Norwich (away)

[toonotl 2828]

Who has a decent 4th (and 5th) choice CB in their squad ?? Serious question.

 

Not many. But you're confusing not having a decent 4th choice centre back with not having a 4th choice centre back.

[Toonpack 8686]

Stoke City seem to have at least 4 experienced centre backs in their squad. And in almost all cases they have played for or been on the fringes of their national team squads at some stage of their careers. They may not all be brilliant, and I have my own opinions of them, but Pulis and his chairman have built the squad correctly. If we'd have had one of Shawcross, Huth, Woodgate or Upson yesterday just to head the ball away from the area when it came in then we may have got something. Who knows, its all conjecture. But we wouldve stood a better chance if Pardew had been allowed to address a glaring weakness in the squad after Campbell departed. We all knew we were weak in this posistion and Norwich didnt have to come up with anything more original than just lumping the ball into the area to put 4 past us. Two full backs in central defence, and the likes of Stoke can call on 4 half decent ones, fuckin hell.

 

The wheels havent come completely off though. We weren't as good as some were saying 6 or 7 weeks ago and we were never going to be as bad as some were suggesting pre season. It could be so much better if we'd have invested the Carroll money properly but we didn't and thats old news. Rome wasn't bulit in a day, but I don't think Ashley can be arsed to lay the foundations properly.

 

If Stoke lost 3 of that four, who would the "other" replacement be, and would they be as succesfull, not that they've been very good this year so far anyway. (Huth wanted away btw, which is the other problem of having "quality" back-ups).

 

I'm not disputing we should upgrade Perch, however, I am disputing we could realistically upgrade those ahead of him.

[PaddockLad 16507]

Stoke City seem to have at least 4 experienced centre backs in their squad. And in almost all cases they have played for or been on the fringes of their national team squads at some stage of their careers. They may not all be brilliant, and I have my own opinions of them, but Pulis and his chairman have built the squad correctly. If we'd have had one of Shawcross, Huth, Woodgate or Upson yesterday just to head the ball away from the area when it came in then we may have got something. Who knows, its all conjecture. But we wouldve stood a better chance if Pardew had been allowed to address a glaring weakness in the squad after Campbell departed. We all knew we were weak in this posistion and Norwich didnt have to come up with anything more original than just lumping the ball into the area to put 4 past us. Two full backs in central defence, and the likes of Stoke can call on 4 half decent ones, fuckin hell.

 

The wheels havent come completely off though. We weren't as good as some were saying 6 or 7 weeks ago and we were never going to be as bad as some were suggesting pre season. It could be so much better if we'd have invested the Carroll money properly but we didn't and thats old news. Rome wasn't bulit in a day, but I don't think Ashley can be arsed to lay the foundations properly.

 

spot on Paddock Lad.

 

Do you still go in the Denton ?

 

Think you're mixing me up with someone else mate. I'm not from Newcastle and I live on the south coast nowadays. Was up at Norwich yesterday, canny day out ruined by 90 mins of shite, same old same old etc.

[ewerk 29482]

the most simplistic and basic answer of all, is that going into a season with only approx 14 players or so and hoping to do well with such a small number is not good enough.

 

Who are the 14 players?

 

"14 players or so" max who are good enough to wear this shirt ewerk. Try doing a bit of hard assessment, and work them out.

 

It's a squad game, everybody has injuries, most other clubs are better prepared for it, even Stoke. See Paddock Lads post.

 

I was just interested in your opinion as to who makes the grade.

 

I reckon we have around 20/21 good enough for a mid-table PL squad.

 

I'm not giving you my opinion, if I do, some big kid will just complain to admin.

 

I think your assessment of us having 20/21 premiership players is absolutely hilarious and as deluded as it gets.

 

If you want to actually talk about football then here's your chance.

