Frank Lampard

[Fulham Broadway 16,386]

Weird not to see him on the calendar after so many years.

You had a TOPTB calender ? I fucking worry about you Layla.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

Weird not to see him on the calendar after so many years.

Yep. Ironically he was on the December page for 2014.

[CMS 382]

I disagree with that. We were only 1-0 up against Wigan at the time and Lampard was our designated penalty taker. Why should we of let Drogba take it just because he needed to be top scorer? That would be more selfish if Drogba had taken it. Are you seriously trying to tell me if we went in to this last game of the season for instance against West Brom and City were 1 point behind us going into the game and we were 1-0 up which is not a secure lead by any means and we had a penalty and Costa needed one goal to win the awards, that we simply should let him take the penalty over Hazard? Of course not because Hazard is our reliable penalty taker and it would not be a game you should be taking liberties with and Mourinho would not be happy, same way Ancelotti would not have been happy.

This is about a team not a player. The other Lampard criticism is fair and open to opinion but come on using that against him is harsh. When we had the game secured Lampard had no problem in letting Drogba take the next penalty. You said Lamprd knew what he was doing. Of course he did. He knew he was the best penalty taker at the club, we all wanted the PL title and the obvious choice was him. Club over player, it is not player over club.

I agree that we can agree to disagree. However, you telling me if Drogba had taken the PK, we would have lost is beyond the imaginable. Drogba? Are you serious? Who won us the Champions league with the last PK? Please answer that question without mentioning the name Drogba. The fact that you are equating the ability of Drogba as a pk taker to other minnows, relative to Lampard to taking pks is in fact a total disrespect to a great Chelsea player, who might end up in the coaching ranks within the next 6 months. Drogba is a solid player and would be the pk taker on any team. We were lucky that he was always more of a team player than Lampard would ever be. Lampard was not the best pk taker in the club. He just happened to be the designated taker, before Drogba arrived and was not challenged for it. Chelsea has always had more than capable pk takers with Lamps on the team. Leaving him there was just a show of respect. He missed quite a few of pks too, that happened to hurt us in games too for that matter. Best Pk taker? No! Designated Pk taker? Yes!

[MichaelDance 552]

LAMPARD DEAL 'VAGUE'

Jonathan Northcroft of the Sunday Times has questioned the details surrounding Frank Lampard’s second loan-move toManchester City.

Speaking on the Sunday Supplement, he labelled the deal as ‘vague’ and asked whether the former Chelsea midfielder would ever make it to America.

“There are very odd details about Lampard’s contract that even people at Man City are vague about in terms of was it actually a loan to City or had he effectively just signed for them. City are quite vague about it and let’s just say it’s on a unique arrangement between the two clubs,” he said.

“It looks like City have been able to acquire a very good player and maybe sold it to Chelsea and the world in a different way. What happens if he has a great finish to the season and city want him to carry on? He isn’t showing any signs of ageing in this role. I wonder if his move to New York will ever happen.”

- Sky Sports Transfer Centre. I agree with him though.

[123-blue 19]

I agree that we can agree to disagree. However, you telling me if Drogba had taken the PK, we would have lost is beyond the imaginable. Drogba? Are you serious? Who won us the Champions league with the last PK? Please answer that question without mentioning the name Drogba. The fact that you are equating the ability of Drogba as a pk taker to other minnows, relative to Lampard to taking pks is in fact a total disrespect to a great Chelsea player, who might end up in the coaching ranks within the next 6 months. Drogba is a solid player and would be the pk taker on any team. We were lucky that he was always more of a team player than Lampard would ever be. Lampard was not the best pk taker in the club. He just happened to be the designated taker, before Drogba arrived and was not challenged for it. Chelsea has always had more than capable pk takers with Lamps on the team. Leaving him there was just a show of respect. He missed quite a few of pks too, that happened to hurt us in games too for that matter. Best Pk taker? No! Designated Pk taker? Yes!

Are you saying Didier would have converted for sure? Debatable. Lampard was right to take the pen. Imo Frank is more cold whereas Didier is the emotional one.The game was in the balance and the DESIGNATED PENALTY TAKER should take it. Club glory over personal one.

Even Carlo came out saying the same-

'I spoke with him after the first half,' revealed Ancelotti.

