🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Frank Lampard

[Rhino's Skin 972]

I really wonder what supporters will think when Totti leaves Roma as a free agent, then plays for Lazio on loan.

Or Gerrard going on loan to Everton/United to gain fitness.

Or if Raul joined Barcelona to gain fitness.

Legends supposed to represent the club, even if they are released. You have some moral responsibilities like not joining the direct rivals.

If you don't think so, we should finish this discussion here.

Figo barca/real

lewendowski bayern/dortmund

Tevez city/utd

Etc etc etc

Its not as if Lampard forced a move away from Chelsea just so he could sign for Man City.

It happens....get real and live with it.

If support at the away games and the bridge is anything to go by then Lampard is still adored, supported and would be made welcome back any time by them

[stroey 2,525]

Figo barca/real

lewendowski bayern/dortmund

Tevez city/utd

Etc etc etc

Its not as if Lampard forced a move away from Chelsea just so he could sign for Man City.

It happens....get real and live with it.

If support at the away games and the bridge is anything to go by then Lampard is still adored, supported and would be made welcome back any time by them

Are you really comparing 3 years of Lewa at Dortmund and Tevez's short spell at United with Raul, Totti and Gerrard here?

[CHOULO19 24,332]

He signed a pre agreement.....nothing wrong with that.

You have absolutely no proof whatsoever that in his mind he knew he was going to Man City before he signed his agreement with NYC.

After the newspaer statements and sky interviews there hasnt been a report by any journo's saying he was lying and you would have thought especially after last sky documentry they would have picked him up on it if that were the case.

But at the end of the day...SO FARKING WHAT.

He had every right to do what he wanted and the majority of the support still SUPPORT him

He signed the supposed pre-contract in the middle of January way after this press conference and more importantly after his lies exposed by the media and then the EPL.

At the time of that PC I posted above he was lying out of his mind about signing for New York when he has done no such thing, add to that that both he and City explicitly said later that he was "on loan" to them which was clearly not the case.

He obviously already knew that he'd sign a full contract with City or he would not have lied so blatantly about signing with NewYork when he had not done so.

There are PLENTY of articles in the media about how he lied like this in the Guardian. You may choose to stick your head in the sand but it is VERY evident that he lied..a lot!

[BlueLion. 21,491]

He signed a pre agreement.....nothing wrong with that.

You have absolutely no proof whatsoever that in his mind he knew he was going to Man City before he signed his agreement with NYC.

After the newspaer statements and sky interviews there hasnt been a report by any journo's saying he was lying and you would have thought especially after last sky documentry they would have picked him up on it if that were the case.

But at the end of the day...SO FARKING WHAT.

He had every right to do what he wanted and the majority of the support still SUPPORT him

Absolutely, he had every right. He could have signed for Spurs if he wanted to. But you're totally missing the point here. Some fans are mad because he went to City. Some fans are mad because he was so back-handed about it, and lied through his teeth. That diminishes his reputation in my eyes, and tarnishes his image. If he'd have been up front and said he wanted to join City because they were offering him what he wanted, then he'd have gone with good grace, in my opinion. We wouldn't have liked it, but we'd have accepted it. Instead he came up with some bullshit story where he fabricated some tale about going on an adventure to New York City, but that he'd join City on loan for a few months to gain fitness. Okay, I can deal with that. But then that "loan deal" was extended to Christmas; then it was extended to the end of the season. The reality is that "loan" was never a loan - it was a short contract agreement between Lampard and City:

Subsequently, however, that has proved not to be the case with City now revealing that Lampard never became a NYCFC player last summer and actually signed a short-term contract at the Premier League club instead. Subsequently, there was no need for a loan".

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903456/Manchester-City-admit-New-York-City-mistakes-Frank-Lampard.html

He lied to NYCFC fans, and he lied to Chelsea fans, so it wouldn't tarnish his image. But the truth came out, in the end, didn't it? There was never a loan. He signed for City and lied about it. There are too many corroborating news reports for it to be otherwise (just do a Google search - the BBC, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Independent - all the reputable British sources - all say the same thing). Frank will continue to lie through his teeth and say he intended to go to NYC, but the Premier League and Manchester City both came out and acknowledged there was no loan deal and they fabricated a story about a loan from NYCFC. That hurts. No contract with NYCFC was signed until mid-January this year.

He is still loved, but you're kidding yourself if you think every Chelsea fan loves him as much as they used to. Go back to the victory parade last weekend - I heard some people (not very many, admittedly) very clearly started chanting "Judas, Judas Frank" on the Fulham Rd. back to the train station... tongue in cheek you would hope.

