Paul Scholes at his peak, or Steven Gerrard?

retired_Angela Adams · 09-06-2007, 06:54 PM

Mash owns all. But yeah, the ginger **** is inferior to Stevie.

retired_mrszip · 09-06-2007, 06:54 PM

Gerrard.

But clearly going to be Scholes due to the irrational Scouse hatred on the board.

retired_guidsy · 09-06-2007, 06:54 PM

The only reason Le Tissier was ever played in midfield was so that he didnt have to run to get the ball.

retired_tarareyes · 09-06-2007, 06:55 PM

Gerrard

Average Joe · 09-06-2007, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jep:
The fact that Gerrard has been in all kinds of pressure situations and still played very well is a massive plus for him. He has taken games by the scruff of the neck and won them by himself - Olympiakos is the best example of this for me. He never shirks his responsibility, and has proven his leadership skills on numerous occasions. He has the ability to play anywhere on the pitch and not look out of place, and if I was to find any weakness in his game it would be that he maybe doesn't trust his team mates enough. But, with the Liverpool sides he has played in over the past 4 years can you blame him ??

I would like to ask this question - could Scholes play anywhere else on the pitch and still not look out of place ?? I know Gerrard can because he has proved it.

Because being able to play in other positions is what makes a great midfielder.

Better right back than G Neville iirc?

retired_the gizmo · 09-06-2007, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rekwob Toille:
in the end it comes down to whether you need a player that'll help out defensively or not, as a second striker/attacking midfielder with a midfield four behind him i would always choose scholes, as someone in the midfield four i would always choose gerrard

like the henry/rvn debate, it was the simplest ever, henry is the better player and better at creating, rvn better at finishing and getting into the positions, and anyone that tried to compare them further was arguing for the sake of it

bowker so wise

retired_janearific · 09-06-2007, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Coldberg:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by jep:
The fact that Gerrard has been in all kinds of pressure situations and still played very well is a massive plus for him. He has taken games by the scruff of the neck and won them by himself - Olympiakos is the best example of this for me. He never shirks his responsibility, and has proven his leadership skills on numerous occasions. He has the ability to play anywhere on the pitch and not look out of place, and if I was to find any weakness in his game it would be that he maybe doesn't trust his team mates enough. But, with the Liverpool sides he has played in over the past 4 years can you blame him ??

I would like to ask this question - could Scholes play anywhere else on the pitch and still not look out of place ?? I know Gerrard can because he has proved it.

Because being able to play in other positions is what makes a great midfielder.

Better right back than G Neville iirc? </BLOCKQUOTE>

No - being more of an asset to a team is what makes you a better player.

The question doesn't ask who is the better midfielder, I read it as who is the better player. For me its Gerrard.

retired_erynelouise · 09-06-2007, 07:04 PM

Gerrard. He's better at 'what he does'. Scholes was supposed to be an attacking midfielder, yet lacked the vision, flair and technique to really become a top, top one. When it comes to box-to-box midfielders, Gerrard has the lot, and so if I was constructing a balanced side I would prefer Gerrard.

retired_kikiiscwazy · 09-06-2007, 07:07 PM

Me and DP did this threat two years ago.

retired_kikiiscwazy · 09-06-2007, 07:07 PM

This thread too :/

Paul Scholes at his peak, or Steven Gerrard?

Grab a beer, sit back and relax.

Paul Scholes at his peak, or Steven Gerrard?