'It was my decision, if there was a penalty, to give it to Lampard. I told him to stay calm and quiet because he'd have opportunities to score in the second half. I said: "Quiet. You can score in the second half."

Drogba later said he was wrong to throw a fit on the pitch as well.I don't see what's the fuss about?

As for being selfish- Almost all top players are.It's why they are at the top of the player pyramid. I could not care less as long as they perform when at the club.And let's not make Didier to be some mega team player. I remember him and Ballack embarrassing themselves on the pitch vs Man utd until Ricky had to step in and break it up.

5.55 in .Lol at Essien's reaction. Let's face it they're all a bunch of big babies.

Also I agree Ballack was a better penalty taker but as you can see it's why Lampard was chosen as A)he was almost always on the pitch no matter the game and his club status could not be questioned. If not we'd have to witness those cringey scenes like the one above on a more regular basis.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

- Sky Sports Transfer Centre. I agree with him though.

Frank is a genius at utilizing the media for his own agenda. When he was having tantrums about AVB not picking him, or when he was he was negotiating a new contract under Rafa, he would pop up in the media and interviews every time he'd score a goal or get an assist. Now, watch him completely disappear and not give any interviews until all of this blows over so he doesn't have to explain any of it.

[Stats 6,980]

I agree that we can agree to disagree. However, you telling me if Drogba had taken the PK, we would have lost is beyond the imaginable. Drogba? Are you serious? Who won us the Champions league with the last PK? Please answer that question without mentioning the name Drogba. The fact that you are equating the ability of Drogba as a pk taker to other minnows, relative to Lampard to taking pks is in fact a total disrespect to a great Chelsea player, who might end up in the coaching ranks within the next 6 months. Drogba is a solid player and would be the pk taker on any team. We were lucky that he was always more of a team player than Lampard would ever be. Lampard was not the best pk taker in the club. He just happened to be the designated taker, before Drogba arrived and was not challenged for it. Chelsea has always had more than capable pk takers with Lamps on the team. Leaving him there was just a show of respect. He missed quite a few of pks too, that happened to hurt us in games too for that matter. Best Pk taker? No! Designated Pk taker? Yes!

I never said we would have lost but he is not our usual penalty taker. It seems you are a person who would put a player over club. I put club before player. If Drogba had taken the penalty, that would have been more selfish because of the reason that: HE WAS NOT OUR DESIGNATED PENALTY TAKER. Lampard is and therefore Lampard should have taken it. Don't give me that rubbish that I am giving disrespect to a Chelsea legend simply because I think it was the right decision to let Lampard take the penalty and not Drogba.

It is quite ridiculous to me that you think we should have let Drogba taken that penalty simply so that he can fulfil a personal achievement. Why should we change our penalty taker just to make sure Drogba recieves the golden boot. Ridiculous. Like I was saying if that came into a similar situation come the end of the season and Costa needed a goal or so to acheive the top goalscorer award, I would want Hazard to take it because he is our designated penalty taker. You obviously would want to see Costa take it.

Let's get one thing clear, we have our legends and Drogba is certainly one of them but this is 'Chelsea FC', not 'Drogba FC'.

Lampard was our best penalty taker. What are you on about? Look at the ratio of his penalties converted compared to the ratio of those missed. Of course you are going to miss some. How you are trying to refute that he was our best penalty taker is beyond me.

We will have to agree to disagree but I can't believe you are telling me on the final day of the season where we needed to win and we were only 1-0 up that we should let Drogba take the penalty just so he can have the accolade of being the top goalscorer when we as fans and the team itself wants the title. Of course Lamprd should have taken the penalty. Don't be ridiculous. Selfish would have been if he had taken the next penalty when we were like 5-0 up but he never, Drogba did or like I was saying selfish would have been Drogba taking the penalty when we were 1-0 up because he would have been thinking about himself.

[iseah100 5,612]

Don't care anymore, I only worry about players who are fighting for this team, not trying to beat us.

