http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11662/9859150/frank-lampard-turned-himself-into-the-ultimate-midfield-machine

Good article.  I like this bit - "Lampard has often lost the battle for attention, while winning the trophy war.

Gerrard is the hero who wins games on his own. And yet, Lampard has scored more goals at club and international level. Paul Scholes, meanwhile, is regarded as the pass master. But look at their assist tallies and Lampard’s is more than double that of the archetypal midfield architect."

No media love for Lampard.... an end to a career in English football that has seen him notch up the second most Premier League appearances, the fourth most Premier League goals and the third most Premier League assists.

 

It was much the same when Lampard scored his 100th Premier League goal. When Scholes did it Sky went completely nuts and had days of tributes. It was much more muted when Frank reached 100, even though he did it in half as many games.

It was much the same when Lampard scored his 100th Premier League goal. When Scholes did it Sky went completely nuts and had days of tributes. It was much more muted when Frank reached 100, even though he did it in half as many games.

 

Did it even get a mention when he overtook Thierry Henry on Premier League's all time top scorers list?

Edited May 22, 201511 yr by Maksimov

Phil McNulty has reignited the Lampard vs Gerrard debate on the BBC

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32734819

 

Essentially he ends with:

 

But if a choice has to be made it would be Gerrard. Just. Just for that ability to change a game in an instant which is the preserve of true greatness.

 

Despite the articles accompanying graphic being:

 

 

All I would say to McNulty's argument is:

 

As I've said before, there's this whole mythology surrounding him and Liverpool in the media which means by default they will always pick Gerrard. It doesn't matter that Lamps got a CL final goal, semi final goals, world class assist for Rami vs Barca, FA cup final winner, or was vice captain and a leader, he didn't run around at 100 mph playing from instinct putting in crunching tackles and shouting at teammates, all the things English football love. Gerrard was a plucky looser, he won a single league cup since 2005, never won the league and bottled his own chance with a sh*te touch leading to a slip, again English love this tragic hero stuff. Lampard's career only went up and even into their twilight Lampard was the more effective payer, just look at his minutes per goal this season compared to what Stevie Me has been doing for the last few years, aimless hollywood passes and long rangers trying to pretend it's still 2006. It doesn't matter that the Liverpool 07-09 side were better than the Chelsea side that won the 2012 FA cup and CL, because it goes against the narrative that Lamps only won more because he had a better team around him. 

Phil McNulty has reignited the Lampard vs Gerrard debate on the BBC

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32734819

 

Essentially he ends with:

 

But if a choice has to be made it would be Gerrard. Just. Just for that ability to change a game in an instant which is the preserve of true greatness.

 

Despite the articles accompanying graphic being:

 

 

All I would say to McNulty's argument is:

 

 

Or this:

 

 

That changed a game in an instant.

Point being why does it have to be Lampard OR Gerrard?

Can't we celebrate them both in their final season in the league rather than bringing up a 10 year old debate?

One of the most heard arguments is that Gerrard was the captain and the leader. To what did he lead Liverpool exactly? A few fa and league cups? He led them through years and years of mediocrity. Big f**king deal.

I'd take Super Frank over Stevie Me any day of the week. Even at the age of 36.

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/579179/Frank-Lampard-Chelsea-Man-City-Mourinho-Ancelotti

Nice little interview.

Apparently 65% of TalkSport listeners think Gerrard is the bigger legend, I'm sure Lampard will be gutted as he polishes his medals

Apparently 65% of TalkSport listeners think Gerrard is the bigger legend, I'm sure Lampard will be gutted as he polishes his medals

 

Those listeners probably thinking Gerrard is bigger legend because he hasn't left Liverpool for different English club (which we don't know yet). For me Franky is always gonna be, I don't remember any moment that he ruined for Chelsea to win the title or something that hurts the fans. His move to Man City was dirty, but I'm sure he didn't really mean to do so.

The BBC column is dreadful. Lampard has more goals, more assists, more appearances and more trophies.So what is the conclusion? Gerrard because he could change a big game in a flash apparently. That goal he scored against us the other week was only his second against Chelsea in 40 odd games. Where were his flashes of inspiration in all of those games? Were they not big games?

I think Gerrard is getting all the plaudits because he carried the Liverpool team for the best part of 15 years. Lampard was an excellent player in an already strong squad. If you had to name the best Liverpool player in each of the last 15 seasons you would probably say Gerrard for 10 or so - Lampard was probably our best player once or twice.

I don't really get all the praise heaped on Gerrard. Let's be honest, if he had come to Chelsea he would have been a smaller fish in a bigger pond and the media wouldn't be doing all this send off malarky as a result.

