In the centre we lack steel which is one of the reasons we are conceding so many goals. Lampard won't change that.
Frank Lampard
- Thread starter green_day
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
The cost would be in the squad place we'd have to lose. Remember we can only have 25 outfield players over 21 in our PL and CL squads and I'm pretty sure we are at that limit now, with maybe one extra space. Add Lampard and either someone else has to go or we can't bring anyone else in, and Lampard is not sufficiently better than any of our current midfielders to justify changing things up or losing the space. If we're going to ditch someone we should go for an obviously superior replacement.
The only ones he could replace would be Scholes or Giggs, which would just be like for like - old immobile players who don't dominate the game and have to be carried by the rest of the team. Lampard doesn't really add that much of a spark to Chelsea, he increasingly just hovers around the box making the final ball or picking up scraps - not what you need if you seriously want to challenge for the title.
Ive often seen Lampard dominate a midfield and thought "That's just what we need!"
His ability to tackle and sheer physical presence, almost "steel" like, often win games for Chelsea single handedly. The way he then uses the ball to craft passes of such sublime vision, like some kind of "creative spark", is a joy to behold.
WARNING the above post may contain trace amounts of sarcasm.
I think he'd be useful, and I wasn't insinuating he'd give us steel, just pointing out we haven't had any steel for years..
I think he'd be useful, and I wasn't insinuating he'd give us steel, just pointing out we haven't had any steel for years..
a bit like when Henrik Larsson was with us.
I think he'd be useful, and I wasn't insinuating he'd give us steel, just pointing out we haven't had any steel for years..
I think he'd be a complete waste of a squad space, not to mention oxygen.
The United bench is far to good for him and he'd even struggle to make that when we have Kagawa, Cleverly, Anderson, Carrick, Fletcher, Giggs, Scholes, Powell all vying for CM and all but Powell offer far more than Fat "stroll around the centre doing nothing" Frank can.
I would think of a comeback but I don't actually know who plays for Arsenal these days.
That's what happens when you're a feeder club, by the time a player is famous enough for me to know you sell him.
Seriously who do arsenal have in the middle? I cba to google it.
There's that overrated English kid who's injured a lot, that overrated Welsh kid who's even more crocked.... and thats it, thats all I know about Arsneal's midfield.
How Ramsey gets into a "top 4" side week in and out is beyond me, thats one player i'm sure they will be able to keep hold of!
ramsey>Cleverly
Cazorla>Nani and Young
Wilshire>Scholes
Diaby>Carrick
Rosicky>Giggs
RVP > Giroud.
Though I agree Lampard wouldn't be useful to your team, it's laughable how deluded and biased you are towards his obvious talent and ability. Wouldn't take any of your midfielders over Lampard, and I doubt many others would either.
To strengthen your midfield, maybe someone like Tiote? You definitely want someone who's going to force his way into a game and make his presence in midfield unavoidable (admittedly not Lampard's natural strength). Fellaini?
What talent and ability is that?
It's sure as hell not his passing, his range is pathetic and limited to 10 yard easy passes with the occasional through ball. Even at 60 kicking the ball round with his grand kids Scholes will have more ability than Frank did in his "prime".
He's not much of a tackler either, just galumphs round midfield aimlessly.
Lampard has made a career from hanging round 30 yards out and occasional deflecting one in, oh and taking penalties to pad out his goalscoring stats. He sucked for England not because of Gerrard, who is a far better player (I can see that despite my anti Liverpool bias), but because fatty frank doesn't have the ability to play in a 2 man midfield. He needs two men to carry him so he can wander round aimlessly trying to bang in a few screamers.
Why do you follow a sport that you clearly have no ability to draw accurate conclusions from? Lampard is Chelsea, so you think he's crap, only logic behind your reasoning.
ramsey>Cleverly
Cazorla>Nani and Young
Wilshire>Scholes
Diaby>Carrick
Rosicky>Giggs
And yet this is the worst Arsenal team in nearly 20 years. Funny old game.
Not really. Id say JT is more "Chelsea" than frank and I can admit JT was a formidable defender in his day, not now though. I can also see what Gerrard brings to LFC despite disliking everything about him.
Fatty Frank is one trick pony (shooting) and even then he's not all that accurate.
Im still waiting for someone to tell me what he does that makes him so great when he can't pass, tackle, control a match, dribble, beat a man using pace...