Steven Gerrard leaving Liverpool?

beno619

Anyway will this temper the rivalry?

With Saurez and Gerrard gone there are no Liverpool players left for me to hate.

Fergie peeved off a few as well how does yous feel about Rooney these days ?

8-10

beno619 wrote: »

Anyway will this temper the rivalry?

With Saurez and Gerrard gone there are no Liverpool players left for me to hate.

Fergie peeved off a few as well how does yous feel about Rooney these days ?

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057162722/1/

Rumours Stevie will be back on loan next year anyway

citytillidie

phenom wrote: »

He would have won the league if he had moved to Chelsea in 2005 alright.
Paul Scholes was the most underrated English player ever, it wasn't until the end of his career that he was being recognised for the player he was.

The 3 of these players are world class in the day , if you judge a player on how good he is/was by what he has one well then there is only one winner

If refs had the bottle Scoles would not have played so many games as he would have been suspended more for his terrible late tackling record

Nailz

SantryRed wrote: »

Purely using trophies won as a marker for have good a player was? What crap..

****s sake, you lads must love making stuff up as you go along?

Will I Amnt

beno619 wrote: »

Anyway will this temper the rivalry?

With Saurez and Gerrard gone there are no Liverpool players left for me to hate.

Fergie peeved off a few as well how does yous feel about Rooney these days ?

There's not much to hate about Gerrard IMO. Unless you want to hate someone for getting in a fight in a nightclub or something, in which case you would more than likely hate some of your mates, maybe even yourself...
Maybe he is a total dick off the pitch, I've no idea, but that is irrelevant to me anyway. I don't want or need to know.
In the same way I couldn't care less how nice Suarez is off the pitch, I despise him as a footballer.

phenom

citytillidie wrote: »

If refs had the bottle Scoles would not have played so many games as he would have been suspended more for his terrible late tackling record

He certainly wasn't the best at tackling Alrite , so what are you saying that refs favoured Scholes or where afraid to send him off, that's ridiculous

cournioni

SantryRed wrote: »

This thread is the biggest load of bollocks I've ever seen.

Purely using trophies won as a marker for have good a player was? What crap.

There is genuinely not much to separate the three players. I personally would put them in order of Lampard, Scholes and then Gerrard.

HOWEVER, it is very very minute in the differences between them. I personally think Gerrard will regret not leaving after the CL win, if he had won the league last year, I feel he wouldn't, as one PL medal with Liverpool > 3/4 with Chelsea.

One thing about Gerrard was his ability to just grab games by the scruff of the neck. If I had to pick one of those three players to play in a one off game, it'd be Gerrard all day long. He just always showed up in games. Yes, the position he played for the majority of his career allowed him to be the 'Hollywood' player, but he was so dynamic and devastating in that role, particularly when he played under Benitez. I have a lot of time for a player who stays loyal to his boyhood club, regardless of him almost going to Chelsea, he stuck around and I really wanted him to get that PL medal, he is by far and away the most deserving player in the PL to never get one.

Yet more selective reading.

Where has anybody stated that their opinion was PURELY based upon trophies won? Has anybody used it to back up their point? Yes they have. Is the gauge of how good a player someone is solely down to trophies? No, but it can be a factor. Mr Alan has used examples of John O'Shea, Darren Fletcher, Michael Carrick, Tom Cleverley and others to prove that trophies alone do not set you aside as the best player. What does this highlight however? That it takes a player like Paul Scholes in your team to deliver trophies for the likes of Fletcher, Cleverley, Anderson, Carrick, John O'Shea, Jordi Cruyff etc.

It is no coincidence that without Paul Scholes in the team United have not won trophies in the last four seasons. When he came back United won in 2013. The Ferguson factor cannot be understated, but the Scholes factor has been something that has been overlooked in a major way.

