Frank Lampard

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

[Jase 43,479]

Bobby Tambling: Chelsea 'great' Frank Lampard proved me wrong

[Phil Driver 503]

Had Lampard gone to Utd he would probably been even more successful than he was with us and lets forget who retired Scholes from the England team

Paul Scholes scores goals but not as many as Lampard ,Lampard for me every time and that is without mentioning Scholes dreadful tackling for which he should have been sent off many more times than he was ,thanks to Fergies hold on referees.

Frank always held his own with Xavi ,Iniesta and co and was amongst the best midfielders in the world in his generation and Lamaprd is the best scoring midfielder in the world in his generation and goals are what the game is all about.

[termninja 5,290]

Damn you Lampard, I hate you because I love you so much which will make me cry without stopping when you leave Chelsea

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

Also, lmao at the comparisons to Scholes.

In my honest opinion, I believe Scholes in England's greatest midfielder of all time. That's not even disrespecting Lampard, that's just how simply amazing Scholes was.

I also lmao at the comparisons to Scholes. No way should a player like Scholes compared to a player so much superior. Thank god not only statistics but also the football world (for those of you who prefer the survey method) have it the same

@ Lamps vs Scholes vs Gerrard

1.Lampard prime > Scholes prime In 2005 Lamps was 2nd in world and European player of the year, which is quite some feat cos he is english&epl player, Scholes has never won an individual award of any significance

2.Lampard overall > Scholes overall

reflected by performances, stats and statistics respectively.

https://twitter.com/BigJohnTerry/status/291291194531651584/photo/1

They are not quite up to date (from end janaury or so)and only premier league but, updating and including more competitions only influences these stats even more in Lamps's favour, cos Gerrard has only assembled a massive 3 goals since then whilst Scholes has recorded a bombastic 0 goals and 0 assists. Lamps has scored at least 10 goals. If u include all competitions Lamps has 271 goals which is about as much as Scholes and gerrard have combined overall. Also Lamps's 0,34 goals per game ratio beats them both comfortably with 0,2 and 0,23 respectively. Interesting is also that Lamps has more goals in the league alone than either Scholes or Gerrard have overall( which are more matches). Also for England Lamps has a far better scoring record than both.

Also funny is that Lampard has waaay more games, esp. starts than Scholes, despite being 5 years younger. Shows how much the two actually contribute to their clubs.

Lamps has outscored Gerrard in 13 of the 17 seasons they have played in parallel, including the including the last 4 running, even though being older, outassisted Gerrard in every season they have played in parallel i have checked so far, outassisted and outscored Paul Scholes in every season since 2004.

Scholes's prime 2000-2005 is not even close to Lamps's 2005-2010 in terms of goals and assists and most importantly titles. Yes titles. When Scholes had the biggest imapct on his team during his career before becoming a bench player in these years he won 2 leagues, 1 fa cup, Lamps won 3 leagues, 4 fa cups and 2 league cups when he had the biggest impact on the team.

Now i have dug really deep to find some individual awards Scholes actually has won. He has been in the team of the decade 1992-2001. , Lamps has been player of the decade 2000-2009. Lamps has also won 39 individual awards to Scholes 7. Lamps also won 4 times player of the month, 3 times pfa team of the year to scholes's 2, Lamps has won silver award in european and world player of the year, world xi and countless other awards scholes can only dream of. That is why all in all Lamps beats scholes and gerrard in terms of all relevant statistics and individual awards.

Let's not forget Lampard literally kicked Scholes out of the England team. Scholes was 30 when he retired form international football. Lampard still carries on with almost 35.

In the ManU team Scholes was replaced by the mighty Steven Fletcher. Lampard had the competition of Deco, Ballack, Essien...and got the better of anyone.

Scholes played his last season in which he contributed in and not only featured as a mascot that sometimes strayed into the starting lineup (as a consequence of Utd's chronically shit midfield), carried as charity cause, in 2003/4 when he was 29. Lamps at the age of almost 35 is still a massive part of the team. 13 years of worldclass vs half career as Utd's answer to paulo ferreira (post 2007 ofc).

