Re: The EPL thread (I)

[holcs]

Crappy Lampard runs the show against one of the best defences in the league up until now. Just the 3 assists today was it? What a shit tip he is.

Funny how he comes back and Chelsea start winning again. Lampard bashers truly know nothing about football.

He does well in a good team. But rather like Cantona, he goes missing at the highest level.

I'll admit Chelseas results have improved since Lampards return, but I suspect Chelseas improvement has more to do with the return of the big lad upfront that scores goals and generally wreaks havoc everytime he plays.

Did you even watch the game? Admit it, you didn't did you? Did you see Lampard's pass for Drogba's first goal?

Lampard created 3 goals this week and 2 goals last week. You don't seem to be able to understand that without Lampard, the "big lad upfront" wouldn't be scoring the goals he does. Lampard has played 7 premiership matches this season. IN those games he has 3 goals, 5 assists. Second only to Fabregas (who has 5 goals and 6 assists but has played 3 extra games). And it's not even a rare occurrence. Lampard does it season in, season out. World mother focking class.

LLL, you can't be world class if you play for your country like a drunk amateur on a Sunday afternoon.

He maybe of the highest order when playing for Chelski in the Premieirship, however for England he has been nothing but very average at best.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

[holcs]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

His record stands up to most? What on goals scored agianst some p1ss-hole opposition only to disappear at the big finals time after time?

Name a tournament where he was anything othere than average on the whole?

He performs in the chamions league, so what? Its club football. Its not and will never be the ultimate pressure cooker that is international football in England, irrespective of the quality of the opposition.

[Guest]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

Lampard 2004-2005 was immense for England. It's his recent form which has let him down. And it's not just been for a few games either, it's been since the World Cup, he's been given so many chances to prove his critics wrong but he proves them right with every game he plays for England.

For me, it's not about whether he is world class or not, like you say the Champions League is probably of higher standard than the World Cup. It just seems that he doesn't give a shit when he puts on an England shirt these days, which is the only reason I dislike him. When he gets the ball for Chelsea I'm always thinking that he is going to either score or pull off a beautiful through ball but when he gets the ball for England there is a sense of inevitability that he will either dribble the ball straight into the opposition and get caught in possession, take a crap shot that gets deflected wide or make a poor pass that gets intercepted.

[Guest]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

Name a tournament where he was anything othere than average on the whole?

Umm, Euro 2004? You've made yourself sound a bit silly, he did use to be good for England.

[Merlin]

Lampard's okay but he lacks the vision and anticipation of Gerrard.
That's the difference between the two midfielders - which makes one genuine world class and the other a very competant club player.

Watching Gerrard in the game yesterday against Arsenal gave me, as a rampant Gooner, heart palpitations every time he was on the ball in the Arsenal half.
Gerrard CREATES and fashions play rather than just loitering around outside the box for a chance attempt at a smack at goal off a poor clearance ... as Limphard does.

Great game yeaterday BTW ... classic attacking football at both ends, both sides going for glory right to the end - 1-1 was a just result.

[holcs]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

Name a tournament where he was anything othere than average on the whole?

Umm, Euro 2004? You've made yourself sound a bit silly, he did use to be good for England.

Not really at all. I couldn't remember a international tournament when he was anything other average. Thanks for the info.

I'll take your word for it..

Used to be good? Thats ok then.

[Guest]

But that doesn't make any sense. Lampard was our top scorer in qualification for the World Cup. Without him, we wouldn't have been there. Yes, he had an average world cup but on the whole, the entire England team (Beckham and some of the defence apart) played like shite throughout the world cup.

His record as an English midfielder stands up to most.

And he performs in the Champions league which is probably at a slightly higher standard than the World Cup.

Anyway, these arguments have already been posted earlier in this thread. No-one rebutted them in any adequate sort of a way, instead, preferring to retreat to the limp wristed "it's my opinion and I have a right to it, despite having no empirical foundation from which to hold it".

Pointless.

Name a tournament where he was anything othere than average on the whole?

Umm, Euro 2004? You've made yourself sound a bit silly, he did use to be good for England.

Not really at all. I couldn't remember a international tournament when he was anything other average. Thanks for the info.

I'll take your word for it..

Used to be good? Thats ok then.

Don't get me wrong, I dislike him as much as the next man but credit where credit is due. I think he was our top scorer in that tournament and made the all star team at the end of it.

But yeah, pile of shite for the last couple of years.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

You don't know anything. Don't bother arguing.

