Frank Lampard

[communicate 2,703]

I am perfectly sure most of managers would want to have him here. Esp. the current favourites (as for the bookies) Jose and Jürgen Klopp. The former, I think i do not have to explain why. Jürgen Klopp said experienced midfielder and captain Sebastian Kehl was instrumental in his side's recent success. And Lamps is 1000 times better than Kehl in EVERY single position. Btw i am convinced 4-3-3 is still our best formation. 4-2-3-1 is overrated and needs either proper out and out winger or the fullbacks to provide width. In the latter case the team commits so many bodies forward, esp as the AMs on the flanks are defensively not apt enough, we get cought on the counter every game. i can't remember us being caught on the break on single time in the 2009/10 season which was a model season in terms of tactic. Even though we are overloaded with ineffective AMs and still lack genuine wingers, we would fare better with a 4-3-3

Let say we play 4-3-3

Ba

Mata - Hazard

Lampard - Rami

Mikel

Mata and hazard have tendency to move central which mean ramires has to cover and move to the the wing and it becomes

Ba

Hazard - Mata - Ramires

Lampard - Mikel

Back to 4-2-3-1

[OneMoSalah 8,754]

So - Who else thinks he's going to tie or break Bobby Tambling's record this season? I for one do. And I cannot wait. Really can't.

Lampard >>> Zidane (no I'm not joking.)

No Leif no!!!!!

Zidane > Lampard.

Zidane > Messi.

Zidane is in my eyes in the top 3 players that ever lived, behind Maradonna and Pele, Messi is fourth imo.

Zidane was just...... words cannot describe..... he was such a genius on the pitch, even in his older years he managed to carry France by himself to the WC 2006 final. If he hadn't been sent off France would have won the World Cup imo.

Things like that seperate Maradonna, Pele and Zidane from the likes of Messi and Ronaldo. Even though Brazil had an amazing team when Pele played, he was undoubtably the star player, goal record speaks for itself, won 3 world cups. Maradonna was Argentina's star man, the world cups he helped them win with his incredible talent, the teams he carried to the top, BOTH GOALS VS ENGLAND ( ).. incredible... sure the drugs and life crisis he suffered put a dampner on that but still an incredible player. Then Zidane, France's most technically gifted player when he was in the side by a mile, winner of a WC and European championship where he played a key role in winning both. Won multiple trophies at club level too where he was a key part of the team.

Lampard doesn't even get close to Zidane. I mean sure Lampard is a legend here but Zidane is a legend of the game.

[Magic Lamps 11,638]

Let say we play 4-3-3

Ba

Mata - Hazard

Lampard - Rami

Mikel

Mata and hazard have tendency to move central which mean ramires has to cover and move to the the wing and it becomes

Ba

Hazard - Mata - Ramires

Lampard - Mikel

Back to 4-2-3-1

yeah and it could also easily shift to

4-3-2-1

-----Ba

Hazard-Mata

Lamps Mikel Ramy

or we could utilize Oscar and moses

--------------Ba

Hazard/mata------Moses

Oscar/lamps---ramy/lamps

-----------Mikel--------------

so we got an in-and-out and an out-and-out who can shift sites and puzzle defenders. The point is, a 4-3-3 is far more flexible and defensively stable, cos in a neutral position, we got 3 men in the middle instead of having a defensively useless no.10.

2ndly our build up play is a big problem, if 3cms+luiz share playmaking duties from deep, ther connection between midfield and attack would not be such a problem, cos one of the mdiflelders could always move "diagonally" in the space behind the striker. In a 4-2-3-1 only the 3 AMs really interchange positions, which is quite useless, cos the only move in front of the opponent's lines instead of moving into the spaces between, as Lamps has always done with great effect in a 4-3-3.

For a 4-2-3-1 u need at least one genuine out-and-out winger, (at best s.o. with great pace such as Blasczykowski or di Maria) + a perfectly balanced pivot + 10 field players that are always moving always running and moving so quick and agile, they can directly get the ball back. Esp the mid in the pivot have to be mobile and should be good tacklers and accurate passers, cos they usually find themselves into narrow spaces where they directly have to go to the man. if not the AMs have to run all the way back in order to fill the spaces at the flanks. In a 4-3-3 it is easy for 3 mids to close the space for the opponent with the ball, so he either has to wait for support or play a ball across the field which can be inaccurate and always gives the defending team time to recover. That is why a 4-3-3 does not get caught on the counter that often. I think it suits us more as Romeu is our only midfielder who is actually a match for the pivot, Mata, Oscar and Hazard are not good enough at defending esp tackling and their offensive talents are wasted when they have to. And they have to as soon as they all three play together, cos that leaves the midfield exposed against fast or skilled opponents. Even if we do not get caught on the break which is when the maestros have tracked back. We usually do not get the ball back soon enough, cos most of our midfielders can't tackle. In a 4-3-3 the mdifelders only have to cover the space. That is why I am against playing 3 AMs and why I think a 4-3-3 is a better match for us.

