Chelsea Transfer Rumours: Blues Must Give Frank Lampard a New Contract
Here is the latest on Lampard's future, according to Shaun Custis of The Sun:
But the 34-year-old has been told his Blues career is over and that he can find a new team on January 1.
A Stamford Bridge insider confirmed: “Frank is absolutely distraught."
Lampard proved over the weekend that he is still extremely valuable to Chelsea after scoring both goals in the Blues' crucial win over Everton at Goodison Park.
According to the BBC, a strong performance from Lampard usually turns into a positive result for Chelsea, which gives the club even more incentive to keep their star.
Chelsea are unbeaten in all 11 Premier League matches that Frank Lampard has appeared in this season, winning 10. #bbcfootball— BBC Sport (@BBCSport) December 30, 2012
If Chelsea want to challenge Manchester City and Manchester United in the title race this season and next season, they must keep Lampard because there is no other player in the squad capable of replacing him at the moment.
No other central midfielder in the team can provide manager Rafa Benitez with the goal scoring, playmaking, leadership and experience that Lampard brings to the pitch for every match.
Will Lampard remain with Chelsea beyond this season?
Lampard is second on the team in league goals with six, one behind Fernando Torres and Juan Mata despite starting in just six Premier League games.
If Lampard is willing to re-sign with a lower weekly wage than he's earning now, then Chelsea have no excuse to let him leave.
Lampard's career at Stamford Bridge will not last much longer, but now is not the time to part ways with a great player who is responsible for much of the club's success over the last decade. He could also play an important part of the club's future success over the next year-and-a-half.
There's no reason for Chelsea to allow Lampard to leave before the summer of 2014.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?