[Madmax 9,219]

Can scarcely believe this needs to be set out in black and white yet again, lol. Good ol' Frankie made some puppy eyes and offered us some platitudes so these internet warriors need to chill the fuck out.

[Rhino's Skin 972]

He signed the supposed pre-contract in the middle of January way after this press conference and more importantly after his lies exposed by the media and then the EPL.

At the time of that PC I posted above he was lying out of his mind about signing for New York when he has done no such thing, add to that that both he and City explicitly said later that he was "on loan" to them which was clearly not the case.

He obviously already knew that he'd sign a full contract with City or he would not have lied so blatantly about signing with NewYork when he had not done so.

There are PLENTY of articles in the media about how he lied like this in the Guardian. You may choose to stick your head in the sand but it is VERY evident that he lied..a lot!

He signed pre agreement in June/july ....he didnt lie.

But as I have said...all you doubters need to get real and realise its a case of SO WHAT.

You lot are in the minority and the majority of the support will always welcome him back wether it be just as half time walk around or whatever

[CHOULO19 24,332]

He signed pre agreement in June/july ....he didnt lie.

But as I have said...all you doubters need to get real and realise its a case of SO WHAT.

You lot are in the minority and the majority of the support will always welcome him back wether it be just as half time walk around or whatever

I just provided several links in papers that he did not. Alex provided even more. It's not even debatable, it's a clear fact. You are so deep in denial here, it's unreal.

The second part is besides the point, you said there is no proof that he lied when in fact there are tons of proof. I'm debating that and that alone.

[Rhino's Skin 972]

Absolutely, he had every right. He could have signed for Spurs if he wanted to. But you're totally missing the point here. Some fans are mad because he went to City. Some fans are mad because he was so back-handed about it, and lied through his teeth. That diminishes his reputation in my eyes, and tarnishes his image. If he'd have been up front and said he wanted to join City because they were offering him what he wanted, then he'd have gone with good grace, in my opinion. We wouldn't have liked it, but we'd have accepted it. Instead he came up with some bullshit story where he fabricated some tale about going on an adventure to New York City, but that he'd join City on loan for a few months to gain fitness. Okay, I can deal with that. But then that "loan deal" was extended to Christmas; then it was extended to the end of the season. The reality is that "loan" was never a loan - it was a short contract agreement between Lampard and City:

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903456/Manchester-City-admit-New-York-City-mistakes-Frank-Lampard.html

He lied to NYCFC fans, and he lied to Chelsea fans, so it wouldn't tarnish his image. But the truth came out, in the end, didn't it? There was never a loan. He signed for City and lied about it. There are too many corroborating news reports for it to be otherwise (just do a Google search - the BBC, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Independent - all the reputable British sources - all say the same thing). Frank will continue to lie through his teeth and say he intended to go to NYC, but the Premier League and Manchester City both came out and acknowledged there was no loan deal and they fabricated a story about a loan from NYCFC. That hurts. No contract with NYCFC was signed until mid-January this year.

He is still loved, but you're kidding yourself if you think every Chelsea fan loves him as much as they used to. Go back to the victory parade last weekend - I heard some people (not very many, admittedly) very clearly started chanting "Judas, Judas Frank" on the Fulham Rd. back to the train station... tongue in cheek you would hope.

think it was the Oliver Kay interview in the times?..that spelled it out. He has never said it was a loan....it was City who said that and then backtracked.

As for singing....minority, Never said all...have always said majority

[Rhino's Skin 972]

FROM THE TIMES AND SKY.

confirming he had a pre agreement.

Of course the rest is a mess...never disputed that but he DID sign a pre contract agreement .

It was the 2 clubs City and NYC who got it all wrong with their statements which went against what Lampard was saying so the PL looked into it

The recent transfer saga about when midfielder Frank Lampard will feature for Major League Soccer franchise New York City has been “a farce of epic proportions”, according to The Times’ James Ducker.

Newly-formed MLS outfit New York City stated last July that Lampard had signed for them on a two-year contract following his departure from Chelsea.

Manchester City, who are New York City’s parent club, then announced the 36-year-old would be joining them on a six-month "loan" deal ahead of the 2015 MLS season, with Lampard then due to team up with his new side in January.

That was until it was revealed in December that Lampard, as a free agent, had actually agreed a short-term contract with the Premier League champions rather than being loaned to City.

But when it was then confirmed the former England international would be staying at the Etihad Stadium until the end of the season, rather than teaming up with New York for the start of the MLS season, there was outrage across the Atlantic.

And Ducker says City’s reputation in the United States has now taken a battering as a result of this whole affair.

“It is a mess,” The Times’ Northern Football Correspondent told the Sunday Supplement.