[Styles 9,790]

I agree that we can agree to disagree. However, you telling me if Drogba had taken the PK, we would have lost is beyond the imaginable. Drogba? Are you serious? Who won us the Champions league with the last PK? Please answer that question without mentioning the name Drogba. The fact that you are equating the ability of Drogba as a pk taker to other minnows, relative to Lampard to taking pks is in fact a total disrespect to a great Chelsea player, who might end up in the coaching ranks within the next 6 months. Drogba is a solid player and would be the pk taker on any team. We were lucky that he was always more of a team player than Lampard would ever be. Lampard was not the best pk taker in the club. He just happened to be the designated taker, before Drogba arrived and was not challenged for it. Chelsea has always had more than capable pk takers with Lamps on the team. Leaving him there was just a show of respect. He missed quite a few of pks too, that happened to hurt us in games too for that matter. Best Pk taker? No! Designated Pk taker? Yes!

I'll just leave this here:

[CMS 382]

I never said we would have lost but he is not our usual penalty taker. It seems you are a person who would put a player over club. I put club before player. If Drogba had taken the penalty, that would have been more selfish because of the reason that: HE WAS NOT OUR DESIGNATED PENALTY TAKER. Lampard is and therefore Lampard should have taken it. Don't give me that rubbish that I am giving disrespect to a Chelsea legend simply because I think it was the right decision to let Lampard take the penalty and not Drogba.

It is quite ridiculous to me that you think we should have let Drogba taken that penalty simply so that he can fulfil a personal achievement. Why should we change our penalty taker just to make sure Drogba recieves the golden boot. Ridiculous. Like I was saying if that came into a similar situation come the end of the season and Costa needed a goal or so to acheive the top goalscorer award, I would want Hazard to take it because he is our designated penalty taker. You obviously would want to see Costa take it.

Let's get one thing clear, we have our legends and Drogba is certainly one of them but this is 'Chelsea FC', not 'Drogba FC'.

Lampard was our best penalty taker. What are you on about? Look at the ratio of his penalties converted compared to the ratio of those missed. Of course you are going to miss some. How you are trying to refute that he was our best penalty taker is beyond me.

We will have to agree to disagree but I can't believe you are telling me on the final day of the season where we needed to win and we were only 1-0 up that we should let Drogba take the penalty just so he can have the accolade of being the top goalscorer when we as fans and the team itself wants the title. Of course Lamprd should have taken the penalty. Don't be ridiculous. Selfish would have been if he had taken the next penalty when we were like 5-0 up but he never, Drogba did or like I was saying selfish would have been Drogba taking the penalty when we were 1-0 up because he would have been thinking about himself.

My friend why are you getting all personal and emotional for? Like you've said and to take your own quote, but fixed. "It's Chelsea FC and not Lampard FC" We were already 1-0 up, to think that we would have lost the game at 1-0 up because Drogba was going to take the pk, that would or would have not given us a 2-0 lead is ludicrous. Obviously you must must have been a newby Chelsea fan. 1-0 Chelsea lead back in the day was a guaranteed win. There was no shaking for any true Chelsea fan if we came up 1-0 in the first minute of the game and had to play and defend that lead for 89 minutes. Enough said and end of story.

[MichaelDance 552]

Lol watching the Match of the day, Lampard had two chances, one he missed by inches, and the other he was way off in the cross haha. Oh I love it when he misses for our rival.

[SouthKorea 38]

It is.. yes, because one club is in fucking-america and the other is in our own backyard who also happen to be direct rivals...

Really buddy.

[SouthKorea 38]

Yeap.

How's that naive? In the first instance he's not playing for a direct rival of ours whilst in the second instance he is. That's a big difference.

It is.. yes, because one club is in fucking-america and the other is in our own backyard who also happen to be direct rivals...

Still not the same as putting on a city jersey.

FYI, I know that City and NYCFC share the same owners, and are technically "sister" clubs.

And that doesn't have anything to with what I was stating in my post.

That word describes yourself. That is a ridiculous comment. I am not going to explain why because others already have.

Who cares if he goes to a team bankrolled by one of our rivals? We don't want him to actually go TO one of our rivals.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

You accused fans who stated signing for NYCFC and City are completely different of being naive. Of course they are bloody different. Yes same owners, same colours etc but get the message one club plays in America and the other in England. I would find it odd for someone to have a huge problem with that. I certainly don't but Man City is a different factor. A rival of ours who have a great chance of winning the league while the other plays in a retirement for legend such as Frank.

