Photocredit: Goal.com
Many were screaming that Lampard was being biased against Pulisic as he was the star signing and Lampard was playing favorites by going with Mason Mount over the more experienced Pulisic. Mason Mount after all had played for Lampard last year at Derby. Mount had played in the Championship. Pulisic had experience in the Bundesliga and Champions League. It should have been obvious which one was going to be on the team. Even the Premier League's fantasy site put Pulisic's value at 7.5m and Mount's at just 6.0. Clearly bias all around. But hold on.
Fast forward 8 games into the season and 2 international breaks. Look at Chelsea's record. Can you really fault Lampard for realizing quickly that one of them was better than the other and it was not the one with as much fanfare? I for one, don't think so. It's pretty obvious that Pulisic isn't in the same class as Mount, Pedro, Willian, or Ross Barkley. Barkley was scoring goals for England. Mount made England. England is a far better team than the USA. Pulisic wouldn't make England. That's a fact. He lost his place at Dortmund without much a fight back to Jadon Sancho, who got dropped for the game in Bulgaria from what team? England. Pulisic has miles to go before he is actually good enough to feature regularly for Chelsea. Jury is out on whether he can improve enough to force himself into Lampard's plans. Remember, he wasn't Lampard's signing so Lampard really doesn't owe anything to the player here.
The fact of the matter is, Pulisic would have been better off at a bottom half premier league side when he made the transition from the Bundesliga to the Premier League. Or at least a mid table team. Yarmolenko was a solid player for Dortmund as well but he didn't have the same fanfare that Pulisic did. Thus Yarmolenko is at West Ham and wasn't bought by one of the bigger sides. West Ham was a good place for him to go. Pulisic bit off more than he could chew going to Chelsea. Can't fault him for not wanting to play for Mourinho but he wasn't actually at the level to be at a club in England that was challenging for Europe. Not yet. Like Yarmolenko, he should have chosen a mid table team. One where he was going to play and go through the pains of development to the new league without being dropped altogether. Chelsea was a bad choice for him. Any top side would have been.
I expect him to be seeing the exit door after just one season if not January. His crying on the bench against Canada (Pedro, Willian, or Mount would have had a hat trick against Canada) said it all. Anyone who thinks it was "Flu like Symptoms" is very gullible. We all know why he was crying.
I feel bad for him. If he weren't American he'd have hardly any of the pressure on him that he has. Agreed that if he was going to go to the EPL he had to go somewhere further down the table first. Even if it seemed like a step backwards psychologically.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
He can still make it there, a little slack for someone that learns the feel and pace of English football... give him some time!
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It would show some good character if he soldiered on and could improve under Lampard. At the very least you know Pulisic cares. I doubt those were crocodile tears last night.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I would kill to have him at United. The thing you can say about mount is that he is incredibly agressive in the way he plays and partly reminds of Hazard in the way he strikes the ball with purpose.
Pulisic is a smooth player and given the opportunity he would do quite well.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I will agree he could play that right side that is absolutely barren at Man U right now. I believe it he would have considered United but for Jose Mourinho. Jose likely wouldn't have given him enough chances. Solskjaer may have due to his age.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
True. Jose was a dinosaur and it is actually shocking seeing how people are desperate to have him back at the club as if they forgot his third season with a better squad that solskjaer.
If we could get him on loan it would be absolutely perfect because then we have options going forward which we are massively lacking.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Can't imagine Chelsea loaning a player to United though. In fact, if they do, it would mean United have fallen so far that Chelsea see them as a tier below.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I would give him game time, I wouldn't want to repeat history like what happened to Mo Salah at the Bridge without much game time.
The question is where would that time come from when the likes of Mount, Willian, are also competing for game time.
I wouldn't blame Lampard at this point as long as his trusted Mount is delivering, along side Tammy and Timori.
I wouldn't writes of Pulisic off yet untill he's got game time and fails to deliver and on the other side Lampard haven't got much time for experimenting.
Its a tough one for Pulisic...
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Find it hard to believe he's another Salah. Lets not forget De Bruyne either. Chelsea have let some real gems go. That's a good point.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit