Lampard was nominated for manager of the year in 19/20 despite a worse season than Sarri's before him, while Sarri was hounded out of the club despite winning the Europa League. Lampard's cut more slack because he's English (and a former player). https://twitter.com/TeleFootball/status/1321174163739037696

Sarri's Chelsea conceded 15 fewer goals than Lampard's in the league, and only scored 6 fewer (also Pulisic, Havertz, and Werner would have been ideal 'Sarriball' players).

Kepa wasn't as much of an issue under Sarri either (even though he obviously was one at times (Carabao Cup)) and they had the third-best defence in the league with players now not deemed good enough for Lampard.

Chelsea weren't a Champions League side when Sarri took over, and he got them back in the top four.

Contrary to popular belief, Sarri also played Kante in his best position (if 4-3-3) and Kante's performances have dropped since he left.

And, Sarri was probably better for Hudson-Odoi's development than Lampard has been, too, even though Sarri was heavily criticised for not selecting him.

So Lampard should maybe look at the treatment of Sarri before him, before claiming he's given a raw deal in the media, or wherever else, because he's English.

Fwiw (not much) Lampard had a decent first season and probably surprised a few critics with a top-four finish, which is where they should finish again given the signings. This is more related to the double-standards applied to him and Sarri, and these recent comments.

Wrote this before Lampard's first season, which also looks at the transfer ban. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesnalton/2019/07/22/frank-lampard-chelsea-manager-transfer-ban/

And if Chelsea fans prefer watching Lampardiball to Sarriball then you can't argue with that, though I think second-season Sarriball would have been much more entertaining, especially with Pulisic. https://twitter.com/D_R_Stan/status/1321398899735777282