I can only assume this notion you have of Lampard as an excellent dribbler is some sort of weird false memory. Do you mind if I ask how old you are?
8
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 59
- Goals
- 14
- Assists
- 13
- Yellow cards
- 12
- Status
It wasn’t though. Solid passer, yes, but nothing particularly special for a premier league midfielder, and not as good as Bruno in terms of creative passes, through balls etc
Not only is Bruno more creative than Lampard he’ll make a better manager too.
They didn't score many goals - with the Ancelotti season being the exception. It was an efficient team, but their sole source of creativity was Lampard a lot of the time, as Bruno has been for us.
Not that interested in the Bruno vs Lampard angle creativity wise. I think they're in the same sort of category though. I'd have the likes of Fabregas and Ozil a level above them both.
I wonder if they were all children when he was in his prime? Some very odd memories of how he played.This just isn’t true at all. His creative passing was never a big feature of his game. I feel like I’ve walked into an alternative reality
I'd like to see Bruno get 18 assists in a PL season next year when we get a proper striker.
I actually feel like the one that's stepped into an alternate reality. I had to actually go and dig up highlights to make sure I wasn't going crazy. This is Lampard's playmaking from just one season, from the 2min mark it shows his passing and creativity.This just isn’t true at all. His creative passing was never a big feature of his game. I feel like I’ve walked into an alternative reality
i actually feel a bit dirty defending Lampard like this but you and others are blatantly rewriting history on Lampard. He was an amazing passer, especially the final ball.
Not here for Lampard vs Bruno. I do think we've seen a glimpse of a proper role for Bruno. He gets some hate because he acts like a brat too often, and I observe that he's often too wasteful with opportunities. But I love his passion and desire for the club. I'd like to seem him along side Casemiro and C Erickson can play 10, might be a winning combo.
I've really loved his vision and ability to play a decisive long pass to our runners. It could be a deadly part of our DNA that develops.
I've really loved his vision and ability to play a decisive long pass to our runners. It could be a deadly part of our DNA that develops.
Skills posted the wrong stats. What age is Bruno right now? I said compare the players stats age for age. Bruno joined us 25 and this is his 4th season. Skills for some reason included 5, so I guess we'll just invent some Bruno numbers to make it fair. It's actually pretty even if you compare them and remember, this was when Lampard won the following titles: PL (twice), EFL twice and FA Cup once. He was playing for a significantly better team, with better players.
*Taken from Transfermarkt
Bruno - 115 games, 30 assists - 0.26 per game (19-20 season to this season)
Lampard - 148 games, 39 assists - 0.26 per game (03/04 season to 06/07)
He was creative in a period of his career when Chelsea were winning everything, so how much of that creativity is due to Lampard himself or simply being in a dominant team? He wasn't a player that I would consider creative throughout his career but in his peak, I will concede he was. Having said that, if you put Bruno in a team with a functional striker and a settled Management then you'd see his numbers increase. He certainly played for a worse team and still his numbers are the same.
You quoted a post of yours praising Bruno and in the very next sentence you stick the knife in him again. I actually struggle to find anything positive you've written in here about Bruno, it's all negative. Just wave after wave of negativity. You certainly are not fair.
Bruno is a creative diamond. We're lucky to have him, I love a player that no matter his previous mistake he's got that inner belief to keep trying. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts next season when we no doubt strengthen our attacking options.
I said he is a much better dribbler than Bruno. Not that he was an excellent dribbler. 38
Why do people keep mentioning this as a negative? You make it sound like Lampard had very little to do with Chelsea being dominant during that period.Skills posted the wrong stats. What age is Bruno right now? I said compare the players stats age for age. Bruno joined us 25 and this is his 4th season. Skills for some reason included 5, so I guess we'll just invent some Bruno numbers to make it fair. It's actually pretty even if you compare them and remember, this was when Lampard won the following titles: PL (twice), EFL twice and FA Cup once. He was playing for a significantly better team, with better players.