Euro 2004. 3 goals in 4 matches. Tin pot teams? France, Portugal and Croatia. He was England's player of the tournament and one of the best players of any team of the tournament. Named in the Uero 2004 all star squad.

He then followed up Euro 2004 by top scoring in England's qualification for WC 2006 and being voted England fans player of the year in 2004 and 2005.

The Champions league isn't a pressure cooker. The Champions league isn't up to the standard of World Cups? Ok then. I can see that this conversation is going to be fruitful.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

Lampard's okay but he lacks the vision and anticipation of Gerrard.
That's the difference between the two midfielders - which makes one genuine world class and the other a very competant club player.

Watching Gerrard in the game yesterday against Arsenal gave me, as a rampant Gooner, heart palpitations every time he was on the ball in the Arsenal half.
Gerrard CREATES and fashions play rather than just loitering around outside the box for a chance attempt at a smack at goal off a poor clearance ... as Limphard does.

Great game yeaterday BTW ... classic attacking football at both ends, both sides going for glory right to the end - 1-1 was a just result.

You didn't watch Lampard at the weeked either. Lacks vision and anticipation! HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH! Sometimes I think you just randomly pick words out of the dictionary and force them into your sentences. It's hilarious.

[Guest]

You don't know anything. Don't bother arguing.

Euro 2004. 3 goals in 4 matches. Tin pot teams? France, Portugal and Croatia. He was England's player of the tournament and one of the best players of any team of the tournament. Named in the Uero 2004 all star squad.

He then followed up Euro 2004 by top scoring in England's qualification for WC 2006 and being voted England fans player of the year in 2004 and 2005.

The Champions league isn't a pressure cooker. The Champions league isn't up to the standard of World Cups? Ok then. I can see that this conversation is going to be fruitful.

But what about his England performances during the World Cup and in every game since then? I've already said that you can't fault the Lampard of 2004-2005 but does that mean he should automatically be picked on the hope that he will "come good" when he hasn't given any indication that he will for over a year now?

Great club player, but he either doesn't give a shit about England any more or he bottles it. I can't think of any other explanation. A poor run of form doesn't last for over a year, it lasts for a few games.

Please remember that I'm arguing purely on his international performances, in general I can't fault his play for Chelsea (even if he is a jammy bastard with the number of deflected goals he has).

[Lara Lara Laughs]

The post wasn't aimed at you. It was directed at holc, who can be so ridiculously dogmatic with his ill conceived opinions that it's just not funny.

Holc asked when he was good in a meaningful tournament. I answered. Like I said, nearly the entire team was poor in the world cup. We played uninspired, Beckham-dependent football, throughout. I don't see how that's Lampard's fault. Gerrard wasn't great. And let's not have the Gerrard can't play because of Lampard rubbish. Perhaps Lampard can't play because of Gerrard?

A poor run of form can last years. Anyhow, since the start of the world cup until now is only a handful of games. A number of those weren't particularly poor anyway. Brainless fans seem to scapegoat Lampard for any draw or defeat, regardless of whether it's his fault. Lampard plays ok, it's Lampard's fault. Lampard is underpar, it's just Lampard's fault, no-one elses. Rubbish and piffle I say. Crap and vomit and all things inbetween.

I don't see what he did wrong against Germany anyway but national hero Gareth Barry seems to be in vogue at the moment.

I appreciate that you actually know a thing or two about Lampard rather than blustering your way into an argument that you clearly know nothing about just because parts of the press and the English masses have a "Let's hate Frank Lampard" fetish.

And he's not a jammy bastard with deflections. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/martin_samuel/article2246555.ece

[Merlin]

You didn't watch Lampard at the weeked either. Lacks vision and anticipation! HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH! Sometimes I think you just randomly pick words out of the dictionary and force them into your sentences. It's hilarious.

I did.... though I am glad you are so easily amused.

One or two nice touches ... rest of the time running around like a headless chicken amidst all the other blue shirts, trying to look pretty creating havoc in a Man City defence that resembled a flock of recently castrated sheep.

But hey, don't let facts get in the way - or indeed try avoiding the point I was making.

I repeat ....
Limphard is an extremely good and competant CLUB player.
Gerrard however, is world class.... his play against an Arsenal team in full flow (unlike ManCity) yesterday is testament to the many facets of his game.

Now do please confirm that you have fully understood the words I have chiselled together from my latest coy of Websters?

[Lara Lara Laughs]

Albus, you're unbelievable. Really, you are.

