Steven Gerrard leaving Liverpool?

aodea

bucketybuck wrote: »

Interestingly, Gerrard was not one of the first ten players selected in the current boards Premier league draft.

I stand corrected. That is the end of when it comes to the debate.

I was wrong. Where was he picked is it ok to say he is one of the top 110 players?

LuckyLloyd

bucketybuck wrote: »

Interestingly, Gerrard was not one of the first ten players selected in the current boards Premier league draft.

Well someone selected Fernando Torres as the third greatest player of the premiership era so I'd go easy using that draft as an indicator of anything.

Hidalgo

When is the David Beckham led Miami led franchise up and running?
Gerrard would be ideal for being the face of that side.

ctrl-alt-delete

kfallon wrote: »

He'll be gutted about that I'd say......

Some sources suggest it is one of the main factors behind the timing of the announcement.

niallo27

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

I think Gerard was too loyal to Liverpool, bit like Le Tissier at Southampton. He should have been more selfish. I know people will commend him for his loyalty but what did he owe Liverpool? He won them lots of trophies and should have went to a bigger club when he had the chance. Waste.

He didn't do too bad in fairness. You are talking like the fella never won anything. He won everything thing there was to be won except a league.

8-10

Hidalgo wrote: »

When is the David Beckham led Miami led franchise up and running?
Gerrard would be ideal for being the face of that side.

I can see that dying a quiet death. Too many issues in Miami to get it up and running. They can't get attendances for their baseball team, building a new stadium in that town will not be easy to do. If they shared stadium with the Marlins then it might work in the short term but I can't see it happening until 2017 season earliest.

aodea

8-10 wrote: »

I can see that dying a quiet death. Too many issues in Miami to get it up and running. They can't get attendances for their baseball team, building a new stadium in that town will not be easy to do. If they shared stadium with the Marlins then it might work in the short term but I can't see it happening until 2017 season earliest.

2017 is the earliest it can happen as thats the next time new teams can enter the MLS after teams entering this season coming up. Thier are a few differnt options but will be intresting if Miami gets up and running. Beckham could attract some decent ageing stars thier.

Hidalgo

8-10 wrote: »

I can see that dying a quiet death. Too many issues in Miami to get it up and running. They can't get attendances for their baseball team, building a new stadium in that town will not be easy to do. If they shared stadium with the Marlins then it might work in the short term but I can't see it happening until 2017 season earliest.

With the number of Latinos I always thought the Marlins would be better supported. Even when they were good post World Series 2003 they never really attracted big crowds.

8-10

aodea wrote: »

2017 is the earliest it can happen as thats the next time new teams can enter the MLS after teams entering this season coming up.

Ah ok fair enough! Too late for Gerrard anyway perhaps.

8-10

Hidalgo wrote: »

With the number of Latinos I always thought the Marlins would be better supported. Even when they were good post World Series 2003 they never really attracted big crowds.

They haven't made the playoffs since that 2003 World Series win. They screwed up when building the new ballpark, place is a joke.

I think the sensible thing to do would be to move Beckham's team there while they build a purpose-built stadium.

Gerrard would be a big coup for them, if they loan him out for 2016 it would work but he'd need the guarantee that they'd be a team in 2017 - and that would require them to share a stadium you'd think.

LA Galaxy or NY Red Bulls the most likely I'd say. Looking forward to seeing how he does in the league

jay1988

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

I think Gerard was too loyal to Liverpool, bit like Le Tissier at Southampton. He should have been more selfish. I know people will commend him for his loyalty but what did he owe Liverpool? He won them lots of trophies and should have wvent to a bigger club when he had the chance. Waste.

Bigger club? Pull the other one.

Gits_bone

zerks wrote: »

He did,but this fella seems to have some sort of immunity from criticism.:rolleyes:

Didn't Liverpool finish 7th for a few years? :rolleyes:

Paully D

Excellent player.

Regarding his loyalty to Liverpool, do you think there is much truth in the rumours that he was going to leave for Chelsea until he was told by some undesirable people that it would be much better for him and his family if he was to stay at Liverpool?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-560616/Soccer-star-gangsters-Steven-Gerrard-murky-depths-Liverpools-underworld.html

Four years ago, Gerrard's multi-million pound transfer to Chelsea was called off at the eleventh hour because of intolerable pressure being placed on his family by "certain elements".

......

