drewmelbcity Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Three positions with last visa spot. Now is the time that we need our scouting network to find someone who can play GK LB and FWD. Not impossible. and again it comes down to how much salary cap left perhaps we sacrifice our aussie marquee spot and instead of getting kennedy we try and find a valuable left back and you saw last year when JVS took over we actually started to hit the score board and be competitive without even having a known striker the load was shared between engelaar, williams, duganzic and co. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 He only said no plans. As opposed to not coming to melb. Read from that what you will I guess. I think it's fair to say from that that it's extremely unlikely to happen. Scott Munn was asked about the Lampard rumours weeks ago and just deflected the question. There was no reason to make a 'no plans' statement on the record at this stage, unless it's not happening, as far as I'm concerned. If there's money left, we should definitely use that last visa spot though. Still a couple of spots in the first XI that could be significantly strengthened with a quality international signing. Including and most importantly and striker once Villa is gone we have next to nothing, I still think williams could have a stellar of a year. Guess that depends on what is going on with Kennedy. If he's a done deal, I'd rather shore up the defence with that last visa. Also, just guessing, but I reckon class (for this league) LBs would be a bit cheaper than class strikers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Not too dissapointed with missing out on Lampard, one guest player is enough. Last visa (assuming Koren has signed) on a left back for the whole season would be more beneficial to the squad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks again captain obvious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyheart Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Windley is terrible, need Davitovic to finish his holidays! LB, RB, DM, ST would all be nice. Thinking the latter two the most likely. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewmelbcity Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks again captain obvious I would have gone with "Is that so Captain Obvious?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinnamon Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks again captain obvious I would have gone with "Is that so Captain Obvious?" You'll get your chance 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks again captain obvious I would have gone with "Is that so Captain Obvious?" You'll get your chance We'll all our get our chance... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Hahahah jesus I can't be taken seriously with this name can I! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexDaGroza Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Hahahah jesus I can't be taken seriously with this name can I! ...obviously 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attack11 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 I'm not convinced about Lampard not coming! First I would like to point out that in his presser he did not reject a possible move to Melbourne and if he wasn't coming why would he not just say so? Also I think that the CFG need to be careful how they deal with Lampard in regards to coming to Melbourne City because Manchester City FC, Melbourne City FC and New York City FC are all separate clubs with their own identities who share 1 common owner which is the CFG... it's not a merger between all 3 clubs.... If they were to announce that Lampard is coming to Melbourne City FC as quick as they did with Villa it would minimise the impact for New York City FC... At this point Lampard is a NYCFC player for the next 2 years... once the media, the club, and the fans in America start to engage with the announcement and excitement, the focus will turn to his fitness and deal will be done. I still believe he will play for Melbourne City FC, and he will be here longer than Villa. I really cant see Lampard playing 10 games for us and then returning to the MLS and not play in Jan, and Feb... Lampard is not going to do 3 months pre-season at 36yrs old... is he? Also what's interesting about this is that the club (S. Munn) is on record as saying that David Villa has yet to be confirmed if he will be a guest player or on Loan... the media have reported from day 1 that he is coming as a guest player but the club have not confirmed the arrangement. That's my reading of this... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heart_fan Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 http://www.theage.com.au/sport/soccer/frank-lampard-melbourne-city-decision-pending-20140725-zwoxe.html Given that this one seems more uncommital, and certainly hasn't ruled it out, who knows. I think its fair to say that the likelihood of it happening is small, and it may be the case that JVS will look at one of the trialists to fill that last visa spot. The pressure would be on him really, given he would be well aware of the risks of destabilising the team mid-season with substantial changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeming Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 I read the Age article too and was somewhat more hopeful but then read that it was an AAP article which I don't have all that much confidence in. Now that I have said that now I'm hoping that prompts the powers that be to make me look stupid and have Lampard come Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexxandro Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 I'm not convinced about Lampard not coming! First I would like to point out that in his presser he did not reject a possible move to Melbourne and if he wasn't coming why would he not just say so? Because if he denies it the newspapers stop writing about Melbourne City. He is not in control of what he says but has City