The Frank Lampard thread

[drewmelbcity]

It's times like this that I wish we had mifsud, maycon, maiweus, worm, Fred back those were the glorious days

This.

Why do some people look back on the past with such rose coloured glasses?

Makes me sick thinking how long JA was allowed to stay on as manager, not to mention one million other things that were fucked with the club.

But hey, at least we got to wear red shirts!It baffles me also.

I can understand how some are annoyed with the villa situation.

But as I see it our club is starting to hit some good form, our young players are playing well. Our marquee scored a hat trick for his debut as a starter. Paartalu is starting to regain fitness and a league form. Mooy is playing out of his skin. If all goes well we will have a big man target soon in the form of Jesus.

The whole guest/ loan player seems to be one big mess but the new players we have gained over the off season are starting to look real good.

Yes, agreed about the guest situation, but at least Villa playing merely four games was better than Beckham, Ronaldinho, Holt etc etc playing for us in Scott Munn's media circus fantasy land.

Quite right,

When villa left after four games I was annoyed then. Now I don't think twice about it. I'm not saying our team is perfect at the moment and there are still some quite large holes to fill but in most part our team looks promising.

[Tony999]

It's times like this that I wish we had mifsud, maycon, maiweus, worm, Fred back those were the glorious days

Imagine having all the above in the starting line up. L-e-t-h-a-l!

[belaguttman]

Yes, agreed about the guest situation, but at least Villa playing merely four games was better than Beckham, Ronaldinho, Holt etc etc playing for us in Scott Munn's media circus fantasy land.

 

 

Things definitely feel different now compared to the empty promises of Heart.

 

I think that Sidwell et al and CFG have something in common, they both make mistakes. There are also differences though: CFG have the football experience and the money and the will to not make the same mistakes over and over. I expect them to learn how to manage  a stable of football clubs/franchises over the next few years. Here we have a franchise model not a club so our relationship to the owners is as customers but any business that doesn't listen to its customers is heading for disaster so we aren't without influence in telling them what we want and how to correct mistakes.

[hakz7]

Statement from Third Rail:

"Our support for our ownership group has been unwavering until now, but this we cannot support."

:droy: :droy:

They wouldn't even have a club to support if it wasn't for the CFG and The Third Rail wouldn't even exist.

[Tesla]

Statement from Third Rail:

"Our support for our ownership group has been unwavering until now, but this we cannot support."

:droy: :droy:

They wouldn't even have a club to support if it wasn't for the CFG and The Third Rail wouldn't even exist.

Ridiculous comment. A second NY team has been on the agenda for a long time and there would be no shortage of potential investors. It's New York. It's the capital of the world. It's the biggest market in the world for anything. Even if Soccer isn't a huge sport, the soccer market is still huge just because it's New York. A second NY MLS team is an opportunity that's unmatched anywhere else in the world. Anyone with the money and any sort of itnerest in owning a football team worth their salt would have been looking at investing in a second NY team. CFG were just wiling to pay the most for the licence.

Edited January 2, 2015 by Tesla

[Tesla]

ROFL at this though

The Third Rail added: "We reject out of hand any suggestion that NYCFC is in any way secondary to Manchester City FC, regardless of the source, and are disappointed that City Football Group would give such an appearance."

[jw1739]

ROFL at this though

The Third Rail added: "We reject out of hand any suggestion that NYCFC is in any way secondary to Manchester City FC, regardless of the source, and are disappointed that City Football Group would give such an appearance."

That's just a stupid comment that does not recognise the reality of the situation.

[n i k o]

Statement from Third Rail:"Our support for our ownership group has been unwavering until now, but this we cannot support." :droy: :droy:

They wouldn't even have a club to support if it wasn't for the CFG and The Third Rail wouldn't even exist. Ridiculous comment. A second NY team has been on the agenda for a long time and there would be no shortage of potential investors. It's New York. It's the capital of the world. It's the biggest market in the world for anything. Even if Soccer isn't a huge sport, the soccer market is still huge just because it's New York. A second NY MLS team is an opportunity that's unmatched anywhere else in the world. Anyone with the money and any sort of itnerest in owning a football team worth their salt would have been looking at investing in a second NY team. CFG were just wiling to pay the most for the licence.

