Frank Lampard

[hjperdeath 2,226]

But Alonso is more loyal.

[tiby2979 175]

He will always be a legend, and as quick as I embraced him here I have let him go and wish him the best.

City or no City his legacy lives on at Chelsea and it will never ever be tainted IMO.

A legend of our club who voluntarily decided to play for a rival club after saying he would not. Does not seem right, it is my opinion and I will not change it.

[Special Juan 27,429]

A legend of our club who voluntarily decided to play for a rival club after saying he would not. It does not seem correct, it is my opinion and I am not going to change it.

I don't expect you to, this a forum and we discuss things. Everyone has an opinion.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Will always respect him, he gave alot to our club, but it doesnt realy matter if he got contract extension or not, greatest legends never join rival under ANY circumstances. And he is probably greatest legend of Chelsea.

One day he will come back here, as part of the board, and continue his chelsea legacy.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

This thread had gone quiet because he hadn't even made it onto City's bench yet. Imagine the meltdown when he plays in the third round of the League Cup

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

Frank Lampard admits he would still be a Chelsea player had a contract extension been put to him at Stamford Bridge.

Lampard told The Sun: I would have obviously stayed if Chelsea had offered me another year. There was no reason for me to leave.

Yes, I wanted to play a bit more regularly but Im not stupid.

If Chelsea had given me a new contract it would have been mad not to take it at the time.

It wasnt that I didnt think I could still do it. If I felt like that I wouldnt have gone to City on loan.

I had a chat with Jose Mourinho and both he and the club were always great with me. The decision was made and I dont know who made it.

He added: When we won the Champions League I knew there would be some sort of evolution. Chelsea wanted to bring in some younger players and it was the right move for the club.

We had a fantastic spine of players who helped carry us through from one manager to another and win things, but it doesnt last forever.

Jose was brilliant about it. I didnt walk out with any bad feelings towards him or the club.

I knew things were coming to a head but Im realistic and, in football, I move on quite quickly.

I also felt like I didnt want to be a player who faded away with that being the last memory people had of me.

So maybe it was the right time. Maybe it was right that the club took it out of my hands.

I certainly didnt want to go until I was 40 and just being rolled out for the Capital One Cup after the great times I had at the club.

What I really want now is to make a really positive impact in my time at Manchester City and then again in the next stage of my career.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11661/9456722/premier-league-frank-lampard-would-have-stayed-at-chelsea-if-offered-deal

kinda sad reading that

[Jase 43,479]

To borrow a phrase that was quite popular a while ago, get over it people...

[bababoom 4,478]

I'm pretty sure Chelsea offered him a new contract, he wasn't prepared to lower his wages which is fair enough, he wants that final big payday and he's earned it.

[stroey 2,525]

http://www.espnfc.co.uk/chelsea/story/2021378/frank-lampard-chelsea-player-power-claims-a-load-of-crap

"AVB had played his cards and it hadn't worked," he told The Sun. "I don't know if he was too young or whether it had come too early for him.

"One thing I will address is that a lot of people said when he and Phil Scolari and some of the other managers left it was all down to player power at Chelsea.

"That's a load of crap. I'm being completely honest. Okay, AVB and I were not very close but I don't need to be close to my manager - but I am definitely not the type to act up.

"No one at the club was. Even Ash [Cole], who I know wasn't happy not playing week-in week-out, would never have run off and said, 'Please sack the manager, we've had enough of him'. That's plain ridiculous. We are professionals.

"Can you imagine what Roman Abramovich would've said to him? 'I pay your wages, I make the decisions, now f--- off and play.'

"It just didn't work with AVB. He then went on to Tottenham and had another experience which was negative. Now he's apparently doing pretty well at Zenit so good luck to him. We all learn."

Lampard described Villas-Boas' sacking as "a horrible night for the club." Chelsea had just lost 3-1 at Napoli in the Champions League -- a scoreline they would turn around under Di Matteo before going on to win the competition.

"It had been brewing for some time -- there had been a few problems in the AVB era from the start," Lampard said. "He was a very young manager and he had been at the club before. But he changed a lot of things all at once to try to put his own imprint on the club which, to be honest, I think he may have been asked to do.

"But it seemed quite clear that he didn't see me, Didier Drogba and, to a point, Ashley Cole as being in tune with how he wanted to do it or the way the club should go. I was in and out of the team and Didier didn't play a lot, either.

