Steven Gerrard

Nah Amol, there's no point nit picking my post to single out "technical players" are the in thing, you know what I meant. Gerrard was way more about power, pace, strength as oppose to the "subtle & softer" technical bits, it doesn't mean he was technically great. See his long range shooting etc.

My opinion is that Gerrard is a bit under rated in this thread. Fabregas/RvP/Vieira etc all better then him? It's a tough call & not as clear cut as some are making it sound, let alone that non of them even played in the same position.

I am biased but I don't see how Fabregas is better (maybe some forum bias because of the current transfer link with over 10,000 replies).
Gerrard has performed to a consistent level over many years, often single-handedly winning games when otherwise the team have struggled.

Can't argue Cesc is and has been a very good player, but I don't think he has had the influence Gerrard has.
 
I am biased but I don't see how Fabregas is better (maybe some forum bias because of the current transfer link with over 10,000 replies).
Gerrard has performed to a consistent level over many years, often single-handedly winning games when otherwise the team have struggled.

Can't argue Cesc is and has been a very good player, but I don't think he has had the influence Gerrard has.

Fabregas isn't/wasn't a better player than Gerard on his peak, whoever says that Fabregas was better is seriously underrating Gerrard. There haven't been many (or any) better midfielders than Gerrard in EPL and even those who someone can argue that were better than Gerrard are not in a level above and surely is a tough call. For me he's right there as one of the best CM of all time in EPL with the likes of Scholes, Keane, Vieira and Lampard (no particular order).
 
Fabregas is better and will be remembered as such. Gerrard has more brilliant moments but fabregas is better overall.
 
Fabregas is better and will be remembered as such. Gerrard has more brilliant moments but fabregas is better overall.


Not so sure about that. Specially when it comes to their careers so far. Gerrard at his best was an absolutely fantastic footballer, just below the likes of Scholes, Keane, Vieira in the middle of the park(not as pure CMs). Fabregas I'd put in the same tier or maybe even a tier below that in the prem.
 
Fabregas is better and will be remembered as such. Gerrard has more brilliant moments but fabregas is better overall.


Debatable. Fabregas is undoubtedly the better technical player and is better with the ball at his feet but Gerrard's ability to drive his team forward and score some crucially important goals were priceless at times for Liverpool. In the long term Fabregas may be seen as the better player assuming he ends up taking over Xavi's role for Barca, but it's not certain at the moment for me.
 
I wonder how Gerrard is viewed abroad. Of course the English love that power and drive that Gerrard has, whereas I dare say fans of La Liga or possibly Serie A or even the Bundesliga might prefer someone like Fabregas. In England though I would say far more fans value Gerrard over Fabregas.
 
RVP shouldn't even come into all the time PL great debate yet, for me. Fantastic player I'm sure we all agree, but let him do it for another couple of seasons first.
 
I struggle to speak positively about Gerrard for obvious reasons, but as his peak he was one of the best midfielders around in my opinion. He's played in an average Liverpool team for a while now, so it's difficult to compare him man for man in my opinion. Even in 2005 when they won the Champions League I wouldn't say they were a great team, but as a leader he has been highly influential for them throughout his career. He leads by example and at his peak, he had that explosiveness that meant he could hurt you at any second. He's dragged them back into games that they didn't deserve to win, and he has done that throughout his career. I can't stand him, but he would have been some player in a decent team.

Obviously I don't watch Liverpool week in, week out, but he doesn't seem to have that explosiveness aspect to his game anymore and that was always going to be an issue with him. He's got a great range of passing but he isn't the sort of player who will sit deep and control the tempo of a game in the way Scholsey did for example later on in his career. You can only play that all-action styled game up until a certain point and I don't think he has the tactical capabilitied to play in that deeper position.
 
I struggle to speak positively about Gerrard for obvious reasons, but as his peak he was one of the best midfielders around in my opinion. He's played in an average Liverpool team for a while now, so it's difficult to compare him man for man in my opinion. Even in 2005 when they won the Champions League I wouldn't say they were a great team, but as a leader he has been highly influential for them throughout his career. He leads by example and at his peak, he had that explosiveness that meant he could hurt you at any second. He's dragged them back into games that they didn't deserve to win, and he has done that throughout his career. I can't stand him, but he would have been some player in a decent team.