*Taken from Transfermarkt
Bruno - 115 games, 30 assists - 0.26 per game (19-20 season to this season)
Lampard - 148 games, 39 assists - 0.26 per game (03/04 season to 06/07)
He was creative in a period of his career when Chelsea were winning everything, so how much of that creativity is due to Lampard himself or simply being in a dominant team? He wasn't a player that I would consider creative throughout his career but in his peak, I will concede he was. Having said that, if you put Bruno in a team with a functional striker and a settled Management then you'd see his numbers increase. He certainly played for a worse team and still his numbers are the same.
You quoted a post of yours praising Bruno and in the very next sentence you stick the knife in him again. I actually struggle to find anything positive you've written in here about Bruno, it's all negative. Just wave after wave of negativity. You certainly are not fair.
Bruno is a creative diamond. We're lucky to have him, I love a player that no matter his previous mistake he's got that inner belief to keep trying. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts next season when we no doubt strengthen our attacking options.
Bruno actually plays alongside a natural goalscorer, whose pace, directness and his tendency to always attack the spaces in-behind fit his own strengths as a playmaker to a tee. His name is Marcus Rashford. The both of them have carried our whole attack on their shoulders this season.
Where some of us differ is when the discussion comes to United becoming a more settled side with better players all around. Why should we take for granted that Bruno's numbers can only increase, if that happens? It's actually a big plus for Lampard that he managed to get these numbers while playing alongside the likes of Fabregas, Essien or even Drogba (who was excellent at bringing others into play). Throughout their careers (counting Lampard's formative years and his decline in), Bruno is slightly better by per game stats: 0,16 in goals/assists, 0,22 in through balls and 1,6 in accurate long balls. He edges it, but the thing with Lampard is that he needed 32 fewer passes per game to get his stats.
To become a better team, we'll have to become less reliant on one or two individuals in each aspect of the game and start delegating responsibilities and spreading the quality throughout the pitch. That's what City and Arsenal do so well this season. It comes as no surprise that Bruno has more touches than any other creative midfielder in the PL. By quite some margin, too. You can argue that this particular United side benefits from him wanting to have the ball all the time. But further down the road... that's a different question.
Anyway, i can agree with you and the others who are saying that Lampard wasn't anything special when it comes to "pure" playmaking abilities. Where i disagree is that i don't think that a side with Bruno as its playmaker can reach the same heights as Chelsea did with Lampard playing in the hole.
Amazing how same stats are use to tell different story, if it was to describe player like McT, people conclude that McT was hiding and doesn't move well enough to receive passes.
Anyways those stats are not accurate, don't think PL has track of complete career and sites like whoscored tracks from 2009 only.
Clever. Actually, the midfielders in deeper roles, like McT, tend to average the most touches and passes pg alongside the defenders. Speaking of stats and narratives...
Then how is Bruno averaging so many more touches and passes than Lampard (going by your post).
Well, he is the only one in the team able to create chances, so it wouldn't be far from the truth in saying that a lot of our players are consciously trying to get the ball to him as often as possible, as opposed to the Chelsea team who had several world class players.
Because all of our creative game goes through him. As i mentioned in my first post, he and Rashford are carrying the whole attack on their shoulders. I can't be more clear than that. I also mentioned that i agree that Lampard wasn't anything special as a playmaker. The fact that his average numbers (going by PL's site stats) are close to Bruno's, despite not being your archetypical #10, is a testament to his overall quality as a player which was top-class. He played his unique part in a Chelsea side where both creativity and end product were delegated to several players.
To his credit, Bruno absolutely does all the heavy lifting at United. What the other poster was arguing was that, in a more functional side, Bruno's numbers will get even better. This may not be the case, simply because the responsibility for creating chances and finishing them will eventually be delegated. When that happens, we'll see whether Bruno's numbers will increase or not. But, as things stand, he has about 150 more touches than Odegaard, 250 more than KdB and close to 400 more than Bernardo Silva. Take into consideration that Arsenal and City are the best possession sides in the PL, too. He has great numbers, he is a very high value player for us, but we can't deny that there might be a correlation between his creativity and how much he sees of the ball.