"I'm not stupid. If I'm playing regularly and a new manager comes in, brings in a couple of new players and then leaves you out for a good few weeks, you understand what it is. We then went to Napoli and he didn't play me or Ash while he had Jose Bosingwa out of position at left-back.

"It was a disastrous night. AVB went soon after, Robbie Di Matteo came in, me and Ash came back for the second leg, Didier scored the first and the team turned it round."

Lampard is now on loan at Manchester City from Major League Soccer's latest franchise, New York City FC, and could face his old club when they meet on Sep. 21 in the Premier League.

And the midfielder, who retired from international football last week, is confident there will be no ill-feeling when he takes on the Blues.

"I don't see it as a slight on anyone if I take part," Lampard added. "The way I feel about Chelsea fans, it wouldn't be a problem to play in front of them again. I have nothing but good feelings for them and know I'd get a good reception.

"I know I said I'd never play for another Premier League club and I never thought I would. I left Chelsea and my feeling was to go to play abroad. So I signed for New York - which is a great chance for me - entirely in good faith.

"I know people say it was a set-up situation for me then to go to City. It wasn't. The only thing I hadn't worked out was how to stay fit before starting in the States. But then City approached me to train, play and be part of the squad. The champions of England, a fantastic club, with a squad brimming with talent. It just made complete sense.

"If I'd had five months off at 36, I don't know what state I would have been in to play. But now I'm fit enough to be involved and knocking on the door and I don't want to be here just to make up the numbers. I haven't broached it with the manager yet but I'm sure we will speak about it. I don't think it would be right for me to declare now that I didn't want to play because what happens if City get two or three injuries in midfield?

"Am I going to allow them to play a kid there when they are paying my wages? On a professional note, I have to get my head round that one. As a Chelsea player I would never have acted like that and I don't want to start now. Whatever I do, it will be with completely the right intentions on all fronts."

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

http://www.espnfc.co.uk/chelsea/story/2021378/frank-lampard-chelsea-player-power-claims-a-load-of-crap

"AVB had played his cards and it hadn't worked," he told The Sun. "I don't know if he was too young or whether it had come too early for him.

"One thing I will address is that a lot of people said when he and Phil Scolari and some of the other managers left it was all down to player power at Chelsea.

"That's a load of crap. I'm being completely honest. Okay, AVB and I were not very close but I don't need to be close to my manager - but I am definitely not the type to act up.

"No one at the club was. Even Ash [Cole], who I know wasn't happy not playing week-in week-out, would never have run off and said, 'Please sack the manager, we've had enough of him'. That's plain ridiculous. We are professionals.

"Can you imagine what Roman Abramovich would've said to him? 'I pay your wages, I make the decisions, now f--- off and play.'

"It just didn't work with AVB. He then went on to Tottenham and had another experience which was negative. Now he's apparently doing pretty well at Zenit so good luck to him. We all learn."

Lampard described Villas-Boas' sacking as "a horrible night for the club." Chelsea had just lost 3-1 at Napoli in the Champions League -- a scoreline they would turn around under Di Matteo before going on to win the competition.

"It had been brewing for some time -- there had been a few problems in the AVB era from the start," Lampard said. "He was a very young manager and he had been at the club before. But he changed a lot of things all at once to try to put his own imprint on the club which, to be honest, I think he may have been asked to do.

"But it seemed quite clear that he didn't see me, Didier Drogba and, to a point, Ashley Cole as being in tune with how he wanted to do it or the way the club should go. I was in and out of the team and Didier didn't play a lot, either.

"I'm not stupid. If I'm playing regularly and a new manager comes in, brings in a couple of new players and then leaves you out for a good few weeks, you understand what it is. We then went to Napoli and he didn't play me or Ash while he had Jose Bosingwa out of position at left-back.

"It was a disastrous night. AVB went soon after, Robbie Di Matteo came in, me and Ash came back for the second leg, Didier scored the first and the team turned it round."

Lampard is now on loan at Manchester City from Major League Soccer's latest franchise, New York City FC, and could face his old club when they meet on Sep. 21 in the Premier League.

And the midfielder, who retired from international football last week, is confident there will be no ill-feeling when he takes on the Blues.