Obviously I don't watch Liverpool week in, week out, but he doesn't seem to have that explosiveness aspect to his game anymore and that was always going to be an issue with him. He's got a great range of passing but he isn't the sort of player who will sit deep and control the tempo of a game in the way Scholsey did for example later on in his career. You can only play that all-action styled game up until a certain point and I don't think he has the tactical capabilitied to play in that deeper position.

The only really good Liverpool side he played in was the 2008/09 team. Him & Torres were unplayable most of the time. They were complimented by other great players in the Liverpool set-up. So you're right when you say it's difficult to compare man for man, because the likes of Fabregas, Vieira, Scholes, Keane et al, all played in superior sides, surrounded by superior players. It's hypothetical I know, but would any of those players have made the same 'Gerrard style' impact on those Liverpool teams from the past 15 years ?
 
The only reason anyone would say Fabregas is better than Gerrard would be to buy into the current trend of holding technical perfection above everything. Gerrard is far better, scored goals that decide finals pretty much whenever he is in them and would get into an all time Liverpool XI.
 
The only really good Liverpool side he played in was the 2008/09 team. Him & Torres were unplayable most of the time. They were complimented by other great players in the Liverpool set-up. So you're right when you say it's difficult to compare man for man, because the likes of Fabregas, Vieira, Scholes, Keane et al, all played in superior sides, surrounded by superior players. It's hypothetical I know, but would any of those players have made the same 'Gerrard style' impact on those Liverpool teams from the past 15 years ?

The 2008/9 was the best Liverpool team he played in by a mile, but that particular side didn't have a great amount of time together. He was devastating playing in that attacking midfield role just off Torres, with Alonso and Mascherano holding the forte deeper in midfield. That was his ideal role to be honest, in a position where he had a free reign to bomb forward whenever he saw an opportunity.

To answer your question, it's difficult to say. Keane for me was a better midfielder than Gerrard but he didn't carry the same attacking threat. He could use the ball but his game was different. Keane was the sort of player who you could build a team around; a magnificent leader who could boss any midfield, whereas Gerrard had/has the ability to make things happen, bomb forward and score goals. Very different players in my opinion which is why I find it tough to judge.
 
Why has Gerrard not really been able to influence like for Club at a national level? Not having a dig but just genuinely curious. It's a bit of an anomaly in terms of career highlights goes for him.

To answer your question, it's difficult to say. Keane for me was a better midfielder than Gerrard but he didn'tcarry the same attacking threat. He could use the ball but his game was different. Keane was the sort of player who you could build a team around; a magnificent leader who could boss any midfield, whereas Gerrard had/has the ability to make things happen, bomb forward and score goals. Very different players in my opinion which is why I find it tough to judge.


Prior to turning 30 be was a genuine box to box goal threat. As much or even better than Gerrard. I can't agree with that at all, Gerrard imo has shown a willingness to try and adapt now in Rogers style but to me is struggling. For whatever reason that is I am not really sure but he genuinely does look a shadow of that 08/09 player right now.

Keane and Scholes adapted their game to fit the style and the mould of the team and Scholes got better with age and Keano still had it until his hip injury and leaving the club.
 
Fabregas is a better midfielder, one that can contol games and still provide the goal threat to rival Gerrard. Having said that Gerrard is capable of pulling a crucial and spectacular goal of his bottom like not many can.
 
Prior to turning 30 be was a genuine box to box goal threat. As much or even better than Gerrard. I can't agree with that at all, Gerrard imo has shown a willingness to try and adapt now in Rogers style but to me is struggling. For whatever reason that is I am not really sure but he genuinely does look a shadow of that 08/09 player right now.

Keane and Scholes adapted their game to fit the style and the mould of the team and Scholes got better with age and Keano still had it until his hip injury and leaving the club.


How can you say Keane was as much or an even better box to box goal threat than Gerrard, when one has scored a goal every four games throughout his career, whereas the other is on around one in 11?

I accept they were both proper box to box player, but one was clearly superior at the other end of the pitch.
 
How can you say Keane was as much or an even better box to box goal threat than Gerrard, when one has scored a goal every four games throughout his career, whereas the other is on around one in 11?


Played a more defensive role that adapted away from goals post 2001ish. Fair enough, was just trying to highlight that Keane in fact had goals in his locker prior to 2001 and wasn't always a balls to the wall DM.
 
