Steven Gerrard

[Mike Litoris]

A second rate player with a poor first touch and a preponderance to give the ball away with unnecessary Hollywood 60-yd balls.

Worst of all he kept the best England midfielder of his generation either out of the team or subdued due to his presence.

Tellingly, none of the big foreign teams came looking for him.

Still, he ran around a lot and could fist-pump with the best of them.

All of the above is not really Gerrard's fault though (although he could have worked on his technique in the afternoon's off). What really gets me is his comment that he's retiring from international football because Liverpool are in the Champion's League. If that doesn't sum up what went wrong at the recent World Cup, I don't know what does. The FA needs to take a long hard look at that comment.

Wow.

[HoldenBall]

Gerrard was a great player and one of the best of his generation. This is the simple truth.

For Liverpool maybe..

[Super]

Stevie Me has a better ring to it. Hollywood balls that would occasionally reach it's target and selfish shooting from distance (Chelsea at Anfield last season for instance) that hardly helped his team out. Definitely the best decision for all parties involved. Was clearly finished as an international footballer on his world cup showing. I have to agree I find it bemusing that Rooney gets bashed for not being international quality (rightly so on some occasions) yet Gerrard has been exempt form such criticism for that whole time. Strange.

It was only a few years back United fans were claiming he was up there with Ronaldo and Messi. Rooney has been a huge let down on the big occasion. Gerrard has not produced his club form for his country but not many have.

[North London Red]

It is a puzzler, isn't it? Seems 'Chivs' may have hit on a poiniant point.

I still maintain the individual ego's of players, inflated unproportionately for being better than the likes of Norwich etc (no disrespect intended to Norwich) doesn't help. The next generation is going to go the same way as Barkley, Shaw, Lallana are going to get their backsides systematically kissed before actually achieving anything.

An all Spanish final this year and Spain did awfully at the World Cup, incidentally.

 

A very fair point, but I don't think it means their squad have suddenly become inferior players. You can probably put their World Cup failure down to a combination of being in a bloody hard group, their players looking cream crackered after the closest domestic title race in years (contrast that to the Bundesliga, which was done and dusted in record time), two of their teams reaching the CL final, their defence looking far weaker for the absence of Carlos Puyol, and the opposition finally working out how to play effectively against their system.

 

(Mind you, a first round exit after winning 2 consecutive European Championships and a World Cup is the kind of failure I'd probably settle for!).

 

I guess the point I was originally trying to make is why do we always have a team that looks less than the sum of its parts? Look at Greece in 2004 - they won the tournament by being organised, having a sensible manager, taking their chances when they came, and having an 11 that was greater than the sum of its relatively modest parts (and that's not meant to sound disrespectful at all - comparing their players against most of the other squads in that tournament, you'd find it hard to believe they'd end up winning the whole thing).

 

I'm not saying I expect England to win the Euros or the World Cup, but if other countries can at least look the sum of (or greater than) their parts, why can't we?

[Rob k]

Overhyped and found out at international level. There's a reason England have been piss poor for the last ten years - we keep producing players who aren't actually that good. The best of a poor bunch still get their asses kissed, though.

Thank him for his effort but surely even he must know his England career was largly dire.

We reached an u21 final in 2009 and recently win an u17 tournament,

I think we are producing good enough players but they just don't get the opportunity to kick on and play first team games at big clubs as the premiership demands instant success so it's easier to buy a player.

[red colin]

he certainly did more for England than Scholes ever did.

What...scholes was pushed out to keep lampard in .scholes was a player who could control a game and dictate ,lampard and gerrard could not . Lampard gets a tackle in runs forward and shoots from anywhere ,gerrard tries to do everything at breakneck speed and over hits too many long balls loosing possesion. Scholes was different class to those 2

[Super]

What...scholes was pushed out to keep lampard in .scholes was a player who could control a game and dictate ,lampard and gerrard could not . Lampard gets a tackle in runs forward and shoots from anywhere ,gerrard tries to do everything at breakneck speed and over hits too many long balls loosing possesion. Scholes was different class to those 2

 

Gerrard and Scholes got shafted and had to play on the left many times. Fact is Scholes never produced his club form for England nowhere near he even said himself.