"I don't see it as a slight on anyone if I take part," Lampard added. "The way I feel about Chelsea fans, it wouldn't be a problem to play in front of them again. I have nothing but good feelings for them and know I'd get a good reception.

"I know I said I'd never play for another Premier League club and I never thought I would. I left Chelsea and my feeling was to go to play abroad. So I signed for New York - which is a great chance for me - entirely in good faith.

"I know people say it was a set-up situation for me then to go to City. It wasn't. The only thing I hadn't worked out was how to stay fit before starting in the States. But then City approached me to train, play and be part of the squad. The champions of England, a fantastic club, with a squad brimming with talent. It just made complete sense.

"If I'd had five months off at 36, I don't know what state I would have been in to play. But now I'm fit enough to be involved and knocking on the door and I don't want to be here just to make up the numbers. I haven't broached it with the manager yet but I'm sure we will speak about it. I don't think it would be right for me to declare now that I didn't want to play because what happens if City get two or three injuries in midfield?

"Am I going to allow them to play a kid there when they are paying my wages? On a professional note, I have to get my head round that one. As a Chelsea player I would never have acted like that and I don't want to start now. Whatever I do, it will be with completely the right intentions on all fronts."

Well said

[iseah100 5,612]

I love Frank. Legend no matter what. Can't believe some people are stilk crying about this.

[Term-X 7,891]

Psychology 101 really..

At the end of the day, if you're a Chelsea fan, it's the easy and preferred route to just 'brush things off'. Whether it's an English club not having any English players or a legend joining a title rival. It also stems from a lack of control, because we have none, so why not take the happy route and twist reality.

Actions speak louder than words, and I will continue to judge Frank Lampard on his 'actions'.

[zolayes 14,489]

Psychology 101 really..

At the end of the day, if you're a Chelsea fan, it's the easy and preferred route to just 'brush things off'. Whether it's an English club not having any English players or a legend joining a title rival. It also stems from a lack of control, because we have none, so why not take the happy route and twist reality.

Actions speak louder than words, and I will continue to judge Frank Lampard on his 'actions'.

I think Frank will survive without your approval

[The Mak 4,459]

This thread had gone quiet because he hadn't even made it onto City's bench yet. Imagine the meltdown when he plays in the third round of the League Cup

I don't think you really get it.

The point for some is not just he joined a title rival; he joined a title rival and clearly the only reason is to fill their quota of HG players (goodbye to the 'to prolong his England career' argument eh?). Our legend is on the same level as one of their youth players; I don't know about you, but I think of Frank as much more than that. He being used like a little bitch, a number of a sheet and Frank doesn't care as long as the price is right.

What else is he supposed to do? Literally anything else. I'm sure this wasn't the one and only choice.

And no, I'm not saying he isn't a legend, I'm not saying his legacy is tarnished, all I'm saying is that I am still very disappointed by his decision. Everyone has different feelings, tolerance levels ect, but I think saying you are 'disappointed' by his actions is more than reasonable.

[darrus 422]

http://www.espnfc.co.uk/chelsea/story/2021378/frank-lampard-chelsea-player-power-claims-a-load-of-crap

"AVB had played his cards and it hadn't worked," he told The Sun. "I don't know if he was too young or whether it had come too early for him.

"One thing I will address is that a lot of people said when he and Phil Scolari and some of the other managers left it was all down to player power at Chelsea.

"That's a load of crap. I'm being completely honest. Okay, AVB and I were not very close but I don't need to be close to my manager - but I am definitely not the type to act up.

"No one at the club was. Even Ash [Cole], who I know wasn't happy not playing week-in week-out, would never have run off and said, 'Please sack the manager, we've had enough of him'. That's plain ridiculous. We are professionals.

"Can you imagine what Roman Abramovich would've said to him? 'I pay your wages, I make the decisions, now f--- off and play.'

"It just didn't work with AVB. He then went on to Tottenham and had another experience which was negative. Now he's apparently doing pretty well at Zenit so good luck to him. We all learn."

Lampard described Villas-Boas' sacking as "a horrible night for the club." Chelsea had just lost 3-1 at Napoli in the Champions League -- a scoreline they would turn around under Di Matteo before going on to win the competition.

"It had been brewing for some time -- there had been a few problems in the AVB era from the start," Lampard said. "He was a very young manager and he had been at the club before. But he changed a lot of things all at once to try to put his own imprint on the club which, to be honest, I think he may have been asked to do.

