Let's be honest, If it wasn't Gerrard, Liverpool would have been mid-table team at best, even might have faced relegation. I doubt any other midfielder would be able to do for Liverpool what Gerrard has done. The guy has everything, scores from penalties, with headers, from distance, free-kicks, great defensively and posses outstanding leadership and vision of the game. If I want a midfielder for my team, I would choose prime Gerrard with no hesitation.

@muhdaiman3836

2 жыл бұрын

also if it wasnt gerrard, liverpool would have won premier league by that time 😂

@lmc3307

2 жыл бұрын

@@muhdaiman3836 not true. The slip wasn’t in an deciding game. The failure was Liverpool drawing 3-3 with Crystal Palace which cost the league

@jayansaini7093

2 жыл бұрын

@@lmc3307 and also without Gerrard lfc prop wouldn't hav been in that situation of close to a league title in the first place

@ak-eg3ff

2 жыл бұрын

@@jayansaini7093 not a miracle of Istanbul and fa cup victory in 06

@thomasmillard1930

2 жыл бұрын

A team doesn’t make lampard close to gerrard

Gerrard for me. I'll never forget the cup final against West Ham. He was phenomenal, whilst the rest of his squad ran around like lemons.

@Spark12429

2 жыл бұрын

Gerrard ran around like a lemon when he faced 40 years old pirlo in the world cup.. 😁😁😁

@rossl5908

Жыл бұрын

@@Spark12429 Gerrard shits on Pirlo and this is coming from a Milan fan. Pirlo was a lazy player

@KINGKING10109

Жыл бұрын

Mate.. it was an Fa cup final against ducking West Ham mate…😑. Look at Lampard’s performances against Barca & Bayern

@JaaysonL

Жыл бұрын

@@KINGKING10109 Look at Gerrards performance against Real Madrid in the 4-0 in 08/09. Then compare the team Lampard had around him for Chelsea in those game to what Gerrard had. Not to mention Gerrards second half in Istanbul against that Milan team with superstars in every position

@dasukihouse5554

8 ай бұрын

​@@rossl5908remember the 2005 ucl final

Chelsea fan since 96, Steven Gerrard wins this one easily for me. If players swapped clubs during their playing time then Liverpool would have been a lot worse off. Gerrard took so many games by the scruff of the neck and you could argue he's defensive game is better and he was a stronger captain. Both could pass, finish, create and take set peices. Lamaprd arguably had the better technique, but Gerrard's overall game was stronger and he influenced games where Liverpool had no right winning.

@pauliewalnuts5803

2 жыл бұрын

Big respect

@matbrennan2941

2 жыл бұрын

Well put phil. I wasn’t trying to make my comment about the clubs its about there overhaul game that I believe Gerrard had the edge. Lampard and scholes where great players mind.👍

@adambee9975

2 жыл бұрын

Thank youuuuu im a chelsea fan and he killed us at times theres so much bias and stat boys

@user-tr9dx6xy8g

2 жыл бұрын

Your a disgrace son

@matipasante8087

2 жыл бұрын

Lamps better technique???

People would follow Gerrard into Hell. The guy is a folk hero and led like no other. Dragged mediocre teams to Champions of Europe against some of the elite teams of an era. Swap him with any of the other names and Liverpool don't win a thing.

@philipmarsden7104

2 жыл бұрын

Take a look at Aston Villa and Everton. With Gerrard at the helm AV are looking with great positivity to the future and Everton are struggling. Both teams needed a leader to gather their strength and pull together in the right direction: Gerrard is by far the better leader, probably someone who will rival his own playing success with managerial success. Not all good players are good managers, Gerrard seems to be one.

@couturecriminal8330

2 жыл бұрын

@@philipmarsden7104 im from the future Everton came back from 2 down to win talk about having great leadership and testicular fortitude and stayed in the Prem also beat United and Chelsea pushed City all the way at Goodison and away at Anfield after Rafa got sacked for losing away at Norwich...

@abdullahshaibu5274

Жыл бұрын

Hell?

@Devypocalypse

Жыл бұрын

@@abdullahshaibu5274 the place South of Heaven

@bigrandomun9267

Жыл бұрын

@@philipmarsden7104 from the future. Gerrard absolutely stunk at Villa and Lampard has somehow managed to regain some form at Everton. And to take the win, Lampard has somehow got Alex Iwobi to play up to his potential and has him carrying Everton every week.

Gerrard and by a mile, only people with club loyalties say otherwise, Gerrard could do anything, Scholes and Lamps went on to have better careers and won more trophies and if that’s the question then they win easily but if it’s about who’s the better player, Gerrard could do it all, every single facet of the midfield play, we were made to watch Gerrard’s clips in the academy, both defensive, attacking and central/holding/ box to box midfielders because he was the one at that time who had it all.

@ginodavids2012

2 жыл бұрын

Well said

@zacklatif7184

Жыл бұрын

Scholes was the better player. Better passer and none of these Hollywood passes. Better at controlling the match,, by controlling the tempo, the need for short passing or long, reading the match situation. Gerrard was the supreme athlete, but had no tactical, positional awareness. Typical of our English players at the time, until Benitez had to drum it in.

