Lampard vs Gerrad vs Scholes
- Thread starter S7_MUFC
- Start date
AnfieldEd
I am Leg End
For me their peak periods are thus:-
Scholes:- 97-04
Gerrard:- 01-09
Lampard:- 05-11
Of them three in their prime:
Speed/Pace: Gerrard
Strength: Gerrard
Athleticism: Gerrard
Stamina: Lampard
Heading: Scholes (Although Gerrard is quite underrated at this - as one memorable occasion showed....)
Tackling: Gerrard
Defensively: Gerrard (Scholes can't even tackle FFS!! and Lampard isn't known for his defensive duties)
Short passing: Scholes
Long Range passing: Scholes and Gerrard
Game intelligence: Scholes (all of them are two steps ahead of the opposition, but this was Scholes biggest strength)
Final ball: Gerrard (ask Owen, Torres, Suarez etc)
Dribbling: Gerrard (none of them are dribblers, but gerrard the only one with the ability to go past players)
Touch: Scholes (all of them fantastic, but Scholes overall technique was fantastic)
Finishing: Lampard (all of them great)
Free kicks: Lampard
Shooting: Scholes (all of them great)
Crossing: Gerrard
Consistency: Lampard
Leadership: Gerrard
Match winning abilities: Gerrard (the one who steps forward in the biggest matches...Fa cup, CL, Uefa Cup, numerous important goals/pentalites and late match winning goals)
This shows that:
Scholes was the best in his position, ball distributing midfielder, without doubt, the best in the world during a couple of years along with Xavi, Pirlo and Xabi Alonso in this position. Fantastic player, and in the top 3 of Uniteds best player in the premiership. IMO
Gerrard, the best player of them all, had the most ability, the most complete player of three.
Lampard, a fantastic player and one of the best goalscoring central midfielders ever in european football. Chelsea best player of all time IMO.
The argument is much more diverse and much more colourful than just listing them as 1,2,3. And yes, Neville did win that argument, sorry, but he did, because he didn't concede on that point.
But I think one thing which most certainly has to be taken into account is the team that the player has played in. It would be interesting to see how well Scholes would have played in a team like Stoke for example; furthermore, it would equally be interesting to see how Gerrard would have performed at United. It's of no circumstance, that Ferguson is supposed to have had 3 failed attempts at signing Gerrard. For me, that speaks volumes. As well, its worth noting that Chelsea also tried to sign Gerrard too.
Two massive points that Carragher should have had in his back pocket. What does it prove? - Well it doesn't prove much because it never happened, but it at least shows you that both managers at the clubs with both of the other players in question, think that Gerrard would have improved their team, with both of those players in question, there at the same time.
One harsh reality is that Scholes and Lampard, have arguably played in a better domestic team than us, again, a debatable point... But I personally feel that Scholes and Lampard don't have as much of a diverse, multi-facted and allround game, as Gerrard has. I don't think Lampard tracks back as well as Gerrard and I don't think Scholes does neither. I don't think both Scholes and Lampard have the penetrating ability that Gerrard has going forward.
So, maybe I'm biased, but Gerrard for me, is the better overall player.
But the order I put them in is:
Gerrard
Scholes
Lampard.
I honestly really did try not to be biased at all. I must admit that I used some of the sentences from another forum which articulated my points better than I could!!!
Scholes:- 97-04
Gerrard:- 01-09
Lampard:- 05-11
Of them three in their prime:
Speed/Pace: Gerrard
Strength: Gerrard
Athleticism: Gerrard
Stamina: Lampard
Heading: Scholes (Although Gerrard is quite underrated at this - as one memorable occasion showed....)
Tackling: Gerrard
Defensively: Gerrard (Scholes can't even tackle FFS!! and Lampard isn't known for his defensive duties)
Short passing: Scholes
Long Range passing: Scholes and Gerrard
Game intelligence: Scholes (all of them are two steps ahead of the opposition, but this was Scholes biggest strength)
Final ball: Gerrard (ask Owen, Torres, Suarez etc)
Dribbling: Gerrard (none of them are dribblers, but gerrard the only one with the ability to go past players)
Touch: Scholes (all of them fantastic, but Scholes overall technique was fantastic)
Finishing: Lampard (all of them great)
Free kicks: Lampard
Shooting: Scholes (all of them great)
Crossing: Gerrard
Consistency: Lampard
Leadership: Gerrard
Match winning abilities: Gerrard (the one who steps forward in the biggest matches...Fa cup, CL, Uefa Cup, numerous important goals/pentalites and late match winning goals)
This shows that:
Scholes was the best in his position, ball distributing midfielder, without doubt, the best in the world during a couple of years along with Xavi, Pirlo and Xabi Alonso in this position. Fantastic player, and in the top 3 of Uniteds best player in the premiership. IMO
Gerrard, the best player of them all, had the most ability, the most complete player of three.
Lampard, a fantastic player and one of the best goalscoring central midfielders ever in european football. Chelsea best player of all time IMO.
The argument is much more diverse and much more colourful than just listing them as 1,2,3. And yes, Neville did win that argument, sorry, but he did, because he didn't concede on that point.
But I think one thing which most certainly has to be taken into account is the team that the player has played in. It would be interesting to see how well Scholes would have played in a team like Stoke for example; furthermore, it would equally be interesting to see how Gerrard would have performed at United. It's of no circumstance, that Ferguson is supposed to have had 3 failed attempts at signing Gerrard. For me, that speaks volumes. As well, its worth noting that Chelsea also tried to sign Gerrard too.
Two massive points that Carragher should have had in his back pocket. What does it prove? - Well it doesn't prove much because it never happened, but it at least shows you that both managers at the clubs with both of the other players in question, think that Gerrard would have improved their team, with both of those players in question, there at the same time.
One harsh reality is that Scholes and Lampard, have arguably played in a better domestic team than us, again, a debatable point... But I personally feel that Scholes and Lampard don't have as much of a diverse, multi-facted and allround game, as Gerrard has. I don't think Lampard tracks back as well as Gerrard and I don't think Scholes does neither. I don't think both Scholes and Lampard have the penetrating ability that Gerrard has going forward.
So, maybe I'm biased, but Gerrard for me, is the better overall player.
But the order I put them in is:
Gerrard
Scholes
Lampard.
I honestly really did try not to be biased at all. I must admit that I used some of the sentences from another forum which articulated my points better than I could!!!
S7_MUFC
New member
Yup and based on technical ability there is only one winner but I'd like to know who you'd like to have in your team..
K
kingleo
Guest
Id say Lampard! He has more goals more assist than the other two, he is more consistent, has won everything and always produces and can be relied upon in the big games!
Lampard has always been underrated! maybe after he retires people will start to realise just how good he was!
Id rank them
1st. Lampard
2nd. Scholes
3rd. Gerrard
Lampard has always been underrated! maybe after he retires people will start to realise just how good he was!
Id rank them
1st. Lampard
2nd. Scholes
3rd. Gerrard
Poor_Sunyol
In Lucho we trust!
They are all shit.
antonnn
Blue Blooded Aussie
Scholes>Lampard>>Gerrard
Chelsea fan n all, I can't say Lampard is better than Scholes other than scoring goals and probably on the defensive side of things. Gerrard is the best athlete of the 3 but also the least consistent over the course of his career compared to the other 2 which loses points for me. He started falling off earlier than the other 2 as well and I don't feel he'll last as long either.
Chelsea fan n all, I can't say Lampard is better than Scholes other than scoring goals and probably on the defensive side of things. Gerrard is the best athlete of the 3 but also the least consistent over the course of his career compared to the other 2 which loses points for me. He started falling off earlier than the other 2 as well and I don't feel he'll last as long either.
sukhy
New member
Has to be Scholes, he was one of the best midfielders in the world between 1997-2004, and if you don't believe me, then ask Zidane, or Edgar Davids or any of his peers who played against him.
Then he had that eye injury and when he returned, age caught up with him and he reinvented himself and from 2006-2011 was easily the best midfielders in the world, if you don't believe me, ask Xavi or Iniesta.
One of a kind midfielder who could do it all, there has never been an English midfielder so technically gifted and who could keep the ball and pass and move like he was Spanish, thats the main reason why he wasn't used properly for England, because the midfielders who were shoe horned in front of him weren't good enough to play a pass and move game which relies on you keeping the ball.
Gerrard and Lampard aren't very good at keeping the ball, they are constantly giving the ball away and when they are pressed the lose the ball easily, they are very English. Scholes, however is a different breed.
Of all the qualities you need to be a top midfielder, pin point passing, keeping the ball the ball under pressure, opening up space for teammates with good movement and reading the game are much more important than being able to chug up down the pitch and attempt 40 yard Hollywood passes every 5 minutes.