Yes, you are being naive. It just doesn't go

Maybe because this is likely to be his last contract he looked for the best offer and this was the best one........

I don't really care if he plays for any team in MLS.

So what if he signed for a club linked with City? I see nothing wrong with that.

I would be shocked if he went to City though, but I personally don't believe it. He wouldn't do that to the fans, to Jose and the Chelsea board.

But if he went there without going to Man City no one will have a bad word to say about him. He went off to a different league who are a sister club for City but inferior.

But if he joins Man City, that is a different matter itself now. Regardless of what he does he still remains a Chelsea legend for me, even I will be a bit irritated to see him go Man City, that won't change my viewpoint. Appreciate everything he has done for us.

[SouthKorea 38]

My 2 cents on the situation.

In august, I already made the comment that lampard signing for NYCFC was essentially the same as signing for Man City. People back than were too naive to think they were 2 separate entities, when in reality they were the same thing. NYCFC could care less if Lampard signed another loan and stayed with City, since they are owned by the same freaking owners, wear the same colors and even have the same exact kits...

However, i don't really take offense to his actions. Lampard is a professional football player, not the son of Chelsea. People need to understand that.

Maybe because I'm not from England, I dont really take huge offense to it, however, Chelsea essentially got Cesc as his replacement, which is 10000x better and allowed the team overall to improve.

BTW, this is NYCFC kit.....

[LAM09 6,535]

I would love to really know who was a fault for him leaving us, as there are several rumours around. Either way, it's so hard seeing him contribute to City's title challenge.

[Term-X 7,891]

Really buddy.

At that point in time, he had earned the benefit of the doubt.. especially after all the quotes.

There was never an agenda against Lamps, he was a hero of mine, I just react to actions and intentions in an objective way.

[Stats 6,980]

My friend why are you getting all personal and emotional for? Like you've said and to take your own quote, but fixed. "It's Chelsea FC and not Lampard FC" We were already 1-0 up, to think that we would have lost the game at 1-0 up because Drogba was going to take the pk, that would or would have not given us a 2-0 lead is ludicrous. Obviously you must must have been a newby Chelsea fan. 1-0 Chelsea lead back in the day was a guaranteed win. There was no shaking for any true Chelsea fan if we came up 1-0 in the first minute of the game and had to play and defend that lead for 89 minutes. Enough said and end of story.

Please don't doubt my credibility as a Chelsea fan. I have been supporting them long about that. I am not getting personal and apologize if you feel that way but you said I was disrespecting a Chelsea legend which annoyed me. A 1-0 Chelsea lead is never or has been guaranteed. We just were very effective at not losing the lead. Ask the majority of people on here please if in that situation who they would want to take the penalty. Don't patronize me please about that 'any true Chelsea' fan rubbish. Now that is trying to get personal isn't it? Who are you to tell me or any other Chelsea fans how they should emotionally respond during a game. Don't go there please. You are player over club. I am club over player. Fair?

But you know what let's create this poll and see what people think actually. Good idea. The poll is up to discuss mate.

http://forum.talkchelsea.net/topic/19672-who-takes-the-penalty-hazard-or-costa/#entry1034886

[MichaelDance 552]

My 2 cents on the situation.

In august, I already made the comment that lampard signing for NYCFC was essentially the same as signing for Man City. People back than were too naive to think they were 2 separate entities, when in reality they were the same thing. NYCFC could care less if Lampard signed another loan and stayed with City, since they are owned by the same freaking owners, wear the same colors and even have the same exact kits...

However, i don't really take offense to his actions. Lampard is a professional football player, not the son of Chelsea. People need to understand that.

Maybe because I'm not from England, I dont really take huge offense to it, however, Chelsea essentially got Cesc as his replacement, which is 10000x better and allowed the team overall to improve.

BTW, this is NYCFC kit.....

Technically not the same club.

City Football Group (80%)

Yankee Global Enterprises (20%)

City still has to have YGE's approval, even though City own the most shares. But one is in America under the MLS and Man City is in the PL which is governed highly by the FA who are the strictest board ever. Players get fined for outside work stuff like they would on the pitch. They have the FFP which City should be fined by for finding a loophole in their transfer system.