Why has Gerrard not really been able to influence like for Club at a national level? Not having a dig but just genuinely curious. It's a bit of an anomaly in terms of career highlights goes for him.




Prior to turning 30 be was a genuine box to box goal threat. As much or even better than Gerrard. I can't agree with that at all, Gerrard imo has shown a willingness to try and adapt now in Rogers style but to me is struggling. For whatever reason that is I am not really sure but he genuinely does look a shadow of that 08/09 player right now.

Keane and Scholes adapted their game to fit the style and the mould of the team and Scholes got better with age and Keano still had it until his hip injury and leaving the club.

I'd take Keane over Gerrard every day of the week but as I say he didn't carry anywhere near the same attacking threat as Gerrard. Yes Keane was box to box, but he didn't carry the same goal threat and he didn't have the creative aspect to his game that Gerrard did/does.

Your point about Gerrard's current role at Liverpool is one that I agree with and I made a similar post yesterday. At his best his main strength in my opinion was his explosiveness. Bombing forward from midfield, getting on the end of things and making things happen in the final third. Playing in behind Torres with Alonso and Mascherano allowed him to have that free reign and that's why he was so dangerous in 2008/9. Tactically he doesn't have the footballing brain to play in a deeper role in midfield and that is why his best years are behind him in my opinion. Scholes has always had a footballing brain on him, but tactically he was one of the best around throughout his career. He could see passes earlier than anyone else could and he could control and dictate the tempo of the game. Gerrard doesn't have that in his locker.
 
Gerrard was a fantastic player - but he will go down in the same catagory as Shearer for me.

Without playing in the best teams possible throughout his career he will always be remembered as a local hero, but never in the top class bracket. Sure he won the CL but if he joined Chelsea when he should have, he would have a CL and many F.A cups / premier league titles also.
 
Fantastic post on RAWK regarding Gerrard.

Part 1:

I’ve grown up idolising a man. I was only 8 or 9 when he made his debut against Blackburn and all through my life I’ve loved the explosive dynamo that is Steven Gerrard. He’s been such an exciting player to witness with a swashbuckling swagger and verve to his game where he literally looks like the biggest man in the stadium let alone on the pitch. In his prime he was absolutely one of the very best in the world wherever he played. There was nothing in his game where he couldn’t look at another top player and say ‘I’m better at that than you’. Tackling, passing, shooting, acceleration, pace, control, heading, blocking, finishing, strength, stamina; you pluck almost any player in football who specialised in two of them qualities and Gerrard was better at it than them as well as the rest. A kid, a talent, a boss, a phenomenon, a king, a god; there’s not a stage Gerrard didn’t take to, prove his metal, his worth, his body, heart and soul and verify himself superior to almost anything you could put in front of him. If you could compare him to a movie star, you just wouldn’t because none of them are Steven Gerrard.

A captain at 23 and the key player in our side for over ten years and counting, this sentence alone could summarise Steven Gerrard for what he would become capable of, but it’s so unfair to try and encapsulate him. You could point to Istanbul, Olympiakos, West Ham at Wembley or frankly any multitude of games well into the hundreds and still it wouldn’t seem to justify what Steven Gerrard is all about. Just how talented, athletic and passionate he was and is couldn’t be comprehended without seeing it all, being there even if only in heart and not body for the 646 games he has done more than just play for this club but at times carry on his shoulders amidst the entity of greatness and expectation that surrounds it, embracing this wonderful football club and city; it’s an honour.

It was his drive that really captured the imagination. Gerrard could appear from nowhere galloping like a racehorse towards the opposition penalty area, his eyes narrowed, his glare firm, and his strike sweet as he made it habitual to arrive from deep just at the right time to rifle the ball into the corner of the goal time and time again. But he could do so much more, as he chased and harried in midfield and lunged out with a telescopic leg take make a tackle that looked quite frankly impossible, hooking the ball away from his opponent before quickly getting back to his feet to go and support for the ball. Once he got it he could spray passes wherever he chose with pinpoint precision as he stretched games length and widthways at a canter before slotting a perfect through ball for any half decent run in behind. He’d play right back in European cup finals, throw himself in front of goal, charge players off the ball and surge towards the opponents half. Winning headers, making tackles, scoring goals and assists, there was little this man couldn’t do on a football park.

