It's not clearly anything though is it, hence the ongoing debate and the inclusion of other players. It's your opinion, that's all. A lot of supporters are blind to Gerrards many obvious flaws and dazzled by a few spectacular games, which keep being brought up here. Yes, he was immense the year Liverpool won the CL, yes he won them the FA cup the following year. We're talking handful of games spectacular. Lampard was consistently excellent for a decade, scored more and won more.
Or alternatively you could say Frank stood out in a top class team and Gerrard stood out in a mediocre one. Gerrard is a classic Roy of the Rovers. Odd great moments but simply not as consistently great as Lampard was. Plus he was prone to mistakes. He won us 3 games alone over the years with own goals and slip ups. In fact Gerrard was a Chelsea legend as well....
.. no ... we were all waiting to see if it would be an Everton fan that would mention it ... I think I've even won some money as a result ... PS how does the cuckoo affect your game? ... was it perhaps nesting in his hair and unbalanced him in THAT game?
Couldn't agree more. So quick to bang on about the fa cup goal, not so quick to remember the Demba Ba one If Gerrard was a goal keeper he'd make world class saves one minute and let a back pass dribble through his legs the next.
There is for smart people. Lampard was a good player in a team full of mostly good players. Gerrard was a great player in a team full of mostly mediocre players. Gerrard was the reason we stayed in the top 4 consistently for a number of years. Lampard was a one position man. Gerrard played as a defender, a defensive midfielder, a winger, an attacking midfielder. A centre forward. On the left. On the right. Through the middle. Gerrard played just about everywhere in his career and wherever he was asked to play he was good. This is what makes him great, his pure adaptability and total football skills. That and he punched a man utd fan DJ.
I stopped reading at this point ... you are a Liverpool fan and hence your statement appears to be something of an oxymoron? (Not to be confused with @Skylarker who is also a Liverpool fan but more of a poxy moron )
So being able to play 'good' in a number of roles makes him 'great'!?!? mmm....ok then. Couldn't give a toss if he could fill in at left back in the same way I couldn't care less if Maradona was good in goal Lampard was the best player in a team of great players. Gerrard stood out next to Baros and Murphy.
It's a well known fact Liverpool fans are the smartest. . The Trump administration announced it at a press conference about 20 mins ago. Apparently they've run a 10 year study on it.
... but on a serious note ... Gerrard could, for many, just have been "a good player in a team full of mostly mediocre players" after all, he did very little of note on the International stage when pitted against the best in the world (he was not alone in that) ... Personally - and as I said above - I thought they were BOTH top drawer and I'm not coloured by any club bias ...
No bias for me either. I'll admit Drogba was mildly better than Iago Aspas for example, but Gerrard was better than Lampard.
Both Gerrard & Lampard were massive for their respective teams. Could they have swapped teams and still been as effective? I think not the teams ideologies and footballing abilities differed greatly for that to happen. Could they have played together in either team as a cohesive midfield? No I believe not. Lampard suited Chelsea's playing style & Liverpool suited Gerrard. It's a Moote question and a difficult one to answer without bias but I firmly believe Lampard's longevity, goals & assists make him more valuable player than Gerrard.
Had he sold out and moved he'd have won the lot. Like Lampard did. Can't see Lampard or Scholes carrying a team like Gerrard did. In a way, his loyalty to Liverpool made him less of a player. It made him "Roy of the Rovers". Had he been surrounded by top players, he would have trusted others to do their job more. Gerrard didn't have Lampards scoring record or Scholes controlling influence. I think they were all different and each suit a different setup.
