Robben - Duff

Am I the only person getting fed up with all this Robben, Robben, Robben now that he's injured? All these stats with the amount of goals Chelsea score with and without Robben trying to make out its a one man team. I just want the Irish players to be known worldwide as quality player but I very much doubt you'll find someone who thinks Duffer is better than Robben.

Duff has more goals than Robben, more assists than Robben and does more defensively than Robben. OK, he's not running by players as much as Robben, but he's also not running by players as much as last season, or the season before that.

Robben's first appearance for Chelsea was against Blackburn, they were winning 3-0 at the time and it was clear they had finally gelled (without the Dutchman). That was only Duff's second or third start.
Chelsea's next match against West Brom, Robben only came on at half time and set up a goal. Duff set up a goal and also scored one, played the full 90 minutes.
The next match was against Everton, Robben scored the goal but Chelsea only won 1-0.
I'll skip on a couple of matches. :) Chelsea's biggest wins this season were against Charlton, Newcastle and Norwich (all 4-0), Duff was the better player in all 3.

Robben hasn't played well against a top team yet this season. Chelsea with Robben and Duff are superb. Without either of them they're less effective but most people seem to thinks its only Robben that they miss.

whatever happened to the team game :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thecorner

whatever happened to the team game :confused:

---

I couldn't give a crap about Chelsea. :) I just want to see the Irish players do well and Duff has been at least just as good as Robben this season yet Robben is getting all the credit. Watching Duff play for me is like watching my club team play.

1-0 Chelsea BTW, Gujohnson. :)

Duffer got MOM today. :)

Who is Chelsea's most important player?


Robben
29%
Duff
5%
Lampard
25%
Terry
28%
Cech
7%
Makelele
6%
Other
2%

Although I don't put much faith in web based polls, this one from Sky Sports today really takes the p!ss. :mad: :mad: :mad:

I think Duff is one of the best players in the world. I watch Chelsea just cause he plays. He's like Maradona.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strangeirish

Who is Chelsea's most important player?
Duff
5%

---

I'm suprised Duff even got 5%, must have been all the votes from the Irish. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strangeirish

Who is Chelsea's most important player?

Lampard
25%

---

Lampard is ****! How did he get 25%??? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

^^^

Lampard a bad player? Im looking forward to your explanation of that particular comment.

there is absolutely no way you can consider lampard a bad player.
arrogant - definitely
over-rated - which england international isn't?
but s.h.i.t. - no way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gary

Lampard a bad player? Im looking forward to your explanation of that particular comment.

---

Bit like Beckham, absolutely fantastic on the ball, shíte off it. As I've said in another thread, the Actim Index proves that. Lampard has almost 3 times the amount of assists as Duff and has more goals but still if Duff was getting his game at the start of the season (even without any addittional goals or assists) he would be way more effective than Lampard. So, to put it simply. Even though Lampard was way more effective offensively than Duff over the course of the season, if Duff played as many games as Lampard he'd have been more effective than him overrall. Lampard is a central midfielder, Duff is a winger yet Duff is probably twice as effective as Lampard defensively.
http://actim.pa.press.net/top100.shtml
e
I study Lampard's game and he does very, very little when he hasn't got the ball. If someone like Gerrard spent their every minute off the ball getting themselves into good positions he'd have way more goals and assists than he does have now. Not acceptable for a central midfielder and I've yet to see Lampard have a good game for England. Out of their 4 Euro Champs games they only had more possession in 1. Switzerland, France and Portugal dominated the entire games (well, the Swiss did until Haas got snt off after an hour) and that (possession) usually boils down to central midfield.

One of my mantras from the 2003 season was that Lampard was crap. I've been made to eat my words though as I think he's improved massively since then. I take the point about his work off the ball though.

Still, there was a game recently (Portsmouth?) which Chelsea won easily in the end but Lampard gave the ball away carelessly TWICE to give the opposition one-on-ones which they missed. No mention of it from the commentary box or the papers.

Although I'd love to see Duff getting the full praise he deserves I'm happy for the world to underestimate our players and our team. But I've no doubt that if Duff was Dutch or somewhere cosmopolitan he'd be lauded to high heaven in the media, exactly as said above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gary

^^^

Lampard a bad player? Im looking forward to your explanation of that particular comment.

---

To be honest I just fcuking hate the cnut! He is not crap but very overated and the man cant take a set piece for his life!

duff's much better off being under-appreciated by the mob-like english press anyway. fu ck 'em.

regarding lampard and his off the ball movement, perhaps it's coaching instructions. i.e. don't go bombing around every single time we're advancing, just sit in and pick your runs, conserve energy, etc. i could be very stupidly wrong about this but i often stare and gerrard as he languishes in a 2 yard square without the ball and come to the same conclusion (i.e. he'd be the first one on his team to go rushing around like a madman unless he were explicitly told not to). i suppose the biggest, even somewhat uncoachable, part of the game is judgement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ken foree

regarding lampard and his off the ball movement, perhaps it's coaching instructions. i.e. don't go bombing around every single time we're advancing, just sit in and pick your runs, conserve energy, etc.

---

He's the same with England.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

He's the same with England.

---

hmm. to be contrary i'll say perhaps that's sven trying to be cool?? :o i'm no fan of fackin lamps or gerrard. over-rated like the rest. but robbie savage is almost the only midfielder of his type at the top, they all wanna be viera? "looking" in command by strolling around. it's - stretching here - egoey.

