Frank Lampard

[Rmpr 8,977]

I am seriously done with Lampard discussion...

Not saying you (zolayes, Toronto, etc) arent giving good arguments, but it is just super boring at the moment.

Why don't we stop arguing and wait to see what happens?

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Ohhhh yeeeeeeees, thank youuu sooo much, I would never ever in a hundred years have figuered out myself that Lamps took most of our set pieces. Well that changes everything of course, forgive me for being so dumb not to consider that. We have to rewrite history, zolayes figuered out that lamps took our set pieces, I have to drastically change my opinion now, god thank you, I mean how shit is it to be a prolific penalty taker, that makes a player so much less great, cos it is so easy, that is why mata tried it...and soon stopped, becuase penalty taking so extremely easy that it only spoils a player and should make every fan reconsider his opinion about players that take penalties.Yes lets always take away penalties from the goal tally. Yeah lets also take away tap ins, and why not also take away headers, hey, why bother counting goals at all?

You need to calm down. This is completely uncalled for and is clearly not the point zolayes was trying to make.

Lets keep the discussion respectable, please.

[Chelsea? 892]

I hate the retiring of numbers. It's one of them Americanisms that shouldn't creep into football.

Retiring numbers is cool, don't retire 1-11 numbers.

Nothing wrong with Americanism eithe. Epl would be so much more successful if it were run like the NFL.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

I am seriously done with Lampard discussion...

Not saying you (zolayes, Toronto, etc) arent giving good arguments, but it is just super boring at the moment.

Why don't we stop arguing and wait to see what happens?

Actually, haven't made many arguments about this. I hate to see people slamming Lampard but the club was around before him and will be after. If it were up to me, I'd offer him a one-yer contract on reduced wages because I think he's still good enough to give Chelsea something, but it's not up to me.

[Chelsea? 892]

@Magic Lamps

Mata is a better player this year though. And Frank wasn't that great on our CL run either. Besides, I think Mata did better than Lampard later last year when we didn't play with 11 defenders.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

@Magic Lamps

Mata is a better player this year though. And Frank wasn't that great on our CL run either. Besides, I think Mata did better than Lampard later last year when we didn't play with 11 defenders.

Frank was great during our CL run. Mata wasn't. Mata had a long season and was tired and our defensive style didn't fit with the way Mata plays. Mata is our best player right now and by a fair bit.

[Superblue 6,351]

Piazon doesn't count as homegrown but he's still under 21 so he doesn't count against us. It works in reverse. You're only allowed 17 non HG players. (which usually means 8 homegrown because you usually have 25 men). So, Cech, Ivanovic, Luiz, Ramires, Torres, Mata, Mikel, Marin, Azpilicueta, Ba, Hazard, Oscar, Romeu, Lukaku, and KDB (not sure with KDB because his mother is English but not sure if that matters at all), is 15. That would mean that at a maximum, Chelsea would be able to bring in 2 or 3 non-homegrown players without getting rid of someone. It makes sense for the club to try to bring in a homegrown player or two who could be in the core of the squad so you don't really have to worry about this issue every year.

Lukaku would be under-21 as well, so that would be 14 meaning we'd be able to sign 3 more non-homegrown players.

It doesn't take into account nationality, just where they have been trained, hence 'home-grown'. It's why lots of the Arsenal youngsters are home-grown even when they aren't English. We have the same for example if we were going to register somebody like Kakuta to the first team squad, he would class as home-grown despite being French, due to him having been trained in England for at least three years before his 21st birthday.

Case in point re: KDB - I think Owen Hargreaves isn't classed as a home-grown player despite playing for England as he grew up and was trained in Canada, then Germany if I'm not mistaken.

The moral of the story is if they're foreign and they're good, sign them up before they turn 18 and you'll enjoy them as one of the 8 home-grown players!

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

It doesn't take into account nationality, just where they have been trained, hence 'home-grown'. It's why lots of the Arsenal youngsters are home-grown even when they aren't English. We have the same for example if we were going to register somebody like Kakuta to the first team squad, he would class as home-grown despite being French, due to him having been trained in England for at least three years before his 21st birthday.

Case in point re: KDB - I think Owen Hargreaves isn't classed as a home-grown player despite playing for England as he grew up and was trained in Canada, then Germany if I'm not mistaken.

The moral of the story is if they're foreign and they're good, sign them up before they turn 18 and you'll enjoy them as one of the 8 home-grown players!

The rules are complicated. Kakuta will count as homegrown but not Piazon I think. And don't speak to me of that turncoat Hargreaves (Canada has some decent players but like Julian De Guzman and Junior Hoilett they don't seem to want to play for Canada.) I think the best thing to do is to find a few key players that are homegrown. We had Terry, Lampard, and Cole for years. If you have that, the quotas are easy to make. If you don't, you're always going to have to be dealing with a silly issue and doing things just to make the quota (like buying players who aren't good enough to play or bringing players that should be on loan on to your bench just to meet the quota).

[Superblue 6,351]

The rules are complicated. Kakuta will count as homegrown but not Piazon I think. And don't speak to me of that turncoat Hargreaves (Canada has some decent players but like Julian De Guzman and Junior Hoilett they don't seem to want to play for Canada.) I think the best thing to do is to find a few key players that are homegrown. We had Terry, Lampard, and Cole for years. If you have that, the quotas are easy to make. If you don't, you're always going to have to be dealing with a silly issue and doing things just to make the quota (like buying players who aren't good enough to play or bringing players that should be on loan on to your bench just to meet the quota).

