The Chelsea F.C. Thread IV

Tbf lampards goalscoring record is ridiculous. To be our top goalscorer and a midfielder deserves a lot of credit, when he breaks it this season it might have to be him.

I loved hasselbaink though, the guy liked scoring super goals(like the one on the first page) against spurs too, a bit like drogba vs arsenal.

Yeh but it'll be annoying if he gets praised for being the greatest chelsea player simply for his footballing ability, like giggs who somehow people believe to be the greatest player in premiere league history when there were many better players then him in his prime. Fair enough they might be a symbol and a legend but based on pure quality frank come nowhere near any of the greatest chelsea players. (still quality though)

Yeh but it'll be annoying if he gets praised for being the greatest chelsea player simply for his footballing ability, like giggs who somehow people believe to be the greatest player in premiere league history when there were many better players then him in his prime. Fair enough they might be a symbol and a legend but based on pure quality frank come nowhere near any of the greatest chelsea players. (still quality though)

How do you work that out?
Don't just make a statement. What's you reasoning behind this. I only ask so I can point out how poor I know it will be.

Well Im sure no one would disagree that zola was a better quality of player than lampard was. I dont care if lamps is rated chelseas greatest player but if people start going round saying he was the best footballer in the clubs history thatll be annoying. My point is it irritates me when people get greatness mixed in with how good of a football player someone actually was.

But lampard is about to become our highest ever goalscorer when he's been playing a CM/DM role for the past 2 seasons. If that's not an indication of how good the guy is I don't know what is. Yes he can be absolutely poo at times but it's because he sets himself such high standards in the first place. I think he's possibly the smartest player that chelsea has ever had on the pitch. He just knows what to do and when to do it. His passing has improved as time goes on as well.

Zola and lampard are different players as well. Lampard will go down as a top 3 in this generation. Only behind zola and drogba in my view this generation. He's near them though. Drogba final touch of the ball for us still brings a tear to my eye.

You would put Lampard ahead of terry in your top 3?

X

x

Debatable whether or not Frank is better than Zola, I'd place Frank above Drogba though. Frank outscored Drogba in 5/8 of his seasons here and was level on scoring. Only twice did Drogba outscore Frank in a season. Not only that Lampard Nearly always, bar one season got more assists.

Drogba was a big game player, but Frank would usually turn up every match. Yes Didier won us a lot of finals, but Franks has always been there popping up with the last minute winners in the lesser games, and still turns up to the big games. If it wasn't for that consistency we wouldn't have gotten to a lot of finals.

Zola is special, some of the things he did, but it's because of the type of player he was he'll usually be more memorable. I think Zola is probably the reason we are where we are today, if it wasn't for him we probably wouldn't have qualified for the CL and RA wouldn't have came.


I always think how people would rate Frank if he had a South American name or played for Barcelona. For example Mata doesn't even make the Spain squad sometimes, whereas Iniesta and Xavi are still hailed as the best midfielders in the world.

But the stats put them to shame:
Mata: 52 apps, 18 goals, 27 assists. Goal/Assist every 0.86 games
Xavi: 40 apps, 6 goals, 9 assists. Goal/Assist every 0.38 games
Iniesta: 41 apps. 5 goals, 22 assists. Goal/Assist every 0.65 games

And then there's the fact all they have to do is give it to Messi and he pretty much does the work, Mata has Torres as his output...

Point being if Frank was playing for Barca, there wouldn't be anywhere near as many critics as he has. Franks has been consistently bagging 20 goals a season, driving us through big and small games, and yet he's under-rated. He was runner-up World Player of the Year and is statistically the best EPL player of the last decade. I think it's quite easy to argue him being our greatest ever player. But it is subjective.

Talk about stats all you, xavi and inesta are better players than mata I think just about everyone would agree. Look at walcott I think he may have more goals than rooney and assists but no way is he even close rooneys level. Stats look good on the eye but to be brutally honest I judge what I see on the pitch.

Talk about stats all you, xavi and inesta are better players than mata I think just about everyone would agree. Look at walcott I think he may have more goals than rooney and assists but no way is he even close rooneys level. Stats look good on the eye but to be brutally honest I judge what I see on the pitch.

Actually Rooney has played 5 less games than Walcott, has more goals but 2 less assists.

Technically you could argue stats are important, or maybe I've watched Moneyball too much....

The point is you can't just fluke you're way through a decade and be lucky statistically. Yes it's possible over the course of a season, I.E Roque Santa Cruz at Blackburn.

I don't think I've ever watched Barca play and think, woah Xavi has been outstanding this match. I'd take Mata over him any day, not because I'm a Chelsea fan, just because I think he's overall a better player. He's certainly never played well against Chelsea, then again neither has Messi.

Iniesta on the other hand...

Tbf xavi is a bit of a dictator when he plays for barca. They generally struggled against us as we played like an italian team, dropping deep, staying narrow etc. and then using our physical prowess and speed(e.g. the match in 05) we hit them on dirty counters. We usually give them no space to exploit(bar the first leg of the 11-12 match we blocked off barca pretty well and restricted them to long shots or passing it in the middle while we hoof it away) I like mata more than xavi for our team tbf. Xavi wouldn't fit our team like iniesta, busquetts or alonso would I don't think.

You would put Lampard ahead of terry in your top 3?

I think most Chelsea fans would. Yes, Terry is the club's captain and an inspirational leader-but Lampard's just as much that as Terry is and he oozes class on and off the pitch-whereas Terry is a bit of a knob.

Saying that did you see the interview after the match where he was being asked about his 200th goal and he started talking about Hazard's performance even though it wasn't brought up?

I thought that was a nice gesture.

I know Xavi plays the role of the so called metronome. But I just think there have been better players in his position. I'd take Pirlo over Xavi, as I genuinely think he's a better player. Why has Xavi only just came about as being a world class midfielder towards the end of his career. He's what, 33 or something now, yet it's only been these past 7/8 years ago people have recognised him as a great midfielder, and I can't help but think that's because he's had Iniesta and Messi now.

Certainly got dwarfed by Ronaldinho when he was playing.

At the risk of getting hate off any Barca fans, if I was to choose between Vidal or Xavi, I'd take Vidal, criminally under-rated and only now getting the recognition he deserves. (Before any comments I'm aware they have different roles, just pointing out that I, in my opinion think there are better midfielders, who don't get the recognition by comparison to others.)