Lumplard joining Man City?!

[JerryGarcia]

It's bizarre that sides no longer see the value of club veterans anymore - there's simply no room left for that role in a squad but if you look across Europe at the most successful sides they have players in their 30s going back generations. The most obvious that come to mind (not including keepers) are players like Puyol, Costacurta, Pirlo, and i've no doubt that the likes of Robben, Lahm, Alonso, Xavi & Iniesta have plenty of years winning silver ahead of them as they march into their 30s.

Seems Premier League teams are the only sides that consider a player surplus once you hit 30 and start to lose a yard. Puyol was being overtaken by drifting continents for 3 or 4 seasons by the time he hung up his boots, but i doubt you'd find many people who could say he was being carried just for nostalgia - he bought more to the side than just being a mind-reading defender.

Rotunda has given the most notable part of his career to Chelsea (and don't forget he left West Ham to join them, so rivalries mean little to wee Frankie), and they've left him out in the cold. Citeh are offered the opportunity to pick up a vastly experienced midfielder at the top table of both the Prem and Europe, who will benefit the youngsters passing that on, and will give them a very solid + in the homegrown quota column...

No brainer for both parties. Citeh get all that, Frank gets the chance to stick two fingers up at those at Chelsea who didn't keep the faith and show the sort of dedication to him as he's shown that club for thirteen years, before he ships out to 'murica, where he can get re-acquainted with his elastic topped jeans.

I agree that some of these older players still have a lot to offer, I just wonder if it's a wage thing with Lampard? I don't know how much he was on at Chelsea but it must have been a lot! I guess there comes a point where paying someone around £180,000 per week (rough guess) for playing a handful of games becomes too much of a loss even for an oil barron.

I wonder if players like Pirlo are just more realistic with their wage demands when they reach a certain age? I'm sure someone will come and tell me Pirlo is on mega wages too now

 

[WalkerboyUK]

I really don't like this whole Man City/New York/Melbourne thing. Quite frankly it reeks of being a way to fudge the figures.
Of course, they've been clever enough to have clubs on different continents, so the whole issue of clubs with same owner not being able to play in same competition isn't a factor.
However, the fact they can sign players 9 months before they are eligible to play, and then loan them to one of their other clubs is VERY dubious.
Chelsea would NEVER have sold or loaned Lampard to City, and I'd wager they didn't anticipate NYCFC doing the same.

 

[TheGreenLily]

I agree that some of these older players still have a lot to offer, I just wonder if it's a wage thing with Lampard? I don't know how much he was on at Chelsea but it must have been a lot! I guess there comes a point where paying someone around £180,000 per week (rough guess) for playing a handful of games becomes too much of a loss even for an oil barron.

I wonder if players like Pirlo are just more realistic with their wage demands when they reach a certain age? I'm sure someone will come and tell me Pirlo is on mega wages too now

About £67000 a week.

So mega wages.

 

[JerryGarcia]

About £67000 a week.

So mega wages.

I'd take those wages (lol) but I imagine if Lampard had felt the same then he'd still be a Chelsea player. Football is strange, it wasn't long ago that a Chelsea player moving to Man City would be the last transfer anyone cared about.

 

[Ribble]

I really don't like this whole Man City/New York/Melbourne thing. Quite frankly it reeks of being a way to fudge the figures.
Of course, they've been clever enough to have clubs on different continents, so the whole issue of clubs with same owner not being able to play in same competition isn't a factor.
However, the fact they can sign players 9 months before they are eligible to play, and then loan them to one of their other clubs is VERY dubious.
Chelsea would NEVER have sold or loaned Lampard to City, and I'd wager they didn't anticipate NYCFC doing the same.

Chelsea didn't sell him to anyone, they let his contract run out.

Also this whole idea has been squashed as soon as it came up - Man City will be paying his wages for the loan spell. Which means this deal is actually slightly damaging to Man City if anything, as they're paying wages for a player who'll rarely play purely to keep him fit until March for their sister team.

 

[DJS]

It's bizarre that sides no longer see the value of club veterans anymore - there's simply no room left for that role in a squad but if you look across Europe at the most successful sides they have players in their 30s going back generations. The most obvious that come to mind (not including keepers) are players like Puyol, Costacurta, Pirlo, and i've no doubt that the likes of Robben, Lahm, Alonso, Xavi & Iniesta have plenty of years winning silver ahead of them as they march into their 30s.

Seems Premier League teams are the only sides that consider a player surplus once you hit 30 and start to lose a yard. Puyol was being overtaken by drifting continents for 3 or 4 seasons by the time he hung up his boots, but i doubt you'd find many people who could say he was being carried just for nostalgia - he bought more to the side than just being a mind-reading defender.

Rotunda has given the most notable part of his career to Chelsea (and don't forget he left West Ham to join them, so rivalries mean little to wee Frankie), and they've left him out in the cold. Citeh are offered the opportunity to pick up a vastly experienced midfielder at the top table of both the Prem and Europe, who will benefit the youngsters passing that on, and will give them a very solid + in the homegrown quota column...

No brainer for both parties. Citeh get all that, Frank gets the chance to stick two fingers up at those at Chelsea who didn't keep the faith and show the sort of dedication to him as he's shown that club for thirteen years, before he ships out to 'murica, where he can get re-acquainted with his elastic topped jeans.

To be fair to Chelsea he just didn't fit their system anymore.

In his prime Chelsea played 4-2-3-1 / 4-5-1 and he was the central attacking player ahead of two holders.

As he's gotten older he is not able to justify being in there ahead of their current crop of hazard, Oscar, Willian etc and I'm not convinced he's suited to play as one of the midfield two engine players.

 

[goughie1966]

Now there's rumours he's not going to retire from international duty. Oh dear....

But not too worry, it's only being reported in the Daily Star, phew for a minute there I thought we'd see him waddling around in an England shirt again.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/fo...l-play-on-for-England-after-signing-City-deal