Clrnc wrote:
Tactics wrote:
Do you consider him a central midfielder? Because If he's, I wouldn't say he's one of the best in that position simply because he lacks the ability to run games. You can't be one of the best central midfielders if you can't dictate the pace of the game and influence the way your team plays IMO.
He can do a lot of things(passing, vision, tackling, positioning etc) in CM at a pretty decent standard but his stand out qualities are in the final 3rd, namely; the timing of his runs and his finishing. He's had a great craeer, but I wouldn't go as far as saying he's one of the best CMs of his generation. Judging him purely on what he does in CM, he doesn't come close to Xavi and Pirlo IMO.
Yes, I consider him as a CM. He isn't close to Xavi and Pirlo, he is a different kind of player. He can dictate pace of the game, his passing is very underrated and his vision is actually pretty good. Just because he is great in timing of runs and scoring goals doesn't mean he is a AM.
Let's agree to disagree on that one.
I can't think of a single top class performance from Lampard against a quality opposition from CM, it's no coincidence he's spent most of his Chelsea career playing as a sort of a 2nd striker. The times I have seen him play in CM(for England), he's looked plain average.
I don't think he's any better than say Arteta in CM(note I'm not comparing them as AM/2nd strikers) and I'm not on the wind up. Can't think of anything he does better than the Spaniard from that position, well apart from being more dominant in the air by virtue of being taller.
