Steven Gerrard ......

[Dublinred4ever]

............ is the most complete footballer Liverpool have ever produced.

 

Discuss

[josemisuncle]

State the bleeding obvious why don't you!!!!!!!!!1

[kenny7]

If he'd come through under Souness or Evans, would he be at the standard he is now?

[Guest Paris 81]

He did come through under Roy didn't he?

[Tones]

He did come through under Roy didn't he?

 

Yes

[Benitez]

He did come through under Roy didn't he?

 

 

Not really.

[Earl Hafler]

His debut about a week after Roy left ?

 

No, Roy had nothing to do with it.

[Guest Paris 81]

I'm sure Roy overseen his development.

[Scally Bob]

Gerrard stagnated under Houllier who worked him like a mule to cover the difficiencies of a poor squad. There's still evidence of that when Gerrard tries to do too much but he now developing as he should.

 

He does not dominate every big game the way Souness did. Nothing intimidated Souness and the bigger the occasion the better he was. He would have laughed at Keane, Veiera and Chelsea if he was playing now. Not one player ever got the better of Souness.

 

Kenny is quite simply the finest ever to have had the privelege of wearing the Liver Bird though.

[Benitez]

I don't think it was Houllier making Gerrard run around like a loon to be honest Thats just the sort of player he is - nothing wrong with that, he's just a hugely energetic machine of a player - that was his natural way of playing.

 

What Houllier didn't do - but what Rafa has - is to make him a more diciplined player. Thats the key as far as I'm concerned with the different coaching.

 

I actually thought that first game SteG played for England under Mcclaren - he reminded me of how he was for us under GH. He was trying to do to much. And ended up actually getting in the way of other players a few times, which is what used to annoy me with him here a bit, cos it could be a hindrance rather than a help sometimes.

 

Rafa has made him such a more diciplined player now - he directs his energy now into doing the things he is best at. And leaving the rest to other players who do that job better. And he's a far better player for it.

[Guest Paris 81]

Souness was a playmaker/defensive/attacking midfielder all rolled into one. Gerrard can play that role well, even for England, but he's been used in a more one dimensional, attacking role for the past few years and hasn't quite developed the defensive side of his game as he should have.

Edited September 2, 2006 by Paris 81

[Dublinred4ever]

The point I was getting at was, is he the most COMPLETE footballer we've had.

 

He seems to be able to do everything exceptionally well. Whereas Rushie was one of the greatest finishers, or Souness could dominate midfield and shoot from distance I think Stevie can literally do everything, aside from playing in goal as someone pointed out.

 

Watching the 2005/2006 season review last night and the variety of his goals was incredible. What stood out for me was the one he scored against the Barcodes away.

 

Burst his b****x running onto a thru ball that never came, readjusted his position for the subsequent cross, controlled the ball with the deftest header to clear a defender and immediately moved to recieve the return ball from Crouch before slotting it home in the bottom corner.

 

Made it look effortless.

 

How people can rate Lampard as a better footballer is beyond me

[Earl Hafler]

Gerrard stagnated under Houllier who worked him like a mule to cover the difficiencies of a poor squad. There's still evidence of that when Gerrard tries to do too much but he now developing as he should.

 

He does not dominate every big game the way Souness did. Nothing intimidated Souness and the bigger the occasion the better he was. He would have laughed at Keane, Veiera and Chelsea if he was playing now. Not one player ever got the better of Souness.

 

Kenny is quite simply the finest ever to have had the privelege of wearing the Liver Bird though.

 

He still tries to do too much but that has gradually been worked on by Rafa and the staff and also the improvement in quality of those around him.

 

And he doesn't dominate in the big games like The Best Player In The World should. Outplayed by O'Shea, Fletcher and Gigg in midfield ffs and matched by Reo Coker in their last couple of battles.

 

Wonderful player but the whitewashing on these forums is what the same people laugh at the Mancs for and refer to themselves as the most knowledgable fans in the world.

[Scally Bob]

The point I was getting at was, is he the most COMPLETE footballer we've had.

 

Stevie Nicol was the best all-rounder.

[Gomez]

His debut about a week after Roy left ?

 

No, Roy had nothing to do with it.

 

I'm sure I read somewhere that promoting SG to Melwood was GH's doing after he'd been down to the Academy to look at another player (possibly Davy Thompson) at the suggestion of Evans.

