Drop Frank, can't get hurt while away then.
Mind you he can't get hurt anyway, on account of the drugs.
Mind you he can't get hurt anyway, on account of the drugs.
But hes mostly been mediocer, which he never is when hes playig further forwardDavo said:The thing is, Gerrard has played the "more defensive of 2 CM's" role (which is different to the Makelele "I'm standing by the defence and not moving" role which everyone raves about thesedays)...on many occasions, and whilst it does limit him, he's still been ace...
Therefore, Lampard (who isn't as good as Gerrard) is clearly at fault......the fat twat
He hasn't thoMozza said:But hes mostly been mediocer, which he never is when hes playig further forward
He has been, last two games for England he was quite shite.Davo said:He hasn't tho
See "Henry syndrome"
Although I think it might be beyond you.....
He was the best player on the pitch against Austria..Mozza said:He has been, last two games for England he was quite shite.
Who was? Neither Gerrard or Lampard were England best player against Austria. Luke Young wasDavo said:He was the best player on the pitch against Austria..
Henry syndrome
Classic example of Henry Syndrome that...Looking Busy said:Who was? Neither Gerrard or Lampard were England best player against Austria. Luke Young was
He was probably stuck out on the left for part of the tournament...fecked if I can remember.Mozza said:Portugal at the euros, 38% pass completion, just what you want from your DM, win it and give it back to the opposition
Henry syndrome my arse, its not his game
Please explain?Davo said:Classic example of Henry Syndrome that...
I'm going to publish a paper on the subject...
He was in central midfield, not every case of a great footballer being shite is the henry syndrome, sometimes he is actually shite.Davo said:He was probably stuck out on the left for part of the tournament...fecked if I can remember.
Point being, apart from the very obvious case of Henry syndrome, is that Gerrard would never be a "DM" in the sense of a Makelele, Hamann or latter day Keane....he's too good a footballer for that
When a player reaches a level of pure feckin genius...like Henry and/or Gerrard..the expectancy level grows to such an extent that when they have "just" a decent game...it's viewed as being a failureLooking Busy said:Please explain?
What is this so-called Henry syndrome.
As for the Austria game Luke Young was Englands best player. No doubt about it in my mind
Eh? He was alright at best and was majorly at fault for the goal.Looking Busy said:Please explain?
What is this so-called Henry syndrome.
As for the Austria game Luke Young was Englands best player. No doubt about it in my mind
Austria not PolandJSV said:Eh? He was alright at best and was majorly at fault for the goal.
That's true, to an extent. We had a shite player play with us last year. Noone knew where to play him, because he was shite. He got a run out at centrehalf and everybody was amazed at how good he was there. They said "now we know where to play him" to which I replied "no we don't, he's shite, he just played above out shite expectations of him" It was true, when our first choice centrehalf came back, our friend went bak to being shite, on the bench.Davo said:When a player reaches a level of pure feckin genius...like Henry and/or Gerrard..the expectancy level grows to such an extent that when they have "just" a decent game...it's viewed as being a failure
Take the Austria game. Young, who is very average, did pretty well....Gerrard, who is amazing, was the best player on the pitch......but the relative perceptions of the two lead some to, incorrectly, think Young was the better player
He wasn't
Gerrard wasn't the best player by any standards against Austria. Our midfield sat off and let austria have the ball, there was no hussle, no urgency, no drive. That is what Gerrard is supposed to provide. It has nothing to do with expectations. Gerrard was nowhere near Englands best player regardless of any bullshit syndrome you can come up with. I suggest you re-watch the match and look how little effort Gerrard and Lampard put in to closing down the Austrians, how little times that tried to rush their midfield and make them play at a higher tempo.Davo said:When a player reaches a level of pure feckin genius...like Henry and/or Gerrard..the expectancy level grows to such an extent that when they have "just" a decent game...it's viewed as being a failure
Take the Austria game. Young, who is very average, did pretty well....Gerrard, who is amazing, was the best player on the pitch......but the relative perceptions of the two lead some to, incorrectly, think Young was the better player
He wasn't
The blank, dead eyes of a blank, dead, junky sheepBodzilla said:
I'm not saying Gerrard never has a shite game......the "Henry Syndrome" is surprisingly hard for people to fathom...Bodzilla said:That's true, to an extent. We had a shite player play with us last year. Noone knew where to play him, because he was shite. He got a run out at centrehalf and everybody was amazed at how good he was there. They said "now we know where to play him" to which I replied "no we don't, he's shite, he just played above out shite expectations of him" It was true, when our first choice centrehalf came back, our friend went bak to being shite, on the bench.
Gerrard has still been shite at times. Like Frank was at Wigan this year, and for most of the Arsenal match a week later.
He was. He wasn't the swashbuckling King of the World that people have come to expect, yet he was the best player on the pitch.Looking Busy said:Gerrard wasn't the best player by any standards against Austria. Our midfield sat off and let austria have the ball, there was no hussle, no urgency, no drive. That is what Gerrard is supposed to provide. It has nothing to do with expectations. Gerrard was nowhere near Englands best player regardless of any bullshit syndrome you can come up with. I suggest you re-watch the match and look how little effort Gerrard and Lampard put in to closing down the Austrians, how little times that tried to rush their midfield and make them play at a higher tempo.
My story was on your Luke Young comparison. To which I agreed. Thus my seemingly random story about ameture footy.Davo said:I'm not saying Gerrard never has a shite game......the "Henry Syndrome" is surprisingly hard for people to fathom...
It's just that people will rate him as "average"...when if, say Fletcher, has put in a similar performance he'd be getting 9 out of 10
It's a relative thing
If he was Englands best player why did our midfield allow Austria so much possession. Why did they allow Austria to play at a tempo that suited them. I Don't expect him to be world class but i do expect him to put himself about. He didn'tDavo said:He was. He wasn't the swashbuckling King of the World that people have come to expect, yet he was the best player on the pitch.
Some of the better journalists spotted this in fairness to them.....
I suggest you watch the match....and try and pretend that everyone's got the same ability
Yeah I know...Bodzilla said:My story was on your Luke Young comparison. To which I agreed. Thus my seemingly random story about ameture footy.
Because the midfield, along with the rest of the team ,were generally rubbish....this isn't all down to Gerrard...but given the working of the Henry Syndrome, I can kind of see why you're thinking it is...Looking Busy said:If he was Englands best player why did our midfield allow Austria so much possession. Why did they allow Austria to play at a tempo that suited them. I Don't expect him to be world class but i do expect him to put himself about. He didn't
It's not...The best players do set incredibly high standards, but that doesn't mean they're going to be fantastic every game......some games they'll be rubbish....many other games they'll be good - but not quite as good as you know they can be.....Looking Busy said:1 more thing before i get some sleep.
This Henry syndrome you keep spouting about is just an excuse used to justify perceived below average performances. It's something you will use to explain away performances where Gerrard isn't up to his usual standard which is bollocks. He has set those standards for himself. If he can't live up to them then he deserves criticism.
I won't I watched it live and i've seen it again in highlights and I didn't rate Gerrard performance.Davo said:Because the midfield, along with the rest of the team ,were generally rubbish....this isn't all down to Gerrard...but given the working of the Henry Syndrome, I can kind of see why you're thinking it is...
Gerrard offered the only drive in the match first half....second half he wasn't so good....as no one seemed to have a clue as to how they should be playing, in the sense of going for another goal or holding the lead.
None the less, overall, he was the best player on the pitch.....watch it again, seriously...you'll come round
You can't expect someone to watch an England game twiceDavo said:watch it again, seriously...you'll come round
Like SaturdayDavo said:It's not...The best players do set incredibly high standards, but that doesn't mean they're going to be fantastic every game......some games they'll be rubbish....many other games they'll be good - but not quite as good as you know they can be.....
This affect's people's judgement....it's technical name is the Henry Syndrome
I'm not hiding behind anything..I'm stating a factLooking Busy said:I won't I watched it live and i've seen it again in highlights and I didn't rate Gerrard performance.
As I said in another post you can't hide behind the Henry bollocks. Gerrard set the standards for himself it is up to him to deliver.
Go to bedLooking Busy said:Like Saturday