Why Ballack Should Boss Lampard

[Guest Brian M]

Why Ballack Should Boss Lampard

February 14, 2008 – 12:02 am

No one doubts Frank’s pedigree, but for once he should be chum.

I’m a fan of Gordon Ramsay. He does good nasty TV. His American version of ‘Kitchen Nightmares’ is corny and over-edited but it’s still got the same enjoyable tropes as before: dizzying camera shots, lots of excited gestures and plenty of two footed tackles on prima donnas - you can tell he’s still sore about not becoming a footballer! But the thing the yanks love is that vicious gusto and his unflinching confidence in authority. Yes, if Gordon Ramsay has taught us anything about football – which he hasn’t - it’s that there’s a big difference between being a cook and a chef. In Lampard and Ballack, Chelsea have one of each. But which is which?

An epidemic of injuries and a stag party’s worth of African Cup go-ers have left the squad thread bare. Lampard is crocked. Terry is still languishing on the sidelines. So, who takes on the heavy burden of captaining Chelsea’s asthmatic chase of Arsenal and United? Perhaps the long serving centre back Carvalho with 140 appearances? Or will the inspirational Joe Cole, with an impressive 190 caps amassed, take the armband? No and No. It’s that German bloke with the floppy hair. His performances last year oozed grace but too, a yawning nonchalance. His choice – despite his protest otherwise – to miss the first third of the season to go under the knife hardly endeared him the Chelsea faithful. But now something’s changed…

He is now the general of a Chelsea side who have climbed back into competition with Man Utd and Arsenal: teams whose form is simply relentless. He is tipped as the future vice or even full time Chelsea captain. How, you may wonder? Quite plainly - he is an excellent leader. Some may argue it’s just a coincidence; he’s hit a rich vein of form. That, the much needed ankle surgery has now freed him from restraint, like a deathly ball and chain. But more likely, that the absence of Lampard has given him undisputed control to steer the midfield. When Ballack is paired alongside Lampard he plays with an uncertainty and sheepishness alike a man unsure whether to walk his dog or chase it. He performs with caution and respect. And who could blame him? I mean, after all, Lampard was runner-up player of the year to Ronaldinho. But whilst he is the darling of Chelsea, he’s miles short of being the commander the team desperately need to compete with the best.

Lampard has never been a great leader.

Despite championing Chelsea to trophies and a Premier League title he is known for going missing in big matches and is a whisper to John Terry’s roaring command when captain. What Chelsea need is a midfield boss. A leader to drive the team from the heart of play. But first they must first have structure, designation, and an order most militaristic. Ballack is clearly is a regal fellow. A gentleman. Beside Lampard, he coyly refuses to dominate. Maybe he’s too keen to be liked? Too careful not be seen as Lampard deposer? Regardless, it smacks of indecision from the managerial side of both and country when handling Lampard. This constant refusal to install a solid structure on both fronts - a hierarchy - shackles them from competing for honours.

Steven Gerrard: when married with Lampard for England, is ghost of his Liverpool self because he worries more about upsetting the balance in respect than he does resetting the balance in control. For Liverpool, he is the governor and Alonso his subordinate – never the other way round. Call it a dictatorship, call it despotism but someone needs to rule. Someone needs to boss Frank Lampard and no - I’m not talking about his wife.

Sven, McClaren and even Jose Mourinho have failed to address the issue of control. They offered parity where they should have installed hierarchy. Where they installed respect they should have issued rank. The sleepy Avram Grant, though steadily guiding Chelsea, is still seen as caretaker by most Chelsea fans, a truth he must know with disdain. He seems to be biding his time for the right moment in which to impress himself on the fans. Could this be his chance? Avram has even admitted he is currently building the team around Ballack. Is it temporary? A bodge job for the time being? Or a sign for future?

Pushing Lampard down the food chain could be a tactical master stroke. With this dynamic the midfield would be a unique force to challenge Europe, to bring equilibrium to the midfield and produce a harmonious attacking midfield, fearless of all opposition. During Lampard’s absence, Ballack’s confidence will have grown and grown; when they were reunited, Chelsea’s attacking threat was minimal in a dire game against Liverpool. Will Avram address the issue that his predecessor dodged? The paradigm would reap rewards for England too, where Lampard would be led again, but by Gerrard. It all seems so logical. The perfect recipe. Ramsay would be proud! The question is; would Lampard really settle with playing second fiddle, being just the garnish to a Michelin star team when he’s so used to be the main course?