We’ve been blessed, because we can compare Steven Gerrard to the likes of Kenny Dalglish, Emlyn Hughes, John Barnes, Ian Rush, St John and many more. Most clubs, 99% of clubs, don’t even see a player with half of Stevie’s ability in its history. Anybody that underplays this man and what he has done over his tenure is not one of us. Alex Ferguson for example – born out of so much bitterness he cannot even applaud possibly the greatest talent of a generation because he wasn’t his. The fact that a man that despises this club so much doesn’t have a particularly good word to voice of our captains abilities speaks volumes of its own. He hates the fact that Steven is a born scouser that plays with the passion and bluster for Liverpool. It tears him up that we produced something and someone better than he ever could even with all the coaches, scouts and Premier League medals in the world.

I can be somewhat of a romanticist at times when it comes to the club I love and the players who I crave to make it successful, but my football brain keeps ticking over between my ears and my heart sinks when I see somebody get the better of Gerrard. I am not in the habit of criticising players, knee-jerking or ‘fanboying’. There are things that are becoming apparent and have been doing over the last year or so in regards to doubting whether Gerrard brings more to the side than he does take away from it. He’s always been athletic and reactive; his game is of course built on the foundations of talent but the explosive pace, strength and stamina that accompanied his technical qualities are really what have made him an extraordinary player rather than just a very good one. It’s the blend of mentality, athleticism and technical skills that have allowed Gerrard to become the iconic figure of Liverpool’s recent history; jack of all trades, master of most. The problem is, nature dictates that while his talent and will to win will never waver, his body will, and that’s the cause we’ve had for concern this last 18 months or so has been. He has lost explosiveness, he has lost the ability to lunge time and time again and travel the length of the pitch for fun. There’s nobody that can do a thing about it, time waits for no mortal nor god alike.

Take away the romanticism; screw your football head on and listen to what we’ve heard our incredibly bright manager say. When Brendan Rodgers speaks about midfield he talks about energy, pressing, functionality pressure, and ‘earning the right to play’. Henderson, Allen and Lucas almost sum up that in their game, the aforementioned duo particularly. The idea is to challenge the player with the ball as early as possible, and with persistence and tenacity all across the midfield with players acting in a pack affect. One player goes and directly challenges the opponent (this will customarily be the nearest player to the ball) whilst another goes and cuts off a passing angle, and a third picking up a position where the ball is likely to drop duo to two angles being cut off – pick up somewhere in between the two remaining angles (Alonso was superb at this) and the ball may well find its way within a few yards of you if it isn’t already with your team mates. The art of anticipation in midfield. The roles will of course change dependant on where the ball is, so all of them must have an idea of how to do this and must be able to press in the system we play. It doesn’t apply to every game though, let me make that clear – I still think there are easily 25 games across a season schedule where one of the pressers can be dropped for more finesse.
 
Part 2:


I’ve been politely saying that Stevie is a luxury player for some time now, and he is an excellent one lest we forget. In games at Anfield where we are going to be allowed to play on the front foot and Gerrard is allowed time and space then he is a player we can afford to have on the park for his pure ability at the expense of balance/energy/mobility because we are not going to be pressed as tenaciously in midfield as we do away from home. Part of the reason for our good form against the fodder at Anfield is because of Stevie’s technical brilliance to pick a range of passes with the time and space to find and execute them, as well as giving us a noteworthy edge at set-pieces recently. He does this very well, and even back in his prime despite his ill-discipline positionally (one of the only flaws in Gerrard’s game) I urged Rafa to start Gerrard deeper in games where we were struggling to score against deep, organised backlines even though I never rated him as highly as a cm as I did out wide or higher up the pitch – I suppose the problem was we didn’t have anybody further up the pitch to replace his significant goal threat from there – I never did like him playing with his back to goal though, so I guess there’s arguments on both sides of the coin, but Rafa is a cannier man than I.

The problem is when we play teams that will pressure the space in midfield by squeezing the backline up and sanctioning their midfielders to press ferociously rather than contain and hold positionally. Gerrard has lost that explosiveness a reactive player needs to be competitive in the hustle and his lack of ability to press and track runners effectively has cost us and made the midfield look weaker than the sum of its parts. People are quick to point to key pass and possession stats and a lack of creativity without Gerrard in the side. Whilst I can understand their concerns particularly at home against stubborn teams, I think they are failing to realise what it is we actually want primarily in midfield, functionality.