That was what made Lampard so important for Chelsea. He was one of the most important cogs in their machine, but he still was a cog. That's not a stick to beat a player with. The weird thing for me about this comparison is that, Bruno has better chances to become as influential for a tittle-challenging United side, if he sheds the skin of the midfield maverick and actually becomes a bit more like Lampard. A player with great vision and good at finishing who will start deeper but will be constantly looking to attack the box.
Wrong point to justify wrong stat.
It must be close to mentally destroying for some people, by watching Bruno's 47 games this season. All those angers and contempt.
Hang in there, bro. Because Bruno will be there for the rest of the games. And most likely next season as well. As undisputed CAPTAIN.
Hang in there, bro. Because Bruno will be there for the rest of the games. And most likely next season as well. As undisputed CAPTAIN.
Last edited:
This whole paragraph I don't agree with at all. Bruno's best stats for us have come when he's been by far the No.1 option in the team. A team catered towards his style of play where he can just go for the killer ball at will. In a settled side with a better tactical setup with other great players, he won't have as much of the ball nor would we rely on him as much. He will never reach the stats he did in his first full season under Ole again. A better tactical setup and team cannot have that version of Bruno.Skills posted the wrong stats. What age is Bruno right now? I said compare the players stats age for age. Bruno joined us 25 and this is his 4th season. Skills for some reason included 5, so I guess we'll just invent some Bruno numbers to make it fair. It's actually pretty even if you compare them and remember, this was when Lampard won the following titles: PL (twice), EFL twice and FA Cup once. He was playing for a significantly better team, with better players.
*Taken from Transfermarkt
Bruno - 115 games, 30 assists - 0.26 per game (19-20 season to this season)
Lampard - 148 games, 39 assists - 0.26 per game (03/04 season to 06/07)
He was creative in a period of his career when Chelsea were winning everything, so how much of that creativity is due to Lampard himself or simply being in a dominant team? He wasn't a player that I would consider creative throughout his career but in his peak, I will concede he was. Having said that, if you put Bruno in a team with a functional striker and a settled Management then you'd see his numbers increase. He certainly played for a worse team and still his numbers are the same.
You quoted a post of yours praising Bruno and in the very next sentence you stick the knife in him again. I actually struggle to find anything positive you've written in here about Bruno, it's all negative. Just wave after wave of negativity. You certainly are not fair.
Bruno is a creative diamond. We're lucky to have him, I love a player that no matter his previous mistake he's got that inner belief to keep trying. It'll be interesting to see how he reacts next season when we no doubt strengthen our attacking options.
The bit on Lampard also doesn't add up, you would have a point if he was an ancillary piece to the side but he was the main creator in that side. He was basically Bruno but a tactical and intelligent version. Its also not like Chelsea were free scoring other than the Ancelotti year. They had good goal scorers but it wasn't like he had a Messi or Haaland there. He helped Drogba just as much as Drogba helped him.
That's stat is anyways wrong, PL didn't keep track of all stats from it's inception. They kept track of only basic stats.
Tbh I don't care about Lampard vs Bruno thing, I find it hilarious that how same stat can be used to conclude two completely different things. The point you used for Lampard can be used for McT also, he has better players than him in the side so he should average lot less passes per game but it's called hiding when it comes to McT (I agree with that point too).
Lampard also averaged well over 50 passes almost all the time. He averaged 53 passes per game in 2009-10 season (the first season whoscored started to record their stats) and guess what? That's the second most in the team.
He averaged 56 passes per game in CL that season, that's the highest in the team.
Lampard was always among the player who was on the ball most of the time. That "he took 32 less passes" is obviously wrong.