@kennyp9616

6 ай бұрын

​@@zacklatif7184He couldn't tackle so not an all rounder but obviously still a class player

@robertcottam8824

5 ай бұрын

Gerrard, Scholes….tick. Who the feck is Lampard? 🧐 Wasn’t he that bloke from ‘Westem’ that was picked by the London press? Got it. Bit like ‘Butch’ Wilkins from Chewulsee. He gets ball, he overrates himself, he shoots, he misses and England lose. Glennoddow was the same. Decent club player; sh*te at international level. Hey ho! England has always been ‘London United’. That’s why we’ve always been sh*te and why so few folk outside the M25 support ‘em. 💩

There's a reason why Jose Mourinho want to sign Gerrard at Chelsea when he already had Lampard at his disposal. And Mourinho try to sign Gerrard when he was at Real Madrid as well.

@pickysaw

2 жыл бұрын

He tried to sign Gerrard wherever he went

@glowwurm9365

2 жыл бұрын

He tried to sign him because he was available, Lampard would never have left Chelsea

@kemarhamilton8813

2 жыл бұрын

What is the point? He also said lampard was the best player in the world. So what is your point.

@Stoicstruggle

2 жыл бұрын

@@glowwurm9365 It would be 10x easier to get Lampard out of Chelsea than Gerrard out of Liverpool

@couturecriminal8330

2 жыл бұрын

Mourinho also wanted Lampard when he was at Inter Milan during the treble winning season what's your point?

Lampard is highest midfielder for goals in the league, and 3rd for assists. U can say Gerard is better but don’t dismiss Lampard like he’s didn’t have an amazing record

Would Chelsea have been worse with Gerrard in the team rather than Lampard? No chance. Would Liverpool have been better with Lampard in the team instead of Gerrard? Never.

@demonedante1148

2 жыл бұрын

You Think Gerard could help Chelsea win the CL in 2012?

@triniSOCCERdude1

2 жыл бұрын

thats a pretty solid argument.

@sib1930

2 жыл бұрын

@@demonedante1148 Yes quite easily

@jezcorrigan651

2 жыл бұрын

Would Chelsea be worse without their all time record goalscorer? Silly question isn’t it? If you think Gerrard could score as many you’re deluded. We’ve seen Gerrard surrounded by world class players in the England team and he was shite. We’ve seen Lampard in an average team at West Ham and he was brilliant. But don’t let facts get in your way.

@jezcorrigan651

2 жыл бұрын

@@triniSOCCERdude1 It’s a solid argument for a layman. Lampard was literally the core in the Chelsea team along with Terry and Drogba… he played every game five years straight..

Both were definitely great players and very well decorated, Lampard in particular. Gerrard did have a number of decent and good players around him during his career, but he was definitely the key man at Liverpool from the time of Rafa Benitez until Luis Suarez' final season with Liverpool... Not only was Gerrard the better athlete in terms of pace and explosiveness, but he was a true box to box midfielder who would play any role in midfield and also as a second striker, he had great technique with the ball at his feet and he had such an extraordinary range of passes as well... Lampard was a very intelligent and highly disciplined player with excellen positional sense who played his role excellently. While he did not have those explosive runs with the ball, beating several defenders with pace and power to finish off a shot or lay a great assist for a clear-cut chance for a teammate, he had good ball control, excellent short passes, and was very effective at not turning the ball over. He was a better and more instinctive goal scorer than Gerrard, who considered himself a defensive midfielder at heart, while Lampard was an offensive midfielder who played mostly in the centre or slightly left. On the whole, I go with Gerrard, because individually, he was more capable of influencing and taking control of a game than Lampard was.

On how many occasions did Lampard or Scholes pick a team up on there own and win games??? Gerrard could play any position on the football pitch and he’d still be world class. This really has never been a debate……

@GiampaoloPazzini7

2 жыл бұрын

Well Lampard at 34 completely overturned the game with one pass at Camp Nou to win it against prime Barcelona. 300+ goals from midfield. Amazing performance in the final vs Bayern too. Masterclass to knock out Liverpool the day after his mother passed. CL final goal in 2008, unlucky in that one. Gerrard obviously had Istanbul and FA cup miracles, great player, but also slipped in arguably the most iconic moment of his career and didn’t perform against Crystal Palace, and the man united red card too.

@matbrennan2941

2 жыл бұрын

@@GiampaoloPazzini7 Did you read my comment properly ?? I’m not saying in anyway Lampard or scholes weren’t great players! I said you could put Gerrard in any position on a football pitch and he’d still be word class. Both Lampard and scholes could never have done that as good as they were. As for the Gerrard slip, your just being childish me old mate. Read before you comment you silly boy.

@matbrennan2941

2 жыл бұрын

@DW That’s my education light weight…..👌

@matbrennan2941

2 жыл бұрын

@DW oh sorry I meant to ask!??? Does DW stand for - Dim wit…..😂😂😂

@matbrennan2941

2 жыл бұрын

@DW No it’s idiots that make it easy…🤭🤭🤭

Only way to answer this question is, could Lampard or Scholes do what Gerrard did in lfc? I think not. Gerrard defo could have done it in Chelsea and utd what them players did in their respective teams.

