Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Genuinely not sure if serious. I can only assume Ronny failed to watch Italy at the Euros or Juve at all of recent. Obviously Chelsea's UEFA Cup win was a big thing, especially when he was captain because of pure circumstance (not that it matters, stick it in anyway).

 

Die in wool old Blue Ronny. Disappointing.

 

At their peak they're different players and it could be argued either way btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Deuce has been watching loads of Serie A while not watching much of the EPL at all. Kudos.

 

Proffers a wildly outrageous opinion, for which he is criticized by all. Takes a pot-shot at the American, because derp and ENGURRLAND.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pirlo's a very good footballer and at his best he was great. Xavi he ain't.

 

As I said, Lampard's made a bigger contribution to his side.

 

Club side more than likely, international side not at all for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Lampard brings things that Pirlo doesn't, and there's definitely an argument to be made for him to get the nod in certain sides like. Pirlo is f***ing magic though, he has dreamy hair as well.

 

I honestly don't think I'd have him in any side ahead of Pirlo. He certainly brings goals, but Pirlo dictates tempo, and runs games. He's immense basically.

If your team is lacking attacking movement and goals in midfield then I'd take Lampard ahead of Pirlo, depends on what you have and need really. They're completely different midfielders so they're not necessarily interchangeable.

 

I'd take Lampard over Pirlo at Newcastle any day of the week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pirlo's a very good footballer and at his best he was great. Xavi he ain't.

 

As I said, Lampard's made a bigger contribution to his side.

 

Club side more than likely, international side not at all for me.

 

Lampard has the edge in goals certainly but in his ten years at AC pirlo won an absolute shed load and I'd argue he was a massive contributor.

 

I'd also argue he played a huge part in Juve's latest title wins.

 

True but there are more ball playing replacement types than Lampard types for me. Plus swap the pair and Chelsea would be worser off for it purely in style terms during that period IMO.

 

Lampard is a far, far better Nolan RE: the above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pirlo's a very good footballer and at his best he was great. Xavi he ain't.

 

As I said, Lampard's made a bigger contribution to his side.

 

Club side more than likely, international side not at all for me.

 

As if that bit is even vaguely up for debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lampard wouldn't get chances at Newcastle. Pirlo would provide chances for the players we already have.

 

Fair point. Lampard's got a horrible record of creating chances for others. Only the 2nd best in Premier League history.

 

He's played in some god-awful teams with Chelsea. Been a man alone adrift in a sea of dross, hasn't he. Those shite Chelsea sides over the years...amazing that he's accomplished so much without any good players around him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Newcastle is a shit example for anything like as we're fucking awful awful at everything but aye :lol: I'm just making the point that they're completely different players who will bring a completely different tool set to whichever side they play for. Pirlo is undoubtedly the more talented footballer like, and as mentioned earlier, he really does have dreamy hair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lampard wouldn't get chances at Newcastle. Pirlo would provide chances for the players we already have.

 

Fair point. Lampard's got a horrible record of creating chances for others. Only the 2nd best in Premier League history.

 

He's played in some god-awful teams with Chelsea. Been a man alone adrift in a sea of dross, hasn't he. Those shite Chelsea sides over the years...amazing that he's accomplished so much without any good players around him.

 

Yep, it's irrelevant now I think about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Pirlo's a very good footballer and at his best he was great. Xavi he ain't.

 

As I said, Lampard's made a bigger contribution to his side.

 

Club side more than likely, international side not at all for me.

 

Lampard has the edge in goals certainly but in his ten years at AC pirlo won an absolute shed load and I'd argue he was a massive contributor.

 

I'd also argue he played a huge part in Juve's latest title wins.

 

True but there are more ball playing replacement types than Lampard types for me. Plus swap the pair and Chelsea would be worser off for it purely in style terms during that period IMO.

 

Lampard is a far, far better Nolan RE: the above.

 

I'd agree with that, but I think it's wholly incorrect to suggest that Pirlos contribution to his team was less significant than lampard's IMO . But I agree that the box to box midfielder is a real rarity nowadays.

 

As is the regista tbf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Pirlo's a very good footballer and at his best he was great. Xavi he ain't.

 

As I said, Lampard's made a bigger contribution to his side.

 

Club side more than likely, international side not at all for me.

 

Lampard has the edge in goals certainly but in his ten years at AC pirlo won an absolute shed load and I'd argue he was a massive contributor.

 

I'd also argue he played a huge part in Juve's latest title wins.

 

True but there are more ball playing replacement types than Lampard types for me. Plus swap the pair and Chelsea would be worser off for it purely in style terms during that period IMO.

 

Lampard is a far, far better Nolan RE: the above.

 

I'd agree with that, but I think it's wholly incorrect to suggest that Pirlos contribution to his team was less significant than lampard's IMO . But I agree that the box to box midfielder is a real rarity nowadays.

 

As is the regista tbf.

 

Not as prevalent certainly. It's what Cabaye could be if he's forced to play deep

 

:thup: With the right personnel around him, he'd be very good there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ronaldo is spot on. It's just cool to hate on English players.

 

Well yeah, because they've been utter failures for the team that we actually have a vested interest in (England). :lol:

 

Sorry we're not all blue TID like Ronnie.

 

Lumplard's been great for Chelsea, whoopdy do. Xavi and Pirlo won the World Cup, they win.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ronaldo said Pirlo was '5 years past it' and nothing to worry about for England at the Euro's, right before he took the piss out of us and then picked up MOTM against Germany as well.

 

Can only assume he's watching a different player to the rest of us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure I said 5 years past his best. Which he was at the time. 6 years now.

 

It's funny the same posters who consistently undermine the significance of international football watch a player once every couple of years in their country's shirt and let it totally dominate their perception.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is hating on Lampard :lol:

 

Nope. One of the best players of the PL era and one of the best England has ever produced. Not a soul here has hated on him.

 

I'm sorry but Frank Lampard's not one of the best players England has ever produced. None of the players in the current squad bar Ashley Cole and maybe Wayne Rooney are in that category.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...