Re: So what is the Lampard situation?

by jibers Sun Jan 04, 2015 12:10 pm

urbaNRoots wrote:As far as I know Lampard refused to take a pay cut which apparently is a club policy for players over 30. Not saying he did wrong not to take the offer but Chelsea did offer him a contract to stay after all and he decided he's better off at City. John Terry on the other hand took the offer to cut his wages and he's still at Chelsea.

That's fair enough to Lampard. Football is a job no matter how glamorised the media try to make it out to be. Why should he cut his wages? People take these things to seriously. I don't care about any player. They answer to #1 which is themselves.

by Abramovich Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:34 pm

Ruined his legacy here especially when City win the title. He's already won them 9 points and taken 2 off us, I wouldn't have minded if he stayed until Feb or whenever he was supposed to go but all these lies and deception guy can gtfo.

Ego is too big wants to get one back over us for letting him go, no so called legend would ever do that.

I didn't see Becks playing for Arsenal when he was training with them, Lamps will be remembered for all the good things he's done but he's tarnished his legacy now in my eyes.

by MaraVilla Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:38 pm

ruined legacy Laughing

by Abramovich Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:21 pm

Well ruined is probably only the top Laughing

Tarnished

by El Gunner Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:07 pm

loooooool Lord help these despondent Chelsea souls.

Move on ffs.

by Lord Spencer Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:53 pm

Chelsea threw Lamps out, and now they are paying for it.

Similar to the Pirlo situation, with the exception that Milan fans apparently (at least here) have much more perspective.

by fatman123 Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:36 am

Loyalty goes both ways. United offered Neville, Giggs and scholes and an unlimited number of contract extensions, even when they weren't good enough for united, Chelsea would never do the same

by Doc Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:53 pm

The non story that Nasir mentioned is looking very much like an actual story.

http://www.espnfc.com/barclays-premier-league/story/2233481/premier-league-probes-frank-lampard-dealfinds-no-agreement-to-join-nycfc

by Red Alert Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:40 am

The MLS is saying Lampard is under contract with "CFG". "CFG" is not a club.

Which would mean Lampard is under third party right? Which means City gets docked points?

by Kick Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:53 am

Potentially.

I can't see City making a mistake like that, but we shall see.

Either NYCFC will lose a lot of fans due the situation or City will get punished.

by Doc Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:16 am

"The Premier League has sought and received assurances from Manchester City that there is no agreement in place between the club or City Football Group with New York City FC relating to the player."

Major League Soccer commissioner Don Garber told Sports Illustrated earlier this week that when Lampard's move to NYCFC was initially announced, the player actually agreed not with the new club but with the City Football Group, a worldwide company run by owner Sheikh Mansour that owns both clubs and Australia's Melbourne City.

Two very contradicting statements. I do hope this doesn't just blow over. I know the English FA (or whoever) would want to "protect" it's reputation and interests but at the same time, this smells awfully like 3rd party ownership.

by Kick Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:21 am

It does. Either way, City are going to have a mob of angry fans on their hands.

by junkyard Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:16 am

Lampard and co lied to both Chelsea and NYCFC fans. Disgraceful act from a PROFESSIONAL.

by mr-r34 Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:37 am

What constitutes a 3rd party agreement?

by Kick Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:39 am

If he is contracted by any organisation which is not a domestic or oversea's football club.

by CBarca Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:18 am

If I recall correctly, I remember at times City saying they were trying to "model Barca" in some areas. I cba to find a particular source, but it seems to be in my memory. Probably something to do with Txiki.

After this whole fiasco and it smelling very fishy, I finally know what they mean.

by junkyard Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:30 pm

CBarca wrote:If I recall correctly, I remember at times City saying they were trying to "model Barca" in some areas. I cba to find a particular source, but it seems to be in my memory. Probably something to do with Txiki.

After this whole fiasco and it smelling very fishy, I finally know what they mean.

by Guest Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:21 pm

He's going to be booed at the end of the month. Called it now.

by mr-r34 Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:28 pm

Spoiler:

https://www.facebook.com/franklampard?fref=nf

It's verified so i think this is his statement on all of this.

by Abramovich Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:37 pm

He got busted and now he's trying to make ammends.

Either way *bleep* him can't be bothered with all this anymore.

by Guest Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:44 pm

mr-r34 wrote:
Spoiler:

https://www.facebook.com/franklampard?fref=nf

It's verified so i think this is his statement on all of this.

Straight from the chains of judecca.

by S Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:45 pm

Forza Lampard !!

by Guest Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:49 pm

Abramovich wrote:He got busted and now he's trying to make ammends.

Either way *bleep* him can't be bothered with all this anymore.

That is who Lampard is. He only cares about himself, and now it is on the road to show. The media narrative for well over a decade is how smart he is, but we all saw how smart he is now that it has come down around him. Public school chums, and the PR campaign won't protect him from the boos coming to the bridge. I pray to buddha that Mourinho starts Schürrle that day too. That will really anger the bridge.

The man with no heart(Oscar),the judas, and the absolute clown all on show as 1 goes against 2.

by Art Morte Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:27 pm

This new info, that Man City have admitted that their original "Lampard is on loan at City from NYC FC" statement was false, paints this whole thing in a bit uglier light than what I first thought. Makes it look like City and especially Lampard were keen to give the impression that Lampard didn't join City, that they were just his "secondary" team, although now they've admitted Lampard never signed a playing contract with New York City, so his only contract has all this time been just with Manchester City.

by LeSwagg James Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:47 pm

This saga

by Kick Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:18 pm

Something is fishy here. Lampard says he signed for NYCFC while City are saying the opposite.

by Sponsored content