If McClaren has balls........................

LFC5Times

He will drop Lampard tonight and play Gerrard and Hargreaves in the middle.

So Hargreaves can do the holding role and Gerrard can get forward.

But he will probably play Gerrard and Lampard in the middle and while they will win,Gerrard will be wasted having to try and do the holding role.

tetsujin1979

Looks like he has no balls, Hargreaves has been dropped and Lampard and Gerrard will play in the middle.
If I was charge of the Andorrans, I'd play 5 across the middle, one a little ahead of the central midfield pairing, and lob balls at him all night. With Lampard and Gerrard constantly pushing up, there's bound to be space for the attacking midfield player to move into

LFC5Times

Id say Gerrard will be told to hold back tonight - as to how much he does we will wait and see,but its such a waste of talent.

Lampard is so average and overrated. He has a free licence to roam at Chelsea as they always have 1/2 holding mids.

If you put Gerrard into the Chelsea team and let him have the exact free role that Lampard has - Chelsea would be well clear of the Mancs at the top.

Im still yet to see Lampard track back and make a tackle.

nollaig

I'm a Liverpool fan.

I'd always pick Lampard ahead of Gerrard. Gerrard occasionaly pops up with a spectacular goal. Thats his contribution --- Nothing else.

Lampard gets involved in the play, everything goes through him and is capable of scoring "uglier" goals that Gerrard.

Thats basd on their Liverpool & Chelsea performance, havent seen much of England lately

mike65

Lampard has'nt scored or even remotely suggested he'll score for England for ages, Gerrard popped in two decent goals during the World Cup.

C'mon Andorra. I mean that.

Mike.

Mitch Connor

mike65 wrote:

Lampard has'nt scored or even remotely suggested he'll score for England for ages, Gerrard popped in two decent goals during the World Cup.

C'mon Andorra. I mean that.

Mike.

in fairness, what else did gerrard do at the WC? The primary responsibility of a midfield is not scoring goals, so that is not the sole criteria they should be judged on. Both Gerrard and Lampard were crap in the summer, neither could pass the ball, or control it, Gerrard was just a little luckier. Apart from Hargreaves, Rio and Terry, i don't think any english player performed particularly well.

Anam

Lampard is definately overrated,20 goals a season and countless assists,scored against some of the top sides in europe,guranteed starter for one of the best teams in europe.Need I go on?

Now I think Gerrard is a slightly better player than Lampard,he's capable of more in a match but doesnt do it often enough,but I think Lampard gives you more throughout a season.The bottom line is that,regardless of which one he drops,the other will perform better due to the absence of another midfielder.

Tbh,I think the partnership of Lampard and Hargreaves would be more effective than that of Gerrard and Hargreaves.I think they will be a lot stronger once Cole and Owen return

Chardee MacDennis

i;d play well in that chelsea team. lamps is over rated. look at his goals to shots ratio. he can only afford to take so many shots because he is in such a quality team. he does nothing defensively either and isnt exaclty quick.

i do think gerrard and hargreaves is the way to go, but i dont think we will see it happen as lamps never gets injured - probably coz he strolls around the pitch:D

Anam

Call_me_al wrote:

i;d play well in that chelsea team. lamps is over rated. look at his goals to shots ratio. he can only afford to take so many shots because he is in such a quality team. he does nothing defensively either and isnt exaclty quick.

i do think gerrard and hargreaves is the way to go, but i dont think we will see it happen as lamps never gets injured - probably coz he strolls around the pitch:D

So what if he takes a lot of shots,he gets you 20 goals a season,most managers would kill for a striker that gets that many.He doesnt need to be quick either,are Scholes or Deco quick?

And he does nothing defensively?He's a Mourinho player,everybody works for the team,from Drogba to Cole to Lampard.

LFC5Times

Anam wrote:

Lampard is definately overrated,20 goals a season and countless assists,scored against some of the top sides in europe,guranteed starter for one of the best teams in europe.Need I go on?

Now I think Gerrard is a slightly better player than Lampard,he's capable of more in a match but doesnt do it often enough,but I think Lampard gives you more throughout a season.The bottom line is that,regardless of which one he drops,the other will perform better due to the absence of another midfielder.

Tbh,I think the partnership of Lampard and Hargreaves would be more effective than that of Gerrard and Hargreaves.I think they will be a lot stronger once Cole and Owen return

Lampard has it easy in the Chelsea team.he does no work an stays fairly far forward,takes 100 shots a game and because alot of the players in the Chelsea team are world class they have more possesion than most teams.

Gerrard would do way more in Lampards situation in the Chelsea team.
Gerrard cant be properly judged playing for England out of position - he needs to play in his best position.
Even still when he plays on the right wing he still plays better than Lamaprd - he was even the better of a bad two against Israel.

