More to his game technically maybe. But Keane was the leader Gerrard could only dream of being. Utd never folded under Keane's leadership they way they did under Gerrard's so many times. Keane would never have put up with the mediocre and toothless draws that cost Liverpool the title in 2009. Gerrard's performance in Istanbul in 2005 was fantastic, but Keane had already put him in the shade in Turin in 99, despite knowing he was suspended from the final. And that, for me, is why Keane will always be greater than Gerrard.
He hasnt got more to his game at all.. Gerrard cant defend for ****. Keane was a proper box to box CM. The next best mid to grace the prem was Viera. Gerrard is an out an out attacking midfielder.. Chelsea fans will probably say Lampard is the best but again he is an out an out attacking midfielder..
Yeah but Gerrard is a master of those positions Roger... He's actually played at international level at at-least 4 of the positions mentioned and for club consistently performs in any position. That sunshine, is the sign of a masterful all round polished player...
I reckon he might be off the pace too. Can his heart carry him thru a game with the mancs?? for sixty maybe. Hendo n Bellers to come on. And that's a threat. Wouldn't mind starting with Bellamy...but ya gotta admit he's scary coming off the bench...against heavy legs n that.
But if they were good at being a CB then surely they would be considered better than they already are??
Bellamy's just scary full stop. Reckon Dalglish allows him to play golf with the squad yet? Henderson, on the other hand, is just amusing. I hope he comes off the bench late on, cos we can guarantee he'll squander at least three chances if the game is tight
How's that a fair comparison Swarbs? He's better than SG all-told based on a game he didn't even play in? That what ya saying? But yes, some of us remember the Inter game and QF's VERY well. Ohhhhh dear. How you managed to win that is anyone's guess. OUTPLAYED -off teh park - from the qf's - til the last two mins of a final? Beyond luck, I think.
I doubt it. Their specialism is what makes them so great, just like Keane. He knew his role for the team, and always gave everything to ensure that the team was successful. Gerrard was never the team player Keane was, just like he was never the leader that Keane was. That said, Gerrard was probably better for Liverpool than Keane would have been. Liverpool at the time didn't have the creativity and playmaking abilities of someone like Scholes to complement Keano, so I will concede that context played a role in Keane being a better player.
This is sensible tho Swarbs. Congrats. That said, Gerrard was probably better for Liverpool than Keane would have been. Liverpool at the time didn't have the creativity and playmaking abilities of someone like Scholes to complement Keano, so I will concede that context played a role in Keane being a better player.[/QUOTE]
If we were comparing scholes to gerrard I would say gerrard was the better all round CM... but scholes was a better attacking midfielder...
...but what's staring you in the face Swarbs, is that Gerrard can (and has) done Scholes AND Keane's job both. To a better standard - attacking. Debatable equal standard - defensively. That's pretty amazing if you think about it.
I'm not suggesting their specialism would be compromised, just having the option of knowing they could play at the same level in different positions is surely beneficial. Look, I was a huge fan of Keane and I am a huge fan of Gerrard. I think they are both top quality players, so the argument in my opinion is pretty pointless. Clearly Liverpool fans will prefer Gerrard and clearly Utd fans will prefer Keane. Case Closed.
stevie gerrard - best english midfielder of the PL era .... but lousy taste in music, and no dress sense. roy keane - quite simple the best midfielder of the PL era - can't comment on his musical taste. as long as it wasn't Enya he's the man!
