View Full Version : Whos better Lampard or Gerrard?
Stretch Armstrong
09 Apr 2007, 07:53 PM
:eek: :eek: :eek:
What
Who would I prefer as an attacking midfielder? Gerrard every time.
The position requires athleticism, especially in the Premiership. Scholes is the better soft shoe player but to bring him up in such a comparison is unfair and a little pointless.
Walter3000
09 Apr 2007, 08:40 PM
As a pure attacking mid, Id take Scholes, he would seem to have th ebest track record in that role.
Stretch Armstrong
09 Apr 2007, 08:57 PM
As a pure attacking mid, Id take Scholes, he would seem to have th ebest track record in that role.
I wouldn't but each to their own. Gerrard can be almost unplayable in the right formation.
Scholes would have been good wherever he had played domestically for Manu back in the day although he struggled playing ahead of Veron. Physically he lacks the qualities to play a more advanced role IMO, where running off the ball is paramount. He is more Pirlo than Gerrard.
I'm not saying Gerrard is a better CM, simply a better attacking midfielder.
The Jitty Slitter
10 Apr 2007, 02:42 AM
"more pirlo?"
errr
Dear_Claudio
11 Apr 2007, 12:27 AM
Mikel pisses on all of them:cool:
cooldude
11 Apr 2007, 12:40 AM
Too damn right he does.
Marko
11 Apr 2007, 09:32 AM
haha
Grim_Reaper
11 Apr 2007, 11:34 AM
Who better Lampard or Gerrard??
I feel it is GerrardFeelings are great, but statistics are a better measure.
Lampard - Actim index 534.00 (3rd place)
Gerrard - Actim index 417.00 (14th place)
'nuff said...
lfcno1fan
11 Apr 2007, 05:12 PM
look at the game for england against macedonia lampard didn't play.
Are you seriously saying that lampard could have played like gerrard did in that game.
gerrard saved mclaren untill the next game
gerrard is the best central misfielder in the world who has scored in every major domestic cup final
Marko
11 Apr 2007, 06:06 PM
Actim Index? "I'm lovin' it", as a fast-food chain with a penchant for serving vile stodgy food might say!
The Actim Index is the bible of football, and anyone who strays from it is a filthy heathen worthy of a public flogging that would make even the Saudis flinch.
Christ, we might as well use FIFA rankings to decide which NT is better.
Come now, Grim Reaper, can't you do a little better than that? Like, um, watch football matches with your own two eyes? Your opinion is worthless when you spout meaningless facts and figures without any input from your good self.
Anyway, do you have any clue what 534.00 and 417.00 mean? How is Lampard 117 points better than Gerrard? If points were pounds in bodyweight, then I'd tend to agree, but I'm assuming they represent something else. What do they represent? How did Fat Frank acquire these 534 points?
Can you explain why you personally think that Lampard is the superior player?
leg_breaker
11 Apr 2007, 08:34 PM
Watching United play last night, I'd say that Gerrard could fit into that team, Lampard couldn't.
Walter3000
11 Apr 2007, 11:50 PM
What does that have to do with anything?
Teso Dos Bichos
12 Apr 2007, 09:39 PM
His lack of tactical versatility, his inability to play quick, one-touch attacking football, his inability to contribute to a creative side...
I assume that is the type of thing leg_breaker will post.
mshankb
13 Apr 2007, 02:26 AM
His lack of tactical versatility, his inability to play quick, one-touch attacking football, his inability to contribute to a creative side...
I assume that is the type of thing leg_breaker will post.
Well if he did, it would be the most stupid post I've read in a long time.
Mike123
13 Apr 2007, 10:29 AM
Watching United play last night, I'd say that Gerrard could fit into that team, Lampard couldn't.
More like:
Put Lampard in Liverpool a few months and replace him with Gerrard for Chelsea. Can Lampard do what Gerrard does for Liverpool, and vice-versa?
cooldude
13 Apr 2007, 11:18 AM
More like: Who gives a ********?
I thought we were debating who they are and what they bring to their present club, not some stupid hypotheical situation.
The Jitty Slitter
13 Apr 2007, 11:39 AM
More like: Who gives a ********?
I thought we were debating who they are and what they bring to their present club, not some stupid hypotheical situation.
Actually he is poster making the positive contribution to the thread whereas it is you that is being stupid.
cooldude
13 Apr 2007, 11:57 AM
Actually he is poster making the positive contribution to the thread whereas it is you that is being stupid.
I simply don't understand this: How does it matter how good Lampard is on the Liverpool team as compared to Gerrard on the Chelsea team? They play for their respective teams and I believe that Lampard is a consistently better performer at Chelsea than Gerrard at Liverpool. You may have a different opinion and that's absolutely fine with me but to consider some situation that will most certainly not exist and compare them makes no sense.
Teso Dos Bichos
14 Apr 2007, 06:01 PM
Doing so will indicate who the better player is. It might also answer the questions surrounding Lampard only being able to 'perform' in one system.
schafer
14 Apr 2007, 06:08 PM
Doing so will indicate who the better player is. It might also answer the questions surrounding Lampard only being able to 'perform' in one system.
Which system would that be? The 4-3-3 Chelsea used the last 2 years, the midfield diamond Mourinho insists upon this season, or the traditional 4-4-2 he played in under Ranieri?