Gerrard had a great team around him over the years and in my opinion the best Liverpool midfielder in decades Xabi Alonso with Torres and also Suarez later on. What I would argue is that Gerrard's "Hollywood" style of passing and shooting was a factor in Liverpool's failures as opposed to Scholes and Lampard's more disciplined approach. This is what sets great players apart in my opinion.

But people only read what they want to read.

8-10

phenom wrote: »

He certainly wasn't the best at tackling Alrite , so what are you saying that refs favoured Scholes or where afraid to send him off, that's ridiculous

I don't find it particularly relevant either. Consensus seems to be that there is no unanimous winner between Stevie, Lamps and Scholesy - all strong achievers at club, underachievers for England.

Gerrard did win plenty of trophies though.

English League titles he didn't of course.

Either did Zola, Moore, Greeves, Hoddle to name a few. Does that that taint 4 of the best players to play in England?

Shearer won one league title and nothing else. Does that take away from him being one of the greatest centre forwards in England?

Of course not. It's scraping the barrel of desperation to say otherwise.

cournioni

rarnes1 wrote: »

Gerrard did win plenty of trophies though.

English League titles he didn't of course.

Either did Zola, Moore, Greeves, Hoddle to name a few. Does that that taint 4 of the best players to play in England?

Shearer won one league title and nothing else. Does that take away from him being one of the greatest centre forwards in England?

Of course not. It's scraping the barrel of desperation to say otherwise.

He did win trophies, which suggests that he is by no means a bad player. I don't think anybody would suggest that. However, performing over the course of a season is what wins you titles and I believe that Gerrard's lack of discipline in his passing and shooting let him down judging by what I've seen of him compared to the others.

Great players win matches, the greats win titles.

beno619

Will I Amnt wrote:

There's not much to hate about Gerrard IMO. Unless you want to hate someone for getting in a fight in a nightclub or something, in which case you would more than likely hate some of your mates, maybe even yourself... Maybe he is a total dick off the pitch, I've no idea, but that is irrelevant to me anyway. I don't want or need to know. In the same way I couldn't care less how nice Suarez is off the pitch, I despise him as a footballer.

Kissing camera's, assisting Drogba/throwing a game.

phenom

8-10 wrote: »

I don't find it particularly relevant either. Consensus seems to be that there is no unanimous winner between Stevie, Lamps and Scholesy - all strong achievers at club, underachievers for England.

On point. It's very hard to say who was the better player this argument has been going on for years , they all had their strong and weak points,

scholes was never given the right chance at international level, playing him out of position , says it all really . I would have like to see him in the centre of the park for England but again it's a tough call.

cournioni

cournioni wrote: »

He did win trophies, which suggests that he is by no means a bad player. I don't think anybody would suggest that. However, performing over the course of a season is what wins you titles and I believe that Gerrard's lack of discipline in his passing and shooting let him down judging by what I've seen of him compared to the others.

Great players win matches, the greats win titles.

Your point might be valid if every team was on a level playing field.

Those Chelsea and Utd teams were on the most part streaks ahead of Liverpool. They were great teams. For many seasons Gerrard carried Liverpool tbh.

By your reckoning Anderson is better than Gerrard because of his title medals.

Also, the point about the players mentioned above is ignored.

beno619

beno619 wrote: »

Kissing camera's, assisting Drogba/throwing a game.

Hate a player because he kissed a camera? Would a grown man actually get upset over that? Seems quite a childish argument

The other two just seem like bitter conspiracy theories

beno619

rarnes1 wrote:

By your reckoning Anderson is better than Gerrard because of his title medals.

Fantastic in his first two seasons and contributed to title wins.

You can twist it how you like nobody has said titles are the be all and end all in evaluating a player.

cournioni

rarnes1 wrote: »

Your point might be valid if every team was on a level playing field.

Those Chelsea and Utd teams were on the most part streaks ahead of Liverpool. They were great teams. For many seasons Gerrard carried Liverpool tbh.

By your reckoning Anderson is better than Gerrard because of his title medals.

Also, the point about the players mentioned above is ignored.

1. As I pointed out, Liverpool have had some great players with them including Xabi Alonso, Torres and Suarez. More than adequate to mount a title challenge.

2. No, by my reckoning Anderson was not a better player. Anderson did not have the influence on United that Scholes had. He should have, but that's not the point.

beno619

When the players are "close" it makes sense to look at thing's like trophy's one.

Failure to win a World Cup will count against Messi and Ronaldo in conversations about all time greats for example.

Osmosis Jones

cournioni wrote: »

1. As I pointed out, Liverpool have had some great players with them including Xabi Alonso, Torres and Suarez. More than adequate to mount a title challenge.

2. No, by my reckoning Anderson was not a better player. Anderson did not have the influence on United that Scholes had. He should have, but that's not the point.

Yeah I loved watching the days of Alonso, Suarez and Torres all playing together.

The_Kew_Tour

phenom wrote: »

He certainly wasn't the best at tackling Alrite , so what are you saying that refs favoured Scholes or where afraid to send him off, that's ridiculous

ah sure nothing beats a good old story and Brown Envelope;)

cournioni

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Yeah I loved watching the days of Alonso, Suarez and Torres all playing together.

Selective reading.

beno619

rarnes1 wrote:

Hate a player because he kissed a camera? Would a grown man actually get upset over that? Seems quite a childish argument

Yeah Garry Neville never upset a pool fans with a celebration.

Osmosis Jones

cournioni wrote: »

Selective reading.

You selected three players from the history of the club, that didn't even all play together, and believed that was a good argument as to how Liverpool were good enough to win the league, somehow in an attempt to back up your points about Gerrard...?

beno619

beno619 wrote: »

Yeah Garry Neville never upset a pool fans with a celebration.

God love them. They'd need to give themselves a good talking to if they actually take it to heart and actively hate him because he kissed his badge. Boo fcuking hoo!

Hating a player over a celebration is schoolboy stuff imo

cournioni

cournioni wrote: »

1. As I pointed out, Liverpool have had some great players with them including Xabi Alonso, Torres and Suarez. More than adequate to mount a title challenge.

2. No, by my reckoning Anderson was not a better player. Anderson did not have the influence on United that Scholes had. He should have, but that's not the point.

Suarez never played with either of those two? Think you are getting stuff mixed up. Alonso and Torres played under Benitez back in 2008 2009

cournioni

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

You selected three players from the history of the club, that didn't even all play together

If you bother to read my posts I have stated just that. But you read what you want to read. Also circa 2008 Liverpool had Mascherano, Reina, Carragher with Alonso and Torres. No titles though.

Michael Owen, Robbie Fowler are others from circa 2001. All well capable of helping Liverpool achieve the title. I'm not listing full squads because United had their fair share of average players when they won trophies too. More than I could list in fact.

phenom

rarnes1 wrote: »

Suarez never played with either of those two? Think you are getting stuff mixed up. Alonso and Torres played under Benitez back in 2008 2009

I would say he is trying to get the point across that Liverpool had some great players that could have helped them with a serious title challenge , look at last season, Suarez carried them to their highest league position in years, and we don't need a reminder of who let that "slip" away,

Tell me this if a club was in serious challenge of a title why would their best players want to leave?

shamrock55

This thread needs to be closed now because its getting ridiculas

Turtyturd

shamrock55 wrote: »

This thread needs to be closed now because its getting ridiculas

But that would be giving in.

smileyj1987

Ryu Hayabusa wrote: »

After much time deliberating and analysis I consider that Frank Lampard was the complete midfielder.

I would place in order after this

2 Steven Gerrard
3 Claude Makelele
4 Nicky Butt
5 Paul Scholes

Lampard ahead of Gerrard ??

Everyone likes to say mourinho is the best manager in the league right now and he wanted Gerrard . That would have meant Lampard probably leaving . So em yeah great judgement .

Giggsy11

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Lampard ahead of Gerrard ??

Everyone likes to say mourinho is the best manager in the league right now and he wanted Gerrard . That would have meant Lampard probably leaving . So em yeah great judgement .

Mourinho wanted Lampard when he was at Inter.

J Mysterio

Ryu Hayabusa wrote: »

After much time deliberating and analysis I consider that Frank Lampard was the complete midfielder.

I would place in order after this

2 Steven Gerrard
3 Claude Makelele
4 Nicky Butt
5 Paul Scholes

:pac: Nicky Butt

Skylinehead

cournioni wrote: »

Great players win matches, the greats win titles.

Great teams win titles. None of the Liverpool teams you have mentioned have been great teams. Last year, they had a terrible defence. 08/09, all they had was Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Torres as truly great players. If you look at any title winning team, there was much more class overall in the teams, so using the title argument is a fallacy.

Will I Amnt

Skylinehead wrote: »

Great teams win titles. None of the Liverpool teams you have mentioned have been great teams. Last year, they had a terrible defence. 08/09, all they had was Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Torres as truly great players. If you look at any title winning team, there was much more class overall in the teams, so using the title argument is a fallacy.

Sure United won a few titles with awful teams if you listen to some people on here :pac:

Nalz

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Lampard ahead of Gerrard ??

Everyone likes to say mourinho is the best manager in the league right now and he wanted Gerrard . That would have meant Lampard probably leaving . So em yeah great judgement .

I'd prefer Lampard over Gerrard, as would a lot of people. Also, I can never take anyone seriously that leaves a spaces before fullstops :pac:

The likes of Scholes, Lampard and Gerrard were excellent players but slightly overrated. World Class no, the next best thing to that, yes. That's my opinion anyways. Then again if you listen to Xavi, Keane and others they say Scholes was the best midfielder of their time, so what do I know!

Iused2likebusts

cournioni wrote: »

If you bother to read my posts I have stated just that. But you read what you want to read. Also circa 2008 Liverpool had Mascherano, Reina, Carragher with Alonso and Torres. No titles though.

Michael Owen, Robbie Fowler are others from circa 2001. All well capable of helping Liverpool achieve the title. I'm not listing full squads because United had their fair share of average players when they won trophies too. More than I could list in fact.

Is it only Gerrard that gets his reputation tarnished for a failure to win a league title or do all the other great players from above get the same criticism. Alonso must be the best midfielder that played in the pl this century if you want to talk about significant trophies won which of course is a nonsense argument to make.

phenom

Skylinehead wrote: »

Great teams win titles. None of the Liverpool teams you have mentioned have been great teams. Last year, they had a terrible defence. 08/09, all they had was Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Torres as truly great players. If you look at any title winning team, there was much more class overall in the teams, so using the title argument is a fallacy.

what "class" players did they have last season that made the difference from previous seasons? They came closer last season points wise than in 08/09.

LuckyLloyd

beno619 wrote: »

Anyway will this temper the rivalry?

With Saurez and Gerrard gone there are no Liverpool players left for me to hate.

Fergie peeved off a few as well how does yous feel about Rooney these days ?

I've always admired Rooney despite my Utd hate. He's an animal warrior footballer capable of the brilliant at the most crucial moment.

In the same way that I've never had any problem lauding Keane / Scholes / Giggs / Beckham / Ronaldo / etc as the great footballers they were. I think you have to be pretty small to want to make spurious arguments to knock players / managers due to club support but there you go - life takes all sorts.

Skylinehead

phenom wrote: »

what "class" players did they have last season that made the difference from previous seasons? They came closer last season points wise than in 08/09.

That Suarez guy was pretty decent I heard. But like I said, their poor defence cost them, whereas City had more quality spread throughout the team.

phenom

Skylinehead wrote: »

That Suarez guy was pretty decent I heard. But like I said, their poor defence cost them, whereas City had more quality spread throughout the team.

Yes he was pretty decent alright, amazing what one player can do for a team isn't it.

They lost 6 games last season, the exact same as city in fact. but their defence lost them the league? They bottled it at the end of the season ..... Simples

Sundance_Kid

I'm sorry but anybody who thinks Lampard was better than Gerrard knows f-all about football - it's that black and white.

Lampard didn't have anything like Gerrards passing ability, technical ability, tackling ability, pace, power.
He couldnt play half the positions Gerrard could play.

Added to the fact that Lampard played in a much better team.

Will I Amnt

Sundance_Kid wrote: »

I'm sorry but anybody who thinks Lampard was better than Gerrard knows f-all about football - it's that black and white.

Lampard didn't have anything like Gerrards passing ability, technical ability, tackling ability, pace, power.
He couldnt play half the positions Gerrard could play.

Added to the fact that Lampard played in a much better team.

What are all these positions that Gerrard has played so well in?

SlickRic

Gerrard is incredible, but so is Lampard.

It's not obvious at all who is better.

smileyj1987

Will I Amnt wrote: »

What are all these positions that Gerrard has played so well in?

He has played on the right wing , right back on a few occasions , central midfield and as a number 10 .

Lampard has mainly played as an attacking midfielder and that's it .

Iused2likebusts

smileyj1987 wrote: »

He has played on the right wing , right back on a few occasions , central midfield and as a number 10 .

Lampard has mainly played as an attacking midfielder and that's it .

He also got in the team of the year as a defensive midfielder last year. Time has caught up on him this season but it was telling that a lot of teams were man marking him this season even in this position.

smileyj1987

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

He also got in the team of the year as a defensive midfielder last year. Time has caught up on him this season but it was telling that a lot of teams were man marking him this season even in this position.

You could also say managers and players wised to Gerrard also !! You give him space he will hit a magnificent ball and bang Liverpool are on the counter .

Will I Amnt

smileyj1987 wrote: »

He has played on the right wing , right back on a few occasions , central midfield and as a number 10 .

Lampard has mainly played as an attacking midfielder and that's it .

John O'Shea must be up there with the best Premier League players of all time...

Iused2likebusts

smileyj1987 wrote: »

You could also say managers and players wised to Gerrard also !! You give him space he will hit a magnificent ball and bang Liverpool are on the counter .

Well no pace in the team made his passing abilities from that position fairly redundant also.

smileyj1987

Will I Amnt wrote: »

John O'Shea must be up there with the best Premier League players of all time...

Hahahaha o Shea mainly got a game when united where stuck .

Billy86

Skylinehead wrote: »

Great teams win titles. None of the Liverpool teams you have mentioned have been great teams. Last year, they had a terrible defence. 08/09, all they had was Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Torres as truly great players. If you look at any title winning team, there was much more class overall in the teams, so using the title argument is a fallacy.

That's not entirely fair in their defense, who were only goals off having the best record in the league that year at 27 conceded. Not to take away from the great season Gerrard along with Alonso, Mascherano and Torres had that year but they were part of a very good team. The main area the team could have used more help was in the wide spots.

It also helped that they got to play against 10 men so often that season, mind!

Billy86

Sundance_Kid wrote: »

I'm sorry but anybody who thinks Lampard was better than Gerrard knows f-all about football - it's that black and white.

Lampard didn't have anything like Gerrards passing ability, technical ability, tackling ability, pace, power.
He couldnt play half the positions Gerrard could play.

Added to the fact that Lampard played in a much better team.

Lampard had much better discipline in terms of his position though, and that was one of the reasons he was so successful. For my money Gerrard was considerably more talented, bit Lampard had the better career and is easily -the- benchmark of his geberation for getting every last possible bit of potential out of yourself and a truly great example for young players because of it.