Frank Lampard

[OhForAGreavsie 5,773]

I found it by going to fifa.com and searching Lampard.

[zolayes 14,489]

TIME to call him a NON BLUE or the wrong shade of BLUE

[manpe 10,855]

FIFA themselves say that NYC have given the contract extension their blessing. Strange if it's nothing to do with them.

Other than that, we're talking round in circles so perhaps it's time to agree to disagree.

NYC may have given their blessing to the contract extension, but was there any mention of a loan? I just quickly searched for the article you're talking about (link) and did Ctrl+F "loan" but nothing came up. I didn't read it fully but a quick skim of the article is pretty much a recycled story about Lampard extending his stay there, with New York's (aka City's playtoy) blessing.

As if a loan wasn't bad enough, it gets clearer that he is actually a full-time player for Manchester City. And the fact that he together with City schemed and conned around that deal this way is the last straw. I now want concrete evidence that this is a loan, otherwise I'm done.

[iseah100 5,612]

So what about Villa?

[manpe 10,855]

And I know that essentially it doesn't make a difference, loan or not - he still kicks the ball for Manchester City either way. It's just the way our would-have-been all-time great has handled this, how it has destroyed the fans. I (don't) hope he finds as many fans at the Etihad, because if all of this gets exposed, he won't have many here.

PS I'm saying all of this in assumption that BBC and New York Times are correct.

Addendum: The "break clause" was an insurance for City in case he sucks so they can deport him to MLS to at least earn them some cash. Maybe that's why Lamps has looked so invigorated - he's playing for something.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I found it by going to fifa.com and searching Lampard.

That is NOT anything official from FIFA itself, it is simply recycling the articles on the Man City and NYFC websites which by the way have both forsaken the any notion of loan. In fact, the Man City website clearly states that he has "extended his contract".

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

That is NOT anything official from FIFA itself, it is simply recycling the articles on the Man City and NYFC websites which by the way have both forsaken the any notion of loan. In fact, the Man City website clearly states that he has "extended his contract".

When you're on loan with a club you will still sign a loan contract with them.

It's difficult to know exactly what has gone on and I doubt we ever will. There's no need for any club to publicly release any information and the conspiracies will continue unfortunately.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

When you're on loan with a club you will still sign a loan contract with them.

It's difficult to know exactly what has gone on and I doubt we ever will. There's no need for any club to publicly release any information and the conspiracies will continue unfortunately.

Yes, but both club websites have clearly shifted from explicitly saying "loan contract" to saying just "contract" or "stay with City".

And again, I'd find it very weird if BBC's David Ornstein, or the NewYork Times, are blatantly lying about having confirmed information that Frank was never an MLS player.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sjk6sa

[OhForAGreavsie 5,773]

I acknowledge that City, who initially used the term loan to describe the move, have stopped doing so and that it is reasonable for Choulo and others to read that as confirmation of their point of view.

On the question of Lamps status with Chelsea fans I'm not personally too bothered but I'm desperate that he should not be booed on 31st January. He is a legend of our club and if he should be booed it would send an appalling message about Chelsea fans. If people don't want to cheer him then fine but please no booing.

Personally I never believed Frank was as good a player as his reputation suggests and I never loved him the way most CFC fans do, or did anyway. I think that makes it easier for me not to be too angry with him now. When Scholes retired from international football the United man cited certain England players playing selfishly for themselves as one of his reasons for quiting. I always thought Frank was one of the people Scholes meant. I have no evidence to support that opinion but selfishness was often a complaint I made against Frank myself.

[The Skipper 20,593]

I acknowledge that City, who initially used the term loan to describe the move, have stopped doing so and that it is reasonable for Choulo and others to read that as confirmation of their point of view.

On the question of Lamps status with Chelsea fans I'm not personally too bothered but I'm desperate that he should not be booed on 31st January. He is a legend of our club and if he should be booed it would send an appalling message about Chelsea fans. If people don't want to cheer him then fine but please no booing.