[LeazesMag 0]

Stoke City seem to have at least 4 experienced centre backs in their squad. And in almost all cases they have played for or been on the fringes of their national team squads at some stage of their careers. They may not all be brilliant, and I have my own opinions of them, but Pulis and his chairman have built the squad correctly. If we'd have had one of Shawcross, Huth, Woodgate or Upson yesterday just to head the ball away from the area when it came in then we may have got something. Who knows, its all conjecture. But we wouldve stood a better chance if Pardew had been allowed to address a glaring weakness in the squad after Campbell departed. We all knew we were weak in this posistion and Norwich didnt have to come up with anything more original than just lumping the ball into the area to put 4 past us. Two full backs in central defence, and the likes of Stoke can call on 4 half decent ones, fuckin hell.

 

The wheels havent come completely off though. We weren't as good as some were saying 6 or 7 weeks ago and we were never going to be as bad as some were suggesting pre season. It could be so much better if we'd have invested the Carroll money properly but we didn't and thats old news. Rome wasn't bulit in a day, but I don't think Ashley can be arsed to lay the foundations properly.

 

spot on Paddock Lad.

 

Do you still go in the Denton ?

 

Think you're mixing me up with someone else mate. I'm not from Newcastle and I live on the south coast nowadays. Was up at Norwich yesterday, canny day out ruined by 90 mins of shite, same old same old etc.

 

ok, sorry......thought you said you went into the Denton once. Must have been someone else.

 

Norwich is one of the few top 2 division grounds I haven't been to. Been to Ipswich, but not Norwich.

[Ayatollah Hermione 13590]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

[LeazesMag 0]

the most simplistic and basic answer of all, is that going into a season with only approx 14 players or so and hoping to do well with such a small number is not good enough.

 

Who are the 14 players?

 

"14 players or so" max who are good enough to wear this shirt ewerk. Try doing a bit of hard assessment, and work them out.

 

It's a squad game, everybody has injuries, most other clubs are better prepared for it, even Stoke. See Paddock Lads post.

 

I was just interested in your opinion as to who makes the grade.

 

I reckon we have around 20/21 good enough for a mid-table PL squad.

 

I'm not giving you my opinion, if I do, some big kid will just complain to admin.

 

I think your assessment of us having 20/21 premiership players is absolutely hilarious and as deluded as it gets.

 

If you want to actually talk about football then here's your chance.

 

I talk about football all the time, I've done it for years. I'm not going into it with trolls, but once personalities come into discussions, then everything changes. I've said this before. Certtain views that I've gave for years are football-oriented but rejected by people for those reasons.

 

I realise I have very definite views on how success is achieved in football, and they are unfortunately for some, based on how success HAS been achieved for 100 years etc etc......there is no other way to do it.

[Toonpack 8686]

Who has a decent 4th (and 5th) choice CB in their squad ?? Serious question.

 

Not many. But you're confusing not having a decent 4th choice centre back with not having a 4th choice centre back.

 

We have a 4th choice CB, his name is James Perch. I accept he could be upgraded, but that still (in our current situation) leaves us with who can be 5th Choice. We cannot have 5 specialist CB's "on the books" without a half decent kid or two, and from team selection it would appear (in the managers opinion) we don't have that.

 

Perch just happens to be on the fans "shit list" he alone never cost us the game yesterday.

[LeazesMag 0]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

[ewerk 29482]

I talk about football all the time, I've done it for years. I'm not going into it with trolls, but once personalities come into discussions, then everything changes. I've said this before. Certtain views that I've gave for years are football-oriented but rejected by people for those reasons.

 

I realise I have very definite views on how success is achieved in football, and they are unfortunately for some, based on how success HAS been achieved for 100 years etc etc......there is no other way to do it.

 

It was a very straight forward question about which players you rate in our current squad. There was no hidden agenda. I'll not bother attempting to engage you in football discussion again.

[LeazesMag 0]

...there's a difference between you naming the players you don't think are shite LM and you going on about ashley and shepherd etc

 

it's the distinct difference between you going from one thing to that everytime that was getting old, like i told you in pm.

(don't start reiterating a "i would but someone will complain to an admin because that's just as annoying)

 

Just stay on topic and enjoy talking about what's at hand without having to compare the two boards all the time, it's not like the majority of users like either of them anyway, just debating players and such gives us all a distraction from the shite we'd like to forget about at the club.

