Frank Lampard's Sack Watch / Sacked

Status
Not open for further replies.
From day dot i think majority of us were blinded by sentiment re. Frank being manager and gave him a free pass whatever he did. Especially last season with the ban, which was acceptable.

But to me he just looks bereft of ideas. Standing there with arms folded for 90mins just tells me he isnt sure what to do... it sometimes feels like a case of "Heres the 11, heres where you are playing, crack on; lets hope something happens." and he has favourites, which is not good really. It's like surely he has watched Werner, & Havertz in Germany and worked out their best positions from that, or more pointedly, worked out what style of play really accomodates them. I mention those 2 because according to the Athletic our board are not happy with how they are performing under Frank. He sometimes seems to shoehorn them into the team where there is a gap, in order so Abraham can play, or Mount.

A plan B seems missing. We rarely change formation, and i think the only real change has made tactically is throwing another striker on. But thats not a plan B IMO... Much as i hate to say it the job is too big for him, but i wish for him to stay and learn to get out of this rut. But we are a club with an owner who wont let you learn on the job, and he has a lot to learn. Lampard needs to drop down the ladder, cut his teeth for a few years and them make his way back up. Because at Derby he only had about 50 games.

My other gripe is he has no one on the touchline with experience of this kinda scenario to lean on and get ideas from of what to do. Jody Morris is our current assistant, he needs demoting and a wise head brought in. We have the least experienced coaching team in the league i'd bet, it baffles feck out of me how anyone can think that isnt an issue
BIB:that was always a decision that was either going to be a stroke of genius or backfire spectacularly, unfortunately it's looking like the latter. The one thing I did think we were safe from with such a young modern coaching set up was dinosaur football, clearly not.

One thing I will say though is whatever happens now I do think appointing him was the right move. With the circumstances we faced with the transfer ban and losing our game changer we needed a man who would commit to a rebuild and would put the club before himself, one who would finally make use of our unbelievably good academy side (something we still need to consider as we have even more talent still to come through) and he's done that, apart from at LW we're stronger in every single position now compared to the team he inherited and that's largely down to him. He sadly doesn't look like the man that's going to get us back to the top himself, but he'd have played his part in getting us there and I hope that doesn't get lost because of how things look to be ending.
 
It's such an odd season I can see him getting a result and things suddenly improving, much like Arteta and Solskjaer.

I've always found Lampard a bit insufferable for some reason, I think it stems from him being an ungracious loser with a "we was robbed" head-shake demeanour on numerous occasions.
 
It's such an odd season I can see him getting a result and things suddenly improving, much like Arteta and Solskjaer.

I've always found Lampard a bit insufferable for some reason, I think it stems from him being an ungracious loser with a "we was robbed" head-shake demeanour on numerous occasions.

Champions league final, he claimed they were the better team.

It was a 50/50 game, it really pissed me off when he said it.
 
Champions league final, he claimed they were the better team.

It was a 50/50 game, it really pissed me off when he said it.

That was the worst one. It wasn't even 50/50 and his lucky goal came after we had battered them.
 
What is the structure like at Chelsea? I know that they used to operate with a Director of Football, or something similar. Is this no longer the case? I only ask because you'd think by having one in place, they would have a clear strategy on how their signings would slot in, rather than the persistent questions regarding Werner's and Havertz's best positions.
 
Lampard is a Chelsea legend and he should leave as one. It was a failed attempt and it will not tarnish his reputation at Chelsea.

What he done wrong was went to a club like Derby for a year to gain managerial experience. This is absolutely nowhere near the pressures and variety of opposition he will be expected to face in the hot seat of Chelsea.

Gerrard has someone who has done it right. He’s in a cauldron of pressure at one half of the Old Firm team. You are expected to win every game whilst also competing in Europe. This pressure is something Lampard didn’t have to face when at Derby and a year of experience was nowhere near long enough and he is so far out of his depth.
 
Lampard is a Chelsea legend and he should leave as one. It was a failed attempt and it will not tarnish his reputation at Chelsea.

What he done wrong was went to a club like Derby for a year to gain managerial experience. This is absolutely nowhere near the pressures and variety of opposition he will be expected to face in the hot seat of Chelsea.

Gerrard has someone who has done it right. He’s in a cauldron of pressure at one half of the Old Firm team. You are expected to win every game whilst also competing in Europe. This pressure is something Lampard didn’t have to face when at Derby and a year of experience was nowhere near long enough and he is so far out of his depth.