Functionality means providing a solid basis where you can expect certain things at certain times. Our midfield against Spurs produced what was expected by winning the ball back quickly, keeping possession well when required, as well as showing the ability to play key passes and play on the break with Henderson giving us a short glimpse of what we used to once regularly see from Stevie by striding through the midfield on the break at pace and playing clever balls in and around full backs to open sides up. Allen of course keeps the ball very well and has shown he can be creative albeit in a different manner. I’ve used this expression for years, but if a midfielder were trying to get into a house, Steven Gerrard would bash the door down, Xavi would pick the lock, and Alonso would go round to the side door. Gerrard is doing more of the latter than his old style, but there are three key ways to get through a midfield to create chances and Henderson and Allen between them fall into two whilst Stevie offers a bit of each but without the functionality behind it.

We don’t want to admit it, or can’t, and others have been peddling shite about Gerrard for years regardless of how he’s done because there is an albeit small anti-Gerrard brigade. Criticising or questioning his role in the first team is sometimes treated as blasphemous, so you’re associated with these types who for some reason do hold an agenda against our skipper (Andy@ would love this thread title were he still among us) but we are not questioning the legend himself or his talent, we are questioning how much his body and lack of athleticism is affecting the team as a whole. For these reasons, some of us have veiled at thoughts and solutions rather than regurgitate the points; I know I’ve held back a fair bit from voicing my concerns, and I don’t doubt you’ve done so yourself, despite your honesty, because of the reaction you’ll inevitably get. I’m not sure what takes more balls, dropping Steven Gerrard or suggesting it on RAWK. It’s perfectly comprehensible and I empathise wholeheartedly as I witness my childhood hero gradually fall from grace; my brain itches at these thoughts because Stevie is one of us, and we defend our own – it’s part of the Liverpool Way.

Nature however, is even bigger than the club, and by proxy, bigger than the man I have idolised for so long.
 
Yeah, SAF is so bitter that he didn't produce Gerrard. He secretly believes that Scholes was nothing compared to Gerrard, but he's so upset, ashamed and jealous of Liverpool, for being blessed with a player as talented as Gerrard, that he has to say that Gerrard wasn't the very best.
 
I'd have read it to the end if it didn't have all that flutey effervescent bollock vocab.
 
He makes some good points regarding what made Gerrard so special to Liverpool fans and sums him up well but goes over the top. He talks about how too many Liverpool fans are hounding those who hold the opinion that Gerrard should be dropped, but does that exactly when talking about those who didn't rate Gerrard as highly as him in his prime. I rate Gerrard in his prime very highly myself, but I don't think he was great out wide like this guy does, or that he ever was really the best in the world either. He seems to think it's wrong for people to criticise his opinion on Gerrard now, but if you disagree with his, like Fergie did, then you're apparently bitter.
 
It's a good read actually. Somewhere around the middle he sways away from a general supporter hive-mind mentality and romantic approach towards your clubs' legendary player(s), and dives into realism and the need to look at what's actually best for the club's future; both short-term and long-term.

Was he banned?:smirk:
 
Agree with some parts, disagree with others. Fact of the matter is Gerrard is our 2nd most talented player and still one of the 10 most talented in the league. We can't afford to drop him. You don't necessarily have to play him in midfield (I think he could do a job on the right or in behind Suarez) or you can choose to take him off at 60 or bring him on at 60 to allow him to give his all into the time he is on the pitch rather than conserving his energy.

What he offers us is still more than any player bar Suarez. He is our best passer, an excellent finisher, one of the best crossers of a ball around and his set pieces our perfect. He is also an exceptional leader.

I would like to see him phased out a bit (playing 75% of the time rather than 100%) but he still is an integral part of our squad. What he lacks in stamina he more than makes up for elsewhere and if I was naming our best eleven, he's one of the first names every time. I do, however, see a point of leaving him on the bench for some games - I'm thinking Swansea and Southampton in particular. He'll always struggle against those types of set-ups. There aren't many other midfields, IMO, that he can't play against and play against well.
 
