• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* English Football Season 2014-15

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah I kinda was and I read Mourinho saying he could have fit both in the side and when I read it I heard Grecian crying. You know who Mourinho would have chosen of the two if he had to though; the same choice any manager would have made.
I think Gerrard would have been perfect for Essien's position. Not to say he wasn't the better player (although I'm not sure he was) but I really don't think he could have done Lampard's job better than Lampard did.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
A lot of ground in this debate has been covered before but the problem with saying that Gerrard's comparative lack of team success isn't a stick to beat him with is that it assumes a) that he has played with mugs all of his career, and b) that he has been in no way responsible for his teams' many failures. Both are untrue.

And I will just assume that the Gerrard v Olympiakos > Keane vs Juventus is a troll.
 

dontcloseyoureyes

BARNES OUT
He maintains it was that suicidal game United City (1-6) loss that cost them the league - that if you'd just lost 3-1 that would have done it.
I'd say outplaying us but still losing 1-0 a week before was probably really where they lost it. Also botching it vs. Everton.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
A lot of ground in this debate has been covered before but the problem with saying that Gerrard's comparative lack of team success isn't a stick to beat him with is that it assumes a) that he has played with mugs all of his career, and b) that he has been in no way responsible for his teams' many failures. Both are untrue.

And I will just assume that the Gerrard v Olympiakos > Keane vs Juventus is a troll.
Gerrard hasn't played with mugs but be honest, look at who he did play with. There's probably 2/3 seasons max where had a genuinely quality side around him. Scholes, Viera, Lampard etc don't have that problem.

As for him being responsible for the failures, slip aside, what would you say he's responsible for???

--

And not directly a reply to you Tom, but does anyone remember the 03-04 season? My word were Liverpool turgid that season. It was a miracle that they were even in the CL in 05, Nevermind won it, and Gerrard was undoubtedly the difference.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
It would've been, it should've been. :cry:

From 7th to potentially champions. It would have added another legendary chapter to his career.

What a cruel end to it. I wouldn't have wished it on my worst enemy.
Another legendary chapter?

Meh.
 

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
I don't particularly like Gerrard or Rooney, but I don't get why so many people, particularly English ones, make such an effort to devalue their careers/quality.
 

cpr

International Coach
I find the Gerrard v Keane/Scholes/Lampard debate a bit of a non starter. Could Gerrard do their job better than them - no. Could any of them be relied on to do their job to a high level and cover other areas of the midfield - no.

What you've got in Gerrard was a exceptionally good player, who may not be the best DM/AM/Playmaker etc in the Prem - top 3 though - but was so good at all that he's a complete shoe in if starting a team from scratch. Keane and Scholes developed around each other at Utd, and we stuckk with that dynamic for long after that seeing where you'd slip Gerrard into that team was hard. Likewise Liverpool built their system around Gerrard dynamic and as such a Lampard or Scholes wouldn't fit into it.

Ultimately England struggled because they couldn't take 3 exceptional midfielders and find a balance between them - Gerrard always had to sacrifice more because he was the most versatile, Scholes got pushed out too because ultimately his game had been built on having players around him who weren't ****ing useless.


Truth is, I'd have taken him at OT, but not at the replacement of Scholes, because that wouldn't have worked with how we played back then.
 

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
I don't particularly like Gerrard or Rooney, but I don't get why so many people, particularly English ones, make such an effort to devalue their careers/quality.
This. Weird how it becomes a battle to belittle, instead of to argue who is best.

I'm not even the biggest Gerrard fan, but I still don't get how him not winning a league title makes him 'less great' or whatever. If anything it makes me more impressed with him, that he achieved so much at a club with questionable transfers, almost run into the ground at one point, etc.

It's like when people devalue Messi because he hasn't won a World Cup with Argentina.

It's a team gameeeeeeeeee
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
Gerrard hasn't played with mugs but be honest, look at who he did play with. There's probably 2/3 seasons max where had a genuinely quality side around him. Scholes, Viera, Lampard etc don't have that problem.

As for him being responsible for the failures, slip aside, what would you say he's responsible for???
See this is it. The slip isn't even something I'd attack him for seeing as it's just bad luck (although tbf the poor control leading to it wasn't). The thing that Gerrard absolutely does deserve criticism for in that game though was an atrocious and selfish second half performance mainly involving wasting more good positions than I cared to count by shooting from 30 yards whenever he had the chance. One of those goes in and he's heroically atoned for the slip, none of them go in and no-one a few weeks later remembers the good positions he wasted. If I had to point to a single game to sum up why I think he is overrated it would be that one, ignoring the slip. The slip was just quite (no actually, hilariously) funny.

With that being said Gerrard off the top of my head has also made more high profile errors than most other names in this discussion. Own goal vs Chelsea in 2005 League Cup final to take it to extra time, backpass vs France 2004, header to Suarez last year, backpass to Henry in some year or other, penalty shootout miss 2006, red card vs us this year and backpass to Drogba 2010. Not a point I'd defend particularly vehemently as I haven't given any of the other names in this discussion much thought, but off the top of my head the list of the others' high profile errors doesn't seem so exhaustive.
 
Last edited:

Furball

Evil Scotsman
A lot of ground in this debate has been covered before but the problem with saying that Gerrard's comparative lack of team success isn't a stick to beat him with is that it assumes a) that he has played with mugs all of his career, and b) that he has been in no way responsible for his teams' many failures. Both are untrue.

And I will just assume that the Gerrard v Olympiakos > Keane vs Juventus is a troll.
Halsey wins at internets.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Anyone know why Ancelotti subbed Ronaldo at half time tonight?

On a serious note it's not the first time he's gone missing in a big Champions League tie and it should really put the Messi v Ronaldo debate to bed.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Other than Chelsea in 2005, how many serious attempts were there by other clubs to sign Gerrard?

Granted, most players at top English clubs tend not to leave for other top English clubs so that in itself isn't unusual, but it's telling IMO that while his midfield chums were signed by Barcelona and Real Madrid he was left in Liverpool. And it's because, as good as Gerrard was (and I'm not trying to argue that he wasn't a very good player, just that he's over-rated), he wasn't good enough to play central midfield for a truly elite team. He is too much if a jack of all trades midfielder and to play at the very elite you need to be more specialised than Gerrard was. He didn't have the positional discipline or tackling ability to play DM and IMO lacked the technical ability to be a really elite playmaker.
 

cpr

International Coach
Halsey makes a good point about Gerrard trying to atone by shooting from distance whenever he could in that Chelsea game, and thats one area of the game I berate him for - he's a very selfish player at times. Always felt he chooses the eloborate (the long shot, the Hollywood ball) over the simple far too often, and whilst everyone glories when it comes off, he doesn't get held up for wasting as much as another would - Now granted I'm struggling to think when Scholes wasted the ball doing the same, so I guess there's definitely an element of selective memory going on. Whilst Liverpool fans point out how he was a star amongst the mediocre, I always felt he was happiest being just that, and wanted to be seen as the lone hero pulling Liverpool forward.

Now I wont argue he wasn't ever a team player - God I think he's the only Englishman in the last 20 years who can say they've performed for England in a major tournament, because he gave his all to cover for the dross around him. Nor would I argue he's the most selfish player ever - We had Ronaldo remember - But I have always felt it to be an unsavoury element to his performances, whereas I never felt that with someone like Lampard.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Too many people to quote but:

1. Cabs is right, Sledger is wrong
2. Alex Ferguson tried to sign Gerrard for Man U. Mourinho tried to take him to Real as well as Chelsea. I mean if Man U and Real don't fit your top clubs bill then I suppose, yeah, no other top clubs wanted him. To say he was stuck in Liverpool is such a tenuous point as if to say that firstly we would automatically know had anyone else ever inquired about him, and ignores the fact that because he wasn't going to leave, it makes the whole thing a non-starter. I'm pretty sure nobody knew Ferguson went in for him before his book came out. Shock horror - we don't know everything that happens behind the scenes.
3. So Halsey kind of makes a fair point about the individual errors, BUT the initial point was about how he had cost himself titles and what not. How many of those errors did that? And I'm sorry, penalty shootout miss, red card etc? Please. I agree though that the Chavs game last year is a good example of him going too far to try and swing the match back in his favour. If you feel that devalues the player then sure, is it worth trading off for the times he's legitimately dragged a game by the scruff of its neck? Who's to say. But to say because a player has made mistakes in a handful of games so he's to blame for his lack of titles is quite the jump.

At the end of the day, I'll go back to my point. If you don't like the guy, fair enough. Certainly if you dislike Liverpool I'm okay with that. But for me, at this stage I'm just glad to have witnessed a career of that stature, and grateful for his performances in the 2010 and 12 tournaments for England when picking up the **** (obviously he was **** in the last World Cup).

People can point to his trophy haul and call him overrated, at the end of the day opinions will always be just that but history will predominantly remember him as a great player, as rightly so.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Find the Gerrard debate pretty weird. The critics saying he wasn't great because he didn't win the league are silly, but so are the tons of supporters who paint every great performance of his as "single-handed". And with regards to the 2005 final, everyone knows that game was the Dietmar Hamann show... Gerrard can suck a fat one.
 

Top