You would never ever ever ever see Lampard do what Gerrard did in the FA Cup Final and get Liveprool back into it and win it - it was known as "The Gerrard Final"

Also put Lampard in the Liverpool team 3-0 down against AC Milan in he European CL final and Liveprool would have lost 5-0.
Gerrard scored that great header,won the peno and played maginificent,went right back and stopped there lightning quick left winger who came on as a sub from attacking Liverpool down that side in the extra time.

Lampard could never ever ever do any of the above.

Lamaprd was muck at West Ham,take him out of Chelsea and you see how average he is.

eirebhoy

He obviously wasn't muck at West Ham if Chelsea paid so much for him but he was inconsistent. He plays well when his team are dominating, he's nowhere to be seen when they're on the back foot. Simply as that.

Anam

LFC5Times wrote:

Lampard has it easy in the Chelsea team.he does no work an stays fairly far forward,takes 100 shots a game and because alot of the players in the Chelsea team are world class they have more possesion than most teams.

Gerrard would do way more in Lampards situation in the Chelsea team.
Gerrard cant be properly judged playing for England out of position - he needs to play in his best position.
Even still when he plays on the right wing he still plays better than Lamaprd - he was even the better of a bad two against Israel.

You would never ever ever ever see Lampard do what Gerrard did in the FA Cup Final and get Liveprool back into it and win it - it was known as "The Gerrard Final"

Also put Lampard in the Liverpool team 3-0 down against AC Milan in he European CL final and Liveprool would have lost 5-0.
Gerrard scored that great header,won the peno and played maginificent,went right back and stopped there lightning quick left winger who came on as a sub from attacking Liverpool down that side in the extra time.

Lampard could never ever ever do any of the above.

Lamaprd was muck at West Ham,take him out of Chelsea and you see how average he is.

He does no work?Please,do you really think Mourinho would have as a key player,someone who does no work?Do you know how much he running per match?Of course as an attacking midfielder he would stay forward,its what he's supposed to do.How can you doubt his ability,did you not see the goals against Bayern and Barca?

Give Lampard games in the centre with Hargreaves and England will play much much better,same goes for if it was Gerrard there.


I dont care about what gerrard has done for liverpool in cup finals,I'm not doubting his ability at all,and Ive said before I think he's slightly better than Lampard,but I couldnt disagree with you more about what you're saying about Lampard being carried by Chelsea.

herbieflowers

Lamaprd goes missing in big games...sure he scores for fun against rubbish opposition but where was he in the second leg vs. Barca last season? Or in any of England's WC games?

Anam

herbieflowers wrote:

Lamaprd goes missing in big games...sure he scores for fun against rubbish opposition but where was he in the second leg vs. Barca last season? Or in any of England's WC games?

Rubbish opposition like Bayern,Barcelona,Liverpool,Arsenal,Spurs,United?
Where was he in the 2nd leg against Barca the year before?Pretty crucial to Chelseas victory i think,same goes for this years victory over them.
Where was Gerrard in any of the WC games?No england players performed well.

~Rebel~

Just leaving their club form out of it. Since the world cup Gerrard has been one of the few england players trying to add some creativity to their play. Lampard has been terrible for England, and continues to be. In that respect I'd play Gerrard and Hargreaves, with Lampard getting a half hour at the end. Hopefully it would be the kick up the arse he needs to get the finger out and start performing. If he takes his chance and outshines Gerrard, by all means swap them, but having them both guaranteed a start is ridiculous.

nollaig

Anam wrote:

He plays well when his team are dominating, he's nowhere to be seen when they're on the back foot. Simply as that.

You can say the same about gerrard.

Anam

nollaig wrote:

You can say the same about gerrard.

Eh I didnt say that.I do agree with you though.


~Rebel~ is fairly spot on,but I dont think tonight would be a good case to judge anything on,given the opposition.

herbieflowers

Anam wrote:

Rubbish opposition like Bayern,Barcelona,Liverpool,Arsenal,Spurs,United?
Where was he in the 2nd leg against Barca the year before?Pretty crucial to Chelseas victory i think,same goes for this years victory over them.
Where was Gerrard in any of the WC games?No england players performed well.

Yup when they're on top and the whole team is flying, no-where to be seen when the chips are down.

stovelid

While I agree that Mclaren is out of his depth and that Gerarrd should probably get the nod over Lampard, I think the dropping of Hargreaves is just for an attack minded formation and Mac thinks that the opposition don't call for a holding midfielder.

Basically he's just used the quality of the oppo to dodge the issue of the lopsided English midfield for another game

Anam

herbieflowers wrote:

Yup when they're on top and the whole team is flying, no-where to be seen when the chips are down.

like against Spurs recently when he scored twice and kept his team in the competition?

herbieflowers

Where were his goals against the big teams, say for instance, last season? West Brom, Villa, Anderlecht, Bolton, Blackburn, Fulham, Portsmouth, Everton - 11 out of 18 of his goals against this opposition, at home. That's what...over 60% of his goals last season against poor sides at home.