[steveybadger]

Couldn't agree more. His inability to keep possession for England always seemed to go unnoticed. Perhaps he wasn't used in his best position often enough or until his later years but ultimately didn't replicate his club form enough on the international stage.

 

 He clearly had merits as a player, but the number of 50 yard pings that didn't reach their man was incredible. People in the media in particular seem to remember the few that did and called him great as a result, when to my mind he certainly wasn't. He sums up the problems with English football to me, in that the reason he shows up so well at club level is that he is surrounded by players who do the things he can't, where as for England he isn't. I remember his best season was essentially playing behind Torres, rather than further back when he didn't have to hold a position of maintain possession as a priority. In fact didn't Benitez play him on the right for a season as he didn't seem to trust him tactically in the centre?

[marshy]

 He clearly had merits as a player, but the number of 50 yard pings that didn't reach their man was incredible. People in the media in particular seem to remember the few that did and called him great as a result, when to my mind he certainly wasn't. He sums up the problems with English football to me, in that the reason he shows up so well at club level is that he is surrounded by players who do the things he can't, where as for England he isn't. I remember his best season was essentially playing behind Torres, rather than further back when he didn't have to hold a position of maintain possession as a priority. In fact didn't Benitez play him on the right for a season as he didn't seem to trust him tactically in the centre?

 

Could have played him at RB in Brazil, we certainly needed one. Personally I think he was a disaster for England in CMidfield for many years, too careless with possession.

[054123]

For Liverpool maybe..

Really interesting debate covering a lot of subjects.

We can debate personalities, politics in the England setup, where he stands against scholes lampard and Beckham ( not worth a lot bhthaving watched them all live Scholes was best up to 2001 then Beckham surpassed Iin terms of overall contribution), but he really was one of the best players of tbe last 15 years.

I dont see that as debatable. You might think one or 2 others were better, you might nit like him as a person, but he was that good.

[Southport Red]

For Liverpool maybe..

That's the thing though.  You can only pick players based on their club form.

 

sad truth is, while many here do not like Gerrard, it is far from clear who should have gotten the shirt in his place over the years.

 

I worry he is a dying breed, whatever you think of his contribution to England, he was always proud to wear the shirt and took defeats hard, a good contrast to 'arry's unnamed Spurs players who pretended they were injured rather than play for England.

 

I would say, Stevie G, Liverpool Talisman, England stalwart and patriot.  There are worse epitaphs.

[Guest]

Glad and good riddance. A perennial underperformer who years ago would have been 2nd choice to lampard in my team.

Giving him captaincy really peed me off. For years he was one of the dependables - dependable to withdraw from any friendly for a 'niggling' injury and absolutely if Liverpool had a big game coming up. Funny because wild horses needed to stop him playing for Liverpool. One of those that treated the national team with disrespect. Stunk as bad as Carragher retiring only to unretire for a World Cup.

[ChippenhamRed]

Really? How many caps did he win, over 100.....name me 10 games that he really took by the scruff of the neck

 

Another one of the great underachievers on the international stage for me, good player for Liverpool, but I don't care about that - so it's goodnight from me

 

Completely agree with Woodsy on this.  On the international stage at least, Gerrard most be one of England's most overrated players of all time.  I'm not saying he's not a decent player, but I can't ever remember him dominating a game for England like he did for Liverpool in his pomp.

 

Do you think fans from other countries rave about Gerrard in the way we do about the likes of Pirlo, Zidane, Iniesta  - i.e. great midfield players from past and present with a proven record on the international stage?  Not likely.  I don't actually think we'll miss him that much.

[Super]

Maybe it needs to be asked why our best players over the years have underachieved??. You can't tell me the likes Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham. etc aren't top players. They have all performed in the Champions League.

