Gerrard

Meh, I never bought into the Gerrard hype so much. He was a very good individual if you played him in his "Gerrard role" behind the striker and built your team around him. He was probably the 5th best English midfielder of the last 25 years imo behind Robson, Scholes, Lampard and Gascoigne in no particular order. At his very best, he might have been on my bench for a world 11, but for sure wouldn't have started.

I suppose the fairest thing I can say about him as a player is that when he started to decline, I was glad about it from a United perspective. A dangerous player to play against.

And that's not me with blinkers on before any soft Pool fan gets in a mood. He didn't have the ability or talent of a maestro like Scholes, he wasn't dribbling wizard like Gascoigne, didn't have the productivity of Lampard and wasn't the box to box player Robson was.

A bit of them all at times, but never a master.

comment by Adam 'The Interview' Lallana (U20650)
posted 12 minutes ago
wow he must be terrible then


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yep you are judges against your peers not the likes of West Ham and Greek pub sides

comment by I am No.4 (U19487)
posted 9 minutes ago
And that's not me with blinkers on before any soft Pool fan gets in a mood. He didn't have the ability or talent of a maestro like Scholes, he wasn't dribbling wizard like Gascoigne, didn't have the productivity of Lampard and wasn't the box to box player Robson was.

A bit of them all at times, but never a maste
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But none of these players had the overall ability Gerrard did I'd argue, he coudl do it all, of course the players you mention were better in certain aspects but can't agree that any of them had the whole package to the level Gerrard did.

For exaple Scholes couldn't tackle, Gazza wasn't as physical as Gerrard, Lampard wasn't as athlethic etc. (all great players for sure)

Enough proper football people have said he's among the best to play the game, that alone says enough.

A world class footballer And I don't use that term lightly, was he one of the top 5 in his positionin the world? Yes 100%

comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by I am No.4 (U19487)
posted 9 minutes ago
And that's not me with blinkers on before any soft Pool fan gets in a mood. He didn't have the ability or talent of a maestro like Scholes, he wasn't dribbling wizard like Gascoigne, didn't have the productivity of Lampard and wasn't the box to box player Robson was.

A bit of them all at times, but never a maste
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But none of these players had the overall ability Gerrard did I'd argue, he coudl do it all, of course the players you mention were better in certain aspects but can't agree that any of them had the whole package to the level Gerrard did.

For exaple Scholes couldn't tackle, Gazza wasn't as physical as Gerrard, Lampard wasn't as athlethic etc. (all great players for sure)

Enough proper football people have said he's among the best to play the game, that alone says enough.

A world class footballerAnd I don't use that term lightly, was he one of the top 5 in his positionin the world? Yes 100%
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's certainly got a broader range of skills than any of the others, but I feel that's what puts him last in the list rather than top. Give me a player who's 100/100 in their best areas and 60/100 in their worst than a player who's 80/100 in all categories.

I do agree that when he was at his very best he could have been in the top 5 on his day, but again he's in an era of Scholes, Xavi, Pirlo, Iniesta, Lampard and more. Would be a very brave call to omit any of them.

comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by I am No.4 (U19487)
posted 9 minutes ago
And that's not me with blinkers on before any soft Pool fan gets in a mood. He didn't have the ability or talent of a maestro like Scholes, he wasn't dribbling wizard like Gascoigne, didn't have the productivity of Lampard and wasn't the box to box player Robson was.

A bit of them all at times, but never a maste
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But none of these players had the overall ability Gerrard did I'd argue, he coudl do it all, of course the players you mention were better in certain aspects but can't agree that any of them had the whole package to the level Gerrard did.

For exaple Scholes couldn't tackle, Gazza wasn't as physical as Gerrard, Lampard wasn't as athlethic etc. (all great players for sure)

Enough proper football people have said he's among the best to play the game, that alone says enough.

A world class footballerAnd I don't use that term lightly, was he one of the top 5 in his positionin the world? Yes 100%
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes. But technically average. See how Pirlo owned him for 110 mins in Istanbul, Athens, Euro 2016.

Gerrard a top player but overrated. See his performances for England.

He wasn't technically average FFS.

Look there's not many things in football that are absolute but Gerrard being a top top top world class player is one of them.

Just look at what other players past and present have said, look at the reaction his retierment got, normal players, or even very good players don't get that reaction.

Zidane, Xavi etc etc. v Some united fans online?

You all know he's world class

He did it on a cold and wet night in Stoke.....the true test of a World Class Player

Scholes

“Faaaaaaaantastic” RED you're such a gladiator... oh fack me