The raging debate of who is the better midfielder has been officially closed today and Frank Lampard was the clear winner! and the proof is in the pudding: 2006/07: Goals (current) Lamps 19 Gerrard 8 2005/06: Goals Lamps 22 Gerrard 21 2004/05: Goals Lamps 23 Gerrard 10 Now for those Manc fans of who are saying Scholes is a better player, sorry but there is no statistical significance of comparing Scholes to Lampard! as Scholes is not even near him on stats board... let the matter rest.
Who cares about stats. Overall performances have been better for Scholes than Lampard if you dion think this you should watch more of Man Utd games.
<div class="quote_poster">C.Ronaldo Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Who cares about stats. Overall performances have been better for Scholes than Lampard if you dion think this you should watch more of Man Utd games.</div>lol, you're joking right? Were have you been the past 3 seasons.
Lets not forget that Lampard also scored more goals than John Terry. Who's the better player there then. See its not all about scoring goals, its all round play and Fat frank is nothing when he doesn't have a a Essien,Makelele type with him because he has no discipline which entitles him to get forward more hence more goals. If Chelsea didn't play such a mind numbingly boring style of play with 8 defenders on the pitch Fatboy would have to do a bit of what they call MIDFIELD work instead of just waiting to shoot from everywhere and hoping for yet ANOTHER deflection
Goals mean nothing, midfielders jobs are a fraction to score goals. Gerrard > Lampard. Get over it. Gerrard uses the ball instead of wasting woeful shots.
Lampard's job is to get goals you donut! Especially with the way Chelsea play him, BIG hence here: the reason he takes most freekicks. Let's not forget he was by far our best player leading up to the worldcup (england team) <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Lets not forget that Lampard also scored more goals than John Terry. Who's the better player there then. See its not all about scoring goals, its all round play and Fat frank is nothing when he doesn't have a a Essien,Makelele type with him because he has no discipline which entitles him to get forward more hence more goals. If Chelsea didn't play such a mind numbingly boring style of play with 8 defenders on the pitch Fatboy would have to do a bit of what they call MIDFIELD work instead of just waiting to shoot from everywhere and hoping for yet ANOTHER deflection</div>John Terry is a defender set out to defend! Like i said before, it's formation! Ronaldinho never gets back to defender - does that mean Gerrard is better then him? Your head must be hurting by now, so i'll stop there. Please try again when you can hold a decent debate.
Yes in my own estimation Gerrard is better than Ronaldinho. Although he may have a lot of foot skills and tricks I think Gerrard offers more to the team in the way of drive and passion alongside considerable skill. Put it this way if all the great players were put up for sale the queue for gerrards signature would be by far the longest and I know I said great players but i'll let fatboy join at the back out of sympathy. PS If you've got a headache stay away from Anfield because you will never recover
Lampard is a better player when it comes to poaching goals and twatting the ball hard, but Gerrard is a better team player. He is more confident when it comes to crosses and long balls
Overall Gerrard is more complete than Lampard. Gerrard can score, but he does not create chances for himself or give himself opportunity's, That is not his job, Lampard's is. So when you come to the conclusion than someone is better by having more goals you are wrong. Would you say McCarthy is better than Rooney? No. And who has more goals? McCarthy. So shut down, because i have just proved you wrong all over.
Thats Chelsea fans for you. Stats. Stats. Stats. I reckon they should watch more matches instead of researchin the internet for stats.