Then there was his abortive transfer to Chelsea in 2004. Following the European Championships that summer, Gerrard was all set to move to London.
With a big wage increase in the offing, he even text-messaged then Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho to say he was looking forward to working with him.

Days later, all that changed. Gerrard told a stunned press conference that he had changed his mind and would be staying in Liverpool.

Officially he was happy - but his ashen face and monosyllabic speech told a different story. The truth, insiders say, is that on the eve of his transfer, Steven had a visit from his father. Paul Gerrard, who had previously been supportive of his move to the capital, had a stark message for him: you can't go. "If you were to leave this city and this football club," he said, "our lives would become intolerable." Steven, sources say, buckled under the pressure.

The precise reasons why this remarkable U-turn came about remain shrouded in mystery. However, it is known that, at the time, a number of leading gangland figures in Liverpool were determined that their football club's prize asset should not be lost to the city - at any cost. Not everybody in Merseyside sees the symbiotic relationship between footballers and gangsters as a bad thing.

irishfeen

He is/was a very good player for Liverpool - his loyalty to Liverpool though mean he (in my eyes anyway) will sit in third best behind Scholes and Lampard in PL history to his retirement. Liverpool FC let him down very badly over the years IMO - poor managers and even poorer signings year after year.

He will go down as a great but not the greatest in PL history certainly - the thing Liverpool fans have to contemplate is how far the club would/could have fell without him bailing them out. There are players who deserve a PL winner medal, he of course is one of them but its simple you win the PL if you deserve to win it - Liverpool in the 16 years Gerrard was playing didn't deserve to win it.

Rayne Wooney

irishfeen wrote: »

He is/was a very good player for Liverpool - his loyalty to Liverpool though mean he (in my eyes anyway) will sit in third best behind Scholes and Lampard in PL history to his retirement. Liverpool FC let him down very badly over the years IMO - poor managers and even poorer signings year after year.

He will go down as a great but not the greatest in PL history certainly - the thing Liverpool fans have to contemplate is how far the club would/could have fell without him bailing them out. There are players who deserve a PL winner medal, he of course is one of them but its simple you win the PL if you deserve to win it - Liverpool in the 16 years Gerrard was playing didn't deserve to win it.

Keane in his prime was better too, and you could argue Viera as well.

CSF

irishfeen wrote: »

He is/was a very good player for Liverpool - his loyalty to Liverpool though mean he (in my eyes anyway) will sit in third best behind Scholes and Lampard in PL history to his retirement. Liverpool FC let him down very badly over the years IMO - poor managers and even poorer signings year after year.

He will go down as a great but not the greatest in PL history certainly - the thing Liverpool fans have to contemplate is how far the club would/could have fell without him bailing them out. There are players who deserve a PL winner medal, he of course is one of them but its simple you win the PL if you deserve to win it - Liverpool in the 16 years Gerrard was playing didn't deserve to win it.

Keane and Vieira are significantly better than the 3 you mentioned. Why would you use those 3 as the list?

But more importantly, I don't think this should be a thread for such a list anyway. Gerrard was a great player who accomplished a great deal in football and is more deserving of the praise for the great career in England that he had, rather than a list of players that were or weren't better than him.

Saipanne

Overrated.

Keane was a different player to Gerrard.

Still though it probably doesn't fit into the pattern. Therefore, Gerrard was infinitely better than Keane!

RollieFingers

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Keane in his prime was better too, and you could argue Viera as well.

LoL! Keane better than Gerrard? Stop the lights!

LuckyLloyd

RollieFingers wrote: »

LoL! Keane better than Gerrard? Stop the lights!

Keane had more impact during his peak years than Gerrard had. I'd say Liverpool would have won the league in 2002 / 2009 / 2014 if they'd had the Roy Keane of 1998 - 2002 in the team.

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Keane had more impact during his peak years than Gerrard had. I'd say Liverpool would have won the league in 2002 / 2009 / 2014 if they'd had the Roy Keane of 1998 - 2002 in the team.

He also had incredible players around him, scholes for one.

But yeah, I agree with your 2nd point for sure

RollieFingers

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Keane had more impact during his peak years than Gerrard had. I'd say Liverpool would have won the league in 2002 / 2009 / 2014 if they'd had the Roy Keane of 1998 - 2002 in the team.

Gerrard is probably the most complete midfielder of all time in the English game, he could do everything! Keane played with world class players, Gerrard played with a lot of tripe, I'd have loved to see Keane single handedly rescue and win games like Istanbul and the West Ham cup final!

