🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Frank Lampard

[Tomo 21,751]

Out of these two options what would you prefer at Fulham? Another drab performance but we win 1-0 through an Oli header or we draw 2-2 but play excellently going forward, create a lot and lose two points due to wastefulness in front of goal and/or a heroic performance by Areola?

I genuinely think i'd prefer the latter, we need a performance to give us hope going forward even if dropped points accompany it.

[Milan 17,956]

15 minutes ago, Tomo said:

Out of these two options what would you prefer at Fulham? Another drab performance but we win 1-0 through an Oli header or we draw 2-2 but play excellently going forward, create a lot and lose two points due to wastefulness in front of goal and/or a heroic performance by Areola?

I genuinely think i'd prefer the latter, we need a performance to give us hope going forward even if dropped points accompany it.

Oh the latter as well, totally. Scrapping an ugly win would feel like delaying the inevitable. We need progress in our gameplay first. Results would arrive later.

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

25 minutes ago, Tomo said:

Out of these two options what would you prefer at Fulham? Another drab performance but we win 1-0 through an Oli header or we draw 2-2 but play excellently going forward, create a lot and lose two points due to wastefulness in front of goal and/or a heroic performance by Areola?

I genuinely think i'd prefer the latter, we need a performance to give us hope going forward even if dropped points accompany it.

Its tough but right now dropping points cannot be an option. Even if it means not changing manager. Or even if a change happens. Everything’s quite tight just now with 5/6 teams all within touching distance but that wont continue for the full duration of the second half of the season. Teams tend to put runs together during the second half of the season because thats when results and positions become much much more meaningful than they are in the first half because its the business end of things.

[Tomo 21,751]

30 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

Its tough but right now dropping points cannot be an option. Even if it means not changing manager. Or even if a change happens. Everything’s quite tight just now with 5/6 teams all within touching distance but that wont continue for the full duration of the second half of the season. Teams tend to put runs together during the second half of the season because thats when results and positions become much much more meaningful than they are in the first half because its the business end of things.

Yeah but at the same time as Milan said a shithouse win would just kick the can down the road and probably ultimately see to our top 4 hopes. On current form who are we beating out of Leicester, Wolves and Spurs? Maybe 1 at a push.

[Jase 43,479]

7 hours ago, Tomo said:

Out of these two options what would you prefer at Fulham? Another drab performance but we win 1-0 through an Oli header or we draw 2-2 but play excellently going forward, create a lot and lose two points due to wastefulness in front of goal and/or a heroic performance by Areola?

I genuinely think i'd prefer the latter, we need a performance to give us hope going forward even if dropped points accompany it.

Problem with the latter is that even if we perform well at Fulham - but don't win - there's no guarantee that we would carry on performing well in the subsequent games. We would need a 3, 4, 5 consecutive good performances to give us actual hope. From Lampard's perspective, he needs the wins to buy himself time and do whatever the hell he wants to do (only god knows at this point). Otherwise, he's gone.

If anything, I'd like to see Lampard at least try changing things up - e.g. a change of formation - because whatever he is doing now is definitely not working as well as it did over a month ago. 

[MoroccanBlue 5,381]

17 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Not even half way thought the season and people are having kittens panicking like big girls. Come on, we're better than that...

Mate, I genuinely can't tell if you're taking the piss here?

Liverpool, City, United, Leicester, and Spurs are on course to finish above 70 points. We are on course to finish well below that. We haven't beaten anyone currently above us, and we sit 9th. Add the fact we are getting progressively worse as each game passes with zero signs of progression, how do you genuinely expect us to finish Top 4? Which, you know, was the bare minimum for this season? 

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

27 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Mate, I genuinely can't tell if you're taking the piss here?

Liverpool, City, United, Leicester, and Spurs are on course to finish above 70 points. We are on course to finish well below that. We haven't beaten anyone currently above us, and we sit 9th. Add the fact we are getting progressively worse as each game passes with zero signs of progression, how do you genuinely expect us to finish Top 4? Which, you know, was the bare minimum for this season? 

Utd and Arsenal were being given the last rites a couple of weeks ago its a mad season. No point chucking your toys out the pram right now.

Wait and see -theres nothing we can do about it -  -just KBTBFFH like a true Moroccan Blue 

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

Serious question. If the Russian fucked off - and we were mid table Championship team -how many would still be here ? 

