I came across this article which raises some very good points. Enjoy. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/apr/10/the-question-steven-gerrard-liverpool When Steven Gerrard came off the bench against Newcastle United on 30 December and transformed a 1-1 draw into a 3-1 win, the assumption was that, with their talisman back after an ankle injury, Liverpool would kick on. That win took them to fifth and with Chelsea and Arsenal faltering, Newcastle seemingly beginning to feel the effects of their comparatively slender squad and Tottenham being Tottenham, a challenge for Champions League qualification, perhaps even third place, seemed probable. Liverpool have won only two of their 13 league games since then. Going into Tuesday's game against Blackburn Rovers they lie eighth, level on points with Fulham and Norwich City, the two sides below them, and risk finishing outside the top eight for the first time since they returned to the top flight in 1962. They need 15 points from the six games that remain to avoid their worst points tally in a 20-team Premier League (in 2005, a failure that was mitigated by their European Cup win that year). A Carling Cup and possible FA Cup, of course, provide some mitigation â and it is actually slightly depressing that league position apparently means so much more than trophies â but it is still reasonable to ask what on earth has gone wrong since the turn of the year. Take a cohesive team, add Gerrard, and the result has been a shambles. It seems almost heretical to say it, but could it be that Gerrard is not the solution but the problem; that, fine player though he is, he has destroyed the balance of the side? When Gerrard has not started this season, Liverpool have won 48% of games played; when he has started, that drops to 9%. In the 11 games Gerrard has started, Liverpool have scored an average of 1.00 goal per game while conceding 1.36; without him it is goals for 1.24, goals against 0.90. They have taken 1.67 points per game without him, just 0.73 with. Project that over a season: without Gerrard, Liverpool would get 63 points, which last season would have seen them finish fifth; with Gerrard, they would get 28, certain relegation form. Those figures include six games in which Gerrard has come off the bench. In two of those, against Everton away in October and against Newcastle, he helped turn draws into wins. In the other four, the result has remained unchanged, although Manchester City did increase a 2-0 lead to 3-0. It was apparent even under Rafael BenÃtez that Gerrard was at his best when he could be let off the leash, when the situation was so desperate that he could be released from responsibility and told simply to swash buckles and storm barns all over the pitch â as he did against Olympiakos in December 2004, against Milan in the 2005 European Cup final and against West Ham in the FA Cup final the following year. In that regard, he fitted perfectly the Roy of the Rovers template and, as Scott Murray argued in The Blizzard (a piece reproduced here), there has been no figure so pernicious in English football history as Roy Race. "While little schemers from Italy dreamt of becoming fantasistas, conducting their team-mates to victory from the centre of the park, while South American youths honed their skills and picked up a few street-smarts in the dusty favelas, hoping to put it all together in a gambeta," he wrote, "thanks to Roy Race, English children spent their formative years sat on their arses being taught a very strange lesson: it doesn't really matter what you do for 89 minutes because a superhero will turn up eventually, welt the ball into the net, and you can all go home with your cups and medals. "Such was the sermon preached from the Melchester pulpit. In the big games, Rovers were perfectly happy to wing it, knowing Racey would amble along to the rescue at some point. As a result, nobody would bother preparing for anything. More often than not, Melchester would yawn on to the pitch, and end up a goal or two down not long after kick-off. A Race-inspired comeback was nearly always on the cards." Nobody ever mentions it but in terms of control, Liverpool's best performance in their 2004-05 run in the Champions League was the 0-0 draw at Juventus, where Gerrard was absent and Liverpool's midfield comprised Xabi Alonso, Igor Biscan and Antonio Núñez. Gerrard's penchant for Hollywood passes and his tactical indiscipline are well-known, but the Opta statistics present a more nuanced picture. Shots on target and shots to goal are virtually unchanged with and without Gerrard while possession (55.22% to 56.50%) and pass completion (80.79% to 81.06%) improve marginally with him in the side. Cross completion drops from 21.21% to 15.19% when Gerrard comes into the side, while the number of tackles won falls from 75.49% to 71.90%. That latter figure perhaps hints at what he does in terms of disrupting the shape of the midfield. That said, the injury to Lucas Leiva who, remarkably, has still made more tackles than anybody else in the Liverpool squad this season despite having been injured since November, partly accounts for that fall-off and has clearly been a significant factor in Liverpool's stumble. But what is really telling is the impact Gerrard has on other players. All six of Charlie Adam's assists and both his goals have come when Gerrard has not started. Jordan Henderson's tackle success rate drops from 92.59% when Gerrard does not start to only 63.64% when he does. Jay Spearing wins 60.71% of duels when Gerrard does not start; only 54.76% when he does. When Gerrard is there, they have to adjust to different roles and, so far, that seems to have had a detrimental effect. The phenomenon of a big player dwarfing those around him, particularly when, as in the case of Henderson and Adam, they are low on confidence, is well-known. The tendency, understandably, is to give the ball to the star, to try to feed him at every opportunity: Cesc Fábregas described it happening at Arsenal in Thierry Henry's last full season, while an overreliance on Samuel Eto'o has clearly hampered Cameroon. Gerrard offers an excuse, an easy way for his team-mates to dodge responsibility. It is not that he is a bad player, far from it â and Lucas's absence is almost certainly a bigger reason for Liverpool's slide than Gerrard's return â but it could be that his impact is detrimental. That is the problem with building up individuals in football: no matter how gifted he is, it is never just about one man.
The Everton game suggests yes, but between good games he disappears more than usual. Could we possible use him for big games? Players like Kuyt and Gerrard tend to perform better for the big games.
I agree with the author of the article - I felt Gerrard does have a detrimental impact on our midfield. However, I had my eye on the fact that Agger and Lucas were both out which could have been another factor. But the stats of the other midfielders when Gerrard doesn't play is astounding. In the first half of the season, we weren't getting the results but we were dominating teams and deserved to win. In the second half of the season (when Gerrard returned), we weren't getting results and the performances were suffering.
gerrard is too good for what precisely? his attitude or his work rate. cos thats what its all about now. i'd send him on after 60mins myself. not start
He was as bad for England as well. Lampard conceded a bit of ground, sat a bit deeper, did what he was told. Gerrard just did whatever he pleased- no positional discipline whatsoever.
I've thought & suggested most of this article for a long time now. Let me be clear, I think he is an incredible player who we owe considerably and I am not remotely suggesting we dump him but I think unlike past LFC heroes we have unfairly built Stevie up out of desperation at the mediocrity that has surrounded him over his career. (with a few exceptions) Because he has been run into the ground as one of the few players we've had who dare I say it allowed us to overachieve somewhat. And arguably (not his fault) put off the overhaul that we are painfully seeing today. His Hero status is now the problem though. I've said it before but when he's on the pitch you can physically see the players around him take a step back; almost hear their thoughts "Stevie will sort it/dominate/make it happen" Not only has reality proven even in his good years that Stevie can't "sort it" on his own over the entire campaign of the league. his place on the team prevents our midfield players developing. We can call this batch mediocre. But it has one thing in common with the last batch of mediocre players we got rid of last year. Collectively they played better when Gerrard was absent. We may have always selected him in the balance of things in his prime but as the article suggests if he can now only do the rescue missions in fits & starts & we are truly building for the future (where rescue missions should be unnecessary & unwanted as an approach); as of next year should the needs of the many out weigh the obvious brilliance of the one? (Spock I know I know) Tough one but I do think it's coming near the time to be ruthless.
Gerrard is a fantastic player, lets get this straight. For me, in the last ten years he has epitomised the idea of a box to box midfielder with having the complete range of skills and the stamina/strength to keep energy levels up for the 90 minutes. However, in the last few years (probably due to injury) he is not the dynamo he once was. As Rafa concluded, his discipline isn't the greatest, but his dynamism and vision can really impact a game - hence he was played as an 'in the hole' role in his late twenties, which brought at the best in him when he could look for the ball, drive up and down the pitch as needed but not have to worry about sticking to a position. Gerrard doesn't have the physical ability nor the discipline to play in the centre. He needs to play behind a striker like Torres (Suarez isn't this type of player) or else be put on the wing where he doesn't need to be as disciplined and can still roam around. He has alot to offer the club still, but we're not playing him right.
I have wondered why he wasn't switched back to the right, Both Kelly and Johnston can get up and down the pitch all day, and Gerrard has provided most of the decent crosses that have found Carroll, even if he didn't score. Maybe it's because Lucas is missing & KD doesn't think Spearing can cover holes created by Gerrards indiscipline and the RB's tendency to surge forward. If we don't find a right winger in the summer & Lucas makes his recovery it might be where to play him from now in as you suggest.
