Frank Lampard

[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 11,677]

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 11,677]

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 11,677]

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 20,593]

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.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

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?

Mr Magic Lamps,

The reason Scholes isn't among the goals and assists is because that's not what his role was. Scholes is a fantastic little football player, he's technically superb, he reads the game like no other. His peripheral vision is simply amazing, the way he played the game was like he saw what would happen 2 steps after he'd touched the ball. He didn't get many "assists" because his role was to start the attack. What I mean by this is, he was the one who played the ball to the guy who would get the last pass into the striker.

His game was at the heart of the pitch, in the middle of the park. He wasn't about the long-ball (although believe me, he could play that pass all day long), he was about passing to the right player in the right type of attack.

You say Scholes hasn't earned his plaudits?

"My toughest opponent? Scholes of Manchester. He is the complete midfielder."

- Zidane

"Out of everyone at Manchester United, I would pick out Scholes – he is the best midfielder of his generation. I would have loved to have played alongside him." - Pep Guardiola

"Why isn’t he playing for England? It is crazy. Only in England. Scholes is a great, great player. So experienced and still, for me, one of the best in the world in midfield. Manchester United are lucky to have him."

- José Mourinho

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1355726/Xavi-interview-Paul-Scholes-best-midfielder-20-years.html

[Magic Lamps 11,677]

Mr Magic Lamps,

The reason Scholes isn't among the goals and assists is because that's not what his role was. Scholes is a fantastic little football player, he's technically superb, he reads the game like no other. His peripheral vision is simply amazing, the way he played the game was like he saw what would happen 2 steps after he'd touched the ball. He didn't get many "assists" because his role was to start the attack. What I mean by this is, he was the one who played the ball to the guy who would get the last pass into the striker.

His game was at the heart of the pitch, in the middle of the park. He wasn't about the long-ball (although believe me, he could play that pass all day long), he was about passing to the right player in the right type of attack.

You say Scholes hasn't earned his plaudits?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1355726/Xavi-interview-Paul-Scholes-best-midfielder-20-years.html

"your are the best player in the world" Mourinho to Lampard

"Frank Lampard is currently the best and most complete player in the world" Matthias Sammer

"myvote for World Player of the year award will go to him" - Luiz Felipe scolari about Frank

Why did I not include these quotes into my argumentation? Cos they are no arguments themselves.

I could dig out quotes about any dork in world football that make him sound like he had achieved division by zero.

When many experts come together and vote, the outcome is intersubjective and hence way more valuable.

It is nothing special to play the pass to assist. Lamps does it often enough, too.

Scholes might have been a good player for some years in his career. But I see nothing in this "complete" compilation of him, what a hell lot of other player can't do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3AHuFCoybo

[LDN Blue 7,903]

"your are the best player in the world" Mourinho to Lampard

"Frank Lampard is currently the best and most complete player in the world" Matthias Sammer

"myvote for World Player of the year award will go to him" - Luiz Felipe scolari about Frank

Why did I not include these quotes into my argumentation? Cos they are no arguments themselves.

I could dig out quotes about any dork in world football that make him sound like he had achieved division by zero.

When many experts come together and vote, the outcome is intersubjective and hence way more valuable.

It is nothing special to play the pass to assist. Lamps does it often enough, too.

Scholes might have been a good player for some years in his career. But I see nothing in this "complete" compilation of him, what a hell lot of other player can't do.

That wasn't really my point though, I only put those in because you claim his fame has gone unnoticed.

YouTube won't show you anything, because it wasn't the one off incidents Scholes was acclaimed for, it was the overall game. He, indeed, dictated the pace of the game, gave control to the midfield.

Now what I will say it, Scholes' superiority was more in the 90's and early 00's.. This is probably why you won't be inclined to agree with me. There's nothing wrong with that, in the last decade it has been a case of Lampard > Scholes. But what the way Scholes played in his era, defined him at England's greatest of all time.

This argument cannot go any further, because I'm failing to explain what makes Scholes' so unique. But I'm going to stress my final point; I'm not saying Lampard isn't one of the best players of all time, he's certainly up there. Scholes' was simply a different class above the legacies of Lampard & Gerrard.

[The only place to be 11,313]

"your are the best player in the world" Mourinho to Lampard

"Frank Lampard is currently the best and most complete player in the world" Matthias Sammer

"myvote for World Player of the year award will go to him" - Luiz Felipe scolari about Frank

Why did I not include these quotes into my argumentation? Cos they are no arguments themselves.

I could dig out quotes about any dork in world football that make him sound like he had achieved division by zero.

When many experts come together and vote, the outcome is intersubjective and hence way more valuable.

It is nothing special to play the pass to assist. Lamps does it often enough, too.

Scholes might have been a good player for some years in his career. But I see nothing in this "complete" compilation of him, what a hell lot of other player can't do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3AHuFCoybo

Youtube videos.... :lol2: :lol2:

We get it...you really like Frank Lampard but this is getting a little silly now. It's like listening to a One Direction fan slag off Led Zep and pointing to their lack of Brit Awards.

[Kezza 1,965]

Yay yay yay

[Magic Lamps 11,677]

That wasn't really my point though, I only put those in because you claim his fame has gone unnoticed. YouTube won't show you anything, because it wasn't the one off incidents Scholes was acclaimed for, it was the overall game. He, indeed, dictated the pace of the game, gave control to the midfield. Now what I will say it, Scholes' superiority was more in the 90's and early 00's.. This is probably why you won't be inclined to agree with me. There's nothing wrong with that, in the last decade it has been a case of Lampard > Scholes. But what the way Scholes played in his era, defined him at England's greatest of all time. This argument cannot go any further, because I'm failing to explain what makes Scholes' so unique. But I'm going to stress my final point; I'm not saying Lampard isn't one of the best players of all time, he's certainly up there. Scholes' was simply a different class above the legacies of Lampard & Gerrard.

Youtube videos.... :lol2: :lol2: We get it...you really like Frank Lampard but this is getting a little silly now. It's like listening to a One Direction fan slag off Led Zep and pointing to their lack of Brit Awards.

No it is not, cos opposite to Paul Scholes, the numbers speak for Led Zep. No awards, no stats, no videos... just some warm words... sry when that does not convince me. I'd say legacy is a completely different story. Lampard incented an era of success at Chelsea, he captained the club to both big European titles, is topscorer of the club...scholes, well there are at least 2 guys singing his praises on a Chelsea forum... Scholes as well as Lampard has been a box-to-box midfielder. For me a box-to-box midfielder is all about his effectivity. 271 goals and more than 150 assists speak for themselves. So whatever these feats of your Stone-Age-Scholes might be. As there is obviously only folk memory left of it (ah that's what you call legacy), I struggle to retrace...leave it at that.

[Jase 43,479]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DO1TjLjlo0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMOziy9jM4Q

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Surely Lampard would be willing to have just an average salary if it meant playing for a club so dear to him?

LOL

[Jase 43,479]

Indeed, Mourinho doesn't really need to care about the costs and so he won't. If the Guardian was right in suggesting Lampard dropped his demands and still got £120,000/week it begs the question what the initial demands were.

Let's not think that the reported 120k p/w wages is the right amount. The English media, after all, did report that Hazard was supposedly on a 175k p/w wages when in reality, he's only earning about 110k p/w as mentioned by the Belgian and French media. Even if he's earning 120k p/w, that could include the bonuses he will be earning based on appearances, goals etc into the whole package.

On the other hand, I don't know why people are making a fuss of what Lampard earns here. Yes, I know he's turning 35 years old soon but based on what he has done for the club for the past decade, he probably deserves it. His contribution is gonna be vital both on and off the pitch. Moreover, we will be letting quite a number of players leave this summer and that clears up the wage bill a lot especially when you consider one player that hasn't done a lot for us at all is earning reported 90k p/w wages here!