@muhdaiman3836

2 жыл бұрын

ofcourse they cant do the slippy trophy

@mathebulacraig8791

2 жыл бұрын

U can't compare scholes with Gerrard, different players

@blakan1478

2 жыл бұрын

You are dismissing the highest scoring midfielder in prem history and Scholes who makes any team he plays in a level better because Gerrard achived less with less it makes no sense to me. Sure based on pure talent Gerrard is better but on merit Lampard blows both of them out of the water

@Anon97123

Жыл бұрын

That's such an unfair argument. Gerrard spent most of his career at Liverpool and in doing so got the opportunity to prove he could carry a team. Whereas Lampard and Scholes played for Chelsea and United where they were surrounded by other quality players and didn't get to standout and always be "the man" for years on end. Objectively, I think all three were world class players and would've replicated what the others did at their respective clubs. Yes Gerrard would've won titles playing for a team like Chelsea but Lampard would've stepped up and been seen as "that guy" for Liverpool. He didn't get 15 years of being "that guy" to create that aura about him but ability and mentality wise he absolutely would've carried Liverpool just like Gerrard did. And I'm guessing he wouldn't have slipped when it mattered most 😉

@Henry-sd7vd

Жыл бұрын

Win 0 PL titles. Yeah. Can Gerrard dictate the tempo and be the main playmaker midfielder of an 11 PL title winning Man Utd team like Scholes, I don't think so.

Yes, Lineker just said it! Why can't any England coach back then move out of a 4-4-2?! If Lampard can play successfully with Ballack in a 4-3-3, he can play well with Gerrard in that formation too!

@Chriswatney

2 жыл бұрын

Because at the time, they had to also fit in the celeb captain, Beckham.

@svavar82

10 ай бұрын

Or like Shearer's FFS comment was bleeped out 🤣 Spot on man.

Lampard influences in big games are very underrated, yes hes got the better team, but even though he is surrounded by superstar, he is always the one who brings the win or the orchestrator. his goalscoring records always overshadowed his other ability, he is more than that. Comparing Lampard with Gerrard is like comparing an silent assassin with a general.

Gerrard is the best individual player of the three. He could do everything. Score, assist, tackle, free kicks, leadership, play in a DM role, the CM, box to box, a 10, on the wing. More individual iconic moments. Scholes was the best passer of the three. And Lampard was the best goal scorer. But Gerrard had way more to his game than the other 2.

@kairex4670

2 жыл бұрын

True

@TrevorParsnips

2 жыл бұрын

Gerrard was a poor dm

@vlnakajr2346

2 жыл бұрын

@@TrevorParsnips And yet when England played all 3 of Gerrard, Scholes, Lampard in midfield they asked Gerrard to do the DM role because the other two couldn't do defensive roles and didn't have Gerrard's versatility. Gerrard was a good DM in his younger days pre-2004. He played DM/deep lying playmaker after 2012 but his legs were gone then and he could barely run so he was a poor DM at that age. Great quarterbacking playmaker tough.

@TrevorParsnips

2 жыл бұрын

@@vlnakajr2346 incorrect, old bean! Lamps and Gerrard both played box-to-box for England those days, it was a farcical decision by the English management. And no Liverpool manager EVER played Gerrard as a dm and delivered any kind of success

@TrevorParsnips

2 жыл бұрын

@@vlnakajr2346 also, Scholes played the pirlo role for utd to great success

Gerrard was a heroic captain who single-handedly carried that mediocre Liverpool team to cup success ....He led from the front... Lampard would not be able to play to his max in a mediocre team....

@mistaefromdtn

2 жыл бұрын

Got relegated with West Ham as well

@miziiva5492

Жыл бұрын

Haha..lampard menang liga lagi byk drp gerrard..sumbat gol pn lg byk..haha.

@Anon97123

Жыл бұрын

How do you know? So you have 20 years of games for both to look at and you're going to decide who's better not by objectively looking at what they did in games but on a hypothetical that Lampard wouldn't be able to do what he did if he'd played for Liverpool. That's a completely baseless claim.

Some player can attack, some player can assist, some player can score, some player can defend and some player can motivate their team, bu Gerrard can do all those.

vs AC Milan in Istanbul Gerrard play 3 position in single match, midfiled then on the second half switch to central forward and then in extra time swith to rightback

Gerrard was the better player 👏 Lampard has the better career 👏 👌

@Kojo_995

3 ай бұрын

So Which one is better for you

This debate only ever happened AFTER their time in the premier league. If you’re objective and ACTUALLY watched both of them Gerrard is easily the better player. Shameless debate in my opinion.

@dangraham3361

2 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@sinisterdrip

Жыл бұрын

Actually i grew up during those times. There WERE heavy debates predating back to 2002. They were the golden generation, wore the same number, sam position, similar names lol. The answer is unequivocally gerrard tho. That much never changed

@mightymqb4800

5 ай бұрын

Waffle

Love both. Absolute beasts im their day but Gerrard for me just had more. Lamps was goals in a very talented chelsea teams. Gerrard gave you not as many goals but did score, assist, make something out of nothing in Liverpool’s mediocre days. Tbh lamps played with freedom to go forward.

@Tonishog

Жыл бұрын

Yet lamps has more assists and the record for chances created by an English player in a Pl season

Its a tight one but I would have Gerrard in my team ... He is an all action midfielder ..can shoot can tackle can assist and can lead the team by example

Nobody debates it, from an arsenal fan if you are neutral and not a chelsea supporter it’s obvious gerrard is the better player, ex pros mostly say gerrard, pundits often say gerrard. Even now they are both managers gerrard is better. Steven gerrard all day long apart from a few chelsea fans who don’t like to admit it.

Okay lampard played for a better team, but he also was frequently the best player on the pitch for those great teams. He's the first name in chelseas 11 from any fan

Frank Lampard was a great player in his own right but it's Steven Gerrard all day every day. The closest player you'll ever see to Roy of the Rovers. Started off as a right back, turned into a brilliant box to box midfielder, won PFA player of the year playing on the right wing and as a number 10, then finished off his career as a brilliant number 6. A freak footballer.

The distinctive point that Gerard is more of versatile player. He can paly anywhere. Plus he has a great leadership character!

How scholes even gets into this debate is crazy. He could pass. That’s it. Gerrard could pass just as well and had better vision

@rahanabdur8036

2 жыл бұрын

Didn’t you see his goals

@steviewonder0850

2 жыл бұрын

Bit harsh on Scholes as he was a world class player, and boiling him down to just 'he could pass' is pretty disingenuous, would you say that about Xavi or Pirlo? Not to mention he was a very good finisher in his younger days. That said, Gerrard was easily the better player.

@anne-mariecallanan4290

Жыл бұрын

Scholes all day

If you gave each Premiership Manager a choice between prime Scholes, Lampard or Gerrard to go straight into their team, I believe most of them would pick Gerrard, especially mid-table and bottom-table teams. Gerrard could play almost all positions at a high level. Scholes and Lampard could only play as attacking mid or second striker well (though it has to be said perhaps better than Gerrard in these positions). But in all other positions, it's not even close.

@Henry-sd7vd

Жыл бұрын

Bro said Scholes could only play as attacking mid or second striker well.😭 Just say you don't watch football. The statement is true for Lampard. He scored a lot of goals and played upfront more. But Scholes was literally the least attacking of the 3. He literally played as a deep lying playmaker for the most part of his career. Dictating the tempo, controlling the game, spraying passes all over the field. He's famously likened to players like Pirlo or Xavi due to this very reason. They were deep lying playmakers, dictating the tempo. It's widely known that, Lampard -> Best attacking mid, goal scorer. Gerrard-> Best box-to-box all round player. Scholes-> Best technician, passer and tempo controller. I'm not even rooting for Scholes as the best of the 3. I'd probably choose Gerrard too. But at least get your facts straight. You sound like you're just making opinions based on youtube highlights.

@ds6914

7 ай бұрын

@@Henry-sd7vd Scholes was actually an attacking midfielder for most of his career

Gerrard never played in teams even close to as good as Lampard has. You can’t say Lampard for goals. Lampard played further forward to Gerrard and Gerrard still bagged a lot of goals and assists. If Gerrard played in Lampard role or vice versa, Gerrard would be miles ahead of Lampard

@GiampaoloPazzini7

2 жыл бұрын

Lampard didnt play further than Gerrard at all, showing your inexperience here

@muhdaiman3836

2 жыл бұрын

tf liverpool fan, ur team has xabi alonso mascherano, torres , carragher, riise, pepe reina and u said doesnt even close 🤣

@billybob-fw3vr

2 жыл бұрын

@@muhdaiman3836 goalkeeper & left back lmao was decent. Never good enough. 3 world class players in that team. Lampard had 10 in his

@seansean250

2 жыл бұрын

Prove Gerrard would have done good at Chelsea. U do realise that's not how football works. Just because a player performs in a worse team doesn't guarantee him doing the same or close to the same in a better one. This argument is 🗑

@Anon97123

Жыл бұрын

They both CMs you helmet. Yeah sometimes Lampard played as an AM in a diamond and sometimes Gerrard played more defensively but they both played in the same position more often than not. And that Chelsea team is renound for being pretty defensive aside from Ancellotti's time in charge. If Lampard had played under an attacking manager his numbers would be even more ridiculous. That 09/10 season under Ancellotti was his best stats wise he got 27 goals and 16 assists. If he'd played under a Klopp/Pep/Ancellotti for the majority of his career instead of someone like Mourinho it would've been absolutely ridiculous. Like the De Bruyne comparisons that are currently happening would have far less merit.

It’s pretty easy for me…Gerrard is better all day every day and twice on a Sunday! I’m with Micah on this, he nearly says it, it’s not even a debate!

I always love discussions that are based on "what if", "I know for a fact, because "reasons"". The fact is, Lampard played at Chelsea, Gerrard played at Liverpool. And although some similarities were present, they played in specific systems in specific teams. Lampard leads in terms of goals and assists, Gerrard was more mobile, and more oriented on the center of the field. Discussions like "would that team be better with Lampard/Gerrard" are pointless per se, because both of them played where they played, the rest is pure speculation with 0 proof and vague arguments like "I know for sure".

@seansean250

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly lol, it's the same retarded arguement that people make when discussing pep vs klopp. Acting like they know for sure klopp would have made city better or even as good as pep has.

@piyushkapaley1620

Жыл бұрын

But then we would never be able to make comparisons, ever. We make minimum assumptions with the facts at our disposal and debate it over. I completely take your point though but then we would never be able to indulge in such conversations simply because football is a team sport and better teammates do in fact make it look better for the player under scrutiny.

@arsk5127

Жыл бұрын

@@piyushkapaley1620 ​ Then its for the better, because the point of "comparison" is to "prove" that somebody is worse/better (under aged kids are practically in need of this, otherwise they loose their meaning of existence), and not to enjoy the game they play. Somehow I have been a football fan for more than 20 years, and lived happily without making bullshit comparisons, while it seems other people can't live a day without them, although how on earth you can compare a team dependent and influenced skill set, is beyond me.

I'm a united man! And ima say Gerrard Gerrard had heart and passion!! Midfielder goals scorer and could defend!!!!!!! And lead a team even though I like lampard it's gerrard

For me I’d say Lampard. Lampard beats him in every stat possible. More Goals, Assists & Trophies.

@nabylad2194

2 жыл бұрын

eye test matters as well, when gerrard was not putting in output stats he still was effective in defensive duties: tackles, recoveries, aeriel duels, etc.. and he was picking out passes as well, I love lampard but i feel that gerrard gets disrespected too much

@LetsGoBoxing

2 жыл бұрын

@@nabylad2194 I don’t think Gerrard gets disrespected at all. People praise him all the time and the majority of people choose him over Lampard. If anything I would say Lampard is the player people don’t respect as much.

@yukeyzerostudio2090

2 жыл бұрын

Before making ur decision look at the team the two were playing ,Lampard was playing attacking all the time coz he was having a legendary team who help him in defensive midfield, but gerard played all the role of midfield coz of the team he was, there were no many class players there

@LetsGoBoxing

2 жыл бұрын

@@yukeyzerostudio2090 he played alongside some world class players with Suarez, Owen and Torres. He had one of the best midfielders Xabi Alonso partnered with him in midfield. And at times Gerrard was played upfront as a striker. So I would have to disagree with that. I think Lampard in that Liverpool team would of easily scored and assisted more that Gerrard

@nabylad2194

2 жыл бұрын

@@LetsGoBoxing gerrard was not played upfront as a striker and the seasonwhere he played as a number 10 he hot 20+ goals, if rafa didnt force him out as a right midfilde and played him a 10 he would easily get more goals than lampard and the world class midfield was truly world class for one season, our best players kept on leaving and we never were able to replace them whereas chelsea could easily replace what they sold, Lampard wouldnt do shit in the liverpool squad gerrard had

Micah Richards, a premier league winning professional, a NEUTRAL in this debate with no ties to either Liverpool or Chelsea, who has played and trained with both Gerrard and Lampard live, therefore would have the best insight and better insight than any of us, who has played at a higher level than any of those Chelsea twitter nerds will ever play at, has just said its chalk and cheese when comparing the two and said Gerrard is better, end of debate, not like there ever was one.

You all said Gerrard. It’s not a debate

Lampard was definitely better, Gerrard just looked better cause he ran around a bit more. Lampard's passing was better, he was a MUCH better goalscorer (one of the PL all time top scorers, as a central midfielder ffs), he was better positionally, and also much better defensively than he's given credit for.

@pauliewalnuts5803

2 жыл бұрын

He’s no where near Gerrard ability wise, Lampard was a second striker basically Gerrard would offer a lot more

@daviddbell1987

2 жыл бұрын

That's cause he had a team full of better players to make him look better and didn't have to worry about tracking back and didn't have to carry a team on his own like Gerrard did

@seansean250

2 жыл бұрын

@@daviddbell1987 horrible argument.

Ppl will say Gerrard is better because he didn’t have a team around him as good as Chelsea. Lol but when they played each other back in them days it was always battles, and who did Liverpool really have in them seasons who wasn’t world class, plus this isn’t a question about how they played with their team it’s individual so if we are going on stats Lampard

Gerrard had everything Scholes and Lampard had but Gerrard in his prime was a stronger and quicker athlete, better defender and a better captain

Secanrio. England vs Germany. All subs used. England's right back comes off injured, can't replace. Midfield is lamoard, Gerrard and scholes. Who would you move to RB so they can do at least a solid job.

Gerrard. A goalscorer; tackler; leader. Closest player I've seen to Bryan Robson. Lampard a fine goalscoring midfielder but Gerrard dictated games. As for Scholes the most talented of the lot and would've had 120 caps and statues built if he'd been Argentinian or Italian.

@Gj-uk2ir

2 жыл бұрын

cambiasso doesnt have statues and hes the exact same player as scholes

@Tonishog

Жыл бұрын

It’s criminal how people forget Lampard’s other attributes just because of how good a goalscorer he was

@dazzlingdiaz9321

6 ай бұрын

Gerrard the closest thing to Robson? Gerrard was 1 million times a better player than Robson. Robson wasn't good enough for Liverpool 's reserves and Bob Paisley told Fat Ron that back in 1981 when Robson was at West Brom. That is why Robson joined Man United. Robson was never getting a start in Liverpool's first team either, they were European Champions in 1981. Would Gerrard have started alongside Souness in 1981? 100%.

@stedros

6 ай бұрын

Riquelme doesn’t have any statues and imo better than Scholes. All 3 over rated, especially Lampard.

@dazzlingdiaz9321

6 ай бұрын

@@stedros Toe sucker and Fatso are over -rated. Gerrard wasn't.

Gerrard scored 21 Non-penalty goals for England and gave 24 assists. Lampard scored 20 non-penalty goals and provided only 11 assists for England. This with Lampard playing the entire 108 caps as attacking center midfield role. Gerrard literally played DM, LM, RM, CM, AM in his caps. He routinely showed up at every big tournament when no other star name showed up. Lampard only showed up at Euro 2004 and was awful in every other tournament.

@svavar82

10 ай бұрын

Great points and comparison.

Only Chelsea fans would say Lampard. Gerrard was an all round brilliant and better player

@muhdaiman3836

2 жыл бұрын

and u must be liverpool fan for saying that 🤣

Gerrard is the most complete footballer I've ever seen. He was great at every facet of the game - scoring, passing, tackling, leading, good in the air, etc...

@erikpuka2627

11 ай бұрын

Nah. He overraged Strengths He was box to box Strong Fast Long pass Relatively good cross Longshot Weaknesses Football IQ Timing Controlling the pace and tempo Defensive positioning (couldn't play CDM) Dribbling Short passing Just overrall his technical ability was and football IQ was somewhat questionable Could tackle but sometimes too footed challenges refs swallowed the whistle His positioning was not consistent Ran like a headless chicken for England

@Al-ji4gd

10 ай бұрын

Bollocks

Lampard of course. I always thought that Gerrard was overrated, same as Michael Owen because Liverpool is the most famous team in England.

@christianngbonyebi8642

2 жыл бұрын

Gerrard overrated?

@LordBranniganThe

2 жыл бұрын

Clearly you didn’t watch him week in week out

@ws2wswqws947

Жыл бұрын

Man really called stevie G overrated

Gerrard not even a debate

Gerrard by far the most complete player ever - he would pick Liverpool on dead days and make daunting runs through the middle ending up with some great screamers. 2004 Olympiakos - vs Rivaldo, he took the game away and mind you then we had zero world class players in the team. Gerrard would pickup the toughest battles on the pitch, unlike Lampard who was a brilliant No10 cum 8 but nothing close to Gerrrrrrrrrard

Jose M wanted Gerrard / Alex F wanted Gerrard… Yet each manager had Lampard / Scholes at the time 🤔

Gerrard for me, it's not even a debate

Stevie G isn't in Lampard debate,people just like being polite by quoting Lamps in the same bracket

Gerrard more dynamic, better defensive ability, athletic, can give you a worldly at random Lampard smarter/decision making, better scorer, better positionally, more effective and consistent Lamps my fav so little biased but gerrard would fit better in more formations but if I was picking a team I could have lampard purely because he’s too damn effective and consistent. U will get more 7-8/10 performance from lampard where gerrard would dip here and there but would give u a handful of 10/10 performances….. plus gerrard makes more mistakes

@erikpuka2627

11 ай бұрын

Idk about defensive ability. Gerrard tackled better but Lampard read the game better and positioned himself better. 80% of being a CDM is positioning. Gerrard struggled there and often ran like a headless chicken for the 3 Lions

@mofosho

11 ай бұрын

@@erikpuka2627 exactly 100!! I always said that gerrard was a bit too erratic but his ability to actually tackle was decent. Lamps was more disciplined and kept shape well and had amazing stamina to track back… also most of the times it’s about delaying the attack long enough to make the play go stake vs actually having to stop the attack yourself

Lampard no questions about that

This is a very difficult comparison and honestly there is no wrong answer, one thing I always think works in Gerrards favour is that he had hollywood moments playing in an average team that make people perceive him as better. Lampard played in better teams so was never the stand out individual. For me the hardest thing to do in football is score goals, and to get a guaranteed 20 goals from midfield every year is outrageous, he'd win the golden boot this year with his 09/10 numbers, ahead of Son, Kane, KDB, Salah etc. It's because of that for me he edges it, but I'd never say anyone is wrong for picking Gerrard, an absolutely phenomenal player

@ajimmarkpiano9684

Жыл бұрын

You are so wise champ

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

Gerrard could do what lampard did for Chelsea lampard couldn’t do what gerrard did for Liverpool

@mightymqb4800

5 ай бұрын

What's this average team myth? Riise, torres, alonso, carragher, reina, Liverpool always had a deep squad

Last time i checked its the gols that wins matches ..I'll give it Gerrard for that UCL win that was phenomenal...but lampard consistently kept chelsea in the top 4 and carried to our 1st UCL win in 2012... Not to mention the most gols scored by a midfilder period.

If you have Keane in the midfield then Lampard is the best, if you have Scholes in the midfield then Gerrard is the best!

If you see Ronaldo now at crumbling Man U, you would pick Gerrard everytime on this debate People and rivals always undermining Gerrard's effect on liverpool. In reality, he's the blood, he's the one that always been depended on, and he's always creating miracle

@ZakirHussain-fs1rf

2 жыл бұрын

What utter nonsense…. How is that the same…ronaldo is 37 and you are making judgment in this season,,,Gerrard in his early 30 was at la galaxy …he wasn’t carrying lfc then

@Dz73zxxx

2 жыл бұрын

@@ZakirHussain-fs1rf you definitely mistook my whole entire opinion's meaning. What i was saying, take a look at Ronaldo now in MU. See? Everywhere and everytime, his goals, figure of lead, always give Man U hopes. UCL, check. Hat-trick, check. Unironically, what those Man U fans feel now, is what liverpool fans felt under 17 years of Gerrard's service. Mr. Liverpool, Reliable Captain, irreplaceable figure in the club. There ya go.

@joebarnes100

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dz73zxxx perfectly put.

@JaaysonL

Жыл бұрын

@@ZakirHussain-fs1rf Since when was 35 early thirties?

Gerrard no debate reached elite heights with much inferior squads . Scholes and lampard are class but so were 8 other players in their teams . Stevie G only had about 2 or 3 at max besides him best English midfielder in the prem .

Not even a contest. Stevie g by a mile, all great players but his all round game makes him a clear winner. Even better than messi and ronaldo, stevie g would do a job up top but them 2 would struggle in the middle of the park. My logic is undeniable. GOAT

I go by what scholes said; "i was a good player in a great side", "Gerrard was the big match winner in his side" "gerrard could probably do what i did at united" "i could never do what he did at Lpool". Q.E.D 🧐🧐🧐🧐

Gerrard on any day sure...

Newcastle fan - Gerrard easy.

Totally agree

The biggest myth Lampard can't dictate a game. Lampard has more assists than him.

@thesaintst1851

2 жыл бұрын

Your in the minority pal

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

Who’s got more game winning tackles? Ever think of that win

Gerrard

Gerrard can play with any team in the world. I can say this because every world-class players left him alone over and over. He was never in the best team like Chelsea that got plenty of great players. You can’t say oh Gerrard played with Torres, Suarez, Alonso and never won anything. For god’s sake, please look at Chelsea’s Drogba, Shevahenko, Costa, Gudjohnsen, Petr Cech, Cavalho, Terry, A.Cole, Ivanovic, J.Cole, Ballack, Makelele, Hazard, Oscar, Mata, Essein, Robben, Ferreira, Wright-Phillip, Malouda, Deco, Bosingwa, Alex etc. So Super Frank Lampard is the best along the best. Gerard the best among rubbish, but still be in high professional. Respect for him. For me Gerrard is the best English midfielder of all time.

@zuuwuucfc6391

2 жыл бұрын

Costa didn't play with lampard. So your just chatting shit

@nihal6514

2 жыл бұрын

Best among rubbish? Don't insult Alonso, Torres, Suarez, Owen, Riise, Caragher and most importantly, the god EMILE HESKEY!

@hellomotherfk5331

2 жыл бұрын

@@nihal6514 so you didn’t want to mention Spearing, Koncheski, Babel, N’Gog, Downing, Aquilani, Balotelli, Jovanovic, Aspas, Poulsen, Adam, Markovic, Carrol, Cissockho, Diomede, Assadi, Nunez, Cheyrou,Diouf, Dundee, Paletta, Degan and Ziege?!!!

@hellomotherfk5331

2 жыл бұрын

@@nihal6514 I already thought there will be people like you saying Alonso, Suarez and Torres something like this. It’s like you didn’t read my post properly.

@Ktk0627

2 жыл бұрын

@@hellomotherfk5331 even they had suarez kolo toure was in defence lmao

Gerrard all day long his all round game was better and he was a true leader

Gerrard didn't have Drogba and Ballack or peter Cech in his mediocre squad ,and he leads the team to win UCl final against that scary Ac Milan team .

I’m Nigerian , we call him Steven general . He a general on the pitch

According to me, Frankie Lampard is not only better playmaker than Steven Gerrard, but he’s arguably the most completed midfielder in football history! Lampard had a brilliant technique, finishing ability, accurate passes, amazing long shots, scored so many decisive goals for Chelsea! Most of the people don’t know, but Frankie is the top goal scorer in Chelsea’s history - he’s got 212 goals, despite being number 8! There have played so many great strikers through the years : Didier Drogba (110 goals), Diego Costa (60 goals), Fernando Torres (45 goals), Andriy Schevchenko (22 goals)!! Lampard surpassed all of them, so he’s definitely the best midfielder in Premier league!!

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

He’s playing as a second striker of course he had lots of goals

@ws2wswqws947

Жыл бұрын

You said that lampard was the most completed midfielder but you only mentioned an attacking ability and there is no a defence ability is a mindblowing

@vasilenpetrov6483

Жыл бұрын

@@ws2wswqws947 He always performed perfect in defence, I don’t have to mention his defensive abilities!

I think this is easy to figure out. Switch the two players and see how they’d handle the pressure in each others shoes. Would Lampard have had the ability to overcome an AC Milan team in the CL Final like Gerrard did? Doubt it. Would Gerrard be able to contribute to Chelsea in the same way Lampard did? I think so. I don’t think there were any situations Lampards been in that Gerrard couldn’t handle. I don’t think Gerrard is WAY better than Lamps, but I do believe there is a difference between the two.

If Gerrard weren’t scouse it would be easier for people to admit that he’s easily the best. Could do it all, could play right back and be the best player on the pitch.

I'm neither a Chelsea nor Liverpool fan. My favourite team is FC Barcelona but as a fan of the game I can confidently say that Gerrard is the better player. Gerrard was in a team with very little stars whereas Lampard was surrounded by superstars in a Chelsea side led by Mourinho. Gerrard at times won games single handedly for Liverpool.

I have this feeling that Mourinho would have gotten it right with Gerrard and Lampard. Sven and Fabio just made a mess out of them by their (managers) style or playing system. 442 or diamond didn't work for them.

Xavi and Iniesta and Silva existed in their prime at that time... and that is one of many reasons why they never got remotely close.

It's Stevie G all day💯 the man had it all

@adrianwalters2318

2 жыл бұрын

@@Ryanshaw6778 what about him??? He couldn't tackle and no pace

@adrianwalters2318

2 жыл бұрын

@Abdul Raheem bro don't bother wasting your time with people who talk shit

@user-ku5hs3ji8k

2 жыл бұрын

@@Ryanshaw6778 scholes faster than gerrard?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Take either Scholes or Lampard and put them in the Liverpool team Stevie played in… would they still be the legends they are

Lampard was more successful, but I'd have Gerrard all day long. That man had heart like no other.

