Jump to content

Super Frank Lampard


ForeverCarefree
 Share

Sack or Back ???  

114 members have voted

  1. 1. Sack or Back Frank ?

    • Sack now.
      34
    • Back until the end of the season, unless relegation dooms, then evaluate.
      80


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Argo said:

We have had stability, there's more ways to source it than the dugout. We have had stability with our ownership (and i really wouldn't take that for granted, ask Newcastle, Blackburn, Arsenal and even to an extent United fans) with a core of player's who gave us the bulk of their careers, the old guard then the Azpi/Hazard era now all going well James/Mount etc.

We also had the same captain for 13 years (and he was vice for 3 years before that and was then eventually succeeded by his vice offering smooth transitions), how many did the supposed beacons of stability United and Arsenal have in the same period?

Aston Villa is another example - and now they've got a great owner with some good results. We're very fortunate to be in a position where we've had absolutely no issue with owner stability over our success, whereas most other clubs have! Liverpool were close to liquidation. 

 
  •  
Edited by MANoWAR
Link to comment
Share on other sites


20 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

I don't think that any fan that wanted Frankie sacked realized just how bad this makes us look. This means that the club simply did one of our biggest legends in such a bad, dirty way here.

He was never going to refuse this job and it came at a hard time for the club, yet the board showed no gratitude nor patience as soon as a bad period came. 

You could argue that the board knew that Frankie was bound to fail due to their own plans and their own standards.

To treat someone like Lampard in this way is really sad. I thought it was bad when Real Madrid brushed off their own legends like Casillas or Raul or whatever but the way the board treated Frankie, like he was just another guy failing at the job, makes me feel as a supporter very, very sad.

Truly I wish that the board just waited a bit more, this makes us look like we have no hearts, no soul. It's a sad day for me, and I know I'm not alone. I somehow feel as if the fans failed Lampard but I know that's not true, still I feel like I had a part in this somehow... Even here 70% of the people voted not to sack Frankie...

There are some things in life more important than getting a result or getting a trophy, I hope that Roman Abramovich realizes that someday... 

You know, let's just treat it as it is. 

Frank did an excellent job with little experience. He brought through the academy. He worked with Cech to get some excellent signings over the line. He left the club in a better place than when he joined it. 

The performances the last 2 months and the way he communicated, showed me that he isn't the right person for the job long term, but he's still a legendary player and his time here will still be looked on favourably. All managerial roles end in failure or a stand being named after you. At least this way Frank can leave with a bit of dignity, with a sense that because he went a bit too soon people will give him future chances in management.

If he had left at the end of the season with this team in 11th - which to me seemed likely - then would that actually be better?

And also, as a complete aside let's stop reading the athletic. It's complete nonsense. It's laughable nonsense.

Edited by bisright1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, KonaKai Blue said:

IMG-20210125-WA0039.jpg

The problem that I see here is that the club (some 30% of the fans as well) see AVB and Frank Lampard as equals.

This is why others call us rent boys, we show very little patience, even towards such a man as Frank Lampard that was offered the job by the board that knew that he couldn't refuse and that also knew that Frank will be just a small sacrifice as soon as he comes to a bad period.

The job is to get the results, everyone knows that and I have also complained about certain things but if the board couldn't soften their hearts for someone like Lampard then it's up to all the fans to simply accept that as long as those people are involved we will never have a long term manager and that alone might be their downfall, at some point people should treat people as people and not as machines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jack_super_class said:

So Frank wanted Ziyech but only Chilwell was his signing. Makes sense.

One interpretation outside of this being made-up is that he was already scouted for a few years (i.e think back to Conte's tenure) and because we had two outgoing departures, he was going to be a signing (esp. for so cheap) that Lampard would've largely thought similar to, but would nonetheless be purchased regardless of the manager.

It could be different in that case that the club weren't looking at Chilwell properly until he was actually requested/ wanted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

 

This is why others call us rent boys, we show very little patience, even towards such a man as Frank Lampard that was offered the job by the board that knew that he couldn't refuse and that also knew that Frank will be just a small sacrifice as soon as he comes to a bad period.

 

They call us rent boys because it's a gay slur. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disgusting from the club, such a dirty move. Haven't read too many opinions on here yet but this makes us look so bad, sacking the clubs greatest ever player after a fantastic season and little over a month of poor form which was preceded by a 17 game unbeaten run! Scandalous. I dread to think what this means for the careers of Mount, Abraham, Reece James, CHO and Gilmour.

Coming here was a bigger risk and greater show of faith for Frank then it was for the club at the time. He dug the club out of a pit of its own making from then and he absolutely deserved to see the season out at the very, very least!

I'm not articulate enough to put into words how pissed off I am with this, the manner of Carlo's sacking was bad and the lack of faith shown in Robbie in 2012 was just as bad if not worse, this tops them!

P.s. that Athletic article is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, should be treated as the worthless gutter press trash that it probably is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


21 minutes ago, dkw said:

Can people stop posting stuff from the Athletic as though its a factual history of the incidents, its a bunch of journalists trying to make money from clicks on the internet. They have no amazing insight into the goings on at our club, many of their "journalists" are twatter f**kwits for gods sake.

Seriously. All of the supposed “facts” of that timeline will likely have come from unsettled fringe players and staff who Frank didn’t bring in - these are opinions based on anecdotal evidence. Not to mention the blatant contradiction by the journo regarding the 6 signings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gol15 said:

The problem that I see here is that the club (some 30% of the fans as well) see AVB and Frank Lampard as equals.