<div class="quote_poster">bringiton Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"><font size=""6"">Yes in my own estimation Gerrard is better than Ronaldinho</font>. Although he may have a lot of foot skills and tricks I think Gerrard offers more to the team in the way of drive and passion alongside considerable skill. Put it this way if all the great players were put up for sale the queue for gerrards signature would be by far the longest and I know I said great players but i'll let fatboy join at the back out of sympathy. PS If you've got a headache stay away from Anfield because you will never recover</div> now that sir is hilarious, it really is. how you can say that god only knows. anyway boys and bringiton ive posted it in another post where y2kyles been banging on about it so i will post it once again for anyone else Name Index Score Overall Index Rank Team 1 cristiano ronaldo 505 2 Manchester United 2 frank lampard 490 3 Chelsea 3 mikel arteta 457 4 Everton 4 gareth barry 456 5 Aston Villa 5 ryan giggs 402 13 Manchester United this shows that steven gerrard isnt even ranked in the top 13 midfielders in england, let alone in the premiership. if nayone wants to say, "well i bet they are biased" or " where have they got these from" like the scouse enjoy moaning about "Complex mathematical formulae were devised to calculate the value of each player's contribution, match by match. In simple terms, the Actim Index comprises six calculations: Calculation 1 - Assesses a player's contribution to a winning team, based on points won by the team when he appeared. Calculation 2 - Assesses a player's performance in each game, by allocating points for actions that positively contribute to a winning performance such as shots, tackles, clearances and saves. It also takes points away from players for negative actions such as yellow/red cards and shots off target. Calculation 3 - Allocates points based on time on the pitch. Calculation 4 - Allocates points for goal scorers. Calculation 5 - Allocates points for assists. Calculation 6 - Allocates points for clean sheets." "Isn't the Actim Index biased towards players who play for top clubs? The Actim Index aims to identify successful players who contribute to winning performances. However, rewards for team success are only part of the final rating. Players on losing teams can still score points in other areas. The view is that players deserve recognition for contributing to team success, but should still be able to score points if their team draws or loses. Jimmy Bullard finished the 2005/06 season in 13th spot (5.51 points) after a tremendous campaign with unfancied Wigan Athletic. The midfielder scored just four Barclays Premiership goals in his 3288 minutes on the pitch - compared to the 16 netted by Manchester United star Wayne Rooney (5.61 points), who ended the season in 11th place after playing just 62 minutes less. Goals do improve a player's score but you don't need to be a hot-shot to make an impact. Manchester United defender Rio Ferdinand finished fifth with 6.24 but only managed to net three goals, and John Terry who finished eighth netting only four times during Chelsea's championship winning campaign. Indeed, Steve Finnan of Liverpool finished 12th with a score of 5.59 scoring no goals from 33 appearances." ok now then this settles it because its not just goals like you fecking scouse have been maoning about, its passes, tackles so on and so forth so you cant use gerrard treks back to help tackles, because it clocks lampard doing that as well. so stfu you fecking scouse moaning soabs. you irritate the crap out of me saying that gerrard is better when hes not anymore
Maybe he should use his head. Maths has never had any apart in football apart from the score and time.
incandecio tikaboo son tikaboo haha only reason you think gerrard is better is because he kicks the ball bout 20 yards in front of him and absolutly legs it after it and looks more exicting than lampard when he's on the ball. WOW Gerrard is so much better than lampard because he looks more exicting when he gets on the ball. Oh dear i think this debate is wel and truly closed if thats all you are biasing gerrard's defence on. Lampard is a legend end of
how in the blue hell does it not, this is based purely on performance, seeing as your a scouse the only way youd of got a tv is to nick it you fucking scum, why dont you go win a cup for once. obviously with your scouse upbringing you didnt learn how to read and hence didnt read where the maths is coming from. can i have some one who has the capacity to be a neutral and read want to comment on the stats i provided?
<div class="quote_poster">Drew L Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">incandecio tikaboo son tikaboo haha only reason you think gerrard is better is because he kicks the ball bout 20 yards in front of him and absolutly legs it after it and looks more exicting than lampard when he's on the ball. WOW Gerrard is so much better than lampard because he looks more exicting when he gets on the ball. Oh dear i think this debate is wel and truly closed if thats all you are biasing gerrard's defence on. Lampard is a legend end of </div> i dont know whether to be offended or happy with myself, english please sir also by the by, i am making comments as a neutral as i dislike both teams
Watch a Liverpool game and you can appreciate how much Gerrard does, and you will see why he is better.