I'd compare Lampard to Scholes before anyone else and Lamps hasn't got a patch on him. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

Lampard has almost 3 times the amount of assists as Duff and has more goals but still if Duff was getting his game at the start of the season (even without any addittional goals or assists) he would be way more effective than Lampard. So, to put it simply. Even though Lampard was way more effective offensively than Duff over the course of the season, if Duff played as many games as Lampard he'd have been more effective than him overrall.

---

That is purley subjective, it is impossible to say that IF duff had played more he'd have been more effective - there is absolutely nothing to say that for certain and I could say a thousand things along the same lines about Lampard that could justify him being more effective. You can only judge players on what they have done, not what they might have done. Besides I don't believe anyway that Chelsea are reliant on one or the other being more effective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

I study Lampard's game and he does very, very little when he hasn't got the ball. If someone like Gerrard spent their every minute off the ball getting themselves into good positions he'd have way more goals and assists than he does have now.

---

I've watched Lampard many times myself and I believe that he isn't asked to do a lot defensively, that's done by Makellelle, Tiago or Geremi. I don't believe for a minute that Mourinho would keep a player in the team if he wasn't doing the job he was asked, or under achieveing (see J.Cole as an example). If Gerrard was in the Chelsea team in place of Lampard he would be doing the exact same thing as Lampard, playing as the front midfielder and getting shots on target and scoring goals no doubt but he doesn't have that luxury at Liverpool and it's difficult to compare two players playing in two very different midfield set ups in my opinion.

on a side note

i see that Roy Keane today said in the UK Press that he thinks Lampard, Gerrard & Scholes are the three best midfielders in the UK and possibly Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlosIRL

That is purley subjective, it is impossible to say that IF duff had played more he'd have been more effective - there is absolutely nothing to say that for certain and I could say a thousand things along the same lines about Lampard that could justify him being more effective. You can only judge players on what they have done, not what they might have done. Besides I don't believe anyway that Chelsea are reliant on one or the other being more effective.

---

I'm going on the Actim Index which measures every pass, tackle, run and blade of grass a player runs on during every match. They have been doing it 13 years now and it is supposedly very accurate. And I can say for sure that if Duff played the first 6 games of the season (even if he wasn't involved in any of the goals) he'd be above Lampard in the rankings. Thats saying a lot considering Lampard has been involved in so many goals this season. BTW, as I said, Lampard is no different in a 4-4-2 for England. If Lampard was a winger and Duff a central midfielder then fair enough.

BTW - Everyone in the game was raving about Beckham a few years ago and I've seen a lot more of Chelsea than Roy Keane. :) I rarely watch highlight programmes like MOTD as I'm rarely in when they're on but if you were watching them every week we'd all think Lampard was a star.

Some fella on Sky News talking about the subject of Arsenal fielding a squad of foreigners:

"Chelsea have a hardcore of English players, Frank Lampard, John Terry, or British players, Damien Duff." :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

I'm going on the Actim Index which measures every pass, tackle, run and blade of grass a player runs on during every match. They have been doing it 13 years now and it is supposedly very accurate. And I can say for sure that if Duff played the first 6 games of the season (even if he wasn't involved in any of the goals) he'd be above Lampard in the rankings. Thats saying a lot considering Lampard has been involved in so many goals this season. BTW, as I said, Lampard is no different in a 4-4-2 for England. If Lampard was a winger and Duff a central midfielder then fair enough.

---

To be honest I never pay to much attention to these player matrix things as i feel it doesn't always paint an accurate view. I prefer to just look at the stats as they stand. I by no means want to compare Duff and Lampard as they are to very different players playing in different positions but the effectiveness of Lampard to the team in the position he is asked to play, I believe is unquestionable. In the premier league he's played only 4 more games than Duff (23 - 27 games played). He's scored 7 goals with 10 assists compared to Duff's 6 goals & 3 assists. The stat I found impressive however was the successful crosses ratio with Duff managing 67 from a wide position and Lampard managing 60 from a central role.

Again I'll say I don't like comparing players like that as both play very different roles but without doubt I beleive that both are as important as each other to the success of the team.

p.s. for what it's worth I also rate Beckham, for his distribution and work rate alone (notably he's not the best tackler, but neither was many great players like Hoddle, Cryuff etc) I'd have him in a wide midfield role in my fantasty team! :D . Haven't got the stats at hand but I imagine his assists ratio was mighty impressive at Man Utd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlosIRL

In the premier league he's played only 4 more games than Duff (23 - 27 games played).

---

Duff didn't start a league game until 7 games in, Lampard started them all. People talk about Matt Holland going missing in matches, I'm not taking a guess here, I'm stating a fact that Lampard goes missing in plenty of matches. The most recent would have been Blackburn where the 5 live commentator was saying he didn't turn up. I see Chelsea regularly, probably every 2 out of 3 games (and there has been loads) and Lampard is the one player I keep an eye because of the way he's portrayed in the press. I rate Gerrard btw as he does a central midfielders job but Lampard would pull out of a 80-20 never mind a 50-50. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

Duff didn't start a league game until 7 games in, Lampard started them all.

---

According to the premierleague.com site it's 23 games to 27 games for Duff Vs Lampard, of course they could be very wrong! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlosIRL

According to the premierleague.com site it's 23 games to 27 games for Duff Vs Lampard, of course they could be very wrong! :)

---

They're right, Duff made two sub appearances before starting his first game.