Lamps simply has performed better no matter what way you measure it and has done so over a way longer period.

You can compare Lampard to Zidane, Bobby Charlton or Lothar Matthäus. Scholes?

[The only place to be 11,313]

I also lmao at the comparisons to Scholes. No way should a player like Scholes compared to a player so much superior.

Why do you feel the need to denigrate a player like Scholes when you've admitted before that you really haven't seen him play that much?

Are you that insecure about Lampard's legacy that you have to attack someone that most of us wouldn't consider a direct rival? Trust me - Lampard is a great enough player in his own right for you to ease off the quite frankly ludicrous attacks on Scholes.

[Miguelito 459]

I also lmao at the comparisons to Scholes. No way should a player like Scholes compared to a player so much superior. Thank god not only statistics but also the football world (for those of you who prefer the survey method) have it the same

@ Lamps vs Scholes vs Gerrard

1.Lampard prime > Scholes prime In 2005 Lamps was 2nd in world and European player of the year, which is quite some feat cos he is english&epl player, Scholes has never won an individual award of any significance

2.Lampard overall > Scholes overall

reflected by performances, stats and statistics respectively.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BArfzLICIAANfwn.jpg:large

They are not quite up to date (from end janaury or so)and only premier league but, updating and including more competitions only influences these stats even more in Lamps's favour, cos Gerrard has only assembled a massive 3 goals since then whilst Scholes has recorded a bombastic 0 goals and 0 assists. Lamps has scored at least 5 goals. If u include all competitions Lamps has 266 goals which is about as much as Scholes and gerrard have combined overall. Also Lamps's 0,3 goals per game ratio beats them both comfortably with 0,2 and 0,23 respectively. Interesting is also that Lamps has more goals in the league alone than either Scholes or Gerrard have overall( which are more matches). Also for England Lamps has a far better scoring record than both. Lamps has outscored Gerrard in 13 of the 17 seasons they have played in parallel, including the including the last 4 running, even though being older, outassisted Gerrard in every season they have played in parallel i have checked so far, outassisted and outscored Paul Scholes in every season since 2004. Scholes's prime 2000-2005 is not even close to Lamps's 2005-2010 in terms of goals and assists and most importantly titles. Yes titles. When Scholes had the biggest imapct on his team during his career before becoming a bench player in these years he won 2 leagues, 1 fa cup, Lamps won 3 leagues, 4 fa cups and 2 league cups when he had the biggest impact on the team. Now i have dug really deep to find some individual awards Scholes actually has won. He has been in the team of the decade 1992-2001. , Lamps has been player of the decade 2000-2009. Lamps has also won 39 individual awards to Scholes 7. Lamps also won 4 times player of the month, 3 times pfa team of the year to scholes's 2, Lamps has won silver award in european and world player of the year, world xi and countless other awards scholes can only dream of. That is why all in all Lamps beats scholes and gerrard in terms of all relevant statistics and individual awards.

Scholes played his last season in which he actually played a part in and not only was more or less a mascot, Utd's Paulo ferreira carried as charity cause, in 2003/4 when he was 29. Lamps at the age of almost 35 is still a massive part of the team.

man everytime anyone mentions one little bad thing about lampard, you are always there to try to prove them wrong. everyone has their downfalls and lampard certainly does too. i just feel like you go over the top with lampard all the time and it discredits your agruments.

the stats for scholes and lampard are just pointless to compare because of how differently that they played. scholes was never the one to always score or always assist but dictated play incredibly. he ran the show for united on soooo many occasions even when he didnt get on the stat sheet. now lampard is one of my favorite chelsea players of all time, but im in agreement with LDN Blue that scholes is the greatest England midfielder of all time. As a midfielder scholes wass miles ahead of lampard, but as a scorer lampard is obviously far ahead.