I don't believe that you watched it. You either

a)didn't watch it or

b)you watched it and know nothing about football or

c) you watched it whilst cleaning/cooking/jacking off/other and didn't watch it properly or

d) you have eyesight problems (hmmm jacking off, a hypothesis is starting to form) or

e) you're hopelessly biased and like arguing or

f) a little from the lot.

Don't let facts get in the way. Classic.

[Brass Monkey]

Um, Lampard was sh!t hot in Euro 2004... not two ways about. He was pretty damn good up until late '05/early '06.

[Guest]

I'm not suggesting that the majority of his goals are deflections as that would be ludicrous, but you have to admit he seems to score more deflected goals than most other players. Not that it should count against him, just an observation.

With regards to his England performances, it's not that he has been our worst player it's just that he is capable of so much more and to see him not fulfilling his potential time after time is excruciatingly painful. Gerrard is the same but to a lesser extent.

My hope is that England don't qualify for the Euros then get Mourinho to take charge. I think he would be attracted to the job, it's the biggest challenge in football which I think he would relish and he'd be re-united with a lot of Chelsea players. He would probably get the best out of Lampard as well.

I know it sounds ridiculous not wanting to qualify for a tournament but I'd rather not qualify this time and be in great shape for the big one in 2010 than have the inevitable stumbling through the group games and then getting knocked out in the quarter finals.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

Found it!

http://football2u.blogspot.com/

Scroll down to the Chelsea match and watch Drogba's goal. I implore someone to tell me the pass from Lampard wasn't world class. It's quite a useful example of class actually because there can be no argument that it was a fluke or a deflection or a result of his really really good team mates or playing at a rich club or any other pathetic, shit coated, excuse.

Seriously, it's like sexual healing. Ronaldinho or Zidane couldn't have played it better.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

I'm not suggesting that the majority of his goals are deflections as that would be ludicrous, but you have to admit he seems to score more deflected goals than most other players. Not that it should count against him, just an observation.

With regards to his England performances, it's not that he has been our worst player it's just that he is capable of so much more and to see him not fulfilling his potential time after time is excruciatingly painful. Gerrard is the same but to a lesser extent.

My hope is that England don't qualify for the Euros then get Mourinho to take charge. I think he would be attracted to the job, it's the biggest challenge in football which I think he would relish and he'd be re-united with a lot of Chelsea players. He would probably get the best out of Lampard as well.

I know it sounds ridiculous not wanting to qualify for a tournament but I'd rather not qualify this time and be in great shape for the big one in 2010 than have the inevitable stumbling through the group games and then getting knocked out in the quarter finals.

Apparently, because this was such a oft-stated opinion, two Guardian statos researched it and up to the start of this season, 6 of Lampard's 90 odd goals for Chelsea have come from deflections.

There's no need to hope we don't qualify. We're pretty much guaranteed not to. Unless something extraordinary happens to the Russians in Israel. The soviets will be so fired up that it is highly unlikely.

[Makaveli]

Found it!

http://football2u.blogspot.com/

Scroll down to the Chelsea match and watch Drogba's goal. I implore someone to tell me the pass from Lampard wasn't world class. It's quite a useful example of class actually because there can be no argument that it was a fluke or a deflection or a result of his really really good team mates or playing at a rich club or any other pathetic, shit coated, excuse.

Seriously, it's like sexual healing. Ronaldinho or Zidane couldn't have played it better.

Nani's strike the other day was world class too, does that make him a world class player?

And please don't put Lampard in the same sentence as Zidane.

[Guest]

I think I just found the article:

http://football.guardian.co.uk/theknowledge/story/0,,1924393,00.html

But we have done the necessary on Lampard's five-and-a-bit years at Stamford Bridge, and are surprised - and disappointed - to report that only six of his 73 goals for Chelsea have been deflected: a miserable 8%. If you take away penalties, that rises to just under 10% (six out of 62). Either way, it would seem that Lampard's deflected glory is not as great as the nation's many Frankophobes would have you believe. Still, he's getting better: none of the deflections came in his first two seasons at Stamford Bridge.

I think the text in bold indicates why he has that reputation, looks like he's scored all six of these relatively recently.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

Huh? What kind of an argument is that? Lampard consistently performs at that level. Nani doesn't. Lampard has played at that level for the last 4 or 5 seasons. Nani hasn't. Lampard has performed at International and club level, Nani hasn't. Lampard is currently 5 times the player that Nani is. Err....Nani isn't.