Fuhrer

RollieFingers wrote: »

Gerrard is probably the most complete midfielder of all time in the English game, he could do everything! Keane played with world class players, Gerrard played with a lot of tripe, I'd have loved to see Keane single handedly rescue and win games like Istanbul and the West Ham cup final!

What, you mean like Keane did against Juventus?

Dirty Dingus McGee

RollieFingers wrote: »

Gerrard is probably the most complete midfielder of all time in the English game, he could do everything! Keane played with world class players, Gerrard played with a lot of tripe, I'd have loved to see Keane single handedly rescue and win games like Istanbul and the West Ham cup final!

Didn't Keane do something similar against Juventus in the champions league in 1999 and for Ireland against Holland and Portugal in World Cup Qualifying.

ronjo

RollieFingers wrote: »

Gerrard is probably the most complete midfielder of all time in the English game, he could do everything! Keane played with world class players, Gerrard played with a lot of tripe, I'd have loved to see Keane single handedly rescue and win games like Istanbul and the West Ham cup final!

Gerard single handedly won that game in Istanbul?????

Fuhrer

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Didn't Keane do something similar against Juventus in the champions league in 1999 and for Ireland against Holland and Portugal in World Cup Qualifying.

And in multiple League games as well,

Keane was the definition of big game player, far better at than Gerrard.

Saipanne

Gerrard was just overhyped by the English media, and some poor suckers fell for it.

His best years were when Alonso was in the team, then his game suddenly dropped when the Spaniard left.

Funny, that.

Saipanne

Saipanne wrote: »

Gerrard was just overhyped by the English media, and some poor suckers fell for it.

His best years were when Alonso was in the team, then his game suddenly dropped when the Spaniard left.

Funny, that.

Fair play for not falling for it.

The media can be very persuasive.

spockety

Oh look, a pissing contest. How unusual.

Vicxas

spockety wrote: »

Oh look, a pissing contest. How unusual.

Next thing we need is a dick measuring contest.


Ill grab my yard stick.

TheCitizen

rob316 wrote: »

He'll still be a one club man and will probably go down as Liverpool's best ever. Deserved to win so much more and carried liverpool for years but stayed loyal to his home town club.

A legend and the best player to not win the league.

Wish him the very best and I'm glad he knows his time is up.

Liverpools best ever? Dont think so. Dalglish, Souness are two that spring to mind that were better Liverpool players I reckon.

Bandana boy

Arguing that Keane was a better player than Gerrard or a bigger impact to UTD than Gerard was to Liverpool is fair enough we could go back and forth on that ,but stating he was "far better" big match player is ludicrous. One might suspect you never watched either player play.

Keanes strength was his consistency ,his belief that every match was important, demanding that those around him perpare and put in as much effort at Home to Hull as away to Madrid, not big moments in big games ,kind of player at all (Juve game the exception that proves the rule)
Stevie G was the big game big impact kind of player and did it on so many occasions.

Utopia Parkway

Saipanne wrote: »

Gerrard was just overhyped by the English media, and some poor suckers fell for it.

His best years were when Alonso was in the team, then his game suddenly dropped when the Spaniard left.

Funny, that.

Who would have thought playing with other good players would be of benefit to a player's own career. Normally they should be able to win stuff all by themselves.

Saipanne

rarnes1 wrote: »

Fair play for not falling for it.

The media can be very persuasive.

They can indeed.

kingshankly

Banjaxed82 wrote: »

I'd say a good chunk of the people who are saying Gerrard is the best Liverpool player ever, were probably not watching Liverpool in the 70's and 80's. As has been said, different eras, etc

I watched Kenny in his prime and was nothing compared to gerrard Barnes was better than Kenny also

edgecutter

ronjo wrote: »

Gerard single handedly won that game in Istanbul?????

Agreed. If I remember correctly Hamann came on at half time and marked Kaka out of the game to help liverpool win.

LuckyLloyd

RollieFingers wrote: »

Gerrard is probably the most complete midfielder of all time in the English game, he could do everything! Keane played with world class players, Gerrard played with a lot of tripe, I'd have loved to see Keane single handedly rescue and win games like Istanbul and the West Ham cup final!

Like vs Juve / Holland? Yeah.

Blatter

Gerrard shouldn't be compared with Keane at all. Keane was a world class CM. Gerrard was a world class attacker whether he played from the right or behind the striker.

The English media are idiots constantly referring to him as a great CM.

Fuhrer

Blatter wrote: »

Gerrard shouldn't be compared with Keane at all. Keane was a world class CM. Gerrard was a world class attacker whether he played from the right or behind the striker.

The English media are idiots constantly referring to him as a great CM.

Its what happens when anyone who plays in the middle is called a midfielder.


Wingers at least get a fair distinction.

kingshankly

kingshankly wrote: »

I watched Kenny in his prime and was nothing compared to gerrard Barnes was better than Kenny also

That's a matter of opinions of course.

A lot of people would rate Souness as better than Gerrard

8-10

Blatter wrote: »

Gerrard shouldn't be compared with Keane at all. Keane was a world class CM. Gerrard was a world class attacker whether he played from the right or behind the striker.

The English media are idiots constantly referring to him as a great CM.

More often than not he was CM for England

Blatter

Blatter wrote: »

Gerrard shouldn't be compared with Keane at all. Keane was a world class CM. Gerrard was a world class attacker whether he played from the right or behind the striker.

The English media are idiots constantly referring to him as a great CM.

Exactly.

Sadly english media = boards opinions a lot of the time.

LuckyLloyd

Blatter wrote: »

Gerrard shouldn't be compared with Keane at all. Keane was a world class CM. Gerrard was a world class attacker whether he played from the right or behind the striker.

The English media are idiots constantly referring to him as a great CM.

Both would have worked together as an effective partnership imo which proves your point. Lampard / Gerrard didn't work for England because they were too similar.

smileyj1987

It's a sad moment , when a one club player leaves because at the end of the day you don't see it too much in modern football .

garra

Paully D wrote: »

Excellent player.

Regarding his loyalty to Liverpool, do you think there is much truth in the rumours that he was going to leave for Chelsea until he was told by some undesirable people that it would be much better for him and his family if he was to stay at Liverpool?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-560616/Soccer-star-gangsters-Steven-Gerrard-murky-depths-Liverpools-underworld.html

You'll be quoting the Sun next. What good does it do to quote a conservative sh1t-spreading rag like that, which cannot even back up the "story" with actual quotes or any kind of evidence at all? If all you can do is relay hear-say instead of comment on the actual topic, I feel sorry for you man.

8-10

It wouldn't surprise me if it was true or partially-true.

FutureGuy

Gerrard was one of the best premier league attacking midfielders ever. His play with Torres and Alonso was the high point. Not on the same level as Scholes and Lampard, but I think that's because he stayed with Liverpool. Had he moved to Chelsea, he'd be "rated" far higher because of all the trophies they won.

Liverpool will find it difficult to replace him as a player.

bennyl10

jay1988 wrote: »

Bigger club? Pull the other one.

Like Chelsea or Madrid, when he was on the verge of Leaving, is i'm sure what was meant.

Madrid are a bigger club than Liverpool. You cant even attempt to deny that. While in recent years, Chelsea have been substantially more succesful!

One club player also? Hes leaving, jumping ship, going elsewhere etc..
so he'll have been a two club player ..


Gerrard will be remembered as a Liverpool great, in terms of Premier Legue greats, even just in midfield, imo, he falls behind Lampard, Scholes, Keane, Viera and maybe even Toure..

Talib Fiasco

bennyl10 wrote: »

Like Chelsea or Mdrid,when he was on the verge of Leaving,is icm sure what was meant.

Madrid are a bigger club than Liverpool. You cant even attempt to deny that. While in recent years, Chelsea have been substantially more succesful!

Gerrard will be remembered as a Liverpool great, in terms of Premier Legue greats, even just in midfield, imo, he falls behind Lampard, Scholes, Keane, Viera and even Toure..

The loyalty thing though, he was on the absomute verge of joining Chelsea, until he was offered a better deal at pool..

I'm a City fan but in no way does he fall behind Yaya. Okay if Yaya has a repeat of last season for two or three more years we can talk but he's not in the league of Gerrard, Lampard, Keane or Vieira yet...not by a long shot

bennyl10

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I'm a City fan but in no way does he fall behind Yaya. Okay if Yaya has a repeat of last season for two or three more years we can talk but he's not in the league of Gerrard, Lampard, Keane or Vieira yet...not by a long shot

The other 3 though,
I'd have Scholes, Keane, Lampard and Vieira all above Gerrard in any list

Gerrard is without a doubt a phenomenal footballer, and will be remembered as a Liverpool great, but i just don't think he's in the same bracket..