That is correct. For me though it's this unwavering support they seem to feel they have "earnt," you know, with all the tought times they've had to to encounter over the course of their establishment as a brand new club that hasn't played a game yet.

[belaguttman]

 

ROFL at this though

The Third Rail added: "We reject out of hand any suggestion that NYCFC is in any way secondary to Manchester City FC, regardless of the source, and are disappointed that City Football Group would give such an appearance."

That's just a stupid comment that does not recognise the reality of the situation.

 

We reject out of hand any suggestion thatMCFC is in any way secondary to NYCFC, regardless of the source, and are disappointed that City Football Group would give such an appearance.              

[Embee]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/01/frank-lampard-manchester-city-next-season-manuel-pellegrini-mls-new-york-city?CMP=share_btn_tw

[Dylan]

It has been great reading their forum. 

[jw1739]

Well, either Lamps was contracted to New York City and on loan to Manchester City, or he was contracted to Manchester City and NYC believed that after 31st December he would transfer to them. 

 

It sounds as if NYC have been misled all the way and that it was the latter rather than the former, and that the transfer may now never take place at all.

 

Astonishing. I would have thought common sense would require that copies of the paperwork would be held by all the relevant parties. But apparently not. But FIFA must have known all along.

 

IIRC David Villa actually played four games for us. Maybe we're higher in the pecking order than we thought...

[silva10]

To be honest it is a big own goal for CFG as they should have said from the start Lampard was contracted to MCFC

 

The reason why could be because Lampard didn't want it to be known so as not to upset the Chelsea fans.

 

However, I think two things happened here, one was that FFA blocked his proposed loan move to Melbourne until end of December, then Lampard showed he was still a good enough player for the EPL.

 

You never know maybe he will end up at Melbourne next season.

[n i k o]

Only if he arrives at least a month before the start of the season

[Jun]

To be honest it is a big own goal for CFG as they should have said from the start Lampard was contracted to MCFC

 

The reason why could be because Lampard didn't want it to be known so as not to upset the Chelsea fans.

 

However, I think two things happened here, one was that FFA blocked his proposed loan move to Melbourne until end of December, then Lampard showed he was still a good enough player for the EPL.

 

You never know maybe he will end up at Melbourne next season.

Given the hostility and vitriol the NYCFC fans (can we call them that yet?) are displaying, I'd say he'd be a better chance to come to Melbourne than NY.

Then again it doesn't seem like the NYCFC board (or NYCFC Twitter handler or even CFG) give a shit about what the Third Rail think

[HEARTinator]

Just watching ESPN FC, Gabriele Marcotti says that Lamps did not sign a contract with NYC FC but merely a heads off agreement or some such doco that essentially spelled out his intentions without binding him to NYC FC. However, and the most important fact, he is a registered player with ManCity until June 2015. So after that he could sign for NYC FC. Again, looks like people speaking with forked tongues not spelling out clearly what was going on because [ fill in the blanks here].

[silva10]

Just watching ESPN FC, Gabriele Marcotti says that Lamps did not sign a contract with NYC FC but merely a heads off agreement or some such doco that essentially spelled out his intentions without binding him to NYC FC. However, and the most important fact, he is a registered player with ManCity until June 2015. So after that he could sign for NYC FC. Again, looks like people speaking with forked tongues not spelling out clearly what was going on because [ fill in the blanks here].

 

Well Frank went to City to keep fit and maybe play if we had injuries. Mianly because of restricitons of FFP.

 

Then he scored a few goals and was an asset coming off the bench.This then resulted in Frank and City wanting him to stay until the end of our season.

 

I do believe last July he didn't think he would be spending the season at City.

 

What CFG have got wrong is not informing people of the fact he joined City on a short term contract rather than loan. It could be Frank wanted everyone to think he was only going to City to keep fit, and didn't want to upset Chelsea fans.

