Player topic: Frank Lampard (2014/15)

[SWP's back]

Re: Frank Lampard

Remember they have three designated players, they can't be chopped and changed mid season. So if any designated player misses for three months they can't be replaced by a player of similar quality.

It's a salary capped league, designated players are one of the competitive advantages you have over everyone else.

Would we accept a key player of ours missing the first three months of next season to play in a New York title race?

I doubt it, and we are in the position where we could replace that player with quality for the three months.

If we had been bought by Madrid to save us from liquidation, then Madrid had bought us Xavi but needed him for three months then I'd have no qualms what so ever.

We are the parent club.

 

[Bill]

Re: Frank Lampard

to be fair to Frank if i was him i'd would have been long gone already.

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Re: Frank Lampard

OK, I’m obviously in a small minority, but I’m quite looking forward to the summer and coming home from the pub pissed and discovering that New York City are live on ESPN or BT Sport.

This doesn’t mean that I’ll support the Yankees. In contrast if you’re going down that route then every City fan should embrace the Chicago Cubs who’ve got far more in common with the old Typical City than any other sporting institution on Planet Earth.

Lampard has clouded the issue, mainly because nobody at City, (including virtually everybody on Bluemoon) realised just how good he actually was. Either way we’re only talking a few games in a long season.

New York City’s first game is in Orlando and unless we progress to the FA Cup Quarter Final we won’t even have a game that weekend. The two surrounding games are Leicester and Burnley so if we can’t win without Lampard then we won’t deserve to be champions.

The other games will take care of themselves. We might have a fixture pile-up, but then again we might not.
Lampard will still be at City when we go to Stamford Bridge and it's not as though he's starting every game. He's done brilliantly, but let's not over-egg his overall importance.

In the long term the progress of NYC, Melbourne City and Yokahama can only be a good thing.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Re: Frank Lampard

OK, I’m obviously in a small minority, but I’m quite looking forward to the summer and coming home from the pub pissed and discovering that New York City are live on ESPN or BT Sport.

This doesn’t mean that I’ll support the Yankees. In contrast if you’re going down that route then every City fan should embrace the Chicago Cubs who’ve got far more in common with the old Typical City than any other sporting institution on Planet Earth.

Lampard has clouded the issue, mainly because nobody at City, (including virtually everybody on Bluemoon) realised just how good he actually was. Either way we’re only talking a few games in a long season.

New York City’s first game is in Orlando and unless we progress to the FA Cup Quarter Final we won’t even have a game that weekend. The two surrounding games are Leicester and Burnley so if we can’t win without Lampard then we won’t deserve to be champions.

The other games will take care of themselves. We might have a fixture pile-up, but then again we might not.
Lampard will still be at City when we go to Stamford Bridge and it's not as though he's starting every game. He's done brilliantly, but let's not over-egg his overall importance.

In the long term the progress of NYC, Melbourne City and Yokahama can only be a good thing.

His importance is in his experience, & the fact he is a master of scoring key goals, hence we are 3 points behind Chelsea now, rather than six.

In a title challenge that can be the decider.

Will you back against him doing it again in the league or in Europe ?

I intend to watch as much of NYC as I can & hope they are eventually as important in their league as we are in ours, & have their own fans rather than a bunch of wankery bitter rags etc.

Those fuckers need to understand that this is part of CITY & if they don't want to be part of that, they should fuck off & support someone else.

 

[moomba]

Re: Frank Lampard

City winning the league would be better for the 'Group' though wouldn't it?

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Re: Frank Lampard

City winning the league would be better for the 'Group' though wouldn't it?

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

The Lampard who left Chelsea was a faded memory going to he states because that is his level.

The Lampard we are handing back to NYC has a rekindled fire & is a much different player.

 

[moomba]

Re: Frank Lampard

City winning the league would be better for the 'Group' though wouldn't it?

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

The Lampard who left Chelsea was a faded memory going to he states because that is his level.

The Lampard we are handing back to NYC has a rekindled fire & is a much different player.

He still doesnt guarantee us winning the league, or his absence guarantee us not winning.

Him missing the first three months of their season guarantees losing supporters, credibility and positive media coverage. It probably costs them points in their inaugural season.

I presume those who don't think NYCFC supporters should be upset about losing Lampard will happily accept it if the CFG decides he should be in New York for the start of their season.

 

[coleridge]

Re: Frank Lampard

City winning the league would be better for the 'Group' though wouldn't it?

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

The Lampard who left Chelsea was a faded memory going to he states because that is his level.

The Lampard we are handing back to NYC has a rekindled fire & is a much different player.

Shows what the club is doing right.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Frank Lampard

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

The Lampard who left Chelsea was a faded memory going to he states because that is his level.

The Lampard we are handing back to NYC has a rekindled fire & is a much different player.

He still doesnt guarantee us winning the league, or his absence guarantee us not winning.

Him missing the first three months of their season guarantees losing supporters, credibility and positive media coverage. It probably costs them points in their inaugural season.

I presume those who don't think NYCFC supporters should be upset about losing Lampard will happily accept it if the CFG decides he should be in New York for the start of their season.

Fuck them. And yes I would accept it but seeing as City and CFG are run by the same man, with the long term goal being the success of City, that will not happen. And hopefully then you'll give up whining seeing as you ignore all pertinent points and pose questions but then ignore it when posters rebut you in a way you hoped they wouldn't.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Re: Frank Lampard

I would have thought if Lampard was the difference between us winning the league and not we might have signed him permanently ourselves.

The Lampard who left Chelsea was a faded memory going to he states because that is his level.

The Lampard we are handing back to NYC has a rekindled fire & is a much different player.

He still doesnt guarantee us winning the league, or his absence guarantee us not winning.

Him missing the first three months of their season guarantees losing supporters, credibility and positive media coverage. It probably costs them points in their inaugural season.

I presume those who don't think NYCFC supporters should be upset about losing Lampard will happily accept it if the CFG decides he should be in New York for the start of their season.

If Pellegrini & Lampard are happy with that then yes.

If it's purely to pander to a bunch of whingearses because they are worried about upsetting them then no. It should be established that it is the CITY football group & rags etc are supporting a CITY team, not a random independant organisation.

We should build it up as a club which represents us in the states & help them as part of that group, not give rags & Arse fans somewhere to go for recreation whilst they slag us off.

Establish now that this club is part of City & City are part of them, not some isolated entity which we are financing out of charity.