”The nuts and bolts of it are that in July last year New York City, who are owned by Manchester City - they are their sister club and are going to start in the MLS in March - announced that Lampard had signed for them on a two-year deal that would take effect from August 1.

'Completely above board'

Frank Lampard has been in fine form for Manchester City

“City then announced just under a fortnight later that Lampard was joining them on loan and that was completely above board. He had signed for one club and then was loaned to another.

“It was formally announced on both the New York and the City websites, but it then turned out that Lampard had not actually signed for New York and it had not been a loan to City, but in actual fact a pre-contract agreement with New York. He had signed a short-term contract with City, which ran through to June 30, with a break clause dated December 31.

“And City, obviously, given what good form Lampard has been in, wanted to extend that contract, so in effect the break clause was removed, he stayed until the end of the season and that sparked outrage in New York.

“And they basically accused City’s ownership of duping them, or pulling the wool over their eyes and they felt badly let down, which you can obviously understand.

Confusion

“In recent days there has been all sorts of confusion, with City claiming that he had only signed a short-term contract until December 31. The Premier League then confirmed that he had signed until June 30, and that their rules clearly state that you can only sign a season-long contract. And that is why the break clause of December 31 was in there, because his contract with New York was initially due to start on January 1, but that is now going to be July.

“The whole thing has been a mess and a farce of epic proportions. Why those mistakes were made in the first place is beyond me, but they have had a long time to address those and this matter should never have got to the situation it is now in.

“And City’s reputation overseas has certainly been damaged. The American press has nailed them, with the New York Post calling the signing of Lampard a ‘fraud’. So there is a big, big effort required now to restore their reputation over there and their director of football Claudio Reyna has been meeting with supporters, but there is a big way to go.”

[Rhino's Skin 972]

Are you really comparing 3 years of Lewa at Dortmund and Tevez's short spell at United with Raul, Totti and Gerrard here?

ust saying that big players move to rivals

[Rhino's Skin 972]

as posters are throwing newpaper articles at me...here are some back (just a few amongst hundreds) that say there WAS a PRE CONTRACT AGREEMENT committment in place before all this stuff about Man City

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/frank-lampard-unhappy-at-damage-to-his-reputation-after-manchester-city-put-him-at-the-centre-of-humiliating-new-york-city-fc-row-9969146.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/red-faces-for-city-as-lampard-has-say-in-row-9969495.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903696/Manchester-City-row-Premier-League-Frank-Lampard-deal.html

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/premierleague/article4319252.ece

http://mlsgb.com/2015/01/12/frank-lampard-promises-he-will-make-up-for-lost-time-with-new-york-city/

The articles show that the NYC and Man City were wrong with the way they announced 'signing' and/or alleged 'loan' etc etc but Frank lampard seems vindicated in all of this and its the clubs that lied...not him

[BlueLion. 21,491]

as posters are throwing newpaper articles at me...here are some back (just a few amongst hundreds) that say there WAS a PRE CONTRACT AGREEMENT committment in place before all this stuff about Man City

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/frank-lampard-unhappy-at-damage-to-his-reputation-after-manchester-city-put-him-at-the-centre-of-humiliating-new-york-city-fc-row-9969146.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/red-faces-for-city-as-lampard-has-say-in-row-9969495.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903696/Manchester-City-row-Premier-League-Frank-Lampard-deal.html

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/premierleague/article4319252.ece

http://mlsgb.com/2015/01/12/frank-lampard-promises-he-will-make-up-for-lost-time-with-new-york-city/

The articles show that the NYC and Man City were wrong with the way they announced 'signing' and/or alleged 'loan' etc etc but Frank lampard seems vindicated in all of this and its the clubs that lied...not him

So we're to assume that, when Lampard signed these contracts, he did no by neglecting to read the terms and conditions of what he was signing, and that he was "duped" into signing for City? Give over. He knew damn well what he was signing - he's an intelligent bloke; as if he would put pen to paper on a contract he "thought" was a deal to sign for NYCFC on a pre-contract basis. He was a free agent and signed for Manchester City and lied about it in the process. Cold, hard evidence.

We'll have to agree to disagree because I've misplaced my blue-tinted spectacles. I'm not angry at Frank, I'm disappointed, and for me it will take time for that disappointment to subside. If you're happy to cast Frank as the good guy then I'm glad for you.

[Rhino's Skin 972]

So we're to assume that, when Lampard signed these contracts, he did no by neglecting to read the terms and conditions of what he was signing, and that he was "duped" into signing for City? Give over. He knew damn well what he was signing - he's an intelligent bloke; as if he would put pen to paper on a contract he "thought" was a deal to sign for NYCFC on a pre-contract basis. He was a free agent and signed for Manchester City and lied about it in the process. Cold, hard evidence.