 

The only players at NUFC that I personally think are good enough for NUFC are Tiote, Coloccinni, Krul [who I was wrong about], Steven Taylor, Ba, Cabaye and maybe Guittierez. We sold 2 in the last 12 months to Liverpool. The rest of them can all be binned for me. They are not good enough.

[LeazesMag 0]

I talk about football all the time, I've done it for years. I'm not going into it with trolls, but once personalities come into discussions, then everything changes. I've said this before. Certtain views that I've gave for years are football-oriented but rejected by people for those reasons.

 

I realise I have very definite views on how success is achieved in football, and they are unfortunately for some, based on how success HAS been achieved for 100 years etc etc......there is no other way to do it.

 

It was a very straight forward question about which players you rate in our current squad. There was no hidden agenda. I'll not bother attempting to engage you in football discussion again.

 

don't bother with this "question" rubbish, unless you point out to people when they don't answer me.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

With proper half-decent CBs (Kadar and Williamson?), I reckon we could have at least drawn that. Even with Gosling and Obertan on the pitch.

 

Lambert rightly zoned in on our clear weakness at the back and his team exploited it brilliantly and very professionally. Fair play to them.

[Ayatollah Hermione 13590]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

[PaddockLad 16507]

Stoke City seem to have at least 4 experienced centre backs in their squad. And in almost all cases they have played for or been on the fringes of their national team squads at some stage of their careers. They may not all be brilliant, and I have my own opinions of them, but Pulis and his chairman have built the squad correctly. If we'd have had one of Shawcross, Huth, Woodgate or Upson yesterday just to head the ball away from the area when it came in then we may have got something. Who knows, its all conjecture. But we wouldve stood a better chance if Pardew had been allowed to address a glaring weakness in the squad after Campbell departed. We all knew we were weak in this posistion and Norwich didnt have to come up with anything more original than just lumping the ball into the area to put 4 past us. Two full backs in central defence, and the likes of Stoke can call on 4 half decent ones, fuckin hell.

 

The wheels havent come completely off though. We weren't as good as some were saying 6 or 7 weeks ago and we were never going to be as bad as some were suggesting pre season. It could be so much better if we'd have invested the Carroll money properly but we didn't and thats old news. Rome wasn't bulit in a day, but I don't think Ashley can be arsed to lay the foundations properly.

 

If Stoke lost 3 of that four, who would the "other" replacement be, and would they be as succesfull, not that they've been very good this year so far anyway. (Huth wanted away btw, which is the other problem of having "quality" back-ups).

 

I'm not disputing we should upgrade Perch, however, I am disputing we could realistically upgrade those ahead of him.

 

Theyd still have had one out of the 4 to head the ball away when it came in though...theyre all leaders, take charge in the box etc etc. And if all 4 of them were injured I'd suggest playing Danny Higginbottom there, another centre back by trade. Its called building a squad. Pulis has had more time to build his, granted. But going on the evidence of his tenure here I think Ashley is just content to say to Pardew "Graham will find you this, this and this and thats it, get on with it" We need a bit more thought and investment than that, and the short termism and naivety of Ashley's policy will become more and more apparent as the season goes on. And its January in 3 weeks. Ho-hum.

[Ayatollah Hermione 13590]

I thought Gosling was alright until his baffling mistake at the back and then his frustration obviously boiled over. He doesn't particularly look the greatest player but I get the sense he'd do a job in the future ala Guthrie. I hope this sending off doesn't turn some fans against him early though.

[toonotl 2828]

Perch is not a centre back. He's a fullback/holding mid.