An interesting take. I see what you're saying regarding Gerrard and that's a very good point, but wouldn't the counter argument be that Ole only had experience from Molde and Cardiff, yet he seems to be making the step up at United, albeit slowly. If you accept that argument, shouldn't Lampard be given more time? Wouldn't any young manager struggle initially in a "top 6" hot seat?
 
It's such an odd season I can see him getting a result and things suddenly improving, much like Arteta and Solskjaer.

I've always found Lampard a bit insufferable for some reason, I think it stems from him being an ungracious loser with a "we was robbed" head-shake demeanour on numerous occasions.

I find him a generally inoffensive character.
He had that horrible 9/11 celebration, but a lot of youngsters can act idiotically when boozed up.

I never liked that he scored so many deflected goals then ran off as he'd hit a worldie.

And I always had a massive annoyance that some genuinely believe he could be put in the Scholes/Gerrard tier of midfielders. But that's not his fault. He's certainly never given any soundbites to suggest he belongs there.
 
Lampard is a Chelsea legend and he should leave as one. It was a failed attempt and it will not tarnish his reputation at Chelsea.

What he done wrong was went to a club like Derby for a year to gain managerial experience. This is absolutely nowhere near the pressures and variety of opposition he will be expected to face in the hot seat of Chelsea.

Gerrard has someone who has done it right. He’s in a cauldron of pressure at one half of the Old Firm team. You are expected to win every game whilst also competing in Europe. This pressure is something Lampard didn’t have to face when at Derby and a year of experience was nowhere near long enough and he is so far out of his depth.

I'm not sure Rangers is a "cauldron of pressure" bearing in mind it's a 2 horse league that no-one outside of Scotland gives a second glance at, and the absolutely worst position you'll come is 2nd.
Add to that he's come in at a time where Celtic have won the league every year in memory - he can't really fail. If he doesn't win the league he wasn't expected to because of their dominance. If he does win it he can take all that glory.

Lampard properly put his neck on the block and did brilliantly at Derby. The championship is seen as the most competitive league in the world and you can see from Derby's struggles since Frank went that he hardly picked a dominant club.
 
I find him a generally inoffensive character.
He had that horrible 9/11 celebration, but a lot of youngsters can act idiotically when boozed up.

I never liked that he scored so many deflected goals then ran off as he'd hit a worldie.

And I always had a massive annoyance that some genuinely believe he could be put in the Scholes/Gerrard tier of midfielders. But that's not his fault. He's certainly never given any soundbites to suggest he belongs there.
Surely Lampard was as good as Gerrard?
 
Surely Lampard was as good as Gerrard?

Not for me. Gerrard was always a step up from Lampard.
I know we like to play Gerrard down on this forum and I'll still always thinks Scholes was a better footballer than him - while Gerrard was clearly way more dynamic.

Lampard I'll always think was extremely fortunate to have a team built around his skillset. Never played in a midfield 2 and had some absolutely worldies in midfield doing the donkey work.
Scholes as a counter to the same "but he had great players round him" argument was still bossing the game as a 37/38 year old in a 2 man midfield when he returned.
 
Lampard properly put his neck on the block and did brilliantly at Derby. The championship is seen as the most competitive league in the world and you can see from Derby's struggles since Frank went that he hardly picked a dominant club.
They finished 6th the season before he was manager. They finished 6th with Lampard. And that was with his connections getting him valuable loan players. His predecessor is managing Milwall.
 
An interesting take. I see what you're saying regarding Gerrard and that's a very good point, but wouldn't the counter argument be that Ole only had experience from Molde and Cardiff, yet he seems to be making the step up at United, albeit slowly. If you accept that argument, shouldn't Lampard be given more time? Wouldn't any young manager struggle initially in a "top 6" hot seat?

I do appreciate the reply and counter argument but you must acknowledge that Ole has had almost 10 years of managerial experience though. Lampard was given the job on the back of an average performance at Derby. Their fans were not overly impressed and often commented on his game management which continues to cause concern. If Lampard was making silly mistakes here and there, I’d accept that, however he is making the same mistakes every week and he clearly has his favourites. It’s difficult to accept how poor we are. It’s like watching dinosaur football.