Also, why the sudden change of tune

I think Gerrard is getting all the plaudits because he carried the Liverpool team for the best part of 15 years. Lampard was an excellent player in an already strong squad. If you had to name the best Liverpool player in each of the last 15 seasons you would probably say Gerrard for 10 or so - Lampard was probably our best player once or twice.

I don't really get all the praise heaped on Gerrard. Let's be honest, if he had come to Chelsea he would have been a smaller fish in a bigger pond and the media wouldn't be doing all this send off malarky as a result.

They've had plenty of good players. Mascherano, Torres, Alonso, Suarez, Fowler, Owen, Coutinho etc. Why are people saying he was only ever surrounded by mediocre players? I don't remember Liverpool fans saying their teams were complete cack at the time.

Also, why the sudden change of tune

They've had plenty of good players. Mascherano, Torres, Alonso, Suarez, Fowler, Owen, Coutinho etc. Why are people saying he was only ever surrounded by mediocre players? I don't remember Liverpool fans saying their teams were complete cack at the time.

Who said they were mediocre players ? Also, you are naming players who came ( won nothing much) and went , but were not mainstays for the majority of Gerrards tenure ( hence 'best part') We had plenty of seasoned players during Lampards - Terry , Cole, Cech, Drogba to name a few - all of who could hold a candle to Lampard , player wise.

Who said they were mediocre players ? Also, you are naming players who came ( won nothing much) and went , but were not mainstays for the majority of Gerrards tenure ( hence 'best part') We had plenty of seasoned players during Lampards - Terry , Cole, Cech, Drogba to name a few - all of who could hold a candle to Lampard , player wise.

Plenty of people have said Gerrard was constantly surrounded by mediocre players which simply isn't true. They are making out he was left to "do it all on his own". I disagree with that. And even if it were true, since 2006 he obviously hasn't done his one man show very well as they've won 1 league cup in that time.

If Gerrard was carrying Liverpool all these years then he wasn't doing a particularly good job of it. One League Cup win in the last nine years. You have to go back further than that for all the legendary performances against Milan, Olympiakos and West Ham that everyone drones on about. Ironically the season where closest they came to winning the league while he was there, it was mostly down to other players while he just f*cked it up it for them.

Phil McNulty has reignited the Lampard vs Gerrard debate on the BBC

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32734819

 

Essentially he ends with:

 

But if a choice has to be made it would be Gerrard. Just. Just for that ability to change a game in an instant which is the preserve of true greatness.

 

Despite the articles accompanying graphic being:

 

 

All I would say to McNulty's argument is:

 

 

 

Or this:

 

 

That changed a game in an instant.

 

What about this play right here?

First Supa Frank dispossess Messi (many people would argue the Best there ever was). Then he looks up & sends a perfect 50 yard lob to the on rushing Ramires, who stretches the Barca defense & finds The Great DD. The Footie IQ of Supa Frank is 2nd to none. I am just glad I had the chance to see him perform for CFC. I will never get mad at Frank. Always a True CFC Legend!!!

According to a liverpool friend, Gerrard was the better scorer, because he played in a worse team. How does Lampard playing in a better team, take away from his goal scoring ability, or how does a worse team somehow make Gerrard the better finisher, honestly these deluded dippers.

So...based on that argument...Gerrard was better than inesta and xavi because those two played in a superb team of the last 15 years

So Gerrard played fewer games, scored a lot fewer Premiership goals, fewer CL goals, fewer international goals, made fewer assists, won fewer trophies. But he had these 'career-defining' moments  in his career (I make it three, all 9 and 10 years ago) that somehow make you forget all the howlers, all the days when he didn't turn up, all the ridiculous look-at-me passes and shots that ended up miles off target. If you play 700 games, I think three games where you had a signficant and memorable impact is pretty underwhelming.

 

I really am genuinely bewildered by all this Gerrard sh!te.

Can't they just both be excellent players? They're actually different types of player, they played in different teams (of vastly different quality at times) but are both legends in the minds of their supporters. Isn't that the most important thing?

Yes. Provided the media give equal credit to them at the end of their careers. Has that been remotely the case?

Yes. Provided the media give equal credit to them at the end of their careers. Has that been remotely the case?

Who cares what 'the media'says?

How about what people you respect think? Individual pundits, writers and supporters? Isn't that most important?

Apparently haha, my friend is a little deluded, typical dipper really.

So...based on that argument...Gerrard was better than inesta and xavi because those two played in a superb team of the last 15 years