Steven Gerrard are very good players but they are not world class.

[alex1]

Nor would ronaldinho, henry or any player that is up there if you put a fat sh*t in front of them!!!!!

 

http://wc2006.telegraph.co.uk/Document.asp...8F-A385F05F5F9D

Edited July 6, 2006 by alex1

[Benitez]

ok, so now I get it, we're a one man team, and without Gerrard we're nothing. Oh wait, no he's not, he's actually not that great, and only gets away with it in the prem cos he's surrounded by class foreign players.

 

I think I understand

[Cobs]

the witch-hunt of Ronaldo continues, eh Stevie?

 

[CarraLegend]

Nor would ronaldinho, henry or any player that is up there if you put a fat sh*t in front of them!!!!!

 

http://wc2006.telegraph.co.uk/Document.asp...8F-A385F05F5F9D

 

He's right about Lampard, wrong about Gerrard. Agree with quite a bit of what he said to be honest.

[monkey puzzle]

I stopped after the first paragraph when he said that Gerrard wasn't world class yet Rooney was bizarre in the extreme. Hope the rest of the article didn't continue in the same vain.

[Guest Marshy]

Apparantly Paul Gasgoine qualifies as world class as does Rooney but not Gerrard. I detect the smell of bitter manky thoughts.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I stopped after the first paragraph when he said that Gerrard wasn't world class yet Rooney was bizarre in the extreme. Hope the rest of the article didn't continue in the same vain.

exactly.

 

Stevie almost single-handedly beat AC Milan

[Benitez]

exactly.

 

Stevie almost single-handedly beat AC Milan

 

 

[Gilps]

We do sometimes overstate the quality of our players in this country, but the idea that Gascoigne and Rooney are the only two world class players England has produced over the last 15-20 years is b******s

[MarkD]

Don't World Class forwards score in World Cup Finals? or at least qualifiers?

[Bald Devil]

I stopped after the first paragraph when he said that Gerrard wasn't world class yet Rooney was bizarre in the extreme. Hope the rest of the article didn't continue in the same vain.

 

It got better. He's right about the media. It's a f***in big soap opera. Stupid a*** questions like 'how do you feel after that win' and no mention of tactics is the norm after most games. It's different on Italian tv. They talk tactics for ages, even if it is compered by some bint in a bikini.

[Lee W]

"Any side in the Premiership which has good positional rotation, fluidity of movement and clever inter linking passing movements are managed by a foreign coach or has foreign players"

 

Like the all-conquering Liverpool sides of the 70's and 80's and the Mancs in the Nineties. Did England win the World Cup then ?

 

Arsenal play educated football due to a reliance on the artistry and guile of technical players from around the world

 

Artistry and guile that has seen them underperform in the Champions League for so long (barring last year).

[Zoob]

The article is spot on when it talks about the lack of tactical discussion that accompanies the game, but wrong when it says Gerrard doesn't have the technical ability to be a world class player.

 

One of the (many) reasons why Gerrard is better than Lampard in centre midfield, is that he has the technical ability to control and pass the ball quickly in tight situations.

 

For some reason, in the Prem, opposing players tend to give Lampard all the time in the world to pick a pass. During the word cup, whenever Lampard was on the ball and under pressure, he'd just give the ball away. Gerrard was much better at helping the team retain posession (not that it really made much difference), but I'd put this in part down to his technical ability...

[Extraordinary Swindle]

For some reason, in the Prem, opposing players tend to give Lampard all the time in the world to pick a pass. During the word cup, whenever Lampard was on the ball and under pressure, he'd just give the ball away. Gerrard was much better at helping the team retain posession (not that it really made much difference), but I'd put this in part down to his technical ability...

Frank Lampard is the new Danny Murphy!

[Stevie H]

stewart. robson.

 

it's like gerrard being criticised by andy townsend ffs.

[Zoob]

stewart. robson.

 

Don't mock the future England captain

[Lee W]

stewart. robson.

 

it's like gerrard being criticised by andy townsend ffs.

 

lol - didn't realise it was the Stewart Robson. Ex-Arsenal irregular....

 

Thought the article was slanted towards Arsenal somewhat !

[Guz]

The article is spot on when it talks about the lack of tactical discussion that accompanies the game, but wrong when it says Gerrard doesn't have the technical ability to be a world class player.

 

One of the (many) reasons why Gerrard is better than Lampard in centre midfield, is that he has the technical ability to control and pass the ball quickly in tight situations.

 

For some reason, in the Prem, opposing players tend to give Lampard all the time in the world to pick a pass. During the word cup, whenever Lampard was on the ball and under pressure, he'd just give the ball away. Gerrard was much better at helping the team retain posession (not that it really made much difference), but I'd put this in part down to his technical ability...

 

I would agree that Gerrard was better than Lampard but I still think ball retention is the biggest thing Stevie needs to work on his game. He has cut down on the hollywood balls and has improved a LOT under Rafa, but still over does it. Particularly with england..The biggest difference between Stevie and Lampard is that the latter is still a limited player when playing at his best. Gerrard at his best is probably unplayable.