I'm not saying he's a bad player, the amount he's scored for a midfielder is quite a record. I just hink he's vastly overrated. And, yes, perhaps, goals may not equate to a good performance but whenever I've seen Chelsea struggle, particularly this season and particularly in Europe, he's not the one who the team turns to (aside from the Spurs game you pointed out) imo

LFC5Times

Anam you are the only one standing up for Lampard - Hint Hint Hint.

Goals are your only arguement about him,but as has been shown he does no defensive work,takes the free kicks,takes the penaltys,has plenty of shots a game and Chelsea dominate possesion wise most teams so if Gerrard was in there he would easily have as many goals.

Lampard doesnt do much work - what work does he do ? Take 50 shots or the penos or free kicks ?

Gerrard tracks back,puts plenty of tackles in,is constantly seen running up and down the pitch,whereas Lamaprd just stays up there.

~Rebel~

Its irrelevant now anyway, Lampard ruled out through injury.

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_2023243,00.html


On topic, i would very much be standing up for Lampard on his club form. He has a job which he does very very well. Back in chelsea's first Abromovic year under Ranieri he didnt have that support behind him and dominated every game still, when his job was to track back as well as going forward.

For England however he's been very poor since the WC (and during obviously but so was everyone so basing it on that isnt fair). I know Gerrard hasn't been a shining light either, but his England performances have been far better then lamps. I think it would have been better for the team if he had actually been dropped rather then injured as it would show complacency wont be tolerated, and might get Lampard and others performing again.

eirebhoy

Dominated every game my arse. Those were the days I watched the majority of Chelsea games and I used to slate Lampard on here all the time. Now it's the thing to do. I rarely watch Chelsea now since Duff left. Duff was their star player in Ranieri's last season.

mike65

So then Lamps out at least that means Stevie can boss the middle and I suppose Hargreaves back in again then.

---

Robinson
Richards---Rio

---

Terry----Cole
Lennon-Hargreaves-Gerrard-Downing

---

Rooney--Johnson

Mike.

Third_Echelon

Playing the two of them upsets the balance of the team IMO. You just play one of them with Hargreaves holding and Lennon on the right, downing on the left.

Because they are both big stars he doesn't have the bottle to have one of them sitting on the bench. For me anyway, gerrard would get the nod over lampard...

mike65

606 on bbc.co.uk is overjoyed at the news! Plus some reckon this injury lay-off is rather convienently timed. Kinda agree with that.

Mike.

~Rebel~

a telling sign will be if he starts for chelsea on saturday.

i'd prefer to see Barry given a chance on the left in this game. everyone already knows what downing offers, so why not give barry a bash? no risk really since its such an easy game.

Dont be at yourself

a telling sign will be if he starts for chelsea on saturday.

Sure Chelsea send out players with cracked skulls and broken ankles!

gracehopper

I think englands best team is:

---

Robinson
Neville

---

Rio

---

Terry

---

Cole
Beckham---Gerrard---Hargreaves--J Cole

---

Rooney

---

Owen

With the current injuries Id sub in:

Carragher for Neville
Downing for JCole
Johnson for owen
Dyer or SWP for Beckham

I think Beckham is still one of englands best players and would have him in the team before lennon every time. IMO lennon has done nothing this season for spurs or england.

Dont be at yourself

Of all the midfield combinations being thrown around, I don't think a single one has mentioned Barry for the left. He's solid, and would link well with Cashley, I'd say. Definitely a better option than Downing.

gracehopper

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Of all the midfield combinations being thrown around, I don't think a single one has mentioned Barry for the left. He's solid, and would link well with Cashley, I'd say. Definitely a better option than Downing.

yeah ye have a point, he's been very good this year for villa

mike65

My squarefootball.com post-McClueless line up includes Barry.

I'm praying that the plucky Andorans play the game of thier lives. McClaren gets Order of the Boot - El Tel takes charge for the rest of the campaign, he swings the axe and plays Gerrard through the middle ahead of Hargreavs with Frank on the bench, Aaron Lennon on the right with Ashely Cole on the left and Gareth Barry at Left back (or the other way round). DeFoe and Rooney up front, Crouch and Lita on the bench. Hell it might just work! [Ed: Do you have any lottery numbers this week?]

Mike.

KdjaCL

0-0 coming up on half time i bet on the draw at 30 on betfair its gone to 9 now.


kdjac

Vokes

England team booed off the pitch.

Looks like they've ran out of ideas on the pitch - they're shockingly bad, despite the much better balanced lineup.

mike65

Anything short of a goal-rush and McClueless is gone.

Mike.