 

Either way, his early development would have been Steve Heighway, when he got to Melwood it would have been almost all Houllier, Evans can claim very little credit I would guess.

 

He's got even better under Rafa. He's been very lucky to have two such managers to progress under.

Edited September 2, 2006 by Gomez

[Guest Paris 81]

I'm sure Roy would have been involved. He was a brilliant coach and could spot a player.

 

Houllier will take the credit though, didn't he always.

[Dublinred4ever]

Well that's a different question - I'm saying he was a better player.

 

The only ones I'd compare for versatility - if that's what you mean - are Emlyn Hughes, as I said earlier - and as someone else said Steve Nicol maybe.

It's not madness. Gerrard is a fantastic attacker, no doubt about that, but to say he's a better allround player than Lawrenson is just madness.

 

A fantastic attacker who can also tackle, track back, head well, run all day, play at the back if needed no problem and still shine. I know Lawrenson played in midfield for Ireland on occasion but theres no way I'd say he had the versatility and range of skills Gerrard does.

 

I suppose it's great that we've had so many top quality players that we can have this debate.

 

Wonder what they talk about on Everton forums

[Guest Paris 81]

to say he's a better allround player than Lawrenson is just madness.

 

I'm staggered.

[_00_deathscar]

Wonder what they talk about on Everton forums

 

"David Weir - shytest player we've ever produced?

 

Discuss."

 

And ofcourse, like we've having a reasoned debate with quite a few names being offered up for that particular honour, so will they.

[John am Rhein]

A fantastic attacker who can also tackle, track back, head well, run all day, play at the back if needed no problem and still shine. I know Lawrenson played in midfield for Ireland on occasion but theres no way I'd say he had the versatility and range of skills Gerrard does.

 

Well that's right. Gerrard is more versatile than Lawrenson was - but Gerrard (IMO) was a better player than Gerrard is, although not by that far.

 

I've always rated our best players as:

 

1 Dalglish

2 Lawrenson

3 Souness*

4 Barnes*

5 Rush*

 

* not necessarily in that order.

 

I'd say now Gerrard is challenging for the number 3 spot on that list. By then end of his career he might make number 2, but I'd be very surprised if he made number 1. And remember I'm talking about who's the BEST player not who's the most versatile player.

[Dublinred4ever]

Well that's right. Gerrard is more versatile than Lawrenson was - but Gerrard (IMO) was a better player than Gerrard is, although not by that far.

 

I've always rated our best players as:

 

1 Dalglish

2 Lawrenson

3 Souness*

4 Barnes*

5 Rush*

 

* not necessarily in that order.

 

I'd say now Gerrard is challenging for the number 3 spot on that list. By then end of his career he might make number 2, but I'd be very surprised if he made number 1. And remember I'm talking about who's the BEST player not who's the most versatile player.

 

Would Fowler in his first spell at the club not have edged lawrenson? Beardsley?

[smithdown]

Well that's right. Gerrard is more versatile than Lawrenson was - but Gerrard (IMO) was a better player than Gerrard is, although not by that far.

 

I've always rated our best players as:

 

1 Dalglish

2 Lawrenson

3 Souness*

4 Barnes*

5 Rush*

 

* not necessarily in that order.

 

I'd say now Gerrard is challenging for the number 3 spot on that list. By then end of his career he might make number 2, but I'd be very surprised if he made number 1. And remember I'm talking about who's the BEST player not who's the most versatile player.

 

 

You rate Lawro above Alan Hansen, John?

 

I'd well have Lawrenson in the top 10 that I've seen but Jocky, Molby and Clemence would be above him in my book.

[Guest Paris 81]

I'm sorry, I know it's about personal opinions, but how can you possibly say that Mark Lawrenson was a better footballer than Souness, Rush, Hansen, Barnes and Gerrard?

 

Does anyone remember how many seasons Lawro played for us as first choice?

Edited September 2, 2006 by Paris 81

[fred milne]

I'd well have Lawrenson in the top 10 that I've seen but Jocky, Molby and Clemence would be above him in my book.

Molby wouldn't get near my top 10.

 

Its not that he didn't have great natural ability but he was only a key player for 2 seasons (85-6 and 86-7). He never recovered his place in midfield when Barnes arrived in 87 and Whelan moved inside.

[Bjarkinn]

6 seasons

 

81-87

Edited September 2, 2006 by Bjarkinn