Paedo...An Extremely Boring Man said:
That Frank Lampard!
- Thread starter Stamford Bridge
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
DJS said:
Gerrard is a better player than Lampard, potentially, but Lampard have been far more consistent and effective than Gerrard over the last couple of seasons.
Shhhhh.....An Extremely Boring Man said:
Everyone knows that except Scousers. Don't spoil their illusion of Gerrard being the bestest player in the world ever.
I watch quite a number of Liverpool games.DJS said:Coming from the bloke who sees about 2 games a year....
(Not even Liverpool ones)...
Not in stadium unless I'm following the Blues, mind. Not worth going to a shite stadium to watch a shite team that puts people to sleep.
This is the wrong thread to talk about your sexual orientation. Perhaps someone can help you at the General....DJS said:
Lampard is a better attacking mid than Gerrard,
Gerrard is the better all around player.
Gerrard has more to his game hence gets played in positions that don't always suit his best attributes, Lampard is more limited and doesn't have Gerrards engine and strength.
Both will play together at the world cup, and I think it affects both of their games.
IMO the team is stronger with Gerrard in it, but Lampard will score more goals so if you have to play one then it's personal preference.
Gerrard is the better all around player.
Gerrard has more to his game hence gets played in positions that don't always suit his best attributes, Lampard is more limited and doesn't have Gerrards engine and strength.
Both will play together at the world cup, and I think it affects both of their games.
IMO the team is stronger with Gerrard in it, but Lampard will score more goals so if you have to play one then it's personal preference.
gerrard has far more potential, dont see why rafa is trying to turn him into a lampard.
players taking care of his defensive duties etc.
players taking care of his defensive duties etc.
Probably a couple of reasons; loyalty hoping that Scholes can pull it together, no one out there to be able to replace him, not enough money, more important areas of the team need fixing.Stamford Bridge said:
it's obvious that i'll need to dumb this down for you.Stamford Bridge said:In case your sense of time has gone the same place as your knowledge of football, the difference between your treble season and last season was five (almost six) long years.
He scored one chance then missed an exact same chance five years later = he's out of form? Wow, that way Michael Owen must go in and out of form about 3 times every single game.
And you have the nerve to criticize my logic.
How 4-3-3 has glaringly exposed Scholes' weaknesses is that he no longer can rely on Keane to do all the dirty work behind him, as Keane is getting on a bit. Playing as a midfielder rather than in the "hole" shows how poor he is defensively, even if he is a very decent player in an attacking build-up.
Fletcher is a very average player, but he is playing simply because Scholes lacks ball-winning and tackling ability of any kind.
you said that we are now seeing glaring deficiencies that were always present in Scholes' game.
i said, not true. why?
the reason people say that Scholes has lost form is because he doesn't make those late runs of his into the box as often; and when he does get a scoring opportunity, he doesn't bury them.
for reasons of symmetry, i went back 6 years to another Milan side to illustrate that that side of his game (which he had before) is gone: i.e., his form is gone. i could have easily gone back just a couple of years....but i suppose you've no appreciation for intellectual beauty....really no surprises there, but a bit sad.
let's talk about Scholes' mythical defensive side: what defensive side? - every one of us know that there's nothing later in the world than a Scholes tackle.
i'd like to see your precious Fatty play without Makelele in the side, see how he does. speaking of which, why all this argument about Gerrard and Lampard in the same team? - that England need someone in the holding role? -could it be that there are certain 'deficiencies' in their game?
bottom line: Scholes is an attacking midfielder, not a defensive one. never was, never will be (as his error against Blackburn highlighted)...football is a team sport, and every member of a team has a role, and they start in their respective teams because they are good at it. when later on in their careers, they are asked to perform a different role, their game suffers.
Stamford Bridge said:
see my point above vis-a-vis 'out of position'....
and: wow...classic ad-hominem. i was told that when one resorts to name calling in the middle of a(n) (aggressive) discussion, that usually means he's stumped...to paraphrase someone: mud-slinging is the last recourse of the intellectually feeble....
again: your feats of logic have reached further heights of mediocrity...
here's a shovel, dude, dig on....
Lamps has Makelele behind him, yes, but for all his years of greatness Scholes had the best MF (arguably) in the world cleaning up behind him. Where is the difference? Lampard does more defensive work then I have seen Scholes do, at any age.
Neither one of them are bonecrunchers(excluding the odd mistimed tackle), but the way people go on about Lampard only being good because of Maka and ignoring why Scholes was so good is mind boggling.
Gerrard is a very good player, but I would take Frank any day of the week. Beggars belief how his workrate is ignored by most on here, you'd think he was a CF the way people bang on about him.
Neither one of them are bonecrunchers(excluding the odd mistimed tackle), but the way people go on about Lampard only being good because of Maka and ignoring why Scholes was so good is mind boggling.