media people telling him what to say and when to say it. It's all designed to get maximum media exposure. He might be coming or he might not be but not answering either way means squat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) Considering he signed a two year deal he will probably be our guest player at the start of next Season... Edited July 25, 2014 by cadete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Considering he signed a two year deal he will probably our guest player at the start of next Season... Good call, didn't even think about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulhollanddrive Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Why wouldn't he be coming here? You guys are reading too much into nothing. I think the default position is that they would come here for about 10 games, unless stated otherwise as the alternatives are inferior options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LR9 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Considering he signed a two year deal he will probably be our guest player at the start of next Season... Season starts in March, play-offs finish in December, when does he take a break? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhitePride Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) That Herald Sun article is the biggest case of 'something out of nothing' content that I've seen in a while, and that's a fair effort by their standards. Seriously, what else would you expect them to say to that? We all know how tight lipped our new owners are, and I definitely still get the impression that he'll be playing some part for Melbourne City this upcoming season. Edited July 25, 2014 by RedAndWhitePride Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jestr Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedukeofhearts Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 his WOMAN and BRATS should do as they are told !! - you can tell I'm not a family man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) Considering he signed a two year deal he will probably be our guest player at the start of next Season... Season starts in March, play-offs finish in December, when does he take a break? They finish very early in December which basically means that there he has three months without football when the A League is in progress. Plenty of time for a holiday and a small stint as a Guest Player for MCFC instead of a long Preseason at NY. Edited July 25, 2014 by cadete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedukeofhearts Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Even if he didn't play (obviously it would be great if he did) would it be worth him coming down to train. Good bit of press and mentoring for some younger players. Even do a few clinics or something. You wouldn't say it would be a negative thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboozeadams Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) http://www.football365.com/news/21554/9393190/Lampard-In-New-York David Villa will play for another City-owned club, Australia's Melbourne City FC, before teaming up with New York, but Reyna said there were a "number of options" open to Lampard. not sure what that means, but there you go Edited July 25, 2014 by Tonyboozeadams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murfy1 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming It's not like Lampard would be away from his family for a while if he played here (and IIRC he doesn't live with his kids), as we only start playing on October 11 and we stop playing January 4, when the A-League season breaks to accommodate the Asian Cup. So what's that, 10-12 weeks at most away from family, before he could perhaps break and catch up with them in January? David Villa also easily could have got a loan move to a club in Europe as well, and instead he'll be coming on loan here between October and Christmas. So by what reasoning can it be deduced that Lampard won't come here as well? Also, Lampard has always maintained that he wouldn't play for another EPL club that would play against Chelsea, so it's actually rather difficult to think of him finding a club in the UK. And IMO the one sentence behind Windley's 'exclusive', "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne", doesn't really definitely prove that he either will come or he won't come to Melbourne. It could just be yet another instance of Man City people twisting language to make it mean what they want it to mean, in this instance probably to maximize publicity if Lampard ends up coming to Melbourne (this 'will he or won't he' saga would certainly get Lampard, NYCFC and possibly us if he comes to Melbourne more press). Anyway, I'm not going to hold my breath over the matter. I can't call it either way, and will be a bit surprised with whatever happens with Lampard. The greater concern for us IMO is how we recruit for the whole of next season and beyond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming It's not like Lampard would be away from his family for a while if he played here (and IIRC he doesn't live with his kids), as we only start playing on October 11 and we stop playing January 4, when the A-League season breaks to accommodate the Asian Cup. So what's that, 10-12 weeks at most away from family, before he could perhaps break and catch up with them in January? David Villa also easily could have got a loan move to a club in Europe as well, and instead he'll be coming on loan here between October and Christmas. So by what reasoning can it be deduced that Lampard won't come here as well? Also, Lampard has always maintained that he wouldn't play for another EPL club that would play against Chelsea, so it's actually rather difficult to think of him finding a club in the UK. And IMO the one sentence behind Windley's 'exclusive', "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne", doesn't really definitely prove that he either will come or he won't come to Melbourne. It could just be yet another instance of Man City people twisting language to make it mean what they want it to mean, in this instance probably to maximize publicity if Lampard ends up coming to Melbourne (this 'will he or won't he' saga would certainly get Lampard, NYCFC and possibly us if he comes to Melbourne more press). Anyway, I'm not going to hold my breath over the matter. I can't call it either way, and will be a bit surprised with whatever happens with Lampard. The greater concern for us IMO is how we recruit for the whole of next season and beyond. I don't know...it just seems a lot more emphatic than it needed to be if the club was sure he'd be coming here, or even if it was still up in the air. They could have stonewalled the question easily enough. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, but I think for now, it's probably worth working on the assumption that he won't be playing for us this season and worry about who's filling out the remaining spots in the squad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbitm Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming It's not like Lampard would be away from his family for a while if he played here (and IIRC he doesn't live with his kids), as we only start playing on October 11 and we stop playing January 4, when the A-League season breaks to accommodate the Asian Cup. So what's that, 10-12 weeks at most away from family, before he could perhaps break and catch up with them in January? David Villa also easily could have got a loan move to a club in Europe as well, and instead he'll be coming on loan here between October and Christmas. So by what reasoning can it be deduced that Lampard won't come here as well? Also, Lampard has always maintained that he wouldn't play for another EPL club that would play against Chelsea, so it's actually rather difficult to think of him finding a club in the UK.And IMO the one sentence behind Windley's 'exclusive', "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne", doesn't really definitely prove that he either will come or he won't come to Melbourne. It could just be yet another instance of Man City people twisting language to make it mean what they want it to mean, in this instance probably to maximize publicity if Lampard ends up coming to Melbourne (this 'will he or won't he' saga would certainly get Lampard, NYCFC and possibly us if he comes to Melbourne more press). Anyway, I'm not going to hold my breath over the matter. I can't call it either way, and will be a bit surprised with whatever happens with Lampard. The greater concern for us IMO is how we recruit for the whole of next season and beyond. I don't know...it just seems a lot more emphatic than it needed to be if the club was sure he'd be coming here, or even if it was still up in the air. They could have stonewalled the question easily enough. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, but I think for now, it's probably worth working on the assumption that he won't be playing for us this season and worry about who's filling out the remaining spots in the squad. Do you think CFG would allow for this huge signing in melbourne to be released at a NYC press conference? Shot reporting, he hasn't been confirmed to have signed anywhere just yet. He did go on and on in his press conference that he is looking forward to the 'project' city are trying to build. If that's true then he should come to melbourne, only thing that might stop him is the ffa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming It's not like Lampard would be away from his family for a while if he played here (and IIRC he doesn't live with his kids), as we only start playing on October 11 and we stop playing January 4, when the A-League season breaks to accommodate the Asian Cup. So what's that, 10-12 weeks at most away from family, before he could perhaps break and catch up with them in January? David Villa also easily could have got a loan move to a club in Europe as well, and instead he'll be coming on loan here between October and Christmas. So by what reasoning can it be deduced that Lampard won't come here as well? Also, Lampard has always maintained that he wouldn't play for another EPL club that would play against Chelsea, so it's actually rather difficult to think of him finding a club in the UK.And IMO the one sentence behind Windley's 'exclusive', "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne", doesn't really definitely prove that he either will come or he won't come to Melbourne. It could just be yet another instance of Man City people twisting language to make it mean what they want it to mean, in this instance probably to maximize publicity if Lampard ends up coming to Melbourne (this 'will he or won't he' saga would certainly get Lampard, NYCFC and possibly us if he comes to Melbourne more press). Anyway, I'm not going to hold my breath over the matter. I can't call it either way, and will be a bit surprised with whatever happens with Lampard. The greater concern for us IMO is how we recruit for the whole of next season and beyond. I don't know...it just seems a lot more emphatic than it needed to be if the club was sure he'd be coming here, or even if it was still up in the air. They could have stonewalled the question easily enough. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, but I think for now, it's probably worth working on the assumption that he won't be playing for us this season and worry about who's filling out the remaining spots in the squad. Do you think CFG would allow for this huge signing in melbourne to be released at a NYC press conference? Shot reporting, he hasn't been confirmed to have signed anywhere just yet. He did go on and on in his press conference that he is looking forward to the 'project' city are trying to build. If that's true then he should come to melbourne, only thing that might stop him is the ffa The quote has come from a Melbourne City spokesman. He didn't have to confirm that Lampard was coming; he could have quite easily just given a similar smokescreen to Scott Munn recently, something along the lines of 'If we were signing everyone we'd been rumoured to, we'd have a squad of about 50,' or even a pretty basic 'We have no comment to make at this stage' (the reporter - Windley? - probably wouldn't have even been expecting anything other than a deflection). It's not like the spokesman (whoever it was) would have been blindsided by the question, given the speculation. As far as I'm concerned, they have made a conscious decision to hose down the rumour and they wouldn't have done so, if he was still a chance. Like I said, I'd be happy to be wrong, but that's how I read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbitm Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 His woman and kids don't want to leave and as if he couldn't get a club in uk for few weeks just to keep fit He is not coming It's not like Lampard would be away from his family for a while if he played here (and IIRC he doesn't live with his kids), as we only start playing on October 11 and we stop playing January 4, when the A-League season breaks to accommodate the Asian Cup. So what's that, 10-12 weeks at most away from family, before he could perhaps break and catch up with them in January? David Villa also easily could have got a loan move to a club in Europe as well, and instead he'll be coming on loan here between October and Christmas. So by what reasoning can it be deduced that Lampard won't come here as well? Also, Lampard has always maintained that he wouldn't play for another EPL club that would play against Chelsea, so it's actually rather difficult to think of him finding a club in the UK.And IMO the one sentence behind Windley's 'exclusive', "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne", doesn't really definitely prove that he either will come or he won't come to Melbourne. It could just be yet another instance of Man City people twisting language to make it mean what they want it to mean, in this instance probably to maximize publicity if Lampard ends up coming to Melbourne (this 'will he or won't he' saga would certainly get Lampard, NYCFC and possibly us if he comes to Melbourne more press). Anyway, I'm not going to hold my breath over the matter. I can't call it either way, and will be a bit surprised with whatever happens with Lampard. The greater concern for us IMO is how we recruit for the whole of next season and beyond. I don't know...it just seems a lot more emphatic than it needed to be if the club was sure he'd be coming here, or even if it was still up in the air. They could have stonewalled the question easily enough. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, but I think for now, it's probably worth working on the assumption that he won't be playing for us this season and worry about who's filling out the remaining spots in the squad. Do you think CFG would allow for this huge signing in melbourne to be released at a NYC press conference? Shot reporting, he hasn't been confirmed to have signed anywhere just yet. He did go on and on in his press conference that he is looking forward to the 'project' city are trying to build. If that's true then he should come to melbourne, only thing that might stop him is the ffa The quote has come from a Melbourne City spokesman. He didn't have to confirm that Lampard was coming; he could have quite easily just given a similar smokescreen to Scott Munn recently, something along the lines of 'If we were signing everyone we'd been rumoured to, we'd have a squad of about 50,' or even a pretty basic 'We have no comment to make at this stage' (the reporter - Windley? - probably wouldn't have even been expecting anything other than a deflection). It's not like the spokesman (whoever it was) would have been blindsided by the question, given the speculation. As far as I'm concerned, they have made a conscious decision to hose down the rumour and they wouldn't have done so, if he was still a chance. Like I said, I'd be happy to be wrong, but that's how I read it. The quote was from the press conference when he was asked directly if he would join Melbourne, they gave a long answer that does smokescreen it a bit saying there are several clubs were speaking too, Lampard and NYC will talk to decide what is best for him and added he hadn't made plans to join Melbourne, which of course is the only part quoted. Not saying he'll join, it's just a bullshit article imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shroomer Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 CFG bought into the Yokohama F. Marinos. Their season runs until December. Anybody know the J-League rules? Could they slip a guest/designated player like Lampard onto their roster mid-season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) The quote was from the press conference when he was asked directly if he would join Melbourne, they gave a long answer that does smokescreen it a bit saying there are several clubs were speaking too, Lampard and NYC will talk to decide what is best for him and added he hadn't made plans to join Melbourne, which of course is the only part quoted. Not saying he'll join, it's just a bullshit article imo. The article certainly gives the impression to me that the HS saw the news conference, contacted Melbourne City specifically for a comment and received the quoted response from someone from the club who is based in Melbourne. http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/frank-lampard-melbourne-city-stint-not-happening-has-signed-with-new-york-city-fc-in-mls/story-e6frf423-1227000944047 But where pundits worldwide have linked the 106-time England international with a short-term move to brother club Melbourne City - just like the one Spanish legend David Villa will embark upon in October - the Herald Sun can reveal no move to Australia is forthcoming. Asked for comment about the speculation linking Lampard with the club a Melbourne City spokesman said: “There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne.” Edited July 25, 2014 by SF33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Send a tweet to Scott Munn and see what happens... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbitm Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 The quote was from the press conference when he was asked directly if he would join Melbourne, they gave a long answer that does smokescreen it a bit saying there are several clubs were speaking too, Lampard and NYC will talk to decide what is best for him and added he hadn't made plans to join Melbourne, which of course is the only part quoted. Not saying he'll join, it's just a bullshit article imo. The article certainly gives the impression to me that the HS saw the news conference, contacted Melbourne City specifically for a comment and received the quoted response from someone from the club who is based in Melbourne. http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/frank-lampard-melbourne-city-stint-not-happening-has-signed-with-new-york-city-fc-in-mls/story-e6frf423-1227000944047 But where pundits worldwide have linked the 106-time England international with a short-term move to brother club Melbourne City - just like the one Spanish legend David Villa will embark upon in October - the Herald Sun can reveal no move to Australia is forthcoming. Asked for comment about the speculation linking Lampard with the club a Melbourne City spokesman said: “There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne.” This was the article I was using....http://www.fourfourtwo.com/au/news/no-frank-lampard-plans-melbourne-city 'According to News Corp reports, a New York City spokesperson was asked whether Lampard may still be coming to the A-League. He replied: "There are no plans in place for Frank to come to Melbourne."' Fucking media mixing up articles. Who knows what the answer is but it looks to me like one has copied the other... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingman Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 It didnt say a number of clubs, it said he has a number of options. From a marketing perspective, keeping it a big secret is a great choice because the impact of an announcement will be much bigger, so don't draw too many conclusions just Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Fair enough. I guess we'll find out in due course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 If you're really desperate you can look at all of these news articles in chronological order... http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football?JavaScript=1&searchheadlines=&search=New+York+city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbitm Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 So it seems like a lot of articles are using the Hun as a source he isn't coming. Thats less reliable than HeartFc 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhitePride Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 So it seems like a lot of articles are using the Hun as a source he isn't coming. Thats less reliable than HeartFc Not to mention that the journo in question has gotten shit wrong before. PS HeartFc is the most reliable guy ever, thank you very much. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murfy1 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Transfer News: Frank Lampard could join Melbourne City on loan after New York City move 25 July 2014 Frank Lampard could spend a loan spell with Melbourne City as he must wait until February to make his debut for New York City FC. The 36-year-old midfielder signed a two-year deal with New York, but the new franchise will only join the MLS at the start of next season. Lampard will hold talks with his new club about how to maintain his fitness levels and sporting director Claudio Reyna refused to rule out a temporary move to Melbourne City, who like New York, have a tie-up with Manchester City. "There's that possibility, but we really haven't spoken about it," Reyna told Sky Sports News. "We wanted to make sure that Frank had his vacation that he's earned and is well deserved after so many years in the Premier League as well as the World Cup. "We're going to sit down this week - he's here in New York for another week or so - and we'll have those discussions on just planning what we do with him for five months and that is an option. "But we just need to speak together as a group, with Manchester City as well, and see what they think as far as our group. "But one thing for sure is we’re really confident he looks after himself and that he’ll be ready to go in January 2015." Lampard has revealed how his uncle Harry Redknapp, the QPR boss, was keen to sign him but he did not want to join a rival London club after ending a lengthy spell with Chelsea. "I think my Dad spoke to Harry quite a lot and we had some conversations," he said. "But it wasn't really an option for me. I had 13 years at Chelsea and it's something very dear to me so it would have been difficult to play for a club so close. "There were other options in England and all around the world - but this is the one that stood out for me." Lampard is yet to make a decision about his international future and could follow the example of David Beckham who continued his England career after moving to the MLS. "I think the whole England thing is always on an individual basis," he said. "David Beckham did it. I think some people retire when they are 30 years of age or for the sake of their careers. "I need to make sure I make the right decision for me because I've enjoyed playing for my country so much that I want to make sure that I do it at the right time, and it feels right for me." http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9393882/frank-lampard-might-prepare-for-the-next-mls-season-by-joining-melbourne-city-on-loan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhitePride Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Further proof that the HS blew their load way too early. But that's unlike them, really. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.