If you compare the 3 of them, they all spent a section of their careers playing in a more advanced role, the main criticism I have of Gerrard and Lampard are world class midfielders is that neither of them spent their whole career in midfield.
The last big game Gerrard started in a 2 man midfield was vs Milan in 2005 and in the first half they were outplayed like crazy, it was only when Benitez dragged him out of the middle of the pitch and stuck him on the right wing is when he started to influence the game. From then on, he has barely played in midfield.
Lampard is similar but he almost always plays ahead of a 2 man midfield and is usually behind a striker, he's essentially a 2nd striker. The way he plays is to affect the game quickly with passes and shots, rather than control the game.
Scholes has almost always played in a 2 man midfield, apart from a spell in 2002/03 when Veron was put into the team to try and solve a few European conundrums, but it didn't work. He is adept at playing that role, but he was born to play in a 2 man midfield.
Thinking in just a positional sense, if someone asked me 10 years down the line, what position each man played in, I would say that Scholes is a central midfielder, in the Xavi mould. While Gerrard and Lampard are attacking midfielders who are in the same mould as a Thomas Muller or Marek Hamsik.
Gerrard is ahead of Lampard ever so slightly because he can win games on his own and he can play a destroyer role better aswell.
All great players, but Scholes is King.
Then he had that eye injury and when he returned, age caught up with him and he reinvented himself and from 2006-2011 was easily the best midfielders in the world, if you don't believe me, ask Xavi or Iniesta.
One of a kind midfielder who could do it all, there has never been an English midfielder so technically gifted and who could keep the ball and pass and move like he was Spanish, thats the main reason why he wasn't used properly for England, because the midfielders who were shoe horned in front of him weren't good enough to play a pass and move game which relies on you keeping the ball.
Gerrard and Lampard aren't very good at keeping the ball, they are constantly giving the ball away and when they are pressed the lose the ball easily, they are very English. Scholes, however is a different breed.
Of all the qualities you need to be a top midfielder, pin point passing, keeping the ball the ball under pressure, opening up space for teammates with good movement and reading the game are much more important than being able to chug up down the pitch and attempt 40 yard Hollywood passes every 5 minutes.
If you compare the 3 of them, they all spent a section of their careers playing in a more advanced role, the main criticism I have of Gerrard and Lampard are world class midfielders is that neither of them spent their whole career in midfield.
The last big game Gerrard started in a 2 man midfield was vs Milan in 2005 and in the first half they were outplayed like crazy, it was only when Benitez dragged him out of the middle of the pitch and stuck him on the right wing is when he started to influence the game. From then on, he has barely played in midfield.
Lampard is similar but he almost always plays ahead of a 2 man midfield and is usually behind a striker, he's essentially a 2nd striker. The way he plays is to affect the game quickly with passes and shots, rather than control the game.
Scholes has almost always played in a 2 man midfield, apart from a spell in 2002/03 when Veron was put into the team to try and solve a few European conundrums, but it didn't work. He is adept at playing that role, but he was born to play in a 2 man midfield.
Thinking in just a positional sense, if someone asked me 10 years down the line, what position each man played in, I would say that Scholes is a central midfielder, in the Xavi mould. While Gerrard and Lampard are attacking midfielders who are in the same mould as a Thomas Muller or Marek Hamsik.
Gerrard is ahead of Lampard ever so slightly because he can win games on his own and he can play a destroyer role better aswell.
All great players, but Scholes is King.
XaviMessiGirl
New member
Gerrard, but I'm biased.
Zuess99
New member
Obviously scholes. Scholes is just a great midfielder who controls the midflield well, doesn't loose possession, has excellent passing and shooting . Damn who the fuck passes while volleying(shooting) the ball?
He is sometimes decisive too , remember The knockout goal in 08?
Gerrard and lampard are good but they can't compare to scholes . I mean so many other great footballers will tell you the same. Scholes is even used as an example in la masia for young midfielders ect.
Pity the english couldn't stop fapping over the lampard and gerrard midfield and never really made scholes the focal point.
He is sometimes decisive too , remember The knockout goal in 08?
Gerrard and lampard are good but they can't compare to scholes . I mean so many other great footballers will tell you the same. Scholes is even used as an example in la masia for young midfielders ect.
Pity the english couldn't stop fapping over the lampard and gerrard midfield and never really made scholes the focal point.
Home of Barca Fans