Anyways like I said, I don't care about Lampard vs Bruno, I just find it sort of hilarious that how stats can be twisted based on what we want to prove.
I think Bruno has realised that too and when he plays with players like Cas and Eriksen he is more disciplined and plays less hero ball. Lampard was freakishly efficient and Bruno will never be that,
I used the official stats, plus passes are a basic stat. You can believe whoscored, if you like. I have watched enough of Lampard to tell that he was a very efficient player in Chelsea's system. Anyway, i'm not interested in this comparison, either, so let's just leave it at that.
I also explained why McTominay's lack of sufficient touches and passes per game is a problem because of the role he usually has in the team, but you keep on going. It's for the same reason Rodri has about 1000 touches more than any other midfielder who plays ahead of him for City. But, believe whatever you want to believe and try to see an agenda behind every single post.
I agree. With these two on the pitch, he probably feels that there are others who can be trusted to make the big calls/take the risks and it makes him pick his moments more carefully. I think he can be more efficient. Just not as the player that wants to do everything on the pitch. He's a player that can contribute double figures in both goals and assists from open play (or close to that).
Read official PL stats description, it clearly says passes are recorded from 2006-07 season.
You probably should have watched better if you really think Lampard just averaged 21 passes per game .
@TheRedDevil'sAdvocate going by PL site and using your logic and calculation, Scholes averages 19-20 passes per game, so you belive that too?
I don't think the major difference between Bruno and Lampard is in ability to provide an assist. They could both do that at a good rate. Both can pass.
It's that they're very different footballers because Bruno was schooled in an attacking midfield area and Lampard went box to box and learnt his trade as a central midfielder.
So you have fundamentally different approaches to risk in passing, however they get to the end result of 0.26 assists per game or whatever it is. This means it's a little awkward to compare passing abilities in my opinion when they've both got different outlooks. Bruno has to learn the deeper midfield game and how to be more reliable in those areas like Lampard was. Lampard could play the simple game with his passing. Whereas if you tossed Lampard into an almost auxiliary striker role expected to press like a lunatic and show dynamism which Bruno has done for most of his career, it might not have worked so well either.
It's that they're very different footballers because Bruno was schooled in an attacking midfield area and Lampard went box to box and learnt his trade as a central midfielder.
So you have fundamentally different approaches to risk in passing, however they get to the end result of 0.26 assists per game or whatever it is. This means it's a little awkward to compare passing abilities in my opinion when they've both got different outlooks. Bruno has to learn the deeper midfield game and how to be more reliable in those areas like Lampard was. Lampard could play the simple game with his passing. Whereas if you tossed Lampard into an almost auxiliary striker role expected to press like a lunatic and show dynamism which Bruno has done for most of his career, it might not have worked so well either.
Lampard a dribbler.
Fair enough. I've no issue admitting that i was wrong about the source i used. During the later years of his career, when he was playing as a deep-lying-playmaker, Scholes probably averaged more than 60 passes pg.
The fans that wanted to sell Rashford last season seem to have their new complaints man 
He didnt do fancy moves but he was a very capable and effective dribbler.Lampard a dribbler.
I don’t think much of Bruno as a player. Him stringing two good performances together is hardly going to change that, but even then I gave him his due. It’s good for United not to have a player just wantonly giving the ball away, and I think it’s OK for people that like him to be excited. I’ve seen this before.
I'm under the impression that both camps went too far with overrating and underrating Lampard's abilities. To me the beauty of Lampard was that he was an hybrid 8/10, few players were better at switching from one role to the other but a fair amount were better 8s or better 10s. He was the kind of player that provided balance for Chelsea and he would have done the same thing for a number of other clubs.
For the most part Bruno has been a specialist, an elite creator, he lacks in game management and in his ability to provide balance but few players can create as much as he does.
For the most part Bruno has been a specialist, an elite creator, he lacks in game management and in his ability to provide balance but few players can create as much as he does.