I'm not sure Rangers is a "cauldron of pressure" bearing in mind it's a 2 horse league that no-one outside of Scotland gives a second glance at, and the absolutely worst position you'll come is 2nd.
Add to that he's come in at a time where Celtic have won the league every year in memory - he can't really fail. If he doesn't win the league he wasn't expected to because of their dominance. If he does win it he can take all that glory.

Lampard properly put his neck on the block and did brilliantly at Derby. The championship is seen as the most competitive league in the world and you can see from Derby's struggles since Frank went that he hardly picked a dominant club.
You clearly have zero understanding of Scottish football. Second place is failure in the eyes of the Old Firm. To say he can’t fail is an outrageous statement as there were fans calling for his head after last season.

Lennon has just won a quadruple treble and completed 9 in a row and their fans are protesting to have him and the board sacked. No pressure? Give me a break. You can portray all the arrogance you want about other leagues but to belittle the amount of pressure is ridiculous.

Also, Lampard wasn’t outstanding at Derby. If you go back to their forum when he was leaving, you will find a lot of their fans were pleased about the change.
 
They finished 6th the season before he was manager. They finished 6th with Lampard. And that was with his connections getting him valuable loan players. His predecessor is managing Milwall.

Good point.
One game off reaching the premier league though.
So maybe not "brilliant" bit still a good job there. It's a very competitive league.
 
no-one outside of Scotland gives a second glance at

While that may be true, that doesn't mean it isn't a "cauldron of pressure" if you're in Scotland. I agree that the circumstances meant he'd either finish first or second, and wasn't expected to finish first, so it was a pretty nice set up for him. However, the pressure of managing an Old Firm club would still be huge, no matter what the circumstances.
 
It looks like Abramovich's trigger finger's getting itchy


They published that right on the final whistle, with the article pre-written in the hope Chelsea lost. Otherwise, they’d just have waited for the next time Chelsea lost. The Athletic know nothing.
 
He's crap. They'll get better if they keep backing him because they've spent a lot of money and brought in some very good players, some of whom are yong and lernin but they just have no creativity and spark in the centre of the park.

Why he would loan Barkley out without getting in another player who can play deeper and actually provide some element of creativity and goal threat I really can't understand. Kovacic and Jorginho are fine but they're just glorified water carriers if we're honest so why you'd let the one with a bit of talent leave and keep them I just can't fathom. Mount is another one who you can understand why coaches like - versatile, hard working, decent on set pieces, not afraid to get on the ball - but ultimately he's neither particularly talented nor experienced. And yet they're relying on him in most games to create, it's just not a good idea. They need to get as many of their talented players in the side as they can and rely on the likes of Thiago Silva and Kanté to do their jobs at the back.

Werner
Pulisic Ziyech Hudson-Odoi
Havertz Kanté
Chilwell Thiago Zouma James
Mendy

It's criminal that when you could put a team like that out they look dour and boring every week even in the last minutes against the crap teams that they should be getting after and forcing results.
 
Last edited:
Lampard is a Chelsea legend and he should leave as one. It was a failed attempt and it will not tarnish his reputation at Chelsea.

What he done wrong was went to a club like Derby for a year to gain managerial experience. This is absolutely nowhere near the pressures and variety of opposition he will be expected to face in the hot seat of Chelsea.

Gerrard has someone who has done it right. He’s in a cauldron of pressure at one half of the Old Firm team. You are expected to win every game whilst also competing in Europe. This pressure is something Lampard didn’t have to face when at Derby and a year of experience was nowhere near long enough and he is so far out of his depth.

There was nothing wrong with going to Derby to gain experience. Are you trying to say he should have gone straight into a top job.

If anything he would have been better served staying at Derby longer but when Chelsea came calling he could hardly turn them down.
 
He’s in an Arteta like rut at the moment. Needs to start making some ballsy decisions and tighten up his tactical work as at the moment it is lazy management and team selections.

Wouldn’t write him off just yet but he needs to realise his neck is on the line and he can’t just throw names on a team sheet and expect it to work - needs to think things through.

Playing unfit Ziyech in front of a defensive right back who will not overlap - tactical disaster - inverted winger always needs an attacking right back behind them. If James is out - play CHO instead.

Werner as a CF - hell no.

This is my worry with him. Hes not showing anything tactically and there seems to be no method to what he's doing.
 
They published that right on the final whistle, with the article pre-written in the hope Chelsea lost. Otherwise, they’d just have waited for the next time Chelsea lost. The Athletic know nothing.

'The Athletic' know nothing.

