test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

DavidEU

Frank Lampard

Started by DavidEU,

8,949 posts in this topic

Don't really see the big deal. Man City own that club and Frank would want to stay fit till March.

Would you be saying that if Utd owned the international clubs and he returned to the PL with them and Man utd won the season because of our legend's goals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be crushed if the move goes through, but we have no one to blame but ourselves. The club released him and the signed Cesc as his replacement - a player Frank can't stand and even I'm still learning not to cringe everytime I see his face. Everyone agreed it was the best thing for us, that we have to move on even though we're replacing probably our greatest ever player with someone we've hated for years. You know, before anything else football is a business. Then again how could we ask from Lamps not to consider his best career options for whatever reason, it'd be totally hypocritical of us.

On another note, while it sucks he could play for another EPL team I guess it could be much worse. To be honest I don't really hate City, just kinda recognize their existence in the title picture in what I could describe as a non-personal rivalry for the EPL title, strictly business. Just imagine him in the red of United, Arsenal or God forbid Liverpool :mouthclosed:

zolayes and Fulham Broadway like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would you still not see it as a big deal if throughout the season we are neck and neck with City and in Lampard's last game for them in march he scores a last minute winner for them to move above us which results in City winning the league by a point which then results in Jose getting sacked!

of course the chances of that actually happening are slim but while he is there its possible! so to see no big deal in Lampard playing for a title rival is bizarre to me..

It's only a short term loan, I doubt he will make many appearences for a team like City

Would you be saying that if Utd owned the international clubs and he returned to the PL with them and Man utd won the season because of our legend's goals?

Ifs and buts...

Honestly, this isn't that bad as people make out to be.

zolayes likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I don't think he actually had any choice. NYC is City's sister club so they probably politely forced his loan to Manchester. I don't think he will be an important player for them or contribute much, it's just a City trying to show their muscles and saying 'fuck you, we bought your legend' to Chelsea. It's just a cheap trick.

Everyone does those psychological tricks. Mourinho tried to unsettle Shaw saying that he doesn't think any teenager is worth that amount of money and that it's not fair for senior players to pay this ammount of wages to young guy.

The most important thing is that we are not butthurt by it, keep our heads cool, calm & collected, ingore any distraction (yes, this is a distraction) and focus on winning the league.

And Lampard will always be our legend, no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is Lampard won't be playing, he's only there to be an HG player. Then again he has no choice. He cannot say no even if he wanted to because the owners of Manchester City technically own New York as well. Can't believe that people can hate him for that.

zolayes likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many decisions that Frank got wrong. The fact he signed with NYFC, a club owned by the same owners of our direct rivals and also him going to City instead of Melbourne. I still definitely respect him obviously. Unlike Lampard, players like Ashley Cole, Drogba played for non-English teams which was the best the fans could ask for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a sense it's a reminder of how lucky we are. Arsenal have the prospect of a 27 year old Fabregas playing against them, whereas we face legends when they're 35/36. Liverpool lose Suarez, Spurs lose Bale, but we don't tend to lose players in their prime if we still want them.

Yeah, losing stars in their prime is so much worse. After watching this video, I felt about hundred times better:

1.40 min.

Sucks to be an Arsenal fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how some are saying "well, he's being forced to go there", no.. he isn't, when he 'decided' to join Man-City's american side he knew the implications of that.

Even Ashley Cole has more class than Lampard, he said he wouldn't join another PL club and he had plenty of interest, Liverpool etc. Ironic that, considering what Ash is known for..

LDN Blue likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ashley Cole left Arsenal, the team he came up with, in the middle of his career because he wanted more money. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but you can't say he's a super loyal player or any other nonsense just because he didn't play in the EPL after leaving Chelsea. It's incredible to me how blind supporters are. It doesn't go one way. You can't demand loyalty of players and then get rid of them when you want. Lampard has a chance to play for the Premier League champions who are you to say "no, you can't because you used to play for Chelsea." We let him go. We didn't want him anymore. He can play wherever he damn well pleases. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

He is Chelsea, an ambassador for the club, synonymous with us, once you become that.. you will rightfully be treated differently.

Blue-in-me-Veins likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is Chelsea, an ambassador for the club, synonymous with us, once you become that.. you will rightfully be treated differently.

So why do we have the right not to re-sign him but he doesn't have the right to go where he wants? It's like saying to a worker "you were a model employee for 20 years but we are firing you but you can't go to any rival companies".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people so sure Lampard won't play much? Yaya could play as the number 10 next season, which leaves them with Fernandinho and Fernando in the pivot and Lampard and Garcia as back ups. Fernando could struggle to adapt in the PL and also the fact he is bang average could easily see Lampard playing a lot more then People think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why do we have the right not to re-sign him but he doesn't have the right to go where he wants? It's like saying to a worker "you were a model employee for 20 years but we are firing you but you can't go to any rival companies".

Chelsea is bigger than the board, or current circumstances.

And a comparison like that is ridiculous, it's like Setve Jobs going to Microsoft, Lampard is a huge part of the clubs identity. Lampard & Terry are the last of their kind, we won't have legends like that at the club again, it's the end of a bygone era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's weird that Lampard wanted to join City even if it's ony a loan, but come on how can this tarnish his legacy at this club? In 5, 10 or even 20 years time do you think we'll fucking remember that Lampard trained with them for a few months?

The Skipper and BlueLion. like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chelsea is bigger than the board, or current circumstances.

And a comparison like that is ridiculous, it's like Setve Jobs going to Microsoft, Lampard is a huge part of the clubs identity. Lampard & Terry are the last of their kind, we won't have legends like that at the club again, it's the end of a bygone era.

It's not like Steve Jobs going to Microsoft. He was a founder of the company and the CEO. Lampard was an employee. Yes, he is the best player we've ever had, but WE, not him, decided to let him go. You don't have the right either legally or morally to expect loyalty when you don't give that same loyalty. Lampard was given the chance to play for the Premier League champions. What should he do? Say "no" because some Chelsea fans don't want him to go there?

Melanicus likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is he wasn't forced to from what I can tell, he signed up with NYCFC and that's where the contract lies, not with Manchester City. They might own the clubs but he signed with another party. For example a mate of mine works for Waitrose, now Waitrose and John Lewis is the same company he can't just go and work at John Lewis, he's an waitrose employee and he's contract is with them.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.