WAS Jimmy Bullard really all that as a vital Fulham player?
I never could make my mind up to be truthful. If someone asked the effect of selling Bred Hangeland right now,I would have to say, catastrophic.
I can't see any of the giant Norwegian's would-be replacements having half the effect he's had in the back four since blossoming at the start of the season.
But our Jim?
Sure, he got an England call-up - and good luck to him. But if he does finally get a go in an England shirt, it'll be interesting whether he has the pace or the guile to undo the best defences in foreign football.
Bullard was very much give-and-go; keeping a move going; busy,eager - but a telling pass? The one that splits open a defence and lands at the feet of say, Andy Johnson and Bobby Zamora in on goal? Bullard was also an attacking midfielder and had the luxury of some the more dramatic strikes in the last year. But the stats of a mere six out of 39 appearances isn't the final word in deadly finishing.
Compare Bully with Frank Lampard, if you can bear it Fulham fans.
The Chelsea man is exactly three months older than Bullard, and another Cockernee at West Ham the same time as the former Fulham man.
Lampard's average is a goal every three games from all over the pitch. Bullard's is one in every six games while he was at Fulham.
Yes, Lampard is on twice what Bully wanted at Fulham - but he's twice the player.
I shall miss Bullard because he always offered a good line after a match, and was always dead friendly. But he's smart enough to realise that for a 30-year-old, £50k and a four-odd years contract is as good as it's going to get - even if you have to go to Hull to get it.