[MoroccanBlue 5,381]

12 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Utd and Arsenal were being given the last rites a couple of weeks ago its a mad season. No point chucking your toys out the pram right now.

Wait and see -theres nothing we can do about it -  -just KBTBFFH like a true Moroccan Blue 

But United haven't lost since the Arsenal game....which was over 2 months ago. 

Agreed, anything can happen but what evidence suggests we will finish above any one of our rivals when they are all on course to finish higher than us? 

 

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

9 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

But United haven't lost since the Arsenal game....which was over 2 months ago. 

Agreed, anything can happen but what evidence suggests we will finish above any one of our rivals when they are all on course to finish higher than us? 

 

Yeah theres not a lot of evidence. Maybe Lampard needs to be sacked - who would you like to see replace him to ensure we get top 4 ?

[Superblue 6,372]

20 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Serious question. If the Russian fucked off - and we were mid table Championship team -how many would still be here ? 

As crazy as it might sound, I'd arguably find some of the aspects of supporting the club under less pressure to be successful far more enjoyable.

As great as the league wins and Champions League were, I'm not sure if it was ever better for me than the late 90's where we played great football, but the expectations were far lower so the few trophies we did win felt such a bigger deal.

[MoroccanBlue 5,381]

8 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Yeah theres not a lot of evidence. Maybe Lampard needs to be sacked - who would you like to see replace him to ensure we get top 4 ?

We have an incredibly talented squad where an experienced manager could potentially steer the ship until the summer. Ultimately, I'm for the Benitez/Hiddink route for now. Tuchel, who I rate, I admit is a gamble and reports the club were already warned about him back in 2017. 

Lampard has proved he is well and truly out of his depth. 

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

6 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

As crazy as it might sound, I'd arguably find some of the aspects of supporting the club under less pressure to be successful far more enjoyable.

As great as the league wins and Champions League were, I'm not sure if it was ever better for me than the late 90's where we played great football, but the expectations were far lower so the few trophies we did win felt such a bigger deal.

Expectations are so high now, so a blip or performance dip is a disaster. It is for CFC business incorporated too as well as post -Abramovich fans.

Underperformers are quickly despatched. Can be a double edged sword though to react so quickly - eg Hiddink, Salah, de Bruyne  - as every player has performance troughs. However, the Abramovich hire and fire model seems to have worked pretty well since 2004

[Fernando 6,585]

8 hours ago, Jason said:

Since comparing Lampard with Klopp is a common thing, did a minor digging on how Klopp progressed each season at Liverpool (+ only key signings highlighted):

*took over in October*
2015/16 - 8th (60 pts) + League Cup Final + Europa League Final

*bought Matip, Mane, Wijnaldum*
2016/17 - 4th (76 pts)

*bought Salah, Robertson, Van Dijk (January)*
2017/18 - 4th (75 pts) + Champions League Final

*bought Fabinho, Alisson*
2018/19 - 2nd (97 pts) + Champions League Win

2019/20 - 1st (99 pts)

Lampard bought Mendy, Silva, Chilwell, Ziyech, Havertz and Werner in the summer and unless we go on some sort of crazy winning run, we look on course for another finish between 60-70 points again or maybe even lower than that! Plus based on current form, it doesn't seem likely we'll go far in the Champions League either while another FA Cup run is no guarantee. We have never gone 2 straight seasons without winning a trophy under Roman. 

It might be more like Lampard comparing to Ole. 

Lampard is nowhere near Klopp, but more like in the class of Ole. 

And right now Ole got his team on points with Liverpool.....But how Ole got to there is a whole different discussion. 

[Tomo 21,751]

2 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Serious question. If the Russian fucked off - and we were mid table Championship team -how many would still be here ? 

I don't really get this, we can still be unhappy with the current situation and would still "be here" in such a hypothetical situation (which wouldn't happen, we're too big and generate too much money to dive to those depths now even if Roman did leave).

For me it's all about context, if we have the worst squad in the league then i'd demand a statue of a manager if he gets us 17th, someone finishes 17th with this squad then they're the worst manager in our history.

[Vesper 30,172]

Lampard deserves more time at Chelsea but knows the drill if slide continues 

https://theathletic.com/2293057/2021/01/05/chelsea-frank-lampard/

It is safe to assume Frank Lampard knew all this was coming. That if his Chelsea side ever endured a slump in form and slipped off the pace, certainly in terms of Champions League qualification, then the scrutiny would be intensified both from within and outside the club.

Retreat briefly to his inaugural press conference as head coach in the summer of 2019 and, with the chairman Bruce Buck, director Marina Granovskaia and the recently appointed technical and performance advisor Petr Cech all listening intently from the front row, he had been asked whether the hierarchy had stipulated the need for a top-four finish.

“They haven’t, and I don’t think they need to say that,” offered the new man at the helm. “It is very clear that we are a club that, barring a couple of seasons in recent years, has managed to be top four or winning titles. I know there are standards. One of the benefits is I know the club. I understand what is expected.”

So his eyes were wide open coming into the role. He was a player at Stamford Bridge, and a disgruntled one at times, when Luiz Felipe Scolari was ushered out the door after less than seven months in situ, or Andre Villas-Boas dismissed just 256 days into what was supposed to be a long-term project. He saw Roberto Di Matteo, such a popular player in these parts and a manager who claimed the Champions League while in interim charge, summoned to Cobham to be sacked in the small hours of the morning following a flight back from Turin just six months after that glorious night in Munich.

On each occasion, the tipping point had been a run of slapdash form which appeared to jeopardise Champions League qualification, and a lack of faith from those in the boardroom that the incumbent manager could arrest the decline. And, given the recoveries that were mounted after each change had been instigated, the owner could easily argue his decision ultimately proved justified.

Now we are here again with the modern-day team, far from feeling reinvigorated from a summer of frenzied investment, languishing ninth after four defeats in six league games. Yes, that drop off in results had been sharp, crammed into a little over three weeks and preceded by a 17-game unbeaten run across all competitions. Admittedly, the gap to the top four remains a slender and eminently bridgeable three points, even if all but three of the sides above them boast at least one game in hand.

There is also the reality that this is a uniquely congested season which has seen plenty of other top-flight teams endure periods of spluttering form and, as yet, only one manager lose his job. Liverpool’s away form, a trip to Selhurst Park aside, has been far from impressive which was evident once again at Southampton on Monday night. Manchester United, Manchester City and Tottenham Hotspur have all suffered their own blips. Arsenal are hauling themselves out of theirs. All those clubs have demonstrated it is possible to recover.

Yet history shows that, at Chelsea, these spasms of poor results tend to have serious repercussions.

When the team look as aimless and accepting of their deficiencies as they did against City on Sunday, or indeed as they were when succumbing so meekly at the Emirates Stadium on Boxing Day, those doubts over Lampard’s coaching credentials tend to rear up. A head coach who seemed to have struck upon a system during that unbeaten sequence suddenly feels more exposed as a stop-gap appointment, a restorative figure willing to take on the role amid a FIFA transfer ban, when his side are wilting. “I know it’s not normal that I’m here after one year in management,” he had admitted in that inaugural press briefing. “But I don’t believe a club like Chelsea are going to make a decision simply because of the transfer ban.”

They knew his credentials when they made the appointment. Even so, when the team falter, or the in-game management feels muddled, it must be easy for panic to set in. After all, there is no body of work upon which the hierarchy can fall back for reassurance. Lampard may not be naive on the inner workings of Chelsea, but he is experiencing all this from the dugout for the first time. A season at Derby County in the Championship, when he benefited from the owner’s financial backing but fell just short in delivering promotion, and last season’s fourth-place finish – all the more impressive for the game-time seized by academy graduates – are the extent of his grounding. The problems being flung at him now, with huge sums spent in the market and expectations raised accordingly, represent uncharted territory.

The doubters will question whether he boasts the tactical acumen to thrive, or knows how to coax the best from Timo Werner, a player who has flitted from starting berths centre to flank and now gone 12 games without a goal. Can he find a role in which Kai Havertz, an opportunist signing but arguably a luxury when other areas of the team might have been targeted for strengthening, can flourish? Moreover, can he restore some belief and conviction to the collective?

His vision was always “a team that is aggressive, full of energy, brave on the ball and who move it quickly”. Chelsea have been far from that of late and have struggled too often to strike the right balance in their approach to games against the better teams, overcommitting at one end and underserved at the other. That may be down to the make-up of the playing staff at the coach’s disposal, or the fact this is still a relatively young side even with Thiago Silva and Olivier Giroud in their number. Alternatively, it may be there is no coherent plan in place to ensure progress. To have reached January and failed as yet to have beaten a side in the current top eight certainly feels damning at a club of these ambitions.

