I really couldn't care less. You are deluded for thinking Carrick has been anywhere near Gerrard or Lampard. Carrick has had two good seasons and was utter pony beforehand.
Then he's lucky to be one of the multitude of pony United players to have won so much with his club. I can live with that, I'm sure he can as well!
Multitude? Not what I said. We are talking about Carrick, I appreciate that kind of footballer as much as one who contributes goal/assist wise, Scholes for example is in my opinion one of the greatest midfielders I've seen, same with Lamps and Gerrard. Carrick on the other hand is nowhere near the three of them.
i expected the answer too funny as when people underrated Makelele, you chelsea guys come crying but when it is Carrick .. nahh it is just a different story Carrick was one of 6 key players in this golden generation team with Rooney, giggs, Vidic, Evra and Rio between 2006-2013
Nah, he is just lucky that during the 7 years he has been with us he has won 5 titles as an ever present in the poorest midfield in the top half of the table
It's laughable. Someone care to compare Carrick's personal honours compared to both Lamps and Gerrard? Delusion.
No he's not, you're talking out your arse. He's just nowhere near the two players mentioned, **** all to do with luck. Again, nothing to do with any other player you utter idiot.
I think it is difficult, almost stupid, to compare Carrick with those two. While Carrick plays deeper and interceptions and ball distribution, mainly long passes, are his weapons, Gerrard and Lamps, both are traditional English midfielders, almost attacking midfielders. Consistency is Carrick's strength while the latter two can get you goals and change games, but also have futile days in plenty. It is true that Carrick has never reached the same heights, but that is somewhat relative, attacking players always get more exposureand recognition, eg. Pirlo and Messi. Thus if you want someone solidin midfield, go forCarrick, or if someone to bomb forward, Gerrard/Lampard.
Pretty much. Carrick may not be as spectacular or talented as Gerrard and Lampard, but then given that a midfield of Gerrard and Lampard has offered England eight years of nothing other than hoof and shoot, it's a fair bet Carrick plus one of them (or better Carrick plus Scholes) would have been more effective. I've personally never understood why England persisted with Gerrard and Lampard in a two man midfield, when neither of them were effective in that position for their respective clubs. Then people wonder why England consistently underachieve.
Gerrard and Lampard represent the disappointment of the golden generation whereas Carrick (being a late bloomer) is the silver lining of this good-for-nothing generation.
no it is not , you are just a rival fans so it is normal you can't see it but yeahh you must be right .. Carrick was accidentally one of few rare players who played majority of our matches in the golden new generation between 2006-2013 hmmm who knows betters? Sir Alex or you? definitely it is you man Sir Alex is just clueless manager who played Carrick regularly and never replaced him or try other players in his position..
Maybe by you mate, anyone that watched him for Spurs would have seen that he sat in front of the defense, and kept the ball rolling. Wasn't as good at breaking up play at that time though. Fergy toughened him up.
Which was exactly what Utd needed after Keane's retirement. And the main reason we went from also rans in the league and Europe from 04-06 to being title challengers and regular European contenders since. And is also exactly what England needed to actually keep possession in major tournaments after Scholes retired. Rather than the usual "I've got the ball! Hollywoooooood...oh ****, gave it to the opposition. Again." that we've had from our midfield since.
Carrick is a better possession player then Gerrard or Lampard and he has also taken Lampard's position in the England team.