Why not? Could Zidane have passed the ball any better than that? I don't think so. I hate it when people orgasm over Zidane and the like but when an English player does something of equal ability they have a good cry.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

I think I just found the article:

http://football.guardian.co.uk/theknowledge/story/0,,1924393,00.html

But we have done the necessary on Lampard's five-and-a-bit years at Stamford Bridge, and are surprised - and disappointed - to report that only six of his 73 goals for Chelsea have been deflected: a miserable 8%. If you take away penalties, that rises to just under 10% (six out of 62). Either way, it would seem that Lampard's deflected glory is not as great as the nation's many Frankophobes would have you believe. Still, he's getting better: none of the deflections came in his first two seasons at Stamford Bridge.

I think the text in bold indicates why he has that reputation, looks like he's scored all six of these relatively recently.

Aye. But a tiny percentage nonetheless.

Earlier in the thread some mullet wearing, crazy man, tried to argue that the Guardian were unreliable and untrustworthy rather than just admitting he was wrong.

[Makaveli]

Huh? What kind of an argument is that? Lampard consistently performs at that level. Nani doesn't. Lampard has played at that level for the last 4 or 5 seasons. Nani hasn't. Lampard has performed at International and club level, Nani hasn't. Lampard is currently 5 times the player that Nani is. Err....Nani isn't.


Why not? Could Zidane have passed the ball any better than that? I don't think so. I hate it when people orgasm over Zidane and the like but when an English player does something of equal ability they have a good cry.

Ha your funny man, that Nani example was just in response to you saying that one pass proves a player is world class.

Reason why people cream over Zidane is because of what he has achieved, instrumental in world cup/CL/domestic league titles for his teams, he even made the Brazilians look silly in the last WC.

Lampard can only dream of being half the player he was, i could never imagine Lampard doing what Zidane did to Eng in the last 2 minutes in Euro 04 and no Lampard is not a proven international player.

And people do give English players recognition, Rooney, Gerrard, Owen etc get plenty of plaudits.

[Lara Lara Laughs]

Huh? What kind of an argument is that? Lampard consistently performs at that level. Nani doesn't. Lampard has played at that level for the last 4 or 5 seasons. Nani hasn't. Lampard has performed at International and club level, Nani hasn't. Lampard is currently 5 times the player that Nani is. Err....Nani isn't.


Why not? Could Zidane have passed the ball any better than that? I don't think so. I hate it when people orgasm over Zidane and the like but when an English player does something of equal ability they have a good cry.

Ha your funny man, that Nani example was just in response to you saying that one pass proves a player is world class.

Reason why people cream over Zidane is because of what he has achieved, instrumental in world cup/CL/domestic league titles for his teams, he even made the Brazilians look silly in the last WC.

Lampard can only dream of being half the player he was, i could never imagine Lampard doing what Zidane did to Eng in the last 2 minutes in Euro 04 and no Lampard is not a proven international player.

And people do give English players recognition, Rooney, Gerrard, Owen etc get plenty of plaudits.

Huh. I didn't make that argument at all. I said that the pass was world class. It was quite obviously an example of his class rather than conclusive evidence.

Huh? I didn't make the argument that Lampard was as good as Zidane or even "half the player*". I said that the pass at the weekend was as good as anything that Zidane could have produced. And it was. Just because Zidane was a great player and made the Brazilians look silly, doesn't mean that others can't match him, if only for a moment.

And I think you'll find that Lampard is a proven international player. There's enough evidence on this thread alone to prove that.


*He clearly is much more than "half the player" that Zidane was. Ridiculous romanticism.

[Guest]

I think I just found the article:

http://football.guardian.co.uk/theknowledge/story/0,,1924393,00.html

But we have done the necessary on Lampard's five-and-a-bit years at Stamford Bridge, and are surprised - and disappointed - to report that only six of his 73 goals for Chelsea have been deflected: a miserable 8%. If you take away penalties, that rises to just under 10% (six out of 62). Either way, it would seem that Lampard's deflected glory is not as great as the nation's many Frankophobes would have you believe. Still, he's getting better: none of the deflections came in his first two seasons at Stamford Bridge.

I think the text in bold indicates why he has that reputation, looks like he's scored all six of these relatively recently.

Aye. But a tiny percentage nonetheless.

Well, 10% of goals from open play is still probably more than most players, but yeah it is smaller than I thought it would be. I would guess that he scored 3 or 4 of them in fairly quick succession and from then on even if he's only scored one a season it reinforces the belief that he gets a lot of deflected goals.

I'm admitting I'm wrong by the way, I'm just intrigued as to how his reputation came about because even before it was widespread I've thought him to get more than his fair share of deflections.

[Sponsored content]