Surely then it is a problem for the manager to sort out? If I managed a side and one of my central midfielders wasn't playing to my tactics or my right winger kept cutting in when I wanted him to stick to the touch line then it is up to me as a manager to sort it out. The captain has a role to play here too. The captain is the managers eyes and ears while the players are on the pitch. If the Captain isn't doing anything and the manager isn't doing anything than the player is going to think that what he is doing is ok
I agree, and I think Eriksson and Capello bottled it in that respect. The decision had to be made on Gerrard, either he was to be indulged and the team built around him, or left out for the benefit of formation. He and Rooney play in similar parts of the pitch and like to roam- on occasion they were good together, but a great international team needs to be just that- a team of players playing their positions. Lampard and Gerrard were too similar as well. The France team that won the World Cup in 1998 did not have Eric Cantona or David Ginola- Zidane got the nod and they built around him. Personally I don't think that Gerrard (or Rooney) is good enough to allow for indiscipline at international level. Rooney seems more willing to try hold position, although ends up lashing out at the opposition in frustration. Both are outstanding club players, good internationals too- but they are not of the very highest quality (ie. Messi, Ronaldo, Maradona, Zidane).
Firstly, I'm getting sick and tired of seeing silkship all over our board! It's not our fault that his home board is a wasteland but he never has anything positive to say. I just wish he'd bugger off. My opinion so it doesn't need commenting on. The enigma that is Gerrard. We owe him a great debt of gratitude for what he has done and what he has represented. However, we now have to face the fact that he can no longer be the gut busting all around the pitch player that he was before this final set of injuries. I doubt that he will ever regain that level again. However, if you look at the make-up of the squad as it was originally envisaged, I don't think that deep lying CM was what Dalglish intended for him. Adam was brought in to play alongside Lucas and not Gerrard. Gerrard's focus was to be in the hole behind Suarez and Carroll. For reasons that we all know too well this has not had the chance to flourish. He does need the freedom to roam. It's not a sense of ill-discipline as some have suggested, it's part of his general style of play. If you want a sit-in then pick Lampard he can do that all day. However, Lampard will never make the breakthoughs that gerrad can make. So, the stats will say what they will say but give us a chance to play to gerrards strengths and they will change rapidly!
Good article. What I'll say is: When I think of what I would like to see done with Liverpool over the next few years and how I feel they would be best transformed on the pitch, I am no longer seeing Gerrard in the first 11. I feel guilty in a way, but its true. The main reason is that I dont think he fits our style of play as a central midfielder. The position I see him best suited to is behind the main striker. But the player I see best suited there for us now is Suarez, how I feel can bring more to the team and attack. I have been saying all season he has to be played further forward because I'm not so keen on how our midfield goes when he plays deep. Its a fact that his best seasons have come when he has played off the striker or on the right, with a free role. but stick him on the right with Suarez in the whole and one would end up being restricted to avoid loosing our shape. So that wont work. (though the two of them have linked up well a few times) It is interesting to see the stats on how other players performances drop when Gerrard is in. Maybe Gerrard should try the bench for a few games to see what changes. ----------- I remember Rafa saying towards the end of his reign that he thinks Gerrard could became a decent striker when he gets older, as he becomes less fit to be a free running attacker. Its no doubt that Gerrard has a great first touch, a neat and strong finish and is very composed in the box. So maybe Suarez should play behind Gerrard.
Why does you opinion not need commenting on? Sadly not much around Liverpool is positive and I'll be damned if I let a happy clappy lie-mongerer brighten your rightfully dark day!
Maybe Gerrard should become a squad player. It`s not a bad thing as a player becomes older, SAF has done it with Giggs and Scholes, a good squad needs a few older heads that can come on at times when experience is needed.
Currently no. He's out of form, sluggish, a little lazy and unbalances our midfield. We've still got him doing the greyhound work which cannot do anymore. Without Lucas to do the scrapping, playing Gerrard leaves us very exposed. I would still play him just behind Suarez where he won't have to endlessly track back.
So we won without Steven Gerrard ... Up until the sending off (and towards the end of the match), our midfield looks more dynamic with both Shelvey and Henderson pressing hard. Everything looks so much more fluid without Gerrard.