[jw1739]

Just watching ESPN FC, Gabriele Marcotti says that Lamps did not sign a contract with NYC FC but merely a heads off agreement or some such doco that essentially spelled out his intentions without binding him to NYC FC. However, and the most important fact, he is a registered player with ManCity until June 2015. So after that he could sign for NYC FC. Again, looks like people speaking with forked tongues not spelling out clearly what was going on because [ fill in the blanks here].

It's all explained here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903696/Manchester-City-row-Premier-League-Frank-Lampard-deal.html

 

Manchester City do not look good over this web of lies and deceit.

[Shahanga]

Just watching ESPN FC, Gabriele Marcotti says that Lamps did not sign a contract with NYC FC but merely a heads off agreement or some such doco that essentially spelled out his intentions without binding him to NYC FC. However, and the most important fact, he is a registered player with ManCity until June 2015. So after that he could sign for NYC FC. Again, looks like people speaking with forked tongues not spelling out clearly what was going on because [ fill in the blanks here].

It's all explained here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903696/Manchester-City-row-Premier-League-Frank-Lampard-deal.html

Manchester City do not look good over this web of lies and deceit. Unfortunately though their behaviour in this matter matches the double speak they carried on with when they bought us..

I'm sure they don't want my advice, but if I were to offer it it would be "be more forthright" bad news is one thing but deceit is infinitely worse

[jw1739]

 

 

Just watching ESPN FC, Gabriele Marcotti says that Lamps did not sign a contract with NYC FC but merely a heads off agreement or some such doco that essentially spelled out his intentions without binding him to NYC FC. However, and the most important fact, he is a registered player with ManCity until June 2015. So after that he could sign for NYC FC. Again, looks like people speaking with forked tongues not spelling out clearly what was going on because [ fill in the blanks here].

It's all explained here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2903696/Manchester-City-row-Premier-League-Frank-Lampard-deal.html

Manchester City do not look good over this web of lies and deceit. Unfortunately though their behaviour in this matter matches the double speak they carried on with when they bought us..

I'm sure they don't want my advice, but if I were to offer it it would be "be more forthright" bad news is one thing but deceit is infinitely worse

 

Well, in fact all the parties are guilty, whether of acts of omission or commission. Both Lampard and NYCFC knew that he had signed merely a pre-contract agreement and not an actual contract. So did MLS. Yet when the media reported the way they did not one of those parties sought to clarify the situation.

 

I'm afraid I now believe that a similar situation existed with David Villa.

 

In both cases it appears to have been a cynical exercise by several parties to boost interest in the MLS, A-League, NYCFC and Melbourne City.

[HeartinHobart]

The whole situation has been embarrassing to be part of the CFG.

[Melburnian]

The whole situation has been embarrassing to be part of the CFG.

This. It's a shambles. A joke. And down right wrong.

[Deeming]

It looks like CFG have a lot to learn about not pissing off their fans and the public.
Two big stuff ups with their two big signings first Villa's stint with us and then even bigger Lampard in NYC.
At least with us there were pre-existing fans. With NYC their 'fans' won't yet be invested in the club and there is a real risk they will lose them over this.

[Jestr]

CFG doing all they can to create plastic "clubs" read "business enterprise" while ruining any hope of developing true, organic support and following for which football clubs were created for.

It's their business investment and they don't need our (fans) input.

[morphine]

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

[Tonyboozeadams]

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

The villa and Lampard thimgs have been handled badly but both players are luxuries. We shouldn't really be too concerened. If Lampard and villa are the reason you are here or nyc. You can fuck right off

[jw1739]

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

IMO people are quite capable of supporting the club and the takeover whilst recognising that CFG have made a mess of both the Villa and Lampard transfers and should be quite rightly condemned for that.

[morphine]

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

IMO people are quite capable of supporting the club and the takeover whilst recognising that CFG have made a mess of both the Villa and Lampard transfers and should be quite rightly condemned for that. I think the NY supporters in particular are seemingly incapable of separating the two.

[jw1739]

 

 

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

IMO people are quite capable of supporting the club and the takeover whilst recognising that CFG have made a mess of both the Villa and Lampard transfers and should be quite rightly condemned for that. I think the NY supporters in particular are seemingly incapable of separating the two.