We'll have to agree to disagree because I've misplaced my blue-tinted spectacles. I'm not angry at Frank, I'm disappointed, and for me it will take time for that disappointment to subside. If you're happy to cast Frank as the good guy then I'm glad for you.

You have no evidence or proof that before he signed a pre contract agreement he had in mind to go to Man City.

If it was Man Citys and his intention to go there all summer, then why didnt he join them for a pre season?....why leave it until 6th of August meaning he couldnt play due to fitness until last week in August?

No wonder this site is unofficial...plenty of unofficial nonsense and speculation being spouted off here by posters who reckon they could read Lampards mind and know exactly his thought process

[The Skipper 20,609]

You have no evidence or proof that before he signed a pre contract agreement he had in mind to go to Man City.

If it was Man Citys and his intention to go there all summer, then why didnt he join them for a pre season?....why leave it until 6th of August meaning he couldnt play due to fitness until last week in August?

No wonder this site is unofficial...plenty of unofficial nonsense and speculation being spouted off here by posters who reckon they could read Lampards mind and know exactly his thought process

The proof of it is there in the news. All the articles you posted were posted before the truth came out. If you refuse to believe what has been widely reported by every media outlet then good on you.

What does the forum's official status have to do with anything? What an irrelevant point.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

The proof of it is there in the news. All the articles you posted were posted before the truth came out. If you refuse to believe what has been widely reported by every media outlet then good on you.

What does the forum's official status have to do with anything? What an irrelevant point.

There's no point arguing, mate, this is one of those where the person who shouts loudest wins. No point for reasonable debate when you're arguing with someone unreasonable.

You have no evidence or proof that before he signed a pre contract agreement he had in mind to go to Man City.

If it was Man Citys and his intention to go there all summer, then why didnt he join them for a pre season?....why leave it until 6th of August meaning he couldnt play due to fitness until last week in August?

No wonder this site is unofficial...plenty of unofficial nonsense and speculation being spouted off here by posters who reckon they could read Lampards mind and know exactly his thought process

What's that got to do with anything? Although, while we're on this subject, if you don't like it, you know where the "sign out" button is. If you don't like people having opinions that conflict with your own you ought to quit while you're still ahead.

[zolayes 14,489]

Rhinos are noted for having thick skin but seems we have one who is 100% thick

[iseah100 5,612]

lol if players are just players then why accord some the status of a legend? Is 'involvement' only fine so long as it's of the positive kind? This is no ordinary player we're talking about; he's Frank Lampard. Of course there'll be reactions. In fact it's because he's Frank Lampard that there are reactions. Football will always be tribal and things such as these will always polarize opinions, let's not be naive.

Of course it matters, and not just in affinities. One possible important consequence could be on any possible future roles at the club. To quote Jose (rephrased as I can't remember exact words): "We thought he was going to have a year in the US and then come back to be a coach or something at the club, now I don't know if he can still be part of the club in the future."

Meh, i share the same sentiment as Spike and a few others. Sure he could have been a "legend" whatever that means. But all i care about is how they play while here. It doesn't affect me on a personal level and doesn't get my emotions flaring.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

There are other heroes from previous generations, of course, but of the Abramovich era onwards, I firmly believe Terry, Drogba and Cech will firmly hold a monopoly on the 1, 2, 3 positions unless Hazard stays here for ten years.

Good shout, but there has to be (imo) a place for Ashley Cole in there. Though he's moved on, you can tell how much this club did mean to him in the end especially when the rest of the world hated him. He was there defending the club through all, even Terry to the fury of the FA & players alike.

Ash's loyalty must be commended, even though it's not worked out in Roma he'll always be one of us!

[Madmax 9,219]

Meh, i share the same sentiment as Spike and a few others. Sure he could have been a "legend" whatever that means. But all i care about is how they play while here. It doesn't affect me on a personal level and doesn't get my emotions flaring.

Easy to be disingenuous when the circumstances didn't allow him to make the impact there he wished he'd have made, but okay

Btw, didn't you post "ginger cunt" in the Kevin DB thread following his supposed comments about Mourinho? No flared emotions and strictly on-pitch, I see.

[Reddish-Blue 2,506]

Meh, i share the same sentiment as Spike and a few others. Sure he could have been a "legend" whatever that means. But all i care about is how they play while here. It doesn't affect me on a personal level and doesn't get my emotions flaring.

A passionate fan cares about Chelsea players whilst they are playing for the club as well as when they leave the club

A forum fan only cares about how a player does at Chelsea, they don't really care about anything else to do with the club :blue scalf: