Steven Gerrard leaving Liverpool?

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

But... Paul Scholes, Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard have all played in the same team, why don't we assess how they've done for England and factor that in also?

Ok can you please provide relevant stats for England to judge these players. Thanks.

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

Who is better midfielder Darren Fletcher or Steven Gerrard?

Fletcher was arguably better in 07-08 in my opinion, but never a first choice for United consistently.

But if both were to be on Strictly Come Dancing that year, I'm sure Gerrard would probably get the vote, just as long as they play Phil Collins.

Nailz

Mr Alan wrote: »

Largely irrelevant.

Who's a better player Danny Welbeck or Luis Suarez?

You see where I'm going with this?

Not even "largely" irrelevant, there some exceptions and conditions when considering how those honours are won but that should be obvious, don't you think? Danny Welbeck only won 1 league title, and in that season he had only played the full 90 minutes for United in 7/8 matches; not exactly a vital player in the clubs' success that season.

Unlike Suarez or Gerrard (in years previous) who if they had to have won the league they would have been constants and therefore important parts of the Liverpool team that would've won it, unlike Danny Welbeck. If you were going to make such silly comparisons then you should've went full-on and compared Anderson to Gerrard. Common sense should be applied.

Mr Alan

Nailz wrote: »

Common sense should be applied.

I agree.

And common sense is that Gerrard could've moved club & most likely won numerous Premier League titles. The fact he didn't doesn't downgrade him as a player.

Not winning a PL title has no real bearing on judging him as a player. His quality really is beyond question to all but the most dim.

There are plenty of players who've been regulars in PL winning sides but not been any great shakes, are they all better than any player who has not won a PL title?

niallo27

Nailz wrote: »

Anyone who thinks that trophies are irrelevant in considering the quality of a player is bullshitting to an enormous degree.

Would you rate shearer as a decent player.

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

Ok can you please provide relevant stats for England to judge these players. Thanks.

http://www.englandstats.com/index.php

Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard. I'm sure you won't need a calculator.

8-10

cournioni wrote: »

http://www.englandstats.com/index.php

Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard. I'm sure you won't need a calculator.

Cheers, did you get your assist stats from here?

cournioni

niallo27 wrote: »

Would you rate shearer as a decent player.

He won the league once so he can't be bad. But can he win a popularity contest?

Bridge93

Gerrard has the most premiership assists out of the three of them. Couldn't find England.
Gerrard 100 in 494 games.
Lampard 96 in 592
Scholes 45 in 499 games

Gerrard 116 goals
Scholes 107
Lampard 175

monkey9

Gerrard would walk into any Premier League team. Relax lads, just because you don't like like Liverpool doesn't diminish his brilliance.

8-10

Bridge93 wrote: »

Gerrard has the most premiership assists out of the three of them. Couldn't find England.

I can't see it on the site either

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

http://www.englandstats.com/index.php

Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard. I'm sure you won't need a calculator.

The only stats there is goals scored & appearances? Gerrard has far more appearances, Scholes slightly more goals. This is proving nothing?

cournioni

8-10 wrote: »

Cheers, did you get your assist stats from here?

No problem. Yes I did.

monkey9

cournioni wrote: »

He won the league once so he can't be bad. But can he win a popularity contest?

Gerrard won everything else. Including popularity contests. He's basically a winner on and off the field.

8-10

cournioni wrote: »

No problem. Yes I did.

Can you post them? Can't find them / 3am eyes!

cournioni

monkey9 wrote: »

Gerrard won everything else. Including popularity contests. He's basically a winner on and off the field.

Apart from a league. What stats are you looking at? Clearly he has a worse games to goals ratio for England than Lampard and Scholes.

Bridge93

Gerrard has a lot more England starts even though he was a squad regular at a younger age. Seemed to never be a sub whereas Lampard was. When both were at the peak of their powers it seems Lampard made way when they couldn't play both.

cournioni

8-10 wrote: »

Can you post them? Can't find them / 3am eyes!

Phone + 3 am eyes + Copy and Paste = Gerrard doesn't match up to Scholes or Lampard.

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

What stats are you looking at? Clearly he has a worse games to goals ratio for England than Lampard and Scholes.

It's so weird that you think that's the be all & end all.

But in an effort to see if you're at least consistantly weird, do you think Lampard is/was better than Scholes?