Agree with some parts, disagree with others. Fact of the matter is Gerrard is our 2nd most talented player and still one of the 10 most talented in the league. We can't afford to drop him. You don't necessarily have to play him in midfield (I think he could do a job on the right or in behind Suarez) or you can choose to take him off at 60 or bring him on at 60 to allow him to give his all into the time he is on the pitch rather than conserving his energy.

What he offers us is still more than any player bar Suarez. He is our best passer, an excellent finisher, one of the best crossers of a ball around and his set pieces our perfect. He is also an exceptional leader.

I would like to see him phased out a bit (playing 75% of the time rather than 100%) but he still is an integral part of our squad. What he lacks in stamina he more than makes up for elsewhere and if I was naming our best eleven, he's one of the first names every time. I do, however, see a point of leaving him on the bench for some games - I'm thinking Swansea and Southampton in particular. He'll always struggle against those types of set-ups. There aren't many other midfields, IMO, that he can't play against and play against well.


Barney!!!

Suarez, Rooney, Van Persie, Mata, Hazard, Toure, Ozil, Ramsey, Aguero, Silva, Cazorla and Kompany.

In all honesty as a player I respect him a lot, but he can't cut it in the big games anymore either. He has a great range of passing and will do a good job against 80-90% of teams but the very best teams? No way. The game is just too fast paced for him these days, he can't beat his man or keep up with his man defensively (like Scholes at the end). He is worth being on the pitch due to his set piece delivery and passing but he is a liability.
 
Barney!!!

Suarez, Rooney, Van Persie, Mata, Hazard, Toure, Ozil, Ramsey, Aguero, Silva, Cazorla and Kompany.

In all honesty as a player I respect him a lot, but he can't cut it in the big games anymore either. He has a great range of passing and will do a good job against 80-90% of teams but the very best teams? No way. The game is just too fast paced for him these days, he can't beat his man or keep up with his man defensively (like Scholes at the end). He is worth being on the pitch due to his set piece delivery and passing but he is a liability.

He can cope against the best teams. It's the teams that press that are his biggest problem.
 
Synopsis: Gerrard was a very talented player but not a great CM and is now in decline and should be used sparingly in an advanced role.
 
He can cope against the best teams. It's the teams that press that are his biggest problem.


As is the case with most older players the game is just to quick for them. Did he deliver the ball like he does now when he was younger?
 
As you get older as a player, your technique continues to improve which initially compensates for your physical decline. Eventually a slight technique upgrade fails to match you getting fecking slow as arseholes.
 
How many more years do Liverpool fans expect to get out of him? He's a big man who runs a lot, can't imagine his knees are holding up great. What a player though.
 
It's easy to say Gerrard should feature only as an impact sub or a grand old squad player - or whatever. He should - if Liverpool aim for the very top. But the situation is very like ours with Scholes - or Giggs, for that matter. The question isn't whether the player is past his prime - or whether he should ideally be used sparingly or as a luxury player - but rather whether the present alternatives are actually any better.

Just like Scholes or Giggs for us, Gerrard needs to be replaced by someone who is genuinely better - unless he is, it's a bit pointless to claim he shouldn't start, shouldn't feature as much, etc. Neither Scholes nor Giggs ever kept superior, younger players out of the team. Is Gerrard doing that at Liverpool?
 
With respect to previous posters, there's a reason why Gerrard currently ranks 5th in the Prem on whoscored.com (and, indeed, why Cazorla and Mata don't crack the top hundred). It's a consistently high level of performance. I dislike Liverpool as much as most posters on this forum (I still look to see if they have lost before I look to see if we have won), but that unfortunately can't take away from my recognition that Gerrard has been one of the top players in the Prem this season - I'm not sure about 5th, but it's really hard to move him out of the top 10. Anyone suggesting that Mata or Cazorla should rank above him, to my mind, immediately announces that either he knows nothing about football or that he has allowed his dislike of Liverpool to override his objectivity.
 
Gerrard is one of the greatest Premier League players ever, in my opinion. Mata and Cazorla aren't in the same bracket, for me.
 
No one has suggested Mata or Cazorla were better than Gerrard in his pomp.


We're not talking about Gerrard in his pomp, we're talking about Gerrard this season - or, at least, that's my impression. Neither Mata nor Cazorla can hold a patch to Gerrard this season - they were probably both better last season, but that gets us to "class is permanent, form is temporary" doesn't it?