Edited December 11, 2011 by toonotl

[Ayatollah Hermione 13590]

Stoke City seem to have at least 4 experienced centre backs in their squad. And in almost all cases they have played for or been on the fringes of their national team squads at some stage of their careers. They may not all be brilliant, and I have my own opinions of them, but Pulis and his chairman have built the squad correctly. If we'd have had one of Shawcross, Huth, Woodgate or Upson yesterday just to head the ball away from the area when it came in then we may have got something. Who knows, its all conjecture. But we wouldve stood a better chance if Pardew had been allowed to address a glaring weakness in the squad after Campbell departed. We all knew we were weak in this posistion and Norwich didnt have to come up with anything more original than just lumping the ball into the area to put 4 past us. Two full backs in central defence, and the likes of Stoke can call on 4 half decent ones, fuckin hell.

 

The wheels havent come completely off though. We weren't as good as some were saying 6 or 7 weeks ago and we were never going to be as bad as some were suggesting pre season. It could be so much better if we'd have invested the Carroll money properly but we didn't and thats old news. Rome wasn't bulit in a day, but I don't think Ashley can be arsed to lay the foundations properly.

 

If Stoke lost 3 of that four, who would the "other" replacement be, and would they be as succesfull, not that they've been very good this year so far anyway. (Huth wanted away btw, which is the other problem of having "quality" back-ups).

 

I'm not disputing we should upgrade Perch, however, I am disputing we could realistically upgrade those ahead of him.

 

Theyd still have had one out of the 4 to head the ball away when it came in though...theyre all leaders, take charge in the box etc etc. And if all 4 of them were injured I'd suggest playing Danny Higginbottom there, another centre back by trade. Its called building a squad. Pulis has had more time to build his, granted. But going on the evidence of his tenure here I think Ashley is just content to say to Pardew "Graham will find you this, this and this and thats it, get on with it" We need a bit more thought and investment than that, and the short termism and naivety of Ashley's policy will become more and more apparent as the season goes on. And its January in 3 weeks. Ho-hum.

 

I'd honestly take us buying a canny centre-half and striker if it meant getting some loan deals in to bolster the squad for 6 month. That would be my suggestion anyway if I had to deal with Ashley.

[LeazesMag 0]

...there's a difference between you naming the players you don't think are shite LM and you going on about ashley and shepherd etc

 

it's the distinct difference between you going from one thing to that everytime that was getting old, like i told you in pm.

(don't start reiterating a "i would but someone will complain to an admin because that's just as annoying)

 

Just stay on topic and enjoy talking about what's at hand without having to compare the two boards all the time, it's not like the majority of users like either of them anyway, just debating players and such gives us all a distraction from the shite we'd like to forget about at the club.

 

I'll stay on topic. I hope those "trolls" who harp on about me "answering questions" will do the same with people who don't answer me.

 

In the meantime, I'll answer anybody who is constructive, fair and doesn't let personalities cloud their judgements, I will always go by results on the pitch and ambitions of the club to keep our best players and back their managers. That will always be the key for me, rightly so too.

 

Others can get carried away by a few results and make excuses for selling our best players, but that is not my way, and never will be, because no club in the history of the game has achieved consistent good league positions by doing that.

[ewerk 29482]

Perch is not a centre back. He's a fullback/holding mid.

 

He's not even a footballer.

[PaddockLad 16507]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

 

I was surprised at how they played yesterday, with all the media wanking themselves off about how well they play the ball about. Horses for courses though as you say, Morrison & Holt v Perch and Simpson is no contest, as predicted by many on here in the week. Shola did ok defending the set pieces, but relying on him when he's got a job to do at the other end as well is asking a bit much of most players, let alone Shola.

[Ayatollah Hermione 13590]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

 

I was surprised at how they played yesterday, with all the media wanking themselves off about how well they play the ball about. Horses for courses though as you say, Morrison & Holt v Perch and Simpson is no contest, as predicted by many on here in the week. Shola did ok defending the set pieces, but relying on him when he's got a job to do at the other end as well is asking a bit much of most players, let alone Shola.

 

As an aside, I thought Shola was very good yesterday. For all the bleating on about not starting Ben Arfa, I thought Ba and Shola up top were giving them some real bother at times. Few times, their lack of understanding with each other showed but between the two of them, they caused some trouble. Lovely midfield play as well for Ba's second. Can't believe I'm saying that

[LeazesMag 0]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

 

I was surprised at how they played yesterday, with all the media wanking themselves off about how well they play the ball about. Horses for courses though as you say, Morrison & Holt v Perch and Simpson is no contest, as predicted by many on here in the week. Shola did ok defending the set pieces, but relying on him when he's got a job to do at the other end as well is asking a bit much of most players, let alone Shola.