Edited July 6, 2006 by Guz

[Rimbeux]

It's yet another example of the lazy way the country as a whole talks of Lampard and Gerrard as the same player. It's the crap pub bore conversation, it's the open messageboard debate, the radio phone-in, oh who's better, can they play together etc. The thing that gets me is the way it bring Gerrard down to Lampard's level in the perception of people looking for a lazy throwaway comparison. It's alot like Waddle and Barnes

[nd]

Stupid article.

 

Yes, we over-hype British players. Yes, Gascoigne and Rooney are possibly the two most technically able players we've produced in years. Yes, British coaching lags behind foreign coaching in terms of skill, fitness, whatever.

 

But there are different ways of being 'World Class' (a stupid label anyway, certainly not one to base an article on).

 

Much as I hate the c***, the pre-eminent example of a 'World Class' player very much in the (erm) Anglo-Celt mould would be Roy Keane. At his peak he would've walked into any side in the world. But was he extravagantly talented in technical terms? No. Was he an accomplished 'thinking' player (like, say, Platini)? No. Was he a f***ing fantastic player who just instinctively knew how to make the most of his abilities and transcend his limitations, able to take any game by the scruff of the neck and terrify supposedly superior players? Yes. Not for one or two games, but for a decade? Yes.

 

That's the category Gerrard belongs in and is establishing himself within. He didn't have a stellar WC but then who did for England? Play him as he is meant to be played - a marauding midfield general - and you'll see the Gerrard we've seen for years now. Make him the water-carrier for an over-rated, greedy, complacent, public-school, Chelsea ponce and he'll never produce his best.

 

Moreover, wasn't Eriksson supposed to be one of those modern foreign coaches with all the technical know-how required to beautify the English beast? b******s to that. What England needed in this WC was a Clough figure. But then the FA didn't have the guts for Clough when he was alive. Let alone dead, even though he could hardly have done a worse job than Sven had we simply dug him up and propped his corpse next to McClaren in the dugout.

[12twelve]

Gerrard's decision making on the pitch seems to be dictated entirely by his instincts, if he'd have the calmness on the ball as Pirlo combined with his physical strengths, he'd be the perfect midfield player.

[Andy @ Allerton]

Nor would ronaldinho, henry or any player that is up there if you put a fat sh*t in front of them!!!!!

 

http://wc2006.telegraph.co.uk/Document.asp...8F-A385F05F5F9D

 

 

Wayne Rooney - World Class :lol:

 

 

Number of meaningful contributions to the England cause the whole world cup: 0

 

Number of goals: 0

 

Number of assists: 0

 

Number of cutting passes: 0

 

Number of darting runs: 0

 

Number of thuggish yobbery incidents: several

 

Number of thuggish yobbery incidents that got him sent off for being a c***: 1

 

 

 

Incidentall what has Stewart Robson ever done in the history of Football? Except obviously being a t*** of the highest order*

 

99.9% of everyone who has ever written about football in any paper is a t*** by default - they have to prove they aren't by their writing.

 

Sadly few ever do.

 

Stupid article.

 

Yes, we over-hype British players. Yes, Gascoigne and Rooney are possibly the two most technically able players we've produced in years. Yes, British coaching lags behind foreign coaching in terms of skill, fitness, whatever.

 

But there are different ways of being 'World Class' (a stupid label anyway, certainly not one to base an article on).

 

Much as I hate the c***, the pre-eminent example of a 'World Class' player very much in the (erm) Anglo-Celt mould would be Roy Keane. At his peak he would've walked into any side in the world. But was he extravagantly talented in technical terms? No. Was he an accomplished 'thinking' player (like, say, Platini)? No. Was he a f***ing fantastic player who just instinctively knew how to make the most of his abilities and transcend his limitations, able to take any game by the scruff of the neck and terrify supposedly superior players? Yes. Not for one or two games, but for a decade? Yes.

 

That's the category Gerrard belongs in and is establishing himself within. He didn't have a stellar WC but then who did for England? Play him as he is meant to be played - a marauding midfield general - and you'll see the Gerrard we've seen for years now. Make him the water-carrier for an over-rated, greedy, complacent, public-school, Chelsea ponce and he'll never produce his best.

 

Moreover, wasn't Eriksson supposed to be one of those modern foreign coaches with all the technical know-how required to beautify the English beast? b******s to that. What England needed in this WC was a Clough figure. But then the FA didn't have the guts for Clough when he was alive. Let alone dead, even though he could hardly have done a worse job than Sven had we simply dug him up and propped his corpse next to McClaren in the dugout.

 

 

" the pre-eminent example of a 'World Class' player very much in the (erm) Anglo-Celt mould would be Roy Keane. At his peak he would've walked into any side in the world"

 

 

Didn't he actually walk out on an international side because he's a w*****?

 

 

Sorry guys, I think you lot are talking bollo**s. Criticising the article because it was written by Stuart Robson - WTF? Does that mean only the best players past and present are allowed to criticise Gerrard? Ian Wright was a fine player, but I'd value my little sister's opinon over his when it comes to football.