All of which might provoke mid-season change, or at least justify the scrutiny now being afforded to potential alternatives in the role.

Yet this was supposed to be a new Chelsea. One that recognised the value of its academy and turned to Lampard, after all the rancour and political division of the Antonio Conte and Maurizio Sarri tenures, to heal rifts and offer something refreshingly different. They leant on him at an unsettling time and, while he may not have been ready, he still retained their place in the Champions League and reached an FA Cup final. The landscape has changed since in terms of the squad at his disposal. But in this season more than most, given its grim eccentricities, is there not an argument that the hierarchy should back their head coach and offer him the chance to show he belongs?

Lampard has pointed out his is a team in transition, still digesting that lavish rebuild, and there were always likely to be awkward periods en route. Managers backed up with considerably more experience than him might have struggled to secure immediate dividends from this developing side. It took Jurgen Klopp three years to revive Liverpool and, back in September, even he acknowledged that incorporating so many significant signings into a team overnight, regardless of their quality, is no easy task.

“They have to fit together pretty quickly,” said Klopp as he considered the challenge Chelsea would pose to claim his own team’s title. “It’s not only about bringing quality in. You cannot bring in the 11 best players in the world and just hope a week later they play the best football they ever will play. It’s about working together on the training ground.”

Lampard had no pre-season of note and his team have already played 25 games this term with nine-midweek fixtures inevitably influencing the nature of many of his training sessions. There will have been very little time in which to work on tactical switches, let alone to smooth the basic integration of the new arrivals. Perhaps there should have been better planning how they might have been used from the outset, but if time is the key as Klopp suggested, and the players still buy into his methods, then Chelsea’s head coach – the man who played a part in convincing the new recruits to come by offering a long-term vision of their roles – surely merits longer in the role.

After all, would an interim parachuted in from the outside really be better placed, in this most unsettling of seasons, to instigate an immediate upturn? Is it not likelier that Lampard, with his knowledge of the squad, might implement a recovery?

The writing, of course, may be on the wall regardless in the long term. It is hard to recall a Chelsea manager from the modern era surviving a run of results as miserable as the current sequence. Antonio Conte lost four out of five league games and Sarri three of four, both in the new year, but limped on until the summer even with their respective relationships with the hierarchy fractured beyond repair and a parting of the ways inevitable. Their teams were still hovering in and around the Champions League places and challenging for honours. Lampard’s may be the same and, in that context, he deserves until the end of the season at the very least.

Yet if the owner’s old instincts kick in, nothing that follows will come as a surprise. The current incumbent knows the drill well enough.

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

9 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I don't really get this, we can still be unhappy with the current situation and would still "be here" in such a hypothetical situation (which wouldn't happen, we're too big and generate too much money to dive to those depths now even if Roman did leave).

For me it's all about context, if we have the worst squad in the league then i'd demand a statue of a manager if he gets us 17th, someone finishes 17th with this squad then they're the worst manager in our history.

I dont think any Chelsea fan is happy with the situation -its how the club deal with it is the bottom line. Everyone has there own depth of field and perspective on it. eg were Werner and Havertz Lamard signings ? Maybe he had some input - perhaps the casting vote ? Can the players be blamed for under par performances, or is it all Lampards fault ? Is Morris value for money ? For me theres no way hes up there with Holland.

 

15 minutes ago, Tomo said:

which wouldn't happen, we're too big and generate too much money to dive to those depths now even if Roman did leave).

Dont be so sure -we've been there before  though being such a cash cow, almost certain a Yank billionaire would buy the club, and ensure profits for himself 

[Vesper 30,172]

Roman Abramovich is a model of consistency at Chelsea which is bad news for Frank Lampard

Frank Lampard watched on as his Chelsea side lost their fourth game over the past month and pressure is mounting with Roman Abramovich's patience notoriously thin

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/chelsea-frank-lampard-roman-abramovich-23261049

[Jase 43,479]

6 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Everyone has there own depth of field and perspective on it. eg were Werner and Havertz Lamard signings ? Maybe he had some input - perhaps the casting vote ?

They were definitely his signings. It was reported as such after they joined and both even said they joined us because of Lampard, because of the football vision that he sold to them.

[Fulham Broadway 17,312]

6 minutes ago, Jason said:

They were definitely his signings. It was reported as such after they joined and both even said they joined us because of Lampard, because of the football vision that he sold to them.

Fucking useless cunts ought to start putting a shift in then