That's probably the most fair assessment of both
It’s been good to see Bruno play this type of game in the last couple of outings. Been top performances, and we can see that it doesn’t necessary come at the expense if chance creation. I like this version.
I've walked into a Frank Lampard thread.
Anyway, with Bruno putting in some fantastic displays as a number 8, I wonder if ten Hag will focus his attention on more of an advanced number 8/10, instead of pursuing a player like De Jong who we most likely won't get?
That said, I think the constant pursuit of De Jong was due to his ability to dribble out of tight spaces and progress up the pitch. Whilst Bruno has displayed a fantastic passing range in the deeper positions, you wouldn't really say his strength is dribbling out of tight spaces. The same can be said about Eriksen.
Anyway, with Bruno putting in some fantastic displays as a number 8, I wonder if ten Hag will focus his attention on more of an advanced number 8/10, instead of pursuing a player like De Jong who we most likely won't get?
That said, I think the constant pursuit of De Jong was due to his ability to dribble out of tight spaces and progress up the pitch. Whilst Bruno has displayed a fantastic passing range in the deeper positions, you wouldn't really say his strength is dribbling out of tight spaces. The same can be said about Eriksen.
Gimps? how fecking old are you
embarrassingWhere did i say anything about him being better than any of those players creatively? whether he is or isn't is irrelevant as i just said he was absolutely world class. To describe him as a good goal scorer who can run about is a massive disservice. He was a fantastic playmaker and saying he got a load of assists because he took set pieces is frankly bullshit. Do Eriksens assists not count if they're from a set piece (of which he has many by the way) Either way they're creating a goal, and Besides that he had plenty from Open play either way.
Don't know why you took me saying Lampard was world class as some sort of weird attack on Bruno,
Last edited:
Not gonna lie, I read it and thought the same.
Lampard was a fantastic player. He could play off both feet, had a great eye for a pass, a great range and weight of passing on the inside or outside of his foot. Long passes from deep, deft flicks around the box, he had everything in his locker. Here's some more assists and other stuff.
I think under Mourinho he played a very functional role a lot of the time, and obviously he played it very well. But when they played much more flowing football under Ancelotti he showed plenty of creativity and vision.
In any case, saying he had no creativity is really ludicrous, even under Mourinho’s most mechanical football. He definitely would’ve been around the top of the charts for chances created over multiple seasons.
Last edited:
Lampard wasn't as good as the media made him out to be but he was a better player than Bruno.
I quoted a bunch of posts that gave the impression of not having watched Lampard play. You made the cut because you said he was a 10. He wasn’t. He was a central midfielder. At West Ham, at Chelsea and for England. If anything, your comment underrates Lampard, as what made him so special was the amount of goals he scored from central midfield.Gimps? how fecking old are you
Where did i say anything about him being better than any of those players creatively? whether he is or isn't is irrelevant as i just said he was absolutely world class. To describe him as a good goal scorer who can run about is a massive disservice. He was a fantastic playmaker and saying he got a load of assists because he took set pieces is frankly bullshit. Do Eriksens assists not count if they're from a set piece (of which he has many by the way) Either way they're creating a goal, and Besides that he had plenty from Open play either way.
Don't know why you took me saying Lampard was world class as some sort of weird attack on Bruno,
The creativity stuff has been done to death at this stage. My memory of him is as a player who was a level below the likes of Fabregas and Giggs (then) or Bruno and De Bruyne (now) purely in terms of his creativity. Goes without saying he had other strings to his bow. For some reason this enraged the usual suspects who seem to enjoy nothing more than shitting on Manchester United’s most important creative force these last few years. I can live with that.
He was an attacking midfielder playing the most advanced of a 3, for pretty much the majority of his Chelsea career. Ironic your saying people didn't watch him after saying he's not a creative player anyway.
and again, show me where i was shitting on Bruno? fantastic player and absolutely essential for any success we have had/going to have in the future,
- Status