Clive Rose/Getty Images
Why let Lamps leave?
Your team are struggling, you've replaced one manager for another to little effect and you've got a large collection of players new to the club, new to the league and inexperienced at answering the demands for success which are dictated by Chelsea.
What do you do?
Well, one thing I wouldn't do is get rid of the heart and soul of your team, the man who has been there from start to finish and given everything for the cause. A player–arguably the greatest in the club's history–who provides a much-needed bond between the pitch and terrace.
Who on earth could countenance seeing off Frank Lampard at this particular stage of yet another Chelsea revolution/evolution?
Lampard was even willing to take a pay cut (via Daily Star) to remain at Stamford Bridge to see out his playing career. Although he is not the player he once was, surely it's better to have Lampard around the place than not?
Love them or loathe them, Chelsea have had an enviable ability over the past decade to rise above adversity to always challenge for honours.
As with the Champions League last year, it can often be effective rather than exhilarating, but the desire and determination to power on through to the bitter end is a hallmark which has been ingrained into the club. The cornerstone of that attitude is Frank Lampard.
The vice-skipper is not an egotistical man; he's an intelligent individual and should understand the necessity for him to accept a reduced role for the overall greater good of the team.
Not offering Lampard a deal to stay could be the biggest misdemeanor on Abramovich's ever-growing charge sheet.