News: Source: Frank Lampard will play for the Los Angeles Galaxy

How does that make him a starter ?

Chelsea has played more games than that this year.

Mikel, Ramires, and Oscar all have more starts than him this year in the MID.


How many of those goals of his aren't PK's ? And, IS he in the top 10 ?

Alan Gordon scored nice tally last year ... I wouldn't put him in the top 10 FWD players in the MLS. Stats are funny like that.

 

How does starting make him a starter? I don't understand the question.

He has been hurt a lot this year but when healthy has has been a starter pretty consistently.

 

Other people would put him in that category, though.

And Gordon did get called to important US WCQ's last fall, so he's certainly not some bum.

Regardless if Gordon or Lampard are "top" or "top10" (or not) talents in their respective positions and within their respective leagues (or team, even), there certainly aren't a lot of reasons why clubs/owners and fans alike wouldn't want (and benefit from) each player in MLS.

 

No, starting a string of 5 games doesn't make you a starter. Do you understand that ?

You can make whatever excuses for it, or paint it however you want to but the fact is that he's not been a primary starter for Chelsea in the midfield up to this point in the season. That's a fact.

That's sad.

 

hmmm....

 

When he has been healthy he has been a first choice starter. I will leave it at that. No different than Wayne Rooney this season who has started less games than normal because he has been hurt.

 

There's also the part where Lampard is the team captain. He's got 8 goals in 15 matches this year and he's the captain of the defending Championship League winners. To say he's not a starter is just stupid.

 

Him being vice captain of the club, his goal total, and Chelsea winning the CL last year have dick all to do with the fact that in a system that is a 4=3=3 or 4=2=4 set up, he's FOURTH on the list in midfield starts.

To say he's a starter is pretty dumb, at this point. By year's end if he stays healthy, yeah he probably will be one of the regular starters. As it stands there are THREE PEOPLE that start more than he does at his position.

I guess facts are stupid now.

That's great. Has he been healthy all year ? No you say ? So then he's not been the first choice starter all year then has he ? No.

It doesn't matter if you're injured, suck, or whatever. If you aren't playing and starting more than the other people at the position you aren't starting, are you ?

 

He's been INJURED. How are you too stupid to understand that? When healthy, he's a STARTER and still one of the best in the BPL.

 

I'm not the one that has to talk about 3 things that don't matter to the point and then have to try and justify what I'm saying. I'm also not the one that has to say he's something he's not.

Starters start. He's done so less than 3 other players at his position this year. Chelsea doesn't play 4 guys at his spot to start each match.

Injured = not playing. Can't start if you don't play, can you ?

Why is that hard for you ?

He may be a first choice player for them when available, but that's not what I'm saying/debating.

 

Well, have you watched French existentialist cinema?

Why is it so hard and people don't understand it? Because it makes no ********ing sense is why it's 'hard' and people 'don't understand it.'



This thing you're calling a starter, I just don't understand.

 

Alas, I don't have time for effective clean up tonight. A mess for the time being it will stay. But perhaps folks can discuss the move on its merits: will Lampard be a useful player for the Galaxy, at a DP salary, or not? He'll start here is, I think, a good place to begin (good grief, I almost wrote "to start" but then where would we be?).

 

I'm not going to wade too far into this debate, but I wanted to ask you something. Since Obi Mikel is gone to play in the African Cup of Nations and can't start for Chelsea now, does that mean he isn't a starter? If Yaya Toure misses the next month playing in that same tournament does that mean he isn't a starter? I understand your point (even if I don't agree with it) about him not being a starter, but this argument you made here makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

Yes, IMO.

 

This is incredibly obtuse.

You instigated this discussion by insisting that Lampard is "not a starter" in response to a claim that he is a "premier midfielder" in the EPL. You've now defined the meaning of "not a starter" so narrowly that it is an utterly pointless piece of trivia that doesn't actually say anything about whether he is a "premier midfielder."

Are you trying to argue, somehow, that being unavailable for some matches -- for injury, nat call-ups, whatever -- means that a soccer player cannot be a premier midfielder, even though when he is available, he is a first choice player? That seems unfathomable, but such a ludicrous argument is the only way in which to make sense of your comments.