Gerrard is a very good player, but I would take Frank any day of the week. Beggars belief how his workrate is ignored by most on here, you'd think he was a CF the way people bang on about him.
Lampard has many good points to his game but as with the majority of Englands players isn't in the very top drawer that would take us to WC glory.
What do you expect from a BNP sympathiser?marcus agrippa said:
see my point above vis-a-vis 'out of position'....
and: wow...classic ad-hominem. i was told that when one resorts to name calling in the middle of a(n) (aggressive) discussion, that usually means he's stumped...to paraphrase someone: mud-slinging is the last recourse of the intellectually feeble....
again: your feats of logic have reached further heights of mediocrity...
here's a shovel, dude, dig on....
And ant
He's no ant, he's a termite.
Nazi termite...the second worst kind of termite
Queer Nazi termites being the worst.
After Queer Nazi termites
poor postPlechazunga said:
It's true though
do termites have sex?
i hear you, Bod...Bodzilla said:
but look back at what started all this between me and SB....
his claim was that there is no way Ginger's out of form, but there were certain deficiencies in his game that we are only now seeing.
i say Scholes has never been known for his hard tackling (he's been known for his late, mistimed challenges, though)....but he has been known to pop up in the box and put chances away in the box or from outside it....
he no longer does that quite as often or effectively. i say it's because he's playing a different role than he was before, and that he has lost form given that he occassionally gets opportunities which a couple of years ago he would have buried but now fails to do so...
SB contrives not to see this...
hence my point about Fatty Frank: if he were asked to put in a more defensive shift, his game would suffer. fortunately for you lot, he has Makelele for that, so he and Essien can do their thing. i'm not saying he isn't good because of that; but i am saying his game isn't primarily about that....and i wish you'd judge Scholesy the same way....
Scholesy was never a DM, and he has an in-again-out-again Keane, an inexperienced Fletcher and a novice in Smith to keep him company, while the attacking responsibilities are delegated to the 3 R's and Park/Giggs (when playing)....
Yeah, with other termites
i bet they have small dicks.
Thing about Scholes is, half the people on here say he was only ever really good "in the hole", as if that's self-evidentmarcus agrippa said:
The other half say he never liked that, and that was what lost him form after Seba came, and he took ages to get used to it, and was at his best as a normal midfielder...as if that's also self-evident
Whereas actually he's had great games in both positions, but is sometimes out of form, and probably now past his best, sadly.
Exactly. Theres a difference between having more potential and actualy being a better player.. Lampard has performed far far better than Gerrard in the last two years, its not even close.. atleast he doesnt get built up as a player he isnt. Gerrard is a fine player, but far from the player he has the potential to be, which is what those who overhype him already see him as. Hes hardly ever 'run' a game in his life as people seem to suggest.An Extremely Boring Man said:
When he's been there done that I might rate him, for me the jury is still out, and he will never be as good as Scholes at his best. Notice how on Wednesday England played more like a team but that wasn't because of Lampard that was because Rooney was playing, Lampard will never be a star player just a supporting role.Stamford Bridge said:"Overrated cnut"
"Not good enough for England"
"not as good as Scholes"
Yer havin' a laugh now aren't you Dave?
Maybe when Rooney has been there done that I'll rate him.redfan said:
Yet they are still bigger then KinkeysSpoony said:
Been where and done what?Bodzilla said:Maybe when Rooney has been there done that I'll rate him.
Been to Spearmint Rhino's and boned lots of strippers
Apparently Rooney needs to get where Lampard needs to get to where Scholes needed to get. which apparently was "there" and "that." Or summat.Looking Busy said:
Just pokin fun, like.
Lampard's very good, Gerrard is a class above
This really is basic football knowledge.....
This really is basic football knowledge.....
The truth is that Rooney IS the real deal, and the jury is still out on the rent boy.Bodzilla said:Maybe when Rooney has been there done that I'll rate him.
It wuld be interesting to see how Gerrard reacts when surrounded by the quality of players that Lampard has around him every week.Davo said:
Would Gerrard still look the class above. I'm not saying he wouldn't, it's just easier for Gerrard to stand out in the Liverpool side than it is for Lampard to stand out in the Chelsea side, something which he did last season.
If Gerrard played for Chelsea, he'd probably be better than he is for the dippers, not worse
He wouldn't be being compared to Traore, no, but on the other hand, he wouldn 't be playing with Traore
He wouldn't be being compared to Traore, no, but on the other hand, he wouldn 't be playing with Traore
Righto.redfan said:
Some players raise their game when surrounded by the best, others go the other way when being just another good player. Would be interesting to see how Gerrard reacts in that situation. Guess we won't know nowPlechazunga said:
I knowLooking Busy said:
He'd be superb...he is superb
Even though he has a face like a clenched fist, and copper teeth