 

Probably that's understandable. We did at least get to see David Villa in our colours, we have the current season to occupy our minds, and the foresight of the Sidwell board and management team in choosing Latrobe as our HQ is paying off with our new facilities. In contrast the NYC supporters have nothing other than this management stuff, plus the fact that NYCFC is facing opposition in building a stadium where they want to.

[Shahanga]

 

If so many people don't like it, why don't they fuck off?

This isn't like not supporting a government - it's a football club and it's absolutely your choice whether you support it or not.

I read everywhere how everyone hates everything CFG are doing. Well you know what? If it's so aggriegous, then there's nothing keeping you here.

I for one have been nothing short of impressed with what CFG have done, and am ecstatic about the takeover.

IMO people are quite capable of supporting the club and the takeover whilst recognising that CFG have made a mess of both the Villa and Lampard transfers and should be quite rightly condemned for that.

 

Quite right.

A few analogies:

 

• You can be friends with someone without agreeing with them 100% of the time
• You can argue with your partner but still love them
• You can disagree with the direction your employer takes from time to time but still work there.

You can support the "club formally known as Melbourne Heart" and still not be thrilled with the approach and actions of CFG.

 

TBH I would be very concerned about the mental state of anyone who was 100% behind every single thing Melbourne City & CFG had done (and not done) since the takeover.  It would suggest a complete lack of independent thought.  

 

How potential fans of NYC conduct themselves is up to them, but surely this Lampard episode has lost that franchise plenty of supporters, so it is first and foremost a PR disaster of the first order and unlike the Villa stuff up, there isn't a whole lot of rusted-on supporters to fall back upon. 

[morphine]

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

[n i k o]

Because people want a reason for them to belong to something. They want to be part of this club because it fills a void, whether it's a lack of live football or a different team to those available to watch. Even though they have fucked with them the supporters need to fill this void is greater than the fuck up CFG has made.

[KSK_47]

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

I still go to games every now and again and watch every game on TV but I would say I follow city, not "support" them. I don't feel any particularly strong bond with city like I did with with Heart and I certainly don't feel the same sense of needing to go out of my way for the club anymore. Shit like this doesn't do anything to really help either.

In fact if I wasn't OCD there's a pretty good chance I would have opted out by now. It's like a book that I have started reading and even though I am really not enjoying it that much and not reading it anywhere near as much as was, I still have to keep going.

[morphine]

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

I still go to games every now and again and watch every game on TV but I would say I follow city, not "support" them. I don't feel any particularly strong bond with city like I did with with Heart and I certainly don't feel the same sense of needing to go out of my way for the club anymore. Shit like this doesn't do anything to really help either.

In fact if I wasn't OCD there's a pretty good chance I would have opted out by now. It's like a book that I have started reading and even though I am really not enjoying it that much and not reading it anywhere near as much as was, I still have to keep going. Then that's on you, not CFG. And to that end, I think 'supporters' of City would have every right to tell you to fuck off if you started up.

[KSK_47]

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

I still go to games every now and again and watch every game on TV but I would say I follow city, not "support" them. I don't feel any particularly strong bond with city like I did with with Heart and I certainly don't feel the same sense of needing to go out of my way for the club anymore. Shit like this doesn't do anything to really help either.

In fact if I wasn't OCD there's a pretty good chance I would have opted out by now. It's like a book that I have started reading and even though I am really not enjoying it that much and not reading it anywhere near as much as was, I still have to keep going. Then that's on you, not CFG. And to that end, I think 'supporters' of City would have every right to tell you to fuck off if you started up.

Lol so self righteous. So because I don't blindly think everything they do is great my view on things isn't worth listening to? In fact someone who isn't blindly "supporting" the club is probably in a better position to judge.

[Jovan]

Exclusive: Oliver Kay, chief football correspondent, hears Frank Lampard reveal that his initial intention was not to swap royal blue for light blue.