Just search for Gerard longshots only Wayne Rooney can do topspin like that most of Frank Lampard goals were tappings and penalties plus he was not even half as good in defence and Pace on the ball

@unnknown8546

2 жыл бұрын

U do know lampard has more goals outside of the box than gerrard right

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

@@unnknown8546 you do know lampard played as a second striker right?

How did the Golden generation miss???? Simple ...the fact that Beckham was captain, says it all. The Golden generation were just the spice boys #2...all about celebrity.

@pendafen7405

Жыл бұрын

Underrated comment. Imo JT should have inherited the armband from Becks (and Owen before him) a year or two earlier. John was no saint, but even as a newcomer and one of the fresher faces he knew how to Captain better than the rest of that squad, and he was more truly committed about his football and the national team than David ever was. It's a pity too that John shortened his own Captaincy with bad behaviour and didn't get to pass it straight to Stevie, but unlike the former example that was his own fault and not that of McLaren & his staff.

@pentz1

Жыл бұрын

@@pendafen7405 Sol Campbell should have been made captain, as he was established as one of the best defenders in world at the time (how people forget) and ALSO because he was the captain of the arsenal Invincibles...and I say that as a liverpool supporter. If not campbell, then perhaps Neville or outside odds with Micheal owen BUT NEVER SHOULD IT HAVE BEEN BECKS. In regard to JT, it was definitely the correct decision to take his captaincy away after his disgraceful conduct in so many things.

Lampard played in a superior team. Gerrard carried a team. If Gerrard went Chelsea Liverpool wouldn't be where they are now. Liverpool would of gone downhill Gerrard kept us a float. Gerrard in a Chelsea team would of destroyed it. All the big teams wanted Gerrard Madrid Munich inter Chelsea

100% spot on

Gerrard different gravy.if he was in that chelsea side he would easily won 3 or 4 UCL.scoring more than 300 goals.never a debate !!

It’s a shame Gerrard never signed for Chelsea, if he had Mourinho would have made the case for exactly how to play them in a 4/3/3

I watched Gerrard play every outfield position like he owned it. He could score goals with both feet and his head. He could ping a ball sweetly from 5 yards to 65 yards. He could defend, attack, go past players, he could tackle. Stevie G didn't have world class players around him throughout his Liverpool career either. There was periods when he did but not regularly like lampard and scholes had. Stevie G in my opinion was the complete player. He could do it all. Even Messi can't do all that I've described Stevie G of doing. Lampard and scholes could not do all of that.

I think Gerrard stood out more based on being in a less star studded team.

No bias involved it’s just gerrard. Scholes and lampard had their specialities but gerrard had it all

They could have got 2 world cups easily together. Maybe the God's of football didn't want that to happened🤷🏾‍♂️

Stevie G

Gerrard the far superior footballer to Lampard, Lampard was basically a second striker in and around the box most of the time Gerrard offered a lot more than that and was a better leader does Lampard win what Gerrard did at Liverpool? Not in my opinion

Gerrard just had it all and was the only one of them 3 players that could of played in any position apart from keeper and done a good job playing there.

That's like comparing fillet steak to a decent enough burger. Stevie G is the best English player of all, yes, all, time...

@bluesEvanskro

2 жыл бұрын

Oof, all time is a different debate but yeah I agree Stevie G is the best of the three, and I’m a blues fan so

@colingeddes2172

2 жыл бұрын

Im a soton fan. Gerrard is the best central midfielder in the premier league era. As for the best english player of all time? Behave!

Gerrard all day long

None of them touch Gerard all great but he was a bloody icon

I'm a united fan. But both were class

How that golden generation didn't even get close to winning anything it's beyond me..what a waste,it's ashame really 🤷🏽‍♂️

Maybe there isn't a better player. Maybe you need to choose what you want. Lampard scored more goals, all day long. Lampard also won more. But Gerrard was mad.

Gerrard heads n shoulders above.

Ask Pep how he could integrate the three maestros

Slippy G cost his club and country more trophies than he won them whereas Lampard always turned up for the big occasions. More goals, more assist, more trophies, more individual honours. Frank clear.

Liverpool didn’t want him but Chelsea wanted Stevie

Completely agree with Micah Richards here, and honestly, that’s the most sense I’ve ever heard him talk. How can you compare Lampard or Scholes to Gerrard. Gerrard was the complete player who could literally do anything or play anywhere and could singlehandedly and routinely change the course of a match on his own. The other two were great at what they did, but they did not have that sort of impact on a game in general. It’s not a debate.

Frank scored more, created more and won more, simple.

@pauliewalnuts5803

2 жыл бұрын

He scored more and won more as the team was geared around him and he had better players Gerrard did more than Lampard and that’s a fact it’s why all these 3 and every other pundit pick Gerrard

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

@@pauliewalnuts5803 giroud win the World Cup scoring zero goals he’s better than Messi this guy knows what he’s talking about simple.

@pauliewalnuts5803

Жыл бұрын

@@billybob-fw3vr exactly man can’t argue😩

@billybob-fw3vr

Жыл бұрын

@@pauliewalnuts5803 also I’ve scored more and created more goals than pele playing football all my life, so I’m better, simple.

@uzzy1

Жыл бұрын

But answer me how does lampard have more assist then Gerrard tells me lampard was only goals alot more even Barcelona players of ronaldinho eto deco and that lot know lampard was better