Actually I think Fernando is back up to yaya and fernandinho. The formation you suggest seems like more of a cautious/big game set up. Can't see them changing from using aguero just off negredo or dzeko
Frank Lampard to NYC FC
- Thread starter RDCR07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
Actually I think Fernando is back up to yaya and fernandinho. The formation you suggest seems like more of a cautious/big game set up. Can't see them changing from using aguero just off negredo or dzeko
Like Rio in a QPR shirt ,it doesn't look right.
Their central midfield has nice depth now with Toure, Fernandinho, Lampard, Garcia and Fernando.
Its just...weird.Like Rio in a QPR shirt ,it doesn't look right.
I wonder if the boos will rain on him from the Chelsea supporters if he shows himself on the pitch on September 21st or respecially on January 31st (at Stamford Bridge).
This move is such a total joke as a whole.
This move is such a total joke as a whole.
Can't see him getting booed at Chelsea. And why is the move a total joke?
We'll see about that. I said the move is a joke for a few reasons: 1) he's supposed to be a NYC FC player who joins the expansion club next season, 2) it's the whole associate team thing between NYC and City that makes most of the joke here, and 3) there have been heated confrontations between City and Chelsea in recent years. If Arsenal fans think RVP signing to us was bad, think how Chelsea fans see this with Lampard; it's a ploy to disguise a move straight to City for 6 months.
Last edited:
Chelsea fans are probably stupid enough to boo their highest ever goalscorer. He is a Chelsea legend. This move to City is odd imo. I think Frank wanted the move to NYC but has to go through this stage at Man City. I don't believe there is a ploy behind it.
His new club's season isn't till 2015, which means he needs to be match fit till then.
1. Exactly. He joins the club next season. He has to train and play elsewhere for 6 months. He had a choice of the Australian league with Melbourne City or stay in England with a top team in the Champions League, providing a more competitive environment and saving his family the upheaval of settling in Australia only to then settle again in New York.
2. NYCFC is not a club set up to help Man City. The Lampard deal is a one off as NYCFC are not yet up and running. It will never be repeated. NYCFC won't allow it and the MLS won't either.
3. City and Chelsea are title rivals but barring that there is no particular animosity between the two clubs other than the usual between competing clubs. And what, do you really think NYCFC was established as some ploy so City could sign Lampard for 6 months?
Chelsea fans shouldnt be looking at Lampard but at their board. Its not Lampard's fault he is not in Chelsea. He is a legend and they didn't want to extend his contract. Hence he had to move. Its a totally different situation with RVP. Lampard didn't come out and say he wanted to move.
Looks like a very good deal for City so far. Looked like his legs had gone for Chelsea and England the last couple of years, but by playing him almost as a second striker he doesn't need to use them very much.
Aye, I've been surprised at how good he has been. I honestly thought he was done at this level.
If he fires them to the title it will serve the board right.
Seeing what he still has to offer and considering his loyalty to Chelsea, it's mad that he didn't get a new deal. I thought he with finish his career there for sure.
I'm sure he would have stayed given the chance but Chelsea seem to be taking FFP seriously than other "sugar daddy" clubs and £150K a week for a back-up player was a no-no.
I doubt Lampard at 36 would of demanded a new 1year £150k a week deal, I think he would have settled for 60k a week which is probably his wages at City. Chelsea could have easily afforded that without breaching ffp.
He's on more than £150K now. His salary increased after leaving Chelsea.
According to this he's on £90k at City.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...want-him-any-more-says-Manuel-Pellegrini.html
The Guardian said he was on "similar to the £150K he earned at Chelsea" but I guess they don't know the facts any more than the Telegraph does.
Either way, it's more than chelsea wanted to pay for someone who was not in the first team plans and, although I'd let Frank Lampard marry any of my sisters, I understand the clubs decision.