Personally I never believed Frank was as good a player as his reputation suggests and I never loved him the way most CFC fans do, or did anyway. I think that makes it easier for me not to be too angry with him now. When Scholes retired from international football the United man cited certain England players playing selfishly for themselves as one of his reasons for quiting. I always thought Frank was one of the people Scholes meant. I have no evidence to support that opinion but selfishness was often a complaint I made against Frank myself.

I'll hopefully be at that City game. I definitely won't boo him, but I doubt highly I'll be joining in with the Super Frank chants because frankly, I wasn't even that bothered about the loan initially but the fact that he tried to be cute with it and tried to dress it up as a loan from the MLS, when now reputable sources are claiming he actually just signed for City straight and that the NYCFC presentation was pretty much a facade... I'll just stay silent.

This guy was the biggest CFC hero by far, but IMO he's traded that away for some more time at the top. Worth it? I don't think so.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sjk6sa

So he deliberately signed for city.... all the new york deal was just a show?... great.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

So lamps just asked NY to Sign for them (verbal agreement), so chelsea fans will be ok with him, and just sign for city as a free agent for the whole season?...
and if something will go wrong he will use the clause to get out and still be ok with chelsea fans.

[OneMoSalah 8,609]

In all honesty loan deal or not who gives a fuck I've said it from day one he had the chance to go to Man City and he did. Our club's top scorer, a Chelsea legend, honestly why would you do that? Will Gerrard do it to Liverpool? No. Did Giggs and Scholes do it at United? No. Loyalty is a two way street. He wasn't a one club man obviously but still he tainted his legacy with that move in my eyes.

When City come to the Bridge, if fans want to boo him they have every right to in my opinion after him going to City on loan or even on some disguised permanent deal. If he isn't even on loan it is a very cowardly move on his behalf to 'pretend' to be on loan from one club to one of your former clubs direct competitors, to try and preserve a relationship with a fanbase or whatever. Absolutely pathetic and if people want to boo him for that then they should go ahead because its ridiculous but I'm sure some people on this forum will be annoyed for me even saying that and I'll be told to go and support some other team or something but it was Lampard who said yes to go to City, despite having been a Chelsea player for how ever many years and in reality had achieved ultimately everything here.

Should have taken a leaf out of Ashley Cole's book, who did it the right way in my eyes.

[SouthKorea 38]

I think the problem is that fans think that players think the same way as them....

[The Skipper 20,593]

I think the problem is that fans think that players think the same way as them....

I certainly don't think that, but Lampard knows he's carrying Chelsea's identity with him and that he's an absolute legend here. It's disrespectful to the club. Lampard is basically saying that he doesn't care about being one of the greatest players here and that his legacy here is minute to him.

[SouthKorea 38]

I certainly don't think that, but Lampard knows he's carrying Chelsea's identity with him and that he's an absolute legend here. It's disrespectful to the club. Lampard is basically saying that he doesn't care about being one of the greatest players here and that his legacy here is minute to him.

However, it wasnt lampard that gave himself that title... It was the fans..

Alot of players did the same across the years...

Ronaldo played for both milan teams, barca and real, a few brazilian teams as well.

Zlatan played for both milan teams and was willing to go to real madrid after barca.

Figo played for both real and barca.

Luis enrique played for both real and barca.

Landrup played for both real and barca.

Arsenal and everyone they lost...

And many more examples...

IMO, players dont care about stuff like that like fans do. They have a wife and kids, their own life to worry about.

[The Skipper 20,593]

However, it wasnt lampard that gave himself that title... It was the fans..

Alot of players did the same across the years...

Ronaldo played for both milan teams, barca and real, a few brazilian teams as well.

Zlatan played for both milan teams and was willing to go to real madrid after barca.

Figo played for both real and barca.

Luis enrique played for both real and barca.

Landrup played for both real and barca.

Arsenal and everyone they lost...

And many more examples...

IMO, players dont care about stuff like that like fans do. They have a wife and kids, their own life to worry about.

It's sad though. Lampard could've been known as the spearhead of the most successful CFC team ever (so far), and would've been spoken about for decades upon decades here as the man. He still will be spoken about but not in the same vigour.

Guess players like Lampard really do not care about that.