[Taylor10]

He clearly had merits as a player, but the number of 50 yard pings that didn't reach their man was incredible. People in the media in particular seem to remember the few that did and called him great as a result, when to my mind he certainly wasn't. He sums up the problems with English football to me, in that the reason he shows up so well at club level is that he is surrounded by players who do the things he can't, where as for England he isn't. I remember his best season was essentially playing behind Torres, rather than further back when he didn't have to hold a position of maintain possession as a priority. In fact didn't Benitez play him on the right for a season as he didn't seem to trust him tactically in the centre?

He was always a good premiership player but got completely found out at international level. His all action box to box style that didn't involve holding his position or retaining position was effective for Liverpool and in the prem. International football is so different though and his aimless long balls at times were embarrassing. Good riddance from me I'm afraid. The more I think about it the more annoyed I get that he was considered 'world class' when representing England for so long. Not fit to wipe Pirlo's ass.

[Portland Bill]

Absolute rubbish. Of course he will be missed by an average England team. Gerrard has been a top player, Scholes was a top player yet both never produced their club form for England. You might want to ask why that is.

Scholes was a class act,Gerrard was a bull in a china shop imo.

Always wanted to do the difficult things,when the easy pass at International football is the answer.

[Portland Bill]

Maybe it needs to be asked why our best players over the years have underachieved??. You can't tell me the likes Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham. etc aren't top players. They have all performed in the Champions League.

So have many other English players,but they always needed the foreign stars around them.

When it came to England those foreign players they relied on weren't there to help them.

[North London Red]

So have many other English players,but they always needed the foreign stars around them.

When it came to England those foreign players they relied on weren't there to help them.

 

You're quite right, the English players who've played in CL finals wouldn't have got there if their clubs didn't have decent foreign players - however is the same not true of any team that does well in the Champions League these days? They all have imported star players (and I believe Steaua Bucharest in 1986 were the last team to reach a final with 11 players of the same nationality).

Would Bayern have won in 2013 without Ribery, Mandzukic, Robben, Martinez and Dante? Would Dortmund have got to the final without Lewandowski and the other two Poles? Real Madrid's starting 11 in this year's final only had three Spaniards (two defenders and Casillas in goal).

The English players who've played in finals were picked on merit (and in recent times, all by non-English managers) so I still think the question around why the national team is less than the sum of its parts is a valid one.

[marshy]

Maybe it needs to be asked why our best players over the years have underachieved??. You can't tell me the likes Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham. etc aren't top players. They have all performed in the Champions League.

 

A very good question. In my opinion it's all down to a succession of managers who weren't all that adept at the most important part of selection i.e. team-building. As Alf Ramsey once famously said, ''I pick the best team, not necessarily the best players''.

 

So when people say ''who would you pick then?'' or '' have we got anyone better?'' the questions are pointless, the answer is ''I wouldn't be starting from here, I'd be trying out different things to see what worked best''. For instance I would loved to have seen Butt, Beckham, and Scholes playing as a midfield three for England as they offer a great blend of different skills and functions but only by trying it out could you see whether it would have worked. Never happened though, more's the pity.

[Monkeh]

A very good question. In my opinion it's all down to a succession of managers who weren't all that adept at the most important part of selection i.e. team-building. As Alf Ramsey once famously said, ''I pick the best team, not necessarily the best players''.

 

So when people say ''who would you pick then?'' or '' have we got anyone better?'' the questions are pointless, the answer is ''I wouldn't be starting from here, I'd be trying out different things to see what worked best''. For instance I would loved to have seen Butt, Beckham, and Scholes playing as a midfield three for England as they offer a great blend of different skills and functions but only by trying it out could you see whether it would have worked. Never happened though, more's the pity.

thats true we don't look like a team,

I think spains and germanys recent success is down to the the fact alot of the players played together in each age group as well as getting exposed to first team football,

[Mike Litoris]

A victim of his versatility. Forced to play deep to cover for the immobile, rigid and one-dimensional Lampard. Gerrard was never given time in his best position for England, which was with freedom to bomb on from midfield at pace with the protection of a midfielder like Hamman or Alonso. 

