Lampard and the Chelsea job

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

2 minutes ago, Topram said:

Probably just to get more money out of Chelsea 

I don't see Frank being the sort to be involved in those sort of shennaghans to be honest as he would effectively ducking over his lifelong club to assist Derby.

[Sparkle]

14 minutes ago, r_wilcockson said:

Percy!!! 

Are we inserting a greater compensation scheme - interesting though 

[Coneheadjohn]

I would take 10 million plus Mount,Tomori and Abraham for the season please.

[DCFC27]

13 minutes ago, Boycie said:

It’s to facilitate a larger compensation payment, that’s all ☹️

Lampard is unlikely to engage in something that would make it more difficult for Chelsea if he wants to go. 

[cosmic]

[GenBr]

5 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

I don't see Frank being the sort to be involved in those sort of shennaghans to be honest as he would effectively ducking over his lifelong club to assist Derby.

How is an extra couple of mill going to "duck over" Chelsea. Chelsea dont need more money, but Derby do and he has a good relationship with Mel - maybe he is trying to pay us back for giving him his big break.

Either that or he's staying (fingers crossed)

[Millenniumram]

Personally wouldn’t be offering him a new deal myself. Hasn’t really done enough to deserve it yet. If he stays he needs to stay under the current contract imo, would this be happening if there was no Chelsea interest? We don’t want to be held to ransom to try and desperately keep hold of him when he hasn’t done that much yet. Don’t get me wrong if he stays I won’t be complaining, but feel he should honour his current contract. Extending it proves a risk if he needs paying up down the line. Would imagine these are very early stage talks mind, probably just seeing what each party wants and try to meet somewhere in the middle before an actual offers made. Will have to wait and see what happens. One year extension I could understand, don’t wanna pull a billy Davies and give him a 6 year deal though.

[Nuwtfly]

I would imagine this would be something he would sign if he stays, as opposed to something he would sign before he goes (to get more compensation or whatever)

[Mckram]

Imagine if he ends up staying after all of this and then doesn’t win any of his first 10 games next season.

Most fans will be calling for his head and we wouldn’t be able to afford his compo for sacking him!

Obviously hope that doesn’t happen, but I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised if it did. 

[archram]

Maybe this is Frank and Mel’s way of saying that he’s staying without actually issuing a statement? Optimistic hat on! Or it’s so Frank can say the offer wasn’t good enough so he’s going- quick change to pessimistic hat!

Anyway, how the hell would I know!

[REDCAR]

5 minutes ago, DcfcJB said:

Lampard is unlikely to engage in something that would make it more difficult for Chelsea if he wants to go. 

Lovely comment

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 minute ago, Millenniumram said:

Personally wouldn’t be offering him a new deal myself. Hasn’t really done enough to deserve it yet. If he stays he needs to stay under the current contract imo, would this be happening if there was no Chelsea interest? We don’t want to be held to ransom to try and desperately keep hold of him when he hasn’t done that much yet. Don’t get me wrong if he stays I won’t be complaining, but feel he should honour his current contract. Extending it proves a risk if he needs paying up down the line. Would imagine these are very early stage talks mind, probably just seeing what each party wants and try to meet somewhere in the middle before an actual offers made. Will have to wait and see what happens. One year extension I could understand, don’t wanna pull a billy Davies and give him a 6 year deal though.

Well if Mel has surveyed the same list of possible replacements whose names have popped up on this forum, he might well have concluded that Frank is actually more likely to deliver all he wants......

....therefore why not try to stick with Frank and protect yourself at the same time? 

[Carl Sagan]

Plain bonkers to suggest Lamps would sign a new contract to raise compensation levels then bugger off. If he signs it means he's staying; if he goes he won't sign first. 

Still no official approach from Chelsea. Frank and Mel are currently planning the new campaign, but both understand that certainty would be helpful. However, Mel is not going to Frank an ultimatum of "We need to get this sorted one way or another" so instead he's being all carrot and no stick. Exactly the right approach. 

More promising today than a couple of days ago. We wait... 

[RedSmog]

Pulis is available lads ?

[RoyMac5]

 

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

4 minutes ago, GenBr said:

How is an extra couple of mill going to "duck over" Chelsea. Chelsea dont need more money, but Derby do and he has a good relationship with Mel - maybe he is trying to pay us back for giving him his big break.

Either that or he's staying (fingers crossed)

Because he would be putting Derby ahead of Chelsea's interests which isn't really condusive to a long term relationship with your parent club is it.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

15 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

I don't see Frank being the sort to be involved in those sort of shennaghans to be honest as he would effectively ducking over his lifelong club to assist Derby.

 

12 minutes ago, DcfcJB said:

Lampard is unlikely to engage in something that would make it more difficult for Chelsea if he wants to go. 

Spot on. He'd be a ducking idiot to do something like that.

[David]

2 minutes ago, RedSmog said:

Pulis is available lads ?

[Millenniumram]

2 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

Well if Mel has surveyed the same list of possible replacements whose names have popped up on this forum, he might well have concluded that Frank is actually more likely to deliver all he wants......

....therefore why not try to stick with Frank and protect yourself at the same time? 

I think Mel would see frank staying as the ideal scenario of course, so do I and all of us I suspect. No point changing managers if you don’t need to, stability is always good! And there’s certainly no need to unless we’re forced.

Just worry handing out a massive new deal doesn’t really protect us if things go really tits up. Like I say I’d prefer to stick with frank for continuity of course, but we don’t want to duck ourselves over in the process. I mean we don’t know what this new deal entails so it might all be fine and pretty much the same contract being honoured but with an extra year or something, I’d be happy with that. Just saying be wary is all.

[Sparkle]

7 minutes ago, Millenniumram said:

Personally wouldn’t be offering him a new deal myself. Hasn’t really done enough to deserve it yet. If he stays he needs to stay under the current contract imo, would this be happening if there was no Chelsea interest? We don’t want to be held to ransom to try and desperately keep hold of him when he hasn’t done that much yet. Don’t get me wrong if he stays I won’t be complaining, but feel he should honour his current contract. Extending it proves a risk if he needs paying up down the line. Would imagine these are very early stage talks mind, probably just seeing what each party wants and try to meet somewhere in the middle before an actual offers made. Will have to wait and see what happens. One year extension I could understand, don’t wanna pull a billy Davies and give him a 6 year deal though.

Absolutely unfair, on the pitch it’s been more enjoyable but off it we are news and huge publicity- increased publicity means more money in - sponsorship- advertising- better players looking at us and wanting to come - youngsters being promoted to the first team - he has earned a new contract and also we cover ourselves better if and when he does leave.