Frank Lampard has something to say. Rather a lot to say, in fact. For a start, he wants to say that his heart will always be with Chelsea, that he is determined to make up for lost time when he finally joins New York City in July but that, until then, he will be fiercely committed to Manchester City. He knows what some — in New York, in west London and elsewhere — are thinking. He has heard the accusations that he and City tried to deceive his past and future employers in using his pre-contract agreement with New York as a sleight-of-hand trick to engineer a transfer to one of Chelsea’s rivals. 

He had intended just to keep his head down and let his football, along with a well-earned reputation for decency, do the talking, but that is no longer an option, which is why he has agreed to speak to The Times to try to clear things up. There is no PR officer needed to hold Lampard’s hand through the interview. He is, as he says, a big boy. There might be the odd difference in nuance; where he talks of having signed for New York last summer, City — or rather City Football Group, the holding company that runs both clubs — prefers to say that what he signed initially was a “head-of-terms agreement”. 

Lampard, though, is not talking with a legal hat on. He is talking from the heart about a decision that, after much soul-searching, he made with his head. 

The story begins last May, with Lampard in the final weeks of his contract at Chelsea. He, like Ashley Cole, can see the writing on the wall. He is called in to see José Mourinho. “As José touched on recently, the club moved on,” Lampard says. “They didn’t extend my contract. José himself told me that at the end of the season, which is the way I would have wanted it because he was such a pivotal character in my Chelsea career. He moved me on a long, long way as a player. I had a situation the season before where I was being told in Tokyo [at the 2012 Club World Cup] that I wasn’t going to get a new contract. That wasn’t from the manager because it was so topsy-turvy at the time. I respected José completely for taking it on this time, to tell me himself. 

“He didn’t tell me if it was his decision solely — I didn’t need to know that — and he was very sensitive, if that’s the right word, and straight with me because we’ve got a good relationship. 

“That was that. I didn’t have the chance to say goodbye and thank you to the fans, but I don’t want to harp on about disappointments because I was very aware the day would come. It had been toyed with for a few years that I might move on, so you do understand it can happen. We shook hands and I walked out and started thinking about what I wanted to do because I knew I wanted to carry on playing and still had a hunger for it.” 

With a World Cup looming, Lampard’s initial instinct was to delay any talks until July, but New York City, the new Major League Soccer (MLS) franchise set up by City Football Group, were pushing hard. Strong pitches were made by Ferran Soriano, the chief executive of City and New York, as well as Claudio Reyna and Jason Kreis, respectively the director of football and the head coach in New York. Lampard, who had previously thought Los Angeles Galaxy his most likely destination if he moved to MLS, was tempted. 

“I thought, ‘I need to get my head straight about what I want to do’,” he says. “Meetings started to happen on the New York front and it very quickly became the stand-out option. I had options in the Premier League — only talked-about options — none of which I fancied, if I’m honest. I didn’t want to play for another Premier League club after Chelsea. I really didn’t. Around the world, further afield, there were big-money offers, but they didn’t appeal for family or football reasons. Not being big-headed, but I’ve worked hard in my career, a very fortunate career, and I don’t need to make a move for financial reasons. “New York ticked every box — an incredible city, a challenge, a new club, sold to me in a fantastic way by Ferran [soriano], Jason, Claudio. MLS had always interested me when I had thought about what I might do if I left Chelsea. Once that decision had been made for me, and I didn’t have to fight it, I had no problem with leaving. New York was a really exciting challenge.” 

A few weeks after returning from England’s short-lived World Cup campaign in Brazil, Lampard flew across the Atlantic to sign a pre-contract agreement with City Football Group, whereby he would join New York on a two-year deal commencing — according to the original plan — on January 1, in readiness for their inaugural MLS campaign, which begins in March. 

So you signed for . . . ? “New York,” he says. Not New York with a view to signing for City? “No. It was 100 per cent New York. I had sat down with Ferran and it was all about New York. There was no mention of Man City. If they had wanted to speak to me on behalf of Man City, with New York in the pipeline beyond that, they could have done that, because I was a free agent, but that was never the question at all. 