I realize that I'm piling on, but given the yawning gap between the tone of your comments and their substantive merit, I think you deserve it.

 

I never insinuated anything different. I made a tongue in cheek comment about him starting this year. TJG lumped in his "merits" to try and explain why he was a starter.

Narrow ?

What's narrow about using the actual definition of the term that I used ?

A starter is a reference to an individual who is in the starting lineup. Frank Lampard (through various devices this year) has not been a regular starter for Chelsea this year at his position. He's 4th on that list as it stands right now.

How is that narrow ?

Wait what ? The tone of my comments ? Have you not read TJG's posts ?

Then it would appear you also have your answer then ... difference between not playing, and playing for a NT yeah ?

 

As an English Chelsea supporter I would just like to say that EVERY Chelsea supporter in the UK is desperate for him to stay another season, he is historically AND currently the best midfielder in the Chelsea team and one of the VERY best midfielders over the last 7-8 seasons, there is nobody in Europe in his position with a scoring record that even comes close to his. Believe me he is a starter, the only games he missed were when he was injured and perhaps you might like to compare the teams record with him playing against the teams record with him missing due to his injury - that will tell you all you need to know! If he goes accross the pond to you guys we (Chelsea fans) will miss him immensely he may have lost a yard or two of pace but his positioning and reading of the game is stupendous, believe me he is still VERY worth taking on!! Abramovich is a complete mug for letting him go!

 

Oy vay.

I'm well aware of who he is/was. It all has nothing to do with the comments I've made. In terms of him being a starter, it's in reference to this year which I've stated more than once.

Yes, he scores a good number of goals from the midfield .. but he also takes the PKs the majority of the time. That helps substantially. I'm actually curious about your purported scoring status for him, at his position in regards to all of Europe. Do you have anything for it ? I'm actually genuinely curious for that as I know he puts in a good amount of goals for his spot but I wasn't aware it was that many in comparison to everyone at his position in European soccer. I'm also curious about how you'd categorize some of the players in Europe and whether or not they'd be on that list.

That said, none of that really has to do with what I was saying. I'd love to have Lampard here as well, if nothing more than for the PK arguments between Donovan.

 

Agree with this.

And perhaps there is also something to be said for a 35-y.o. player (come June) perhaps preferring the change of scenery/pace that comes with a move to LA (relative to what he'd have to endure by staying in London).

 

Well Ive found this for starters http://www.sport.co.uk/football/chelseas-frank-lampard-is-the-greatest-midfielder-of-his-ge/3665837

 

Thanks for that. Very good perspective.

I'm curious though what it'd be like without this qualifier from the author of the article:
"The stats below show the career appearances, goals and assists chart from who I believe are the five greatest midfielders of this generation."

The point is clearly put out there and I'm not denying anything. I'd just like to see a more comprehensive list with guys like Zidane, 'Dino, and Rivaldo, just to name a few. Still, I had no idea his total was that high.

I did some looking into his PK tally, as everyone bashes him for it, and found this: http://www.thechels.co.uk/2149-frank-lampard-and-the-art-of-the-penalty-kick/

Coming into this season that puts 52 of his 126 (41%) Premier League goals as PKs. That's pretty striking actually.

Interesting information.

 

I did some looking into his PK tally, as everyone bashes him for it, and found this: http://www.thechels.co.uk/2149-frank-lampard-and-the-art-of-the-penalty-kick/

Coming into this season that puts 52 of his 126 (41%) Premier League goals as PKs. That's pretty striking actually.

Interesting information.[/quote]
So because he's damn near automatic from the pk spot his goals don't deserve any merit? Trust me i've seen countless games where a championship is on the line in a pk situation and people miss..A LOT. Your argument about him starting and whatnot is extremely annoying since he's been returning from injury. And you even agree that he's a first choice when healthy...therefore your argument is without any merit whatsoever... what is your goal here? do you hate chelsea or the mls or both? because all but maybe 10 clubs in the entire world would pass on Lampard right now