Harry Kane

Patrick Aubuyeymang? He was **** at QPR and that was nigh on ten years ago. He must be well past it now.

 

Different players for me though. Not sure you'd see Lampard moving to right back to mark Serginho out of the game like Gerrard did in the Champions League final. But that's the thing. Lampard was a supreme attacking midfielder, a goal machine and whilst he could be defensive enough to play in a midfield two if required, he never really had to. Gerrard wasn't a purely attacking midfielder, more of an all-rounder. So I guess they're difficult to compare. The best I can do is say that Gerrard was a more natural, versatile midfielder, capable of performing a number of roles very well. Lampard was more specialised in attacking and therefore probably excelled more than Gerrard statistically.

What isn't in doubt for me though, despite those who would decry the 'golden generation', in Lampard, Gerrard, Scholes, Beckham and Joe Cole, we had a midfield that should have been managed a lot more effectively and achieved so much more with England.

 

I think that one's up for debate rather than a given. Gerrard was a tackler and a fighter who could dig in and drive his team whether that was because they had their backs against the wall defensively or needed a goal and someone to drive them forward by taking it past players. In a few of those respects he was better than Frank, even if he was less involved in goalscoring. And I don't remember Frank inspiring his team to win a Champions League or FA Cup final as significantly as Gerrard did, almost single-handed in the case of the latter.

Just one of those debates that will rage on for decades without an answer, like Pele/Maradona and Messi/Ronaldo.

 

Frank Lampard couldn't play in a midfield 2. There's no wonder he scored so many goals as he got to play as an attacking midfielder & was surrounded by world class players for all his Chelsea career.

Gerrard & Scholes both played deeper for most of their careers.

Worth noting that in the 2 seasons Gerrard played in front of Alonso & Mascherano & behind Torres e.g. in the Lampard role he out scored him.

All 3 were brilliant but the debates who's one & two in Gerrard & Scholes

 

I don't get the argument that La Liga's weak. It's not. It's just that Barca & Real are teams full of world class players. If you put their teams in the premiership they'd run away with it.

I don't believe there's a single premiership player who'd get in Barcelona's side except from De Gea in goal.

And I don't think I'd take many to get in Real's. De Gea in goal, Aguero over Benzema, any more? Not for me.

The 3rd best team in Spain, Athletico dominated our champions Chelsea last season & Bilbao, Sevilla, Villareal etc nearly always beat English opposition.

Barca would be hitting 6 & 7 against most teams in our bottom half

 

Three great replies. Rare on the BBS. I rate both Gerrard and Lampard, but I preferred Frank. But it's like saying you preferred Ward to Shipperley or Hignett over Glavin. Both class acts. Samba's final point is the key point - we had an array of talent, rightly deemed the golden generation. Seaman, Neville, Ferdinand, Terry, Campbell, A.Cole, Beckham, McManaman, Gerrard, Lampard, J.Cole, Scholes, Owen, Shearer, Rooney etc. Some talent there. And whilst they were unlucky I suppose at times, we ought to have really won summat or at least made a final. Even a few years earlier with arguably even more talent in Gazza, Lineker, Waddle, Sheringham, Ince, Adams, Platt, Pearce et al, we could only manage semi finals. We lack summat. Not sure what that is. It's not the style of football. In 96 we were a joy to watch. We weren't bad at times early 00's either. It can't just be bad luck.

 

I also dont remember Lampard dragging Chelsea to Champions League glory single handedly, nor do I remember him saving a cup final in such dramatic fashion its known as the Lampard final.

No matter how to tart it up, Lampard played in great teams for the vast majority of his career, in a role where he was basically on the pitch just to score goals. Gerrard was so much more and far more important to his sides overall ability than Lampard ever was.

Scholes was always a good player but similar to Giggs, I never heard him called world class in his prime, only when he was playing well into his 30's. I think Scholes became a more european midfielder and recieved greater accolades from the continent later in his career. Gerrard on the other hand was a far better player in his prime years but couldnt replicate Scholes' ability to completely change his game to prolong his career.

It's a shame because in most era's both Scholes and Lampard would have been by far the greatest midfielders of their generation but neither got anywhere near the level Gerrard attained around 2008/2009 time.

As for the England midfield debate, as I've said on here before, had we appointed any sort of half decent manager then he would have found a way. Instead we had Sven who picked the big names first and foremost and then thought of formations. We should have been playing 3 in central midfield, whether sitting Scholes infront of the back 4 or even Carrick whos always been underrated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

For me the big problem with English football during the 2000's was that our managers decided to build a team to get the best out of Owen & Beckham rather than one to get the best out of Gerrard, Scholes & Lampard.

Scholes & Gerrard during their peak were two of the best players in the world yet would get shunted out to the left wing so we could play 4-4-2.

Then we had Gerrard & Lampard together in the centre. Gerrard having to play a holding role he didn't play at Liverpool & after a long hard season Lampard having to play in a central two when he was used to been in a two & struggled to adapt.

I would've gone with a 4-5-1. Or a 4-3-3 or maybe even a diamond but I wouldn't have wasted players as good as Gerrard, Scholes & Lampard to accommodate Beckham pumping balls into Heskey to win knockdowns for Owen.

 

Go on then...

Name your top five.

 

Exactly, the big names we're guarentee'd to start just like Rooney is right now. The team should have always been built around getting the best out of Gerrard for me. What a wasted opportunity by constantly employing completely inept managers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Strikers?

Suarez
Kane
Aguero
Lewandowski
Aubemayang
Lukaku
Benzema

Theres 7, in order


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No Jamil Adam?

You'll be missing Frimpong off your list of best midfielders next.

 

Kane better than Lewandowski? No Ibra, Muller or Winnall?

Gi'or wit barm.

 

Kane will be in the next couple of years as will lukaku providing they get games at the top levels.

But your right. Its missing a couple..

 

Muller isnt an out and out striker. Ibra is very overrated and Winnalls too injury prone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk