Stevie Gerrard

Hamann is a decent shout id have included him alongside the likes of Fletcher, Gilberto and that.

Robson left Man U when I was 3 and Ince, notbad but I recall him most playing for diddy teams, like I was 8 when he joined Middlesborough.

Was doing players id seen in England.

 

Gerrard's lack of intelligence always held him back. Particularly his positioning in a 2 man midfield because too often he goes awol.

 

Could say the same of anyone in a 2-man midfield though. Pirlo, Xavi, Toure, Lampard, Scholes, Iniesta.

Really the only players who can play 2-man midfield well are defensive players or players who dont attack a lot but then they need the balance of an attacking player. For example you wouldnt play Alonso and Mascherano as a 2 man midfield or Makelele and Busquets or Ambrosini and Gattuso, you could and it would be solid but you'd need a 3rd midfielder who links play to the attack like a Gerrard or Iniesta or Xavi or Lampard or Riquelme or Scholes.

 

Didn't Keane and Scholes play in a 2 man midfield in their earlier years at United together? And Keane got forward a lot more then.Not a big fan of 2 men midfields myself but I think if the two players have a good understanding of eachothers games and communicate well it can work.

I'd agree you wouldn't get away with playing 2 more attack minded midfielders together, and two defensive ones wouldn't be effective either.

 

Scholes
Lampard
Viera
Gerrard
Keane


That'd be my top 5. The best is certainly Scholes or Lampard for me. Scholes absolutely dominated the premier league era, and I've given it to him. Lampard got more goals, and had played nearly 600 games which is some feat.

I'm going to say Gerrard was better than Keane, Keane was a no nonsense great midfielder who bossed the midfield and a great leader... But I think Gerrard did this also, but with the addition of goals and better link up play.

 

Why is Roy Keane always rated so highly? Scholes, Viera, Lampard, Gerrard are a distance ahead of him

 

Im not taking you * seriously anymore.

 

That's just not true

 

Revisionism was done over Scholes I think because of his talent even though he never hit the heights he could. Same could be said of players like Riquelme, Mendieta and Veron even Rui Costa where they were 5 great talented, quality players but when did they dominate - I dont think they did.

When did Scholes dominate, the 90s? no, the early to mid 2000s? no, the mid to late 2000s? thats when he showed most of his ability, passing and conducting games well from deep but by then he'd lost his legs and was kinda a liability defensively although did have the likes of Carrick, Fletcher, Hargreaves and Park doing most of the running so you wouldnt say it handicapped Man U.

Ive said that a few times on here about Scholes and most dont agree but I just dont know when he was that great. He never got named Man U club player of the year during his career and in about 18 seasons, only made the EPL team of the year 2 times - that wasnt because he was so good people just ignored him as you couldnt give him all the awards it was just because he never played that great. What were his standout seasons, his stand out games, the period he dominated as the best midfielder in England?

 

It's clear to see you have a problem with Liverpool and Gerrard

There's no denying he was world class, and certainly in the top 5 midfielders.

Why was Keane better? On the park what did Keane have that Gerrard never?

 

Gerrard played brilliantly in spells,he would go missing.

Roy Keane never went missing on the pitch.

If you think i am basing my judgement on dislike for Gerrard then you are wrong,i am on recird on this forum for also stating my dislike for Keane.

I have been able to watch the both of them play from the start til the end of their careers and Roy Keane was the ultimate midfielder......he also is not a diving *.

A proper midfield hardman,not a kid on one like Steven.

 

In all fairness, I am a huge fan of Gerrard's, have been since he came on the scene.

His diving lets him down big time, some player though.

 

Gerrard could be seen as dominating games as you like to put it as he was his team's best and most influential player so most of the play would go through him.

Scholes was surrounded by excellent players like Keane, Giggs, Beckham, Rooney, Ronaldo, Van Nistelrooy, Cantona so obviously he wouldn't stand out as much as

The difference he made when he returned after retiring was amazing and showed his class. That was a standout season as the other midfielders weren't as good or influential as him, a bit like Gerrard for the vast majority of his career

 

He wasn't world class either. He was a very good player in the "bestest league in the world hurrr hurr", but that's it.

 

For me Keane was better at controlling games. Gerrard has more natural technical ability and is definitely a better goalscorer/creator. When it comes to actually taking the game by the scruff of the neck though, there aren't many better than Keane. The sheer amount of tackles he put in in matches, and distance he covered in games were incredible.

Also I always liked the fact Keane just kept it simple and rarely would give the ball away, without being a negative player. I know Gerrard's passing range is unbelievable, but I've seen a lot of games over the years where he has simply over done it and given the ball away needlessly. Last year v Chelsea sticks in my mind, he made the mistake for the goal and after that lost his head, kept trying to shoot from anywhere and pull off ridiculous passes.

 

Fair enough

You dont score over 110 league goals from midfield from just playing brilliant in spells.

I totally agree on Keane, he was a hardman, didnt hide and bossed his midfield. That;s why i've put him in the top 5. Gerrard wasn't as hard as Keane obviously but if we are going to go on that then Keane would be the best in the premier league ever, as Keane was the hardest, no nonsense midfielder by a mile.

I just think Viera and Gerrard were both better footballers. Both technically better and offered more in my opinion.

 

Roy Keane was a solid, great, dominant, consistent midfielder who hindered the opposition and massively boosted his own team. He is no doubt one of the greatest players of all time, arguably the best captain ever for me. Always played well in big games too.

Keane was the sort of player whod have took a broken nose to block a shot off the line in a friendly. Just a winner who played with confidence and inspired others.

 

Aye Gerrard is capable of some great passes but he's also guilty of majorly overdoing it and going for the Hollywood balls. Scholes, Alonso and Carrick are better passers

 

Gerrard is living of the european cup win and sone spectacular goals.

 

Vieira for me wasnt THAT great technically, he was good but his style was more athletic, roaming, bossing, ball winning, ball carrying, box to box quality with good stamina who like Keane was a real leader and had great winning mentality. He had a good range of passing but not too different from Keane, they done their roles in a different style but I wouldnt say either was really better technically, Yaya Toure I would say is a bit better on the ball than them and has better passing/shooting ability - although Toure doesnt have near the consistency of Keane or Vieira or the leadership and work-rate and is prone to lapses in concentration/laziness/mistakes which seperated him from them even though he could have been better if he had their mentality.