The fall down in your logic was when you said 'by that logic Henderson had a better season than Iniesta'. If Henderson got 6 goals and 9 assists it doesn't matter who else got what, you base your assessment of him by what he did for his team, what Iniesta did has no bearing whatsoever. The assessment of whether Gerrard had a good season or not is mostly to do with opinion anyway - where's the definition for good or bad season - there simply isn't one, logic doesn't come into it.
There's the crux of it. You're on your own in thinking that and the stats do absolutely nothing to give any credence to your argument, hence the reason you're so eager to dispell them. Gerrards defensive weaknesses were there for all to see, but his manager wanted him to play that role, as he added more to the team than his weakness detracted. Saying that he didn't have a good season is nonsense, as he was captain of the side that nearly won the title and he had a key role in it - as the stats AND his performances proved.
Exactly - just because Iniesta didn't get as many goals or assists, doesn't mean he had no impact. Like I said, scoring and assisting is one thing - but I tend to look at the bigger picture. Overall contribution to the team is far more important. If Gerrard defended well and conceded 10 goals less, rather than score 10 goals, that would have been far better. Reason being is that conceding 10 goals less means he is doing his job well. Conversely, scoring 10 goals means he doing additional things not in his remit which then masks his inability to fulfill his defensive responsibilities.
Don't agree at all. If he was so good last year, then I struggle to understand why he seemed to completely regress in one year. If Gerrard wasn't in the team last year, would we have stilled finished 2nd? Would SAS not scored those goals? Would Coutinho and Sterling not created those chances?
You're not on your own Jimmy. I agree with you people are only seeing the stats. Gerrard has been poor for a while. Much rather Lucas in that role any day of the week
In my opinion - No. Don't forget he was also the Captain and he lead by example throughout his career. You also lost 2 of the 4 games he missed that season btw......
You said 'by that logic Henderson was better than Iniesta' ..... no logic in the world covers that statement. I think most people commenting actually saw all our games and what Gerrard did and didn't do, you're coming across as having some sort of better knowledge than the rest who all saw the same thing.
Its a hard one to argue really. Gerrard did contribute and Markovic didn't really get to play much and show his worth so in that sense he had a better season. It's like asking who contributed more at Everton, did Alcaraz have a better season than Garbutt or Galloway? Alcaraz is a massive liability and a terrible footballer and put in terrible performances. Still did more than Garbutt and Galloway though
..... and Aspas who's apparently got the title for worst corner taker - got twice as many goals as the blues new signing Deulofeu ...
My logic for saying Gerrard had a worse season is that he failed in his role as defensive screen, and played for majority of the season. Markovic was new to league, country and played out of position. Ironically, our best run came when Gerrard was out injured.
I think not winning the title absolutely knocked the wind out of his sails - Probably suffered a mild phase of depression I'd imagine. Age and legs obviously played their part as well
If Gerrard being poor for a while equals him getting into the 2014 PFA team of the year and then in the season after scoring 13 goals in 37 games (1 in 3) then it just shows how ****ing awesome he was at his best for that to be considered poor.