That is the problem with it - potentially ending up with buying players just to fill the quota. It inflates what is already a stupidly expensive market in England. I also hate people making excuses because of the home-grown rule (e.g. we should keep Sturridge because he's home-grown).

Kakuta joined when he was only 16, I think Piazon was already 18 when he joined and hence won't spend at least 3 years here before his 21st birthday. Mikel narrowly missed out on the rule too.

We don't necessarily need to fill the whole quota, but having say 6 out of 8 would give us greater squad depth. Cahill, Bertrand and Moses should have three spots locked down for the next few seasons and it is up to players like McEachran and Chalobah to come through over the next couple of seasons. There isn't a lot of home-grown talent available for respectable money, and we really should be using the rules to encourage a philosophy of bringing a few players through from the academy over time.

[Chelsea? 892]

Frank was great during our CL run. Mata wasn't. Mata had a long season and was tired and our defensive style didn't fit with the way Mata plays. Mata is our best player right now and by a fair bit.

he was poor when we parked the bus.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

he was poor when we parked the bus.

We only "parked the bus" (hate that phrase) for three games. Two against Barca and the final against Bayern. Mata was also poor against Benfica and was not influential for the second leg against Napoli. Lampard played well throughout but especially against Barcelona. Again, I don't think it's worth dwelling on, because I don't think it has any bearing on the future.

[communicate 2,703]

We only "parked the bus" (hate that phrase) for three games. Two against Barca and the final against Bayern. Mata was also poor against Benfica and was not influential for the second leg against Napoli. Lampard played well throughout but especially against Barcelona. Again, I don't think it's worth dwelling on, because I don't think it has any bearing on the future.

We actually were outplayed by benfica and mata actually played quite well against Napoli. It's very simple with mata and every am if you are outplayed he will not be influential because he does not have the ball as much as he wants.

[TrippingStep 336]

But Lamps is the player who transformed Chelsea from a good to a world-class club. We were worse before and will be worse after, cos the board lets the legacy of the old guard go to waste.

The board is overloading us with weakish, wasteful fair-weather footballers and taunting everything the club stands for. Clubs with more history than Chelsea have given their legends like Giggs, Raul, Maldini contracts as long as they wanted and it paid off. Lampard is far greater than all of them but still does not get his. This is simply a shame. I have followed a decade without a title for German football. That has taught me to recognize the early signs of oncoming gloom.

u try to find excuses for Mata's decline in the latter stages of last season again. Hence you confirm my point. I don't give a fuck why he went downhill (first season bla bla), fact he was not there when the team needed a leader, a big time player. So why should it be different now? My assumption of his performances and goal rate going down is at least based on experience, other than your idiotic "25 goals, 30 assists" season bullshit projection. Were it also you brain-wanking about your imagination of that infamous "25 goals 30 assits season" being bettr than Lamps's best? Lamps had 27 goals and 19 assists in 2009/10 + a decnet number of goals in international games. Wake me up when Mata has done that. I guess you can drop the act.

The great defence, Drogba, Makele Ballack or Essien in midfield behind him didn't matter I guess.

If Chelsea have more difficulties now, it's because we have not the same quality in midfield as before.

Look at the defensive and central midfield Chelsea had with Mourinho.

Makele, Essien, Tiago, Ballack.

Lampard is very good in and around the box but I'm not so sure he's as great a leader as you say.

I would even say that Gerrard under Benitez was more a leader and the better player for his all-aroung game but that's just my opinion.

Gerrard has played on the wings, behind the striker, as a deeper playmaker and could still be quite good.

Lampard when playing deeper unless we sit very deep is not very good, he doesn't make the other players playing better.

[gary gordon 1,777]

Can we organize a boycott till Lamps is re-signed??? I can't imagine many Chelsea fans having a problem with that.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Can we organize a boycott till Lamps is re-signed??? I can't imagine many Chelsea fans having a problem with that.

A boycott of what? :lol2:

[gary gordon 1,777]

A boycott of what? :lol2:

A game day boycott you fucking tool.

[The only place to be 11,313]

A game day boycott you fucking tool.

That's not very nice.

Although being told by someone who doesn't go to matches that I should consider boycotting a match because a 35 year old's contract is running out and the club aren't renewing it has given me something to laugh about this morning.

:lol2: :lol2:

[gary gordon 1,777]

That's not very nice.

Although being told by someone who doesn't go to matches that I should consider boycotting a match because a 35 year old's contract is running out and the club aren't renewing it has given me something to laugh about this morning.

:lol2: :lol2:

You think because you live in England that makes you a greater Chelsea fan then somebody else? You can go fuck yourself right there.. I've bled blue since 98 and i can tell you something, your attitude towards a club legend is making me start to question your longevity as a Chelsea supporter. You will start spouting off about history? Anybody can use wikipedia. You will probably want to show us your old Chelsea jersey and memorabilia? Anybody can use eBay.

I couldn't give a fuck if you agree with the club in letting a player who's tears have hit the turf at Stamford Bridge leave. Lampard is 1/3 the reason why the club has been successful over the last 10 years.