Lampard

[redjersey]

2nd best footballer on the planet that, isn't it?

Yep, Andy Gray said so.

[lawrie]

Why the need to refer to Eriksson's nationality?

 

well, because he is

[jfogarty]

England are going home because they are not good enough.Thats not Lampards fault

[Spike]

watching Lampard reminds me of the old kit kat advert with a twist:

 

You can't tackle, you can't pass and you look a right fat c***.

 

You'll go a long way...

[Morris]

England are going home because they are not good enough.Thats not Lampards fault

 

England are good enough. But there manager isnt/wasnt.

[DonRafa]

England are good enough. But there manager isnt/wasnt.

 

 

Is right.

Sven is the 'King who has got no clothes on'

[Guest Les Howard]

Lampard has proved what we knew all along - take the goals away and he's average at best. A poor mans David Platt or John Wark if you will.

He should have been dropped as he wasn't playing well but SGE didn't have the balls to make the decision (the same applies to Beckham).

[Guest Kev]

England are good enough. But there manager isnt/wasnt.

 

Very true.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

his worst performance of the tourny today. a genuine 3/10. he was completely invisible. 25 shots in the wc. 0 goals. i've read excuses about him playing 58 games etc. what about stevie?

[Paul_LFC]

No wonder Stevie always has to play the deeper role of the two central mid's - Lampard just cannot defend/tackle.

 

He has it too easy at Chelsea with Essien/Makelele/Terry right behind him.

 

He has been shown up BIG TIME at the World Cup.

[R A Softlad]

Is right.

Sven is the 'King who has got no clothes on'

 

King Ralph?

 

[Rimbeux]

He's a fine player, but you just can't pick two people for one position, and hope it all fits. Even in afive man, he's looking for the same areas as Gerrard, who then moves himself about to find space.

 

Shame for him, he just seems to play the same gameplan, regardless of who he's playing or playing with, there is zero adjustment.

 

For the sake of England, the next manager has to make a decision for the next two/four years, and choose one of these players, and use the older guy from the bench. Hargreaves has to play

Edited July 2, 2006 by Rimbeux

[Zoob]

For the sake of England, the next manager has to make a decision for the next two/four years, and choose one of these players, and use the older guy from the bench. Hargreaves has to play

 

 

Hargreaves seemed to have the best fitness level in the England team. I think when played in his best position, he's done a good job the majority of times. Gerrard and Hargreaves in the middle would make so much more sense, as they would much better share the burden of defending - mostly Hargreaves - and attacking - mostly Gerrard.

 

It doesn't matter if Lampard and Gerrard play together in a midfield 4 or 5, Gerrard always seems to run double the distance of Lampard, keeps the ball better, and passes much better than him in tight situations.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I just don't understand why Sven chose him for the first pen - the most important pen - when it was clear he had less than zero confidence.

he also missed a pen in a friendly just before the wc

[Barnes' left foot]

All Lampard did at this World Cup is pass left, pass right and shoot (with absolutely no success). In no other way did he try any through balls to the strikers or overlapping fullbacks, or create any openings for Gerrard or Joe Cole.

 

Poor management from Eriksson to keep playing this bloke when he's not producing anything.

 

He's one of the most overrated players in the world by a country mile.

 

And now the master tactician McClaren is taking over the England job.

 

Good god.

[Dan]

so DS77 what makes you feel so sorry for the probable multimillionaire, model for a wife, living the average man's dream career, Frank Lampard?

 

Because he has had an absolute stinker from start to finish, with no help from his manager. Milllionaire or not he's only human you know......or does having money and a fit wife negate any normal human feelings?

 

Are you one of these people who can't understand why footballers can get depressed as well?

[Ombudsam]

Hargreaves has to play

 

He was unbelievable in the two games in his proper position. We have to replace didi and this lad looked like he could do it.

 

On Lampard Goals are a massive part of his game and he does need to score them to be effective. The thing is that he normally does but this tourny he didn't

[Earl Hafler]

I just don't understand why Sven chose him for the first pen - the most important pen - when it was clear he had less than zero confidence.

 

I said the same thing to my mates as he walked up to take it

" He's been s**t all tournament, hasn't scored a goal from umpteen shots and then that shocking miss in normal time...and he's taking the first penalty ?! "

 

Complete w**k from Lampard, Beckham and Sven from start to finish, the only respite being Beckham's first free-kick goal since man came out of the caves.

 

No more objectivity from me about Lampard now. He can **** right off.

[Guest Portly]

It was Erikson's determination to accommodate Lampard that led to the 4-5-1 formation, which has been proved not to work many times in the past. While Rooney was on the field, he didn't make that much contribution because he was isolated up front.

 

4-4-2 always works better than fancy formations. How many times have you seen a club side revert to 4-4-2 during a match and perform much better?

 

Portugal weren't that good as footballers, though their dramatic abilities were quite impressive. I am convinced that if we had played 4-4-2 from the start we would have won comfortably in the 90 minutes and would now be in the Semi.

[Knox_Harrington]

Portugal were s***.

[R A Softlad]

England are good enough. But there manager isnt/wasnt.

 

Spot on.

[Tosh]

But then.... having watched England these past couple of weeks, would you give them a hope in hell v Brazil or France?

 

Nope, nor me. I watched both games yesterday with a friend from Ohio who'd never watched "soccer" before. Even he saw that both Brazil and France were in a different league to Portugal or England and the latter showed no ability to "step it up".

 

For ages now, the whole was less than the sum of the parts - and that's down to the manager. As is picking Owen and Rooney (both crook) for the squad...and perhaps the "big names" need to be dropped to give way to the people like Hargreaves who can do an excellent job, and play for the team...

[R A Softlad]

I'd have thought England could have done France but it would have made some hard decisions.

 

Had the penalties gone the other way you'd have been looking at the next match without Terry, Rooney and possibly Beckham. So I'd have played this team:

 

Robinson

Neville, Carra, Ferdinand, A Cole

Lennon, Gerrard, Hargreaves, J Cole

Crouch, Walcott

 

To be honest Lampard wouldn't have been in my team after game 2. The only players who impressed were Lennon, Hargreaves, Gerrard and Crouch. The other 'big' names didn't show up. I would not have taken Owen and Rooney - probably leaving Owen at home, nor would I have taken Walcott in all honesty. I'd have gone with Defoe and, as I said prior to the squad decision, an older head like Fowler.

[Tosh]

But Softy, Eriksson wouldn't play that team, even in the second half of a meaningless friendly...

[R A Softlad]

Oh I know - hence the hard decisions bit - I don't think Eriksson was capable of that decision though, Beckham wouldn't let him.