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

Why do you feel the need to denigrate a player like Scholes when you've admitted before that you really haven't seen him play that much?

Are you that insecure about Lampard's legacy that you have to attack someone that most of us wouldn't consider a direct rival? Trust me - Lampard is a great enough player in his own right for you to ease off the quite frankly ludicrous attacks on Scholes.

I follow english football since 2004. Not my fault Scholes spent these 9 years of his career picking his nose on the Utd bench. But in my books this is not what good players do. Obviously I've not missed so much anyway, cos anything one can find about Scholes does not come anywhere near what Lamps has achieved. I also did not see Lother Matthäus, Bobby Charlton or Zinedine Zidane play much. Still I can compare them to Lamps, cos what I can find about them legitimises that. You know, they did not spend 9 years on the bench with players like Anderson, Fletcher and Hargreaves starting over them...

[The only place to be 11,313]

I follow english football since 2004.

Fair enough. Maybe listen to the people who watched Scholes in the decade before you started following the English game.

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

the stats for scholes and lampard are just pointless to compare because of how differently that they played. scholes was never the one to always score or always assist but dictated play incredibly. he ran the show for united on soooo many occasions even when he didnt get on the stat sheet. now lampard is one of my favorite chelsea players of all time, but im in agreement with LDN Blue that scholes is the greatest England midfielder of all time. As a midfielder scholes wass miles ahead of lampard, but as a scorer lampard is obviously far ahead.

As Lamps did for Chelsea on soooo many more occasions AND he got on the stat sheet.

So if Scholes play never was about goals and assists, why did he lost his starting spot when his assists and goals became fewer and fewer. If he never was about scoring, why did everyone in English press always hailed him for his 1 goal every 4 games average? If scholes did dictate the game so well, why did he win a lot less titles than Lampard in an comparable space of time? If Scholes was ever so great why did he never collect the awards like other great midfielders did?

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

Fair enough. Maybe listen to the people who watched Scholes in the decade before you started following the English game.

what about reading the whole post?

Not my fault Scholes spent these 9 years of his career picking his nose on the Utd bench. But in my books this is not what good players do. Obviously I've not missed so much anyway, cos anything one can find about Scholes does not come anywhere near what Lamps has achieved. I also did not see Lother Matthäus, Bobby Charlton or Zinedine Zidane play much. Still I can compare them to Lamps, cos what I can find about them legitimises that. You know, they did not spend 9 years on the bench with players like Anderson, Fletcher and Hargreaves starting over them...

[CHOULO19 24,332]

~120k in another Guardian article today.

Surely not. That just defies logic!

[Thomas Williams 166]

I am EXTREMELY skeptical over the reports of 120k a week. I'm sure it is much closer to half of that.

If they are even close to the real contract though, it finally makes sense why it was such an ordeal to get him a contract, if he was demanding about twice what Mata earns (almost all reports say 70k a week). Not to mention I've heard Ivanovic earns under 40k a week.

Surely Lampard would be willing to have just an average salary if it meant playing for a club so dear to him? I mean, he is about to be closer to 40 than 30 in a few months...

[Rubber bullets 1,183]

I am EXTREMELY skeptical over the reports of 120k a week. I'm sure it is much closer to half of that.

If they are even close to the real contract though, it finally makes sense why it was such an ordeal to get him a contract, if he was demanding about twice what Mata earns (almost all reports say 70k a week). Not to mention I've heard Ivanovic earns under 40k a week.

Surely Lampard would be willing to have just an average salary if it meant playing for a club so dear to him? I mean, he is about to be closer to 40 than 30 in a few months...

You're forgetting that he is also a Premier league footballer, so its natural that he will want as much money as possible. Its just that he also knows the right words to say to the Chelsea fans to give them the impression that he loves them and the club dearly and does not at all care about financial interest.

I can see him becoming an MP when he retires.

[The Skipper 20,609]

Frank Lampard's Chelsea career will end this summer - The Guardian, 7th of January 2013.

Doubt they really know what wages he's on exactly.