The whole organisation, who hoovered up a lot of the top UK soccer journalistic talent, know nothing, have no sources and make stuff up? Ok dude.
 
'The Athletic' know nothing.

The whole organisation, who hoovered up a lot of the top UK soccer journalistic talent, know nothing, have no sources and make stuff up? Ok dude.

It's pure speculation just vague enough that you can't dismiss it as complete horseshit.

They're reporting that Chelsea are considering sacking him, with no quotes whatsoever from anyone at Chelsea.
 
'The Athletic' know nothing.

The whole organisation, who hoovered up a lot of the top UK soccer journalistic talent, know nothing, have no sources and make stuff up? Ok dude.
The Athletic know jack shit. Couldn’t care less about the personnel working there. Why would clubs give information to journalists simply because they are well educated? As Duffer said, where are the quotes from Chelsea? What’s the proof? Last year, they even had the temerity to release an article that Pochettino lost the dressing room at Spurs. The players were unhappy that he became angrier and more disengaged with them apparently. Once again, no quotes, and since then, the players have all simply spoken about how much they love him. Did you not see the tributes pouring in from the squad as well after his sacking?

Let me repeat, the Athletic know nothing.
 
It's pure speculation just vague enough that you can't dismiss it as complete horseshit.

They're reporting that Chelsea are considering sacking him, with no quotes whatsoever from anyone at Chelsea.
They're not going to throw their sources under the bus though are they? It could well be bollox but like the poster said they have a pretty big network and a decent reputation, I wouldn't be surprised if they have a source in Chelsea (whether it's false info is another thing).
 
The Athletic know jack shit. Couldn’t care less about the personnel working there. Why would clubs give information to journalists simply because they are well educated? As Duffer said, where are the quotes from Chelsea? What’s the proof? Last year, they even had the temerity to release an article that Pochettino lost the dressing room at Spurs. The players were unhappy that he became angrier and more disengaged with them apparently. Once again, no quotes, and since then, the players have all simply spoken about how much they love him. Did you not see the tributes pouring in from the squad as well after his sacking?

Let me repeat, the Athletic know nothing.
Clubs leak info to journalists all the time, this isn't surprising at all.
 
The Athletic know jack shit. Couldn’t care less about the personnel working there. Why would clubs give information to journalists simply because they are well educated? As Duffer said, where are the quotes from Chelsea? What’s the proof? Last year, they even had the temerity to release an article that Pochettino lost the dressing room at Spurs. The players were unhappy that he became angrier and more disengaged with them apparently. Once again, no quotes, and since then, the players have all simply spoken about how much they love him. Did you not see the tributes pouring in from the squad as well after his sacking?

Let me repeat, the Athletic know nothing.
What do you want them to do? Give their sources away?
 
It's pure speculation just vague enough that you can't dismiss it as complete horseshit.

They're reporting that Chelsea are considering sacking him, with no quotes whatsoever from anyone at Chelsea.
The Athletic know jack shit. Couldn’t care less about the personnel working there. Why would clubs give information to journalists simply because they are well educated? As Duffer said, where are the quotes from Chelsea? What’s the proof? Last year, they even had the temerity to release an article that Pochettino lost the dressing room at Spurs. The players were unhappy that he became angrier and more disengaged with them apparently. Once again, no quotes, and since then, the players have all simply spoken about how much they love him. Did you not see the tributes pouring in from the squad as well after his sacking?

Let me repeat, the Athletic know nothing.


As if sources at a club are going to be quoted as saying they are looking at alternatives to their current manager.

Get a grip. Chelsea would be mad not to be looking at alternatives in case Frank can't turn it around.
 
They published that right on the final whistle, with the article pre-written in the hope Chelsea lost. Otherwise, they’d just have waited for the next time Chelsea lost. The Athletic know nothing.
Or they've been sitting on some info from a source that told them his job was under threat and would be even more so if they didn't win against City?
 
They're not going to throw their sources under the bus though are they? It could well be bollox but like the poster said they have a pretty big network and a decent reputation, I wouldn't be surprised if they have a source in Chelsea (whether it's false info is another thing).

Of course they get briefed all the time, it's just "Chelsea considering sacking Lampard" is a non-story.

There will be people at almost every club who consider replacing the head coach.

You don't think a conversation was had at some point at Stamford Bridge, Old Trafford and Arsenal about getting Poch in? It's not news, it's meaningless speculation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.