"But it seemed quite clear that he didn't see me, Didier Drogba and, to a point, Ashley Cole as being in tune with how he wanted to do it or the way the club should go. I was in and out of the team and Didier didn't play a lot, either.

"I'm not stupid. If I'm playing regularly and a new manager comes in, brings in a couple of new players and then leaves you out for a good few weeks, you understand what it is. We then went to Napoli and he didn't play me or Ash while he had Jose Bosingwa out of position at left-back.

"It was a disastrous night. AVB went soon after, Robbie Di Matteo came in, me and Ash came back for the second leg, Didier scored the first and the team turned it round."

Lampard is now on loan at Manchester City from Major League Soccer's latest franchise, New York City FC, and could face his old club when they meet on Sep. 21 in the Premier League.

And the midfielder, who retired from international football last week, is confident there will be no ill-feeling when he takes on the Blues.

"I don't see it as a slight on anyone if I take part," Lampard added. "The way I feel about Chelsea fans, it wouldn't be a problem to play in front of them again. I have nothing but good feelings for them and know I'd get a good reception.

"I know I said I'd never play for another Premier League club and I never thought I would. I left Chelsea and my feeling was to go to play abroad. So I signed for New York - which is a great chance for me - entirely in good faith.

"I know people say it was a set-up situation for me then to go to City. It wasn't. The only thing I hadn't worked out was how to stay fit before starting in the States. But then City approached me to train, play and be part of the squad. The champions of England, a fantastic club, with a squad brimming with talent. It just made complete sense.

"If I'd had five months off at 36, I don't know what state I would have been in to play. But now I'm fit enough to be involved and knocking on the door and I don't want to be here just to make up the numbers. I haven't broached it with the manager yet but I'm sure we will speak about it. I don't think it would be right for me to declare now that I didn't want to play because what happens if City get two or three injuries in midfield?

"Am I going to allow them to play a kid there when they are paying my wages? On a professional note, I have to get my head round that one. As a Chelsea player I would never have acted like that and I don't want to start now. Whatever I do, it will be with completely the right intentions on all fronts."

I'd say I would have been better off not reading this.

Everything is so reasonable and well-said and leaves a bitter taste at he same time.

I held back with my opinion because I didn't - and still don't - want to judge anyone as this situation is pretty common in football world, Frank deserves a right to continue his career as he sees fit, there are obviously no hard feelings from other side and he's our biggest legend.

But forgive me for saying this.

Frank is my favorite Chelsea player. I will always be grateful for everything he's done for us over the years. I wish him all the best for the future, and it includes his spell in MC.

But I hope that whatever the future will hold for him, he never comes back to Chelsea - be it as manager, director, pundit or whatever.

Sorry if someone is going to be offended by it.

[robsblubot 3,504]

Suspect it was down to money...

It's tricky to lower wages of players or at elast that's my understanding. Often times, it's easier for the employee to leave the company and then rejoin shortly after.

[bababoom 4,478]

I personally don't care. I can see why some people are disappointed in Frank but to say his legacy has been tarnished is going way over the top imo.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

I don't think you really get it.

The point for some is not just he joined a title rival; he joined a title rival and clearly the only reason is to fill their quota of HG players (goodbye to the 'to prolong his England career' argument eh?). Our legend is on the same level as one of their youth players; I don't know about you, but I think of Frank as much more than that. He being used like a little bitch, a number of a sheet and Frank doesn't care as long as the price is right.

What else is he supposed to do? Literally anything else. I'm sure this wasn't the one and only choice.

And no, I'm not saying he isn't a legend, I'm not saying his legacy is tarnished, all I'm saying is that I am still very disappointed by his decision. Everyone has different feelings, tolerance levels ect, but I think saying you are 'disappointed' by his actions is more than reasonable.

I "get it" just fine. What people seem to think is it's okay for one quota of people to be "disappointed", but when the more ambivalent quota (to which I belong) say it's an over-reaction, they can jump on their high horse. For people to not really give a shit, because it is HIS decision, and to think others are making a mountain out of a molehill is also "more than reasonable".

I'm done in with this thread so there's no need replying to this post. I'm not aiming it at you in particular, but there are those of us who've gotten over this a long time ago and have moved on.