[communicate 2,703]

yeah and it could also easily shift to

4-3-2-1

-----Ba

Hazard-Mata

Lamps Mikel Ramy

or we could utilize Oscar and moses

--------------Ba

Hazard/mata------Moses

Oscar/lamps---ramy/lamps

-----------Mikel--------------

so we got an in-and-out and an out-and-out who can shift sites and puzzle defenders. The point is, a 4-3-3 is far more flexible and defensively stable, cos in a neutral position, we got 3 men in the middle instead of having a defensively useless no.10.

2ndly our build up play is a big problem, if 3cms+luiz share playmaking duties from deep, ther connection between midfield and attack would not be such a problem, cos one of the mdiflelders could always move "diagonally" in the space behind the striker. In a 4-2-3-1 only the 3 AMs really interchange positions, which is quite useless, cos the only move in front of the opponent's lines instead of moving into the spaces between, as Lamps has always done with great effect in a 4-3-3.

For a 4-2-3-1 u need at least one genuine out-and-out winger, (at best s.o. with great pace such as Blasczykowski or di Maria) + a perfectly balanced pivot + 10 field players that are always moving always running and moving so quick and agile, they can directly get the ball back. Esp the mid in the pivot have to be mobile and should be good tacklers and accurate passers, cos they usually find themselves into narrow spaces where they directly have to go to the man. if not the AMs have to run all the way back in order to fill the spaces at the flanks. In a 4-3-3 it is easy for 3 mids to close the space for the opponent with the ball, so he either has to wait for support or play a ball across the field which can be inaccurate and always gives the defending team time to recover. That is why a 4-3-3 does not get caught on the counter that often. I think it suits us more as Romeu is our only midfielder who is actually a match for the pivot, Mata, Oscar and Hazard are not good enough at defending esp tackling and their offensive talents are wasted when they have to. And they have to as soon as they all three play together, cos that leaves the midfield exposed against fast or skilled opponents. Even if we do not get caught on the break which is when the maestros have tracked back. We usually do not get the ball back soon enough, cos most of our midfielders can't tackle. In a 4-3-3 the mdifelders only have to cover the space. That is why I am against playing 3 AMs and why I think a 4-3-3 is a better match for us.

In the end, it really does not matter 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, it is very similar, it really depend on your personnel.

[Magic Lamps 11,638]

In the end, it really does not matter 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, it is very similar, it really depend on your personnel.

so please read my post and understand it, i compare them rather profoundly exp concerning the defense and i also gave some examples of how the personel would differ.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Couldn't the same be said of any player though... And most managers think we would be crazy to let him go.

Not really. Most players are contracted because they have transfer value, something Frank probably doesn't. I also don't know where you're getting this idea that 'most managers think' whatever. Yes some have spoken out, but I think we all have to acknowledge the issue of player power in our changing room. He's a big personality, and not every coach will want that looming presence around if they're trying to do something new. Anyone who has had a job knows that sometimes age and experience can be a bad thing (as well as a good thing).

It's why I think it should be the coach's decision, and if Jose does come in then I think he could effectively manage Lamps. A younger, less experienced guy might not.

[bushman 2,043]

Frank has been my favorite Chelsea players for years. He is just one classy player, has done very well for the club, for himself over the years. I will be very sad to see him go. However, from a football point of view & for the club Frank should go & look for another place to play. The club needs to move on. Younger players must be brought in.

Since Roman´s policy states no players over 30....there is nothing to be done here.

Just let him play his role now & I hope he can score goals as many as possible.

[gary gordon 1,777]

Goal.com are reporting that Frank has signed an agreement with LA Galaxy. If its true, I could handle that i guess..

[bushman 2,043]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShN8UIk5-mw

As expected, Frankie goes to Hollywood ?

[BlueLion. 21,491]

I quite like LA Galaxy's kits, so one with LAMPARD on the back wouldn't look too bad.

It's a shame though - his name looks far better on Chelsea blue.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Since when do we consider Goal.com reliable?

[samzilla 517]

I quite like LA Galaxy's kits, so one with LAMPARD on the back wouldn't look too bad.

It's a shame though - his name looks far better on Chelsea blue.

Chelsea are the Man U of the MLS. Heavily favored by the refs, the league bends the rules for them. There's nothing to like about them including their kits.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Chelsea are the Man U of the MLS. Heavily favored by the refs, the league bends the rules for them. There's nothing to like about them including their kits.

I assume you mean L.A. Galaxy and not Chelsea

[Magic Lamps 11,638]

Chelsea are the Man U of the MLS.

That sounds confusing.

But it's L.A. But get your point. I'd rather have Lamps stay in Europe and continue on top level. Italy might be just perfect for him, if they can afford his wages, low temp, respect for older players. Football in the US is such a low standard, Lamps in his best years was probably worth 5 times as much as the entire L.A. Galaxy team is now.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Found this interview in the Sun with Lamps talking about England, Good read: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4751846/Frank-Lampard-interview-England-must-target-World-Cup-win.html

[Rmpr 8,977]

Found this interview in the Sun with Lamps talking about England, Good read: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4751846/Frank-Lampard-interview-England-must-target-World-Cup-win.html

Never thought I would see "good read" and "The Sun" in the same sentence!

[Spike 12,049]

Never thought I would see "good read" and "The Sun" in the same sentence!

Never did I and now I've seen it twice in consecutive posts.

[samzilla 517]

I assume you mean L.A. Galaxy and not Chelsea

Lmao. Yeah. I hate when that happens.