This is why others call us rent boys, we show very little patience, even towards such a man as Frank Lampard that was offered the job by the board that knew that he couldn't refuse and that also knew that Frank will be just a small sacrifice as soon as he comes to a bad period.

The job is to get the results, everyone knows that and I have also complained about certain things but if the board couldn't soften their hearts for someone like Lampard then it's up to all the fans to simply accept that as long as those people are involved we will never have a long term manager and that alone might be their downfall, at some point people should treat people as people and not as machines.

That’s totally not where the rent boys thing came from..so very far off.

It was too soon for frank but 2 months ago they were saying he was a title challenger and  I don’t get why they let him play Luton were they finalising a replacement? 
 

I could see it coming but it still seems they could have done it better.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dkw said:

So why bring in an inexperienced coach and then not give him the chance to gain experience from a difficult period? 

This transfer ban left us in a dodgy state and the board probably had little expectations of Lampard last season. The athletic reported that some were against his appointment. It was a sh*t show from the start. Also take into account we're halfway through the season so there's less room for error with each passing game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


8 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

They call us rent boys because it's a gay slur. 

It’s because Greenaway used to allegedly bed young men and no other reason 

edit: might not have been MG but allegedly one of the top headhunters was with a male prostitute during a police raid at dawn. 

Edited by SFL82
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jack h said:

I dread to think what this means for the careers of Mount, Abraham, Reece James, CHO and Gilmour.

 

If they are good enough they dont have to hide behind Lampard anymore. He made them first team players and it's up to them to perform and stay here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 minutes ago, jack h said:

Disgusting from the club, such a dirty move. Haven't read too many opinions on here yet but this makes us look so bad, sacking the clubs greatest ever player after a fantastic season and little over a month of poor form which was preceded by a 17 game unbeaten run! Scandalous. I dread to think what this means for the careers of Mount, Abraham, Reece James, CHO and Gilmour.

The first four ain't untested youth anymore they're established. They'll all retain a role in the squad even if Mourinho returns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MANoWAR said:

One interpretation outside of this being made-up is that he was already scouted for a few years (i.e think back to Conte's tenure) and because we had two outgoing departures, he was going to be a signing (esp. for so cheap) that Lampard would've largely thought similar to, but would nonetheless be purchased regardless of the manager.

It could be different in that case that the club weren't looking at Chilwell properly until he was actually requested/ wanted. 

It has been pretty clear for a while that the managers at Chelsea have limited input on the signing of players. They probably make requests but in many cases the board/scouting team handles things. We may never know whether Frank had any input on the signing of Werner and Havertz for example. Obviously he was going to back them when they arrived but who knows if he really identified them as targets? Perhaps the club already had a German manager in their sights as early as last summer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Argo said:

The first four ain't untested youth anymore they're established. They'll all retain a role in the squad even if Mourinho returns.

They will certainly be in the squad but it will be interesting to see how many minutes they get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SFL82 said:

It’s because Greenaway used to allegedly bed young men and no other reason 

Wasn't it partly because the surrounding areas (leaking onto Earl's Court) were known for male prostitution? Linked maybe? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mm24 said:

If they are good enough they dont have to hide behind Lampard anymore. He made them first team players and it's up to them to perform and stay here. 

Hide behind Lampard? WTF is that supposed to mean? Based on the past 20 years until Lampard arrived there is abolutely no reason to believe our young players will be given an oppertunity to play serious minutes no matter how talented they are and no matter how well they do on loan or in brief appearances for us. The short-termist, impatient manner of this decision combined with our shocking form for blooding youngsters should be more than enough to make anyone worried for their careers and other youngsters that follow them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, MANoWAR said:

Wasn't it partly because the surrounding areas (leaking onto Earl's Court) were known for male prostitution? Linked maybe? 

From what I have heard one of the top boys in the chelsea firm was caught with a male prostitute during a dawn raid. 
 

as far as I know kings cross has always been famous for prostitution, my ex lived in Earl’s Court for years I’ve never seen a brass there but maybe in the old days, can’t say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does anyone feel like Lampard was let go too soon.

Because all I hear from the media is that Lampard was fired early because that's what Chelsea does.  Which may in fact be the case. . .

 

But the thing for me is that the team spent a bunch of money and you spend that money to get better, not to get worse.  And we just got worse.  Consistently kept losing to mid-tier and even bottom tier teams.

If we're still at around 5 or 6. . . I say don't make this move.  But the team really tumbled in the latter half of December though January.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest now it’s sunk in a bit I’m relieved in a way it was now so we can say well if you have him time...at least we have something to hold onto for him, if he descended Into mid table failure by the end of the season and went in the summer would have been worse 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, Argo said:

The first four ain't untested youth anymore they're established. They'll all retain a role in the squad even if Mourinho returns.

Its Jose. He didnt like Mata, KDB, Lukaku and Salah. So there is not much of a hope for anybody else.  Except maybe Oscar.

Edited by Nick05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • coco changed the title to *Officially sacked* but still Super Frank Lampard
  • coco changed the title to Super Frank Lampard
  • coco unpinned this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Well, this is awkward!

awkward the office GIF

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

emma watson yes GIF

Alright already, It's off!