[The Moos]

A good article and I agree with most of it.

[jack h]

Oh so its Lampard's fault Gerrard is sh*t for England

[Virosh]

Pretty much copies my feelings to the letter. Lampard has never been a born leader and since his comeback, Ballack has been nothing short of inspirational.

[Gem]

As discussed in the match chat last week - it's Lampard's fault that Mourinho got sacked, it's Lampard's fault Grant became manager, it's Lampard's fault that the Munich air crash happened, it's Lampard's fault global warming is occuring at the speed it is (well... weathers lovely here!)... It's just easier if we blame him for everything. So yes, its clearly his fault Gerrard is sh*t for England.

woman rant>

[Virosh]

As discussed in the match chat last week - it's Lampard's fault that Mourinho got sacked, it's Lampard's fault Grant became manager, it's Lampard's fault that the Munich air crash happened, it's Lampard's fault global warming is occuring at the speed it is (well... weathers lovely here!)... It's just easier if we blame him for everything. So yes, its clearly his fault Gerrard is sh*t for England.

With all due respect, Gem, I don't think the guy is saying that. I think he simply points out that Lampard is not a natural leader, but that his enormous class and fame hinder the true leaders around him from showing their influence. This is not his fault at all, he is a fantastic player, but can't inspire those around him. You are either born with that or not.

I remember a lot of people on here arguing that, while JT was off injured last year, the band should have been given to Drogba and I was puzzled at the notion back then. It is making sense now. He is still our , just not the best captain there was.

[Gem]

No I know, I just picked up on the Gerrard part... I can't stand him you see, he makes my blood boil. I agree Lampard is not the best leader vocally wise, but I think he leads by example well. Then again you need more than one string to your leadership bow to be considered a good captain.

JT and Ballack are the captain material leaders... but Ballack doesn't always show others how it should be done. Unless, like against Liverpool, it was how to get caught napping on the ball. Then he was amazing and I take it back.

JT is the captain, everyone else is a mere mortal

[ecthelion]

A good article and I agree with most of it.

I do not. Since when has Lampard gone missing in the big matches.

[Maksimov]

I do not. Since when has Lampard gone missing in the big matches.

I remember him scoring a few against Barca and did he go missing in Euro 2004?

[Virosh]

No I know, I just picked up on the Gerrard part... I can't stand him you see, he makes my blood boil.

[jack h]

I do not. Since when has Lampard gone missing in the big matches.

did he go missing in Euro 2004?

Along with Rooney he was probebly our best player

[c3blu]

Theres plenty of people out there who like a bit of Lampard bashing, but we should'nt hear a word of it from CFC fans. on a bad day is still probably 7/10. Ballack as been great since his return from injury and long may it comtinue but he still has some way to go before he can match FL in my eyes.

Gerrard is the the L'fool skipper and the media love him, yet ive seen him play sh*t for England while Frank has played well yet after the game the disscussion is why cant FL and SG play together rather than Gerrard should have come of because he was having a stinker.

It seems like Frank is not only responsible for his own form but the form of players around him aswell, which is complete Ballacks.

[Barn]

The main reason why that article is sh*te is that Gerrard has played for England when Lampard hasn't and still been sh*te, at the same time Ballack played Tuesday night and apart from a breif spell in the second half was absolute crap. Lamps wasn't palying so who's fault was that?

[Gem]

The main reason why that article is sh*t is that Gerrard has played for England when Lampard hasn't and still been sh*t, at the same time Ballack played Tuesday night and apart from a breif spell in the second half was absolute crap. Lamps wasn't palying so who's fault was that?

I don't know what you mean Barn, it's always Lampard's fault.

[Barn]

what a stupid boy I am, slap my arse and call me "st. stevies bitch" it's all I deserve.

We hate lampard....we hate lampard.......

[Tim]

The article is a complete load of toss.

Some points may be valid, but the moment the author claimed that Frank 'doesn't turn up in the big games' i stopped reading, as that is a blindingly stupid thing to say and there is f*ck all evidence to back it up.