He didn't do a bad job because of this, and he could have made 100+ caps in pretty much any position on the field from right back to support striker. 

Easily the best midfielder to come out of Britain since... Robson?

[Maltshoveller]

A Great premiershjp player

Nothing more than average at International level

Gives the ball away far to often trying Hollywood pases

[AshtonGreat]

A Great premiershjp player

Nothing more than average at International level

Gives the ball away far to often trying Hollywood pases

To be fair, you could say the same about all the recent England players, with the possible exception of Ashley Cole

['Orns]

To be fair, you could say the same about all the recent England players, with the possible exception of Ashley Cole

 

Got some stick (from a Liverpool fan) for saying that Ashley Cole is the only world class player we have produced in years. Obviously my opinion, but I don't see how you can argue with that

 

Shit bloke, although does appear to have grown up a lot down the years, but a fantastic footballer. Anyone agree / disagree?

[Slacker]

I agree/disagree!

[North London Red]

Got some stick (from a Liverpool fan) for saying that Ashley Cole is the only world class player we have produced in years. Obviously my opinion, but I don't see how you can argue with that

 

Shit bloke, although does appear to have grown up a lot down the years, but a fantastic footballer. Anyone agree / disagree?

 

Depends how far back you go. You could probably make a case for Scholes and Rio Ferdinand too. And it's a shame Gareth Bale wasn't born 50 miles further east, as it's probably fair to say he is world class at the moment (and he came through the English system). 

As an aside, I see Ashley Cole has upset a few Americans in the last 24 hours...his quote about not wanting to play in the MLS as 'he's not ready to lie on a beach yet' has been taken pretty badly on this side of the pond!

[cider-manc]

Got some stick (from a Liverpool fan) for saying that Ashley Cole is the only world class player we have produced in years. Obviously my opinion, but I don't see how you can argue with that

 

Shit bloke, although does appear to have grown up a lot down the years, but a fantastic footballer. Anyone agree / disagree?

 

Ashley Cole was the most consistent world class performer without doubt. But (when at the peak of their powers) you can't say that Ferdinand, Scholes, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Owen and even Terry weren't. You only have to look at the amount of individual accolades and acknowledge they received from both home and abroad. 

 

One thing that people always forget is that German coaches visited England to see how our players were coached after the 5-1 drubbing in Munich- they were amazed at the young talented, technical players we had coming through. They took our model and made it better. 

 

The game evolved and age caught up with them- they were left behind. But for a while they were right at the top. Perhaps not as an international team but as individual players.

[Bris Red]

Ashley Cole was the most consistent world class performer without doubt. But (when at the peak of their powers) you can't say that Ferdinand, Scholes, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Owen and even Terry weren't. You only have to look at the amount of individual accolades and acknowledge they received from both home and abroad.

One thing that people always forget is that German coaches visited England to see how our players were coached after the 5-1 drubbing in Munich- they were amazed at the young talented, technical players we had coming through. They took our model and made it better.

The game evolved and age caught up with them- they were left behind. But for a while they were right at the top. Perhaps not as an international team but as individual players.

Baffles me even to this day that David Beckham even gets a mention in the same sentance as the phrase world class but there you go each to there own.

[HoldenBall]

Baffles me even to this day that David Beckham even gets a mention in the same sentance as the phrase world class but there you go each to there own.

Beckham was nowhere near world class, he didn't have the pace, but what he lacked in ability he sure put in the effort

[IdliketoRogerMoore]

Midfield wise we've only produced Gerrard, lampard, beckham and scholes even worth talking (wether it be bad or good)about in 20 years that's our problem!

No one talks about the merits of Danny murphy or Owen Hargreaves just these 4 that should tell you you all you need to know about English football!