“I spent ten days out there. I had a lot of time to suck it in. I went to a Yankees [baseball] game. I knew it was an amazing city, but I didn’t realise the passion and that inclusive feeling that they have, which just rubs off on you. It made me really excited. “We had the press conference, had dinners with Jason and with Claudio, talking about the future. I was really excited about it. I’m excited now, just talking about it.” 

The only concern was about what he would do until New York began pre-season training in January. “To be honest, when I thought about five or six months off, I thought it was quite a result,” Lampard says. “I thought ‘I’ve been playing solid for a long, long time. It will be a good break. I’ll find a way to keep fit.’ ” 

New York’s only other player at that point, David Villa, was sent to Melbourne City, another City Football Group club. “Melbourne was mentioned to me, but never for definite,” Lampard says. “I thought maybe I could train back at Chelsea or something. 

“Then when I was out there in New York I spoke to David Villa’s fitness coach, who is going to be with us in New York, and he said, ‘Look, you need to train really hard.’ 

“David was training hard, had Melbourne in his sights, his future all planned out that way, and he said it was going to be very hard for me to keep my level of fitness at 36. And then Man City came in.” 

So how did Lampard’s pre-contract agreement with New York, which was due to run from January 1, end up superseded by a deal to join City? “This is one of the reasons why I wanted to do this interview, because I’ve heard and seen people say it must have been all contrived that I would join Man City,” he says. “It wasn’t. It was 100 per cent New York. But while all this discussion was going on about the next five or six months, Man City were in town for a pre-season game. I spoke with Manuel Pellegrini and he said he wanted me to come for the first half of the season — simple as that.” 

Just like that? Sheer coincidence? “Yes — and that’s the God’s honest truth,” he says. “Some people think I had in my mind to go originally with that thought process. I didn’t. I certainly wouldn’t have booked two holidays — one with the kids in LA, going to Universal Studios, where they’ve always wanted to go, one in Europe with Christine [bleakley, his fiancée] and then cancelled them if I’d been planning all along to join City. 

“I was, like, ‘Really? Is that what I want to do?’ I didn’t want to play for another English club. I wasn’t sure I would enjoy it. I wasn’t sure about moving to Manchester. In the past I had only come up here, stayed in The Lowry [hotel] and then gone home again. It wasn’t an easy decision. 

“Then, having spoken to my dad, I thought about the family and the fact that Man City wanted me, at 36, to come and be involved. It made complete sense on that front. I spoke to Claudio and Jason, who were great about it. It was a matter of me keeping fit at a really good level. 

“Everything was thrown up in the air — typically in my life — and I’m thinking, ‘How can I tell the kids we’re not going to LA?’ When I spoke to Manuel, I said, ‘Can I have a bit longer and join a bit later because I’ve got these holidays?’ and he said, ‘No, if you’re going to come I need you now.’ I didn’t know how many games I was going to play, but it made sense.” 

What about your suggestion that, out of respect for Chelsea, you would not play for another English club? “I didn’t feel I would,” he says. “It’s fair to say that circumstances change. I had to weigh up whether it was a step I wanted to take. 

“Would it make me feel any different about Chelsea? Certainly not. Would it make Chelsea fans feel like I had let them down? I hoped it wouldn’t. Speaking to people — fans I know, fans I bump into my when I’m out and about, ex-team-mates, staff — I don’t believe it does.

“You will always potentially get some people who feel different because it’s a passion, it’s a religion, and I get that, but I will always be a Chelsea man. This is more of a stopover period.”

A stopover? Well, yes, self-evidently. “I’m not belittling Man City by saying that, because it’s a huge club and they’ve been amazing to me,” he says. “I was 36 and Man City wanted me to go there and play for them for a period.

“No matter that it was as a squad player or that it suited them or whatever — and looking back, you can probably look at it better — at the time I thought, ‘Wow, I didn’t see that one coming.’ And I really didn’t. It surprised me from the first minute they showed interest to sitting here now — that it happened at all and that I’ve been able to make a fairly good impact.”