 

Stuart Robson's articles are usually spot on, and this article is no different. While I disagree that Gerrard isn't 'world class' (a phrase a hate to use anyway, well up there as one of the most annoying football phrases), i would say that if there was one aspect that Gerrard needs to work on, it is his decision making, put another way his ability to control the tempo of the game, which is what Robson is getting at.

 

One of you said that Roy Keane wasn't great technically, well that is frankly rubbish. Every time Gerrard was up against Keane, Keane always had his number, the same goes for Vieira, apart from the superhuman effort by Gerrard 2 seasons ago at Anfield when he played as second striker. Keane and Vieira controlled games, the upped the pace when required, they slowed the game down when their team was under pressure.

 

He's right that England don't have a player who can do that, but it is wrong to criticise Gerrard because that is not his position. That job is done by Alonso for us, but England had nobody who could do that.

 

He is right about the media coverage too. Only a tiny bit of the media deals with the tactics. Gordon Strachan is great at it, and despite the fact he is a complete tool, David Pleat's chalkboard is pretty good for tactical analysis.

 

 

If you really think like that - go and support the f***ing mancs.

 

This is a really good thread, with lots of thoughtful contributions. I couldn't believe my ears last night when Alan Shearer said that England must feel bad because very few of the other semi-finalists' players would get in the England team. I was thinking especially about Italy - Cannavaro was the only one Shearer thought good enough for England. Their performance was incredible. It wasn't just technique, it was also mental strength in that atmosphere. I hate to say it but even Matterazzi - his distribution from the back is simply brilliant. They also had beautiful, imaginative touch play in midfield to create space - look at Pirlo's shimmies and Gattuso's work - what a partnership.

 

England this world cup were like Scotland in 1978. Completely over-hyped at home, about tenth best when they got there. Just because the Sky premium has allowed clubs to pay huge wages and millions in transfer fees, it does't actually mean these lads are as good as the foreigners. That's why managers keep buying the cheap imports.

 

Robson is right - English players are massivle over-valued. He is wrong in only one respect. Steven Gerrard is second as a player only to Ronaldinho, and he's a completely diffferent kind of player. The Italians I speak to know it, and would love Gerrard to play for Milan, Juve or whoever. But he can learn. He can get better. He can use his brain more. Luckily, we have a manager that can help him get to the level he is capable of. At that point, we will win everything.

 

 

England would have done better if they'd taken players that weren't crocked and had barely kicked a ball (Owen, Rooney and Sol Campbell among others)

 

And they would have done better if they hadn't played such stupid tactics 4-5-1 with an unfit, overrated dwarf up front is never going to win a game.

[charlie clown]

This is a really good thread, with lots of thoughtful contributions. I couldn't believe my ears last night when Alan Shearer said that England must feel bad because very few of the other semi-finalists' players would get in the England team. I was thinking especially about Italy - Cannavaro was the only one Shearer thought good enough for England. Their performance was incredible. It wasn't just technique, it was also mental strength in that atmosphere. I hate to say it but even Matterazzi - his distribution from the back is simply brilliant. They also had beautiful, imaginative touch play in midfield to create space - look at Pirlo's shimmies and Gattuso's work - what a partnership.

 

Whilst agree with your point, if I remember this correctly, you are quoting Shearer a bit out of context. I think that he was being asked about Erkisson's performance and he was saying that most of the other teams were no better man for man but the other teams were performing much better than England so it was probably more an issue of management and tactics than the players themselves. And I think your point about Pirlo and Gatusso backs that up - get the right players playing to gether in the right way and the personnel involved, to an extent, don't matter too much.

 

 

His point about Cannavarro was that he was the only player, when you compared England to the other last four teams, who was outsandingly better in his position than what England had to offer.

[Raj]

Gerrard has proven himself world class through his performances at the highest level of club football over the course of years.

 

Just because he struggled to impose himself in the tactically inept Erikkson's side doesn't mean he isn't one of the great players in the game today.

 

This is key. World Class for Liverpool. Ok for England.

And why? The manager.

 

Erikkson has to take full responsibility for players out of position and curtailing their natural ability. Gerrard should have been played on the right hand side. Where, he has had his best season for Liverpool. Carrick and Hargreaves in the midfield, Joe Cole on the left. Rooney and Crouch upfront. (For Rooney, replace with Lampard, when he was injured)

 

He decided that he would stick 11 players on the pitch and get them to conform to a system which was not appropriate to the fit players, let alone the unfit ones. Half the time, the players did not look like they understood their positions. No surprise that Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney had average or poor tournaments.

 

Another point is that the English media do not help by applying criticism dependent on who plays, not how they play indivudally, or as a team. Unfortunately, Sven was too gutless to resist this and the result was seen in the World Cup.

[shaq]

So a player who by his own high standards has a poor world cup, despite being declared by many to be the best in the world. And it's all down to an a manager not playing him in his natural position for his country, as he does to stunning effect for his club.

 

We could be talking about Gerrard, or we could be talking about Ronaldinho. Except Ronaldinho is still the best player in the world, despite his poor showing in the world cup, and according to our f***wit press, Gerrard is not even 'world class'.

 

I f****** despair.