Do you think the Gerrard is much better than Michael Carrick?

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

Phone + 3 am eyes + Copy and Paste = Gerrard doesn't match up to Scholes or Lampard.

I don't think the assists are on that site? Were you lying again?

Gits_bone

But can he win a popularity contest?

8-10

cournioni wrote: »

Phone + 3 am eyes + Copy and Paste = Gerrard doesn't match up to Scholes or Lampard.

Yeah but where on the site did you find the assists? I'm still struggling

monkey9

cournioni wrote: »

What stats are you looking at? Clearly he has a worse games to goals ratio for England than Lampard and Scholes.

Stats? I don't play Football Manager. I look at what he's won and what he's achieved and I just watch Liverpool matches. Seriously, Gerrard was really good. I'm not trying to wind you up.

Bridge93

As of January 2012:

http://www.averageopposition.com/2012/01/LampardvsGerrard.html?m=1

Just about sums up the minimal difference between them that isn't worth arguing over as people will be on different sides of the fence.

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

It's so weird that you think that's the be all & end all.

But in an effort to see if you're at least consistantly weird, do you think Lampard is/was better than Scholes?

Do you think the Gerrard is much better than Michael Carrick?

The be all and end all is trophies, but you've discounted that in favour of popularity contests.

I think that Carrick is a better holding midfielder than Gerrard but in terms of goal scoring Gerrard is clearly better statistically. Would you agree?

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

I think that Carrick is a better holding midfielder than Gerrard but in terms of goal scoring Gerrard is clearly better statistically. Would you agree?

So you do recognise that goals scored is not the only barometer when judging a midfielder. At least when it suits you. Well done.

You didn't answer whether or not you think Lampard is better than Scholes

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

So you do recognise that goals scored is not the only barometer when judging a midfielder. At least when it suits you. Well done.

You didn't answer whether or not you think Lampard is better than Scholes

What is your barometer? Popularity contests?

Scholes is better.

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

Scholes is better.

So let's get this straight...

You've stated explicitly that Lampard is better than Gerrard because his goals per game record is better.

Yet you think Scholes is better than Lampard, even though Lampards goals per game is significantly better than Scholes.

You're not really being very consistent are you? :rolleyes:

8-10

I stand by what I said here -
http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057353335/31/#post93663715

Still can't find these assist figures though on the site that was given

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

So let's get this straight...

You've stated explicitly that Lampard is better than Gerrard because his goals per game record is better.

Yet you think Scholes is better than Lampard, even though Lampards goals per game is significantly better than Scholes.

You're not really being very consistent are you? :rolleyes:

Wrong. I didn't explicitly say anything of the sort.

Scholes has won more trophies than Lampard and that is factored into my decision.

You haven't answered my question. What is your barometer for measuring the better player other than a popularity contest?

Mr Alan

cournioni wrote: »

Wrong. I didn't explicitly say anything of the sort.

Scholes has won more trophies than Lampard and that is factored into my decision.

You haven't answered my question. What is your barometer for measuring the better player other than a popularity contest?

So now we're back to wherever wins the most trophies is the best :rolleyes:

A world where John O'Shea is better than Paul McGrath. Where Nani is better than Bale. Where Berbatov is better than Shearer.

You're embarrasing yourself.

I judge a player using my eyes. By judging their abilities is a football match at the core skills required of them, passing, positioning, shooting, running, tackling, scoring, fighting, touch, control, vision etc etc. Their ability to impact a game to benefit their team.

You just look at the trophy cabinets of the club they play for :rolleyes:

Just to clarify, I'm not stating who is better between Lampard, Gerrard and/or Scholes. Just pointing out how full of ****e you are.

Osmosis Jones

There is no one system of measurement, there's no formula, no algorithm to figure out who the best is.

Hollister11

England were idiots to stick with a 4-4-2 and have one of these players on the left.
Imagine scholes,lampard and gerrard as a midfield trio.

astonaidan

Lets all be fair here, Lampard is better than Gerrard and Scholes
A lot of nonsense being talked about Gerrard, just cause his legs are gone now doesnt mean in his day he wasnt world class, best midfielder in league, no. Should have won the league, no by that logic Shearer deserved a league.

niallo27

astonaidan wrote: »

Lets all be fair here, Lampard is better than Gerrard and Scholes
A lot of nonsense being talked about Gerrard, just cause his legs are gone now doesnt mean in his day he wasnt world class, best midfielder in league, no. Should have won the league, no by that logic Shearer deserved a league.

He did win a league.

cournioni

Mr Alan wrote: »

So now we're back to wherever wins the most trophies is the best :rolleyes:

A world where John O'Shea is better than Paul McGrath. Where Michael Nani is better than Bale. Where Berbatov is better than Shearer.

You're embarrasing yourself.

I judge a player using my eyes. By judging their abilities is a football match at the core skills required of them, passing, positioning, shooting, running, tackling, scoring, fighting, touch, control, vision etc etc. Their ability to impact a game to benefit their team.

You just look at the trophy cabinets of the club they play for :rolleyes:

Just to clarify, I'm not stating who is better between Lampard, Gerrard and/or Scholes. Just pointing out how full of ****e you are.

More selective bollocks from you again. Who explicitly said anything about just trophies or just goals or just assists making one player better the other? Nobody.

If you had read my original post you will have seen that I stated that my opinion was with my eyes and what I had seen with them during live matches. The statistics and trophies merely back up this opinion.

And that last line you came out with is quite rich, considering that you used a popularity contest to try and back up your point.

By the way, who is this Michael Nani chap? Sounds like some prospect.

niallo27

cournioni wrote: »

More selective bollocks from you again. Who explicitly said anything about just trophies or just goals or just assists making one player better the other? Nobody.

If you had read my original post you will have seen that I stated that my opinion was with my eyes and what I had seen with them during live matches. The statistics and trophies merely back up this opinion.

And that last line you came out with is quite rich, considering that you used a popularity contest to try and back up your point.

By the way, who is this Michael Nani chap? Sounds like some prospect.

Stop honestly. Your embarrassing yourself.

cournioni

niallo27 wrote: »

Stop honestly. Your embarrassing yourself.

I'm not worried about popularity contests.

ardinn

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Zidane himself, Pirlo, Scholes, Xavi etc Gerrard will be remembered as a level below at the end of the day.

Genuine LOL!!!

Your funny

beno619

Mr Alan wrote:

Do you think the Gerrard is much better than Michael Carrick?

Better footballer no, better midfielder than Gerrard ? Yes.

Oranage2

beno619 wrote: »

Better footballer no, better midfielder than Gerrard ? Yes.

And there goes the neighborhood!

phenom

astonaidan wrote: »

Lets all be fair here, Lampard is better than Gerrard and Scholes
A lot of nonsense being talked about Gerrard, just cause his legs are gone now doesnt mean in his day he wasnt world class, best midfielder in league, no. Should have won the league, no by that logic Shearer deserved a league.

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

All 3 were different players. All 3 were fantastic players.

They played a lot of the same roles at different times of their career but for varying lengths of time so it's hard to compare like with like imo. Still though it's funny reading the p1ssing contest!

Dirty Dingus McGee

Nailz wrote: »

Anyone who thinks that trophies are irrelevant in considering the quality of a player is bullshitting to an enormous degree.

No they're not.Its a team sport and therefore one individual player can only do so much.It take a team to win trophies not an individual.

beno619

Oranage2 wrote:

And there goes the neighborhood!

The last 3 to 4 years have highlighted it really. Same as Alonso was/is a better midfielder. Gerrard is a great attacking player but has come up short when it comes to the traditional centre midfielder role.

SlickRic

1. They've all lovely bottoms.

2. I personally can't really separate the 3 of Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard. Different players, brilliant players.

3. When judging players, I always find that many of my generation of Utd fans look at players through the prism of their ridiculous success over 20 years. For instance, Scholes, Lampard and Gerrard are all brilliant. I've had many arguments where my Utd fan mate will simply point to trophies as the barometer. It completely discounts that Scholes had the best team around him and best manager managing them for his career.

It also clouds judgments of other players, so that unless they won Premier Leagues, they're not elite. That's nonsense. Only certain Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and City players (plus Blackburn players from 20 years ago) can be considered among the best?

Now, Liverpool fans can be guilty of romanticising, absolutely...but Gerrard really was a special player. It's not even really up for debate.

Ryu Hayabusa

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

Will I Amnt

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

Ha ha, I wonder where Lampard would be had he stayed with Chelsea...

SantryRed

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.

beno619

SantryRed wrote:

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

Nobody has said this tbf. Its only been used as added criteria to judge the players on.