“A fairly good impact” is a typical Lampard understatement. Quite apart from the winning goals in tight games against Leicester City and Sunderland, he scored the equaliser, as a substitute on his home debut, that ended Chelsea’s 100 per cent start to the season in September. Given that City and Chelsea have identical records in the Barclays Premier League season after 20 matches, that goal could have an enormous impact on the title race. Lampard, famously, did not celebrate — an act that, at the time, only heightened his status among the fans in the away end. 

“It probably looked weird,” he says. “Do you know what I mean? A lot of people have said that to me. It was weird. It was a surreal day. In a million years, I wouldn’t celebrate if I scored against Chelsea. I used to celebrate when I scored against West Ham, but that was a different situation. When I left West Ham there was a hostility towards me and maybe a hostility from me towards them over certain things — old news now. But with Chelsea? Never.

“I swear to God, if I went to the [stamford] Bridge and they booed me for 90 minutes and I scored the winner, I still wouldn’t celebrate. It would never come into my head and I think the fans there understand me and how I feel about it. I would never celebrate against Chelsea. That would be ridiculous.”

City’s supporters have learnt very quickly that this enduring affection for Chelsea does not affect Lampard’s commitment to his temporary club. “I think the fans can see that I’ve never been one to give anything less than full pelt,” he says. “I’ve loved it, loved the challenge of it. I’ve been really impressed by the club.

“To be honest, the easy option would have been to train on my own, do bits and bobs, have holidays all the way. The hard option was to take this on — live up here, get the train backwards and forwards, get fit pre-season, try and prove something by getting my nose into the squad — but I didn’t want to come and be a bystander. There would have been no point in doing that. In my head, I thought ‘I want to give it a go.’ 

It wasn’t easy. It was like going to a new school. People might think you’re going to walk in and say, ‘I’ve been at Chelsea, won the Champions League, this is a doddle,’ but it wasn’t like that. When I say about it being like a stopover, I don’t belittle Man City because it has been a huge experience for me personally and a very enjoyable one. The fans, taking me on board — me openly a Chelsea boy — have been great. I think they’ve seen I’ve come here and worked hard.”

Much like at Chelsea last May, Lampard could read the writing on the wall, but this time it said that he was wanted. As the turn of the year approached, City began to push for that short-term contract to December 31 to be replaced by a new arrangement that would keep him in Manchester until the end of the season.

Whatever the sensitivities in the United States and at Stamford Bridge, the unique nature of City’s relationship with New York meant that only one outcome was likely. Late on December 31, to wails of derision in MLS, it was announced that Lampard would stay at City for the remainder of the English season, his arrival in New York postponed until July.

There was confusion over whether it was a loan or a short-term contract or even whether Lampard had ever signed a deal with New York. “I have signed for New York,” he says. “The original intention was for that to start on January 1. I signed a Man City agreement in the interim [in August]. Now that has obviously changed. I have extended my period here and will join New York later.

“That is what has frustrated me, that people were sort of saying to me, ‘You knew what you were doing.’ I never would have done that. If I had wanted to come to Man City, then I would stand up and come to Man City. That wouldn’t have been a problem. And in terms of Man City being ‘sneaky’, they could have signed me on a free anyway if that’s what they and I had wanted to do. People mention Financial Fair Play, but what difference would that have made? No difference. It would have been a slippery move, a dodgy move, for nothing. The fact is I signed with New York, then I signed for Man City in the interim and now it has been extended.”

There is still one thing to clarify: his commitment to New York. For those supporters who worry that they have had the wool pulled over their eyes, that their marquee signing is going to be at City again next season, Lampard’s intimate knowledge of their pre-season schedule, their latest signings and their fixture list — Montreal Impact away on July 4, Steven Gerrard’s LA Galaxy away on August 23 — should be reassuring

“What I want to say to the New York people is that, yes, my start is going to be delayed by two or three months,” he says. “But when I get there, I’m going to give everything, as I’ve given at Man City, as I’ve given at Chelsea before. I want to win. I’ve seen Stevie say the same, how much he wants to win medals there. He’s like me, I think. We’re both driven. We don’t go somewhere to put our feet up and relax. No matter what we’ve achieved in the past, we will always want more. I will certainly give that to New York.