 

I've not seen much of MOTD etc this season due to other things, but have they been playing passing football ? I presumed the way they played yesterday is more or less how they have played all season. If they play a passing game, then it gives Lambert more potential to succeed at a bigger club with more resources IMO.

[PaddockLad 16507]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

 

I was surprised at how they played yesterday, with all the media wanking themselves off about how well they play the ball about. Horses for courses though as you say, Morrison & Holt v Perch and Simpson is no contest, as predicted by many on here in the week. Shola did ok defending the set pieces, but relying on him when he's got a job to do at the other end as well is asking a bit much of most players, let alone Shola.

 

As an aside, I thought Shola was very good yesterday. For all the bleating on about not starting Ben Arfa, I thought Ba and Shola up top were giving them some real bother at times. Few times, their lack of understanding with each other showed but between the two of them, they caused some trouble. Lovely midfield play as well for Ba's second. Can't believe I'm saying that

 

Thats the thing, we still went there and scored two. With someone taking charge at the back thats a minimum of a point, and more than likely 3. Picking Shola was the correct decision for two important reasons, and Ben Arfa and his fanboys will just have to lump it. He is, to put it mildly, tempremental. He took Marseille to court for fuck sakes. If anyone is surprised that he may well end up in a huge gallic sulk because he's not getting games then they've been burying their heads in the sand since he signed. Who claimed that their long term personal happiness and domestic bliss at home was almost entirely centered on the signing of Ben Arfa and what he might do for us? I think it may have been CT, which says a lot about him really

[PaddockLad 16507]

I get the sense that if Perch was at full-back, people would have complained about him playing there as well. The fury over this game is ridiculous; CB depth is a weakness, we all know it, so why be surprised and angry when a team full of big tall bastards up front exploits it? We're not the best team in the world but up until now, have performed well building on strong defensive foundations. When the foundations go, we'll struggle, it's not the end of the world. If even Williamson was on the pitch yesterday, we'd have been a lot more comfortable IMO, just needed some sort of aerial presence.

 

nevertheless, Paul Lambert is a good manager, he's put his team together and they are playing for him. Def one to watch. What would he do at a club with more resources. Change the playing style ? The style they play, like Stoke etc, is limited but pays dividends with the right type of player, up to a point.

 

Aye, thought they were tactically spot on tbf to them (I thought we were as well actually but the defence was always going to be our undoing). I've seen them get the ball down and actually play it as well this season so they have that in their locker too. I don't blame him for playing direct yesterday and focusing on set-pieces, it got them the points.

 

I was surprised at how they played yesterday, with all the media wanking themselves off about how well they play the ball about. Horses for courses though as you say, Morrison & Holt v Perch and Simpson is no contest, as predicted by many on here in the week. Shola did ok defending the set pieces, but relying on him when he's got a job to do at the other end as well is asking a bit much of most players, let alone Shola.

 

I've not seen much of MOTD etc this season due to other things, but have they been playing passing football ? I presumed the way they played yesterday is more or less how they have played all season. If they play a passing game, then it gives Lambert more potential to succeed at a bigger club with more resources IMO.

 

Maybe I'm thinking of Swansea, theyre getting plaudits for good football too. I only have council telly and only really watch other premier league clubs when I'm actually at a game, so I'm no expert really. They were lmited yesterday to say the least, but theyre newly promoted so thats normal. I'll reserve judgment on Lambert ,after the press blowing smoke up Owen Coyle's arse in the last year it just shows that it can all go tits up, however good the initial signs are. A Glaswegian at work was boasting about how many Scottish managers were working in the premier league at the moment and he looked a bit hurt when I asked him how many of them were any fuckin good outside of Ferguson and Moyes I wouldnt want any of them.