune to ruin my career.

[oldjamfan1]

Does Lambert not have a bit of a track record of walking away from clubs? I seem to recall he did the dirty on Colchester after being tapped up by Norwich (just after his Colchester team had just smacked 7 past them) and I'm not entirely convinced he didn't do something a bit iffy at the end of his Norwich tenure too. I have hazy memories of him chucking the towel in at Livingston in his first managerial role as well, come to think of it. He certainly seems to do 'walking away' on a regular basis anyway.....wonder how many times he's been sacked in his career, which is the most common way for a managerial tenure to end?

[ABBEY]

Ha flaming really ? You need a life and as for not wanting to see Venkysout

VENKYSCUM OUT

[JBiz]

I guess things have to be explicit for some people.

As an aside, how come you've not waded in against Ewood Spark, by the way, who called me 'an enemy of the club' for wanting rid of Venkys?

Maybe I didn't read it correctly but I thought he/she said that its wrong for anyone who would happily forfeit our entire history, facilities, league position etc for the sake of being free of the owners. I agree on that.

Ha flaming really ? You need a life and as for not wanting to see Venkysout

VENKYSCUM OUT

I need a life? Am I the one looking for posters who I don't like to call them out through a keyboard? Am I the one who follows a certain posters every word with the same childish reply? Am I the one who believes the entire stadium is pro Venkys because I had one argument with a fan?

I don't blame him one iota for looking after himself, If I was him I wouldn't allow those shysters in Pune to ruin my career.

But the whole world knows how they run this business so why even turn up in the first place?

[Stuart]

Maybe I didn't read it correctly but I thought he/she said that its wrong for anyone who would happily forfeit our entire history, facilities, league position etc for the sake of being free of the owners. I agree on that.

That's you and me done pal.

[tomphil]

Does Lambert not have a bit of a track record of walking away from clubs? I seem to recall he did the dirty on Colchester after being tapped up by Norwich (just after his Colchester team had just smacked 7 past them) and I'm not entirely convinced he didn't do something a bit iffy at the end of his Norwich tenure too. I have hazy memories of him chucking the towel in at Livingston in his first managerial role as well, come to think of it. He certainly seems to do 'walking away' on a regular basis anyway.....wonder how many times he's been sacked in his career, which is the most common way for a managerial tenure to end?

Be a good mate for Steve Bruce then.

[West Yorks Rover]

Maybe I didn't read it correctly but I thought he/she said that its wrong for anyone who would happily forfeit our entire history, facilities, league position etc for the sake of being free of the owners. I agree on that.

I need a life? Am I the one looking for posters who I don't like to call them out through a keyboard? Am I the one who follows a certain posters every word with the same childish reply? Am I the one who believes the entire stadium is pro Venkys because I had one argument with a fan?

But the whole world knows how they run this business so why even turn up in the first place?

Well maybe his agent said to him " Hey Paul how about the Blackburn job ? those owners seem to be acting a bit more sensibly these days,

Gary Bowyer was in charge for 2 and a half years you know "

So he thought he'd give it a go and he was promised a decent budget in the summer, after we come out of FFP embargo, he wasn't totally

convinced however, so his agent insisted he have a get-out clause put into his contract, the rest is history.

[Amo]

Lambert owes us nothing. In fact, I'd say he deserves our respect for not compromising his ambitions, when he could happily toe the line and take the Venky coin like his predecessors. There's been a difference in opinion between Lambert & the Punatics when it comes to the direction of the club and he was probably given certain promises about funds that were reneged on. Forgive me if I take his side rather than the cretins responsible for this shambles.

[Mattyblue]

Social media, web forums etc. are often described as 'echo chambers', i.e many young left wingers (not Wilcox) couldn't comprehend how Labour didn't romp to victory last year, 'I mean EVERYONE I know on Twitter hates the Tories'.

This place is getting like that, Like 99% of BRFCC, I despise Venky's. Pre 2010, I wouldn't hear a bad word said about Blackburn Rovers, the John Williams era club was something I was immensely proud of, so to see this pathetic shell of a club that we now are makes me weep, they are the route of everything that has befallen us.

However, that is not the universal opinion around the area and on matchdays:

'They mean well'

'They were duped by Anderson'

'We were always going to get relegated'

'I'm still glad Fat Sam went'

'At least Bowyer had us playing good football unlike Lambert, thank f--- he's gone'

'They put millions in'

'Hate this negativity, just get behind the lads ffs!'

This is why protests will not get off the ground, there is not enough of a groundswell of support to take the owners on, plenty of folk just think we are falling down the pecking order to our 'natural' level or they are sick of watching tripe and will go to B&Q instead on a Saturday.

WE on BRFCC are the minority, the one's that are out of touch. We spend hours on a BRFC website, debating the ins and out of club finance, board membership, ownership and so on, most fans aren't like us and the Abbey matchday experience of encountering plenty of Venky support in the stands is more common than many on here have grasped.