“Because it’s a team that’s just beginning, there’s a danger of there being a whole focus on me because of this situation, but, from being inside it and speaking to Jason regularly, there’s a whole squad of players. There’s David Villa, Josh Saunders, a whole squad, maybe another DP [designated player] to come in. It’s a squad. That’s what is going to win us the MLS next year, not whether I trot up in March or June.

“Yes I’m coming that bit later now, but when I get there, I want to make up for lost time, simple as that. From how I saw it there, the New York people aren’t going to accept a team that’s a bitty team, just there for the sake of it. I want to go there, play well and be part of a good team.

“Speaking to the people involved, there is no doubt they are going to give New York a team to be proud of. There will be no second best. They won’t be happy until they win there, simple as that, and that’s what made me want to go there.”

And does Lampard expect to arrive in New York as a Barclays Premier League title winner at Chelsea’s expense? “I’m just here to do a job,” he says. “I can’t stop people writing it’s me against Chelsea. I’m a big boy. I chose to be here. The best squad will win it. I’m playing for Man City now, but you’re never just going to switch the lights off the minute you walk out of the building. It doesn’t happen that way.

“Chelsea were fantastic with me. They’ve said about me maybe going back there in the future. That is probably where I see myself going long-term, but right now I’m at Man City and from July I will be 100 per cent a New York player.” For sure? “For sure.”

[Pete Heartspur]

 

 

 

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

I still go to games every now and again and watch every game on TV but I would say I follow city, not "support" them. I don't feel any particularly strong bond with city like I did with with Heart and I certainly don't feel the same sense of needing to go out of my way for the club anymore. Shit like this doesn't do anything to really help either.

In fact if I wasn't OCD there's a pretty good chance I would have opted out by now. It's like a book that I have started reading and even though I am really not enjoying it that much and not reading it anywhere near as much as was, I still have to keep going. Then that's on you, not CFG. And to that end, I think 'supporters' of City would have every right to tell you to fuck off if you started up.

Lol so self righteous. So because I don't blindly think everything they do is great my view on things isn't worth listening to? In fact someone who isn't blindly "supporting" the club is probably in a better position to judge.

 

When people criticise and complain about their football club it usually means they are passionate and give more of a shit! Seriously, nothing pisses me off more than when fellow supporters are told to 'stop being negative' and 'support the club'.

Edited January 11, 2015 by Pete Heartspur

[morphine]

Lucky I didn't say that then Pete.

[hakz7]

How bloody long is that article?!

[Deeming]

 

 

 

 

But with all of those analogies, and indeed the case of CFG, if it upsets you enough to continually rant about it, outwardly slag the club etc. then surely it's reached a point where it's not worth supporting the club anymore?

If you get no enjoyment out of something, why persist when you have the option to opt out?

I still go to games every now and again and watch every game on TV but I would say I follow city, not "support" them. I don't feel any particularly strong bond with city like I did with with Heart and I certainly don't feel the same sense of needing to go out of my way for the club anymore. Shit like this doesn't do anything to really help either.

In fact if I wasn't OCD there's a pretty good chance I would have opted out by now. It's like a book that I have started reading and even though I am really not enjoying it that much and not reading it anywhere near as much as was, I still have to keep going. Then that's on you, not CFG. And to that end, I think 'supporters' of City would have every right to tell you to fuck off if you started up.

Lol so self righteous. So because I don't blindly think everything they do is great my view on things isn't worth listening to? In fact someone who isn't blindly "supporting" the club is probably in a better position to judge.

 

When people criticise and complain about their football club it usually means they are passionate and give more of a shit! Seriously, nothing pisses me off more than when fellow supporters are told to 'stop being negative' and 'support the club'.

 

I don't think people are continually ranting about old things. When was the last time the 'colour' debated raged? The only negative topics that get re-hashed constantly around here are how bad our defence/forwards/keepers are.

People raise new discussion points (e.g. Lampard) when they occur and sometimes these link back to 'old' to discussion points (e.g. Villa) because they may be starting to form a pattern.