Frank Lampard Starting Today .....
- Thread starter Kevin
- Start date
N
Nicholas Constantino
Guest
He really helped City challenge for the title and conquer Europe.
If it wasn't for him they wouldn't have possible won 2nd or 3rd place in the EPL and lose in the round of 16 in the UEFA championship league.
Ferdinand Cesarano
Registered
If Man City come in fourth by one point or third by one point, then every result will have mattered. In that case, the point that Lampard salvaged for them with his late goal versus Chelsea will have been pivotal. (And that is discouning whatever gane-changing contributions that he may make in the final few games.)
Even if it doesn't actually work out like that, the mere fact that such scenarios are still possible with only a handful of matches remaining entirely justifies Man City's decision to keep Lampard until their season's end.
NYCFCFan10
Registered
Chelsea was before our season started so that's a moot point.
Is there any scenarios where Man City is wrong to you? Lol
Traction Engine
Registered
I'm a City fan, and while I didn't agree with the decision in January, I understood it from a practical perspective. But now we've wrapped up direct qualification and it's time for him to leave. He's not playing well anyway.
Ferdinand Cesarano
Registered
Chelsea was what? That sentence is incoherent. I think it is missing a few words (not to mention some punctuation).
Anyway, of course I wish that Man City had not kept Lampard. I am not a Man City fan. Still, I am not so willfully blind to reality as to blame that club for maximising its chances for a title, and, when that slipped away, for a Champions League spot.
Please realise that one can be disappointed about something without being outraged. I cannot possibly feel outrage about something that I myself would do.
Indeed, absolutely any club, in Man City's shoes, would have opted to keep Lampard if the contractual situation allowed for it. People who act offended by this are living in a special kind of fantasy world.
From our point of view as New York City fans, all blame goes to NYCFC's front office, which allowed the contractual situation to be such that Lampard was not required to be here at the season's start, and which then failed to cover itself against the possibility of his staying in Manchester simply by announcing from the start that he'd be a summer arrival. 100% of the blame goes to NYCFC's management. 0% goes to Manchester City, and 0% to Lampard, each whom behaved in a perfectly rational manner given the circumstances.
In any case, this insignificant little hiccup is almost over. Lampard will soon be here, having missed nothing but a glorified pre-season, which is what the early part of an MLS season amounts to on account of the league's bloated playoff system.
Consider that, with one win in nine games, we are a mere three points from a playoff spot. The serious part of the season won't begin until after Lampard arrives. So let's just enjoy it.
Gavin23
Registered
Lot of sense in this post. I never was too hung up about Lampard. Never blamed him personally or hated him personally like a lot of people on the forum. I look forward to his first game actually...
NYCFCFan10
Registered
The. Chelsea. Game. You. Referenced. Was. Long. Before. The. Mls. Season. Started.
Therefore. There's. No. Point. In. Mentioning. It. As. Vindication. Of. His. Stay. There.
I hope that was enough words and punctuation To help you understand.
kas_tippler
Registered
100% agree! You're best poster on here by a country mile!
While lampard is not effective at man city I think he would be pivotal at NYC. The team allows to many stray passes and at times very poor options at goal. I think lampard can be that link player
Traction Engine
Registered
Lampard isn't going to make the difference between 3rd and 4th. With the way both sides playing at the moment the odds of United catching City are somewhere around the odds of the sun exploding at lunch hour.
I also don't understand the justification "it's best for City", like they're some distinct entity that owes us nothing. We have the same owners. Those owners held Lampard out as an NYC player, then broke that promise for reasons that, at best, reflect incompetence in building the City squad. To keep him now, when they don't need him and we haven't won in 6 games and desperately need quality going forward, adds insult to injury.
I also don't understand the justification "it's best for City", like they're some distinct entity that owes us nothing. We have the same owners. Those owners held Lampard out as an NYC player, then broke that promise for reasons that, at best, reflect incompetence in building the City squad. To keep him now, when they don't need him and we haven't won in 6 games and desperately need quality going forward, adds insult to injury.
kas_tippler
Registered
Who you going to blame after Lampard arrives? You lot love to play the victims.
Ferdinand Cesarano
Registered
When he's had his rest and he's in top physical shape in August, at the point when the season gets serious, we'll see that the whole thing has worked in our favour. (Whether everyone will admit this is another story entirely.)
kas_tippler
Registered
Whist everyone involved in contacts at NYCFC are blameless?
I think Lamps is going to come in and be fine, physically. Even if he needs a few weeks to recuperate from the season (he might not've needed it 10 years ago), so be it. If he's gonna be here, let's just hope he gets us back to winning.... though, hopefully by then, it'll be continue winning.
Similar threads
- Poll
