Scolari held an excellent first press conference, the players seem invigorated by his presence and the media were impressed by our new manager - all seemed like a nice rosy start in Day 2 of a new Chelsea – then this!

Confusion reigned after Kutners comments to the media indicating a misunderstanding had taken place with regard to Lampard´s future at the Bridge – YES, Lampard does want to stay, but NO, the club aren’t prepared to give him the deal he wants – result? Lampard is off!

McGarry later provided a sequence of events of yesterday (my comments follow each point):

9.30am: Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon informs the Lampard camp that Blues owner Roman Abramovich will not give him the five-year deal he craves.

So it’s 5 years! There’s me thinking it was 4 Lampard wanted and the club were prepared to offer only 2!  Lampard´s 4 years was probably counting from the end of his current contract where he still has 1 year left to run.

11.25am: Chelsea issue a statement on their website confirming they have been contacted by Inter Milan. But they claim there is no bid for Lamps and state they will not negotiate for the midfielder.

Fair enough.  Although Milan say an actual faxed offer with an amount WAS made, however, the sequence should be (a) Buying club ask if they can negotiate (b) If selling club says “yes” then (c) Buying club makes an offer.

1.15pm: New boss Scolari introduces himself to English football by claiming Lampard is ‘happy at Chelsea and will stay for at least one year. Hopefully many’.

2.05pm: Inter president Massimo Moratti speaks to Italian journalists in Milan refuting Chelsea’s claim they have not made an official bid for Lamps and confirming the Sun story was correct.

Can’t see the motive for Chelsea to say that the offer wasn’t made – they admitted that they had been approached and as for the offer, we would have only been talking about 6M at this stage anyway.

2.35pm: Lampard’s agent Steve Kutner issues a statement contradicting Scolari’s claim, insisting the player’s future ‘remains completely unresolved’.

This is where Lampard and Kutner were very quick out the blocks to let it be known that essentially, Lampard´s presence at Chelsea depended on the 5 year deal being agreed.

3.15pm: After seeing Scolari’s version of events on TV at the club training ground, Lamps goes to see chief executive Kenyon in his office but Kenyon has not yet returned from the Press conference venue two miles away.

3.54pm: Inter Milan fax a new bid of £8million to Chelsea which club directors insist ‘will be rejected’.

Ok, so Inter increase the pressure immediately by upping the offer slightly - and they may have been tipped off by Kutner to do so.

4.15pm: Lamps leaves Kenyon’s office after a short meeting and speaks with Scolari. There is no disagreement between the manager and his midfielder.

McGarry being very diplomatic here – no doubt under instructions from Lampard on this point.  I would like to think this comment is out of respect for Scolari rather then not wishing to burn bridges just in case the situation changes.

McGarry goes on:

“The simple fact of the sorry matter is Chelsea are gravely at risk of losing a player who has been outstanding for them.”

Very true – best midfielder in the Prem for the last 4 years.

“All for an amount of money billionaire Abramovich would class as loose change”

True – but he has to draw the line somewhere doesn’t he?  Having said that, how much did we pay Grant off with?  4-5M?  

“From his point of view, Lamps believes he deserves a five-year deal on around £140,000-per-week, which would see him end his illustrious career at Stamford Bridge.”

I think this would make him the highest played player in the Premier League, although it’s true that he’s been underpaid in recent seasons when compared to many of his peers.

“Chelsea, however, are adamant that four years is the maximum they will offer a player who has only just turned 30.”

Surely that’s a very good deal?!!!  What puzzles me is that Inter are supposedly offering him 4 years anyway – so what would be the point in leaving?

McGarry went on to point out that Terry signed a five-year £130k-per-week contract last summer and that this had been justified by a Chelsea suit with:“JT is 27 and will be virtually the same age as Frank when his current deal expires. We are being realistic.”  

Then McGarry brings up the Shevchenko and Michael Ballack deals – a good point but I think Ballack´s contract ends when he will be 33 and Shevchenko the same – Lampard wants a deal to take him to when he’s 35.  However, they’re certainly on more money than Lampard is – It could be argued that Lamps has financial “catching up” to do and certainly Lampard has given more consistent service than either Ballack or Shevchenko.

McGarry recounts the Scolari/Lampard conversation where Lampard expressed his desire to stay but then gets a bit naughty by slipping in that Scolari had told Lampard he would persuade Abramovich and Kenyon to give him the 5 years!

So here we are…Chelsea are not budging on selling Lampard to Mourinho or on the 4 year deal already offered to Lampard.

Seven years, two Premier League titles, one FA Cup and two league cups, in 369 games - 110 goals.  Unless something dramatic happens we are about to lose our best midfielder ever.

The club know that Lampard is also stuck inbetween a rock and a hard place; Lampard wants 5 years at approx 140K a week - the club are offering 140K at 4 years. Inter are offering the SAME deal as Chelsea!  So what does Frank do now? Stays and swallows a bit f pride?...or leaves for Inter so that he can say "Feck you!" to Abramovich and Kenyon?  

I would have thought 140K a week for 4 years should be enough – but hey ho….

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

Related Articles:

• Scolari: Lampard to Stay for Years
• Lampard Joins Inter!?

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS