Topic: Is Gerrard the best player we have ever had?

[redjed1]

Dalglish, Barnes and even Souness were great LFC players playing in a really good team. Is it easier to come across as a brilliant player when everyone around you is good as well?

Stevie is a bit like Billy Liddell - a shining light in a side of average players. Don't know whether Stevie is the best ever, but I'm glad he plays for us. If he didn't we'd be a really average side.

[betyar]

I think that this debate just goes around in circles, but I'll offer my two cents anyway.  Personally, I think that if you swapped their eras then neither player would be top-5 in Liverpool history.    (EDIT: maybe that's too strong.  But you'll understand my point if you read the rest of my post )

The King's talents were his ability to be calm in a frenetic game, to see the right pass, the right spot, etc, even when tackles were flying in everywhere.  "Cerebral" is probably the right word for it.  He had others to provide the control of the game - he provided the moment of magic that unlocked it.  But to excel as that kind of player, you need great players around you and you need to be in a team that controls most of its games, and that's what the King had.  In the current Liverpool side, Kenny would be looking around trying to link up with the right players and would certainly be great at it, but he wouldn't be nearly as great as he was in our late 70s/80s sides. 

Gerrard on the other hand is the all-action player.  Drive, pace, power, energy.  He thrives on "crisis" situations where he can make that great incision and change a game.  He loves breaking plays down, and then driving through it with his energy.  But in a side that already controlled the game, playing against teams who sit back, Gerrard would still be great, but again his talents wouldn't come to the fore as much as they do in the sides of the 2000s.

So for me, the greatness of Dalglish and Gerrard isn't just their abilities - it's that they both happened to exist in the era that best suited their talents.

(For me, Barnes doesn't even come into the debate.  He was a phenomenal player - one of the best, certainly - but his peak period was a lot shorter than either Gerrard or Dalglish, and in that peak I don't think that he was any better than those two in their peak, so it doesn't offset the shorter time.)

Good argument.. But. In Kennys era, the english clubs won 7 european cup and it would have been more if not for Heysel. The english game was really strong. Still, if you put Kenny Dalglish into any of our then rival teams, he is the best, undoubtedly. Think about Gerrard. Would he have been undoubtedly the best in that Arsenal? Or Manu? Or Chelsea? No way. Gerro had one or two years as good as almost any of Kenny's. I think you underestimate the importance of being the best player in a great team. What Kenny did, I mean hew as the most outstanding plyer of the best tam for god knows how many years is almost unequalled in football history. I can only think of Pele, Puskas (from his Honved era) and Di Stefano (Real) who could do that. Maybe Paolo Maldini was close but he was not the best Milan player in almost every year. I'm not saying that Dalglish is in their category because that would not be true but still he is well above Stevie in terms of quality.

One can say that a team  can make a player great. Right. However, in Kenny's and the above mentioned players' case I'd rather say that the team was made great by them as much they were by the team.

[Ikki.Fenikkusu]

Yeah, Gerrard probably would have been the best in those teams. He would walk into them really. Heck, he's beaten them with inferior players besides him when those teams, packed with stars, fell to his sword.

Answer this: could any of the so-called stars from those teams have won the CL like Gerrard did? Nope. Even Kenny can only dream of that kind of influence.

[betyar]

As much as i hate to say it but imagine Gerrard playing in Dalglish days...

he would be worlds best player then...hope you know what i mean...

Dalglish i never seen play in his days but football now is more complicated, more physicall and more fast than in past...

Gerrard in his day is best, he can make all, defend, attack, score with both foot, head.. if he is on top form, nobody can stop him...


edit: but of course King Kenny achieved much more than Gerrard, he is living legend..but comparing who is better one on one..is very complicated..

Yes, and Carl Lewis was faster than Jesse Owens. As I said here once, my coach in the youth team I played for said that we did tricks ad moves with the ball they never thought or dreamt of. Still, I never played in a national team and never played in a European Cup semi final. He did.

[betyar]

Yeah, Gerrard probably would have been the best in those teams. He would walk into them really. Heck, he's beaten them with inferior players besides him when those teams, packed with stars, fell to his sword.

Answer this: could any of the so-called stars from those teams have won the CL like Gerrard did? Nope. Even Kenny can only dream of that kind of influence.

Anderson, Fletcher, Carrick, Ryan Giggs(!!!) Do you know who they are? In four games in a row against Liverpool, they were the ones who nullified Gerrard. They have four players who could do that, including bloody Ryan Giggs!! For god's sake. Can you see 4 different MU players in that era who could annihilate Kenny Dalglish?

[Ron]

Yes, I think he is.

[Cockney Kid]

I think so yes. In my view he is possible the best midfielder in the world. Amazing passing, amazing shooting, can defend, can attack, box to box, can do a job in any position on the field. good with his head, good from set pieces. I mean i know messi is regarded the best player in the world but can he do the things gerrard can? im not sure he can. Is he an exeptional talent? yes.

[betyar]

Answer this: could any of the so-called stars from those teams have won the CL like Gerrard did? Nope. Even Kenny can only dream of that kind of influence.

I think so yes. In my view he is possible the best midfielder in the world. Amazing passing, amazing shooting, can defend, can attack, box to box, can do a job in any position on the field. good with his head, good from set pieces. I mean i know messi is regarded the best player in the world but can he do the things gerrard can? im not sure he can. Is he an exeptional talent? yes.

You guys should sometimes watch other leagues and our enemies, too:) Yes, Gerrar can do things that is very rare and his versatility is 10/10 for me too. But at passing he is far from the best. He's technique? There are a few much better. And yes, there are things Messi can't do and Gerrard can. But that is still a laughable comparison. Ask 100 really neutral football lovers (it is better the are not english or scouser) and if 20 says Gerrard is as good as Messi, then make a career as  hypnotizer.

[Dagger/Molby]

Call me a idiot or fool    I don't think Gerrard is the best player we ever had... Ian Rush will always be the best and most vital LFC-player - in my opinion. He just needed 1/8 of a chance - then he scored. We will never get a player like him again   

[subroc]

You guys should sometimes watch other leagues and our enemies, too:) Yes, Gerrar can do things that is very rare and his versatility is 10/10 for me too. But at passing he is far from the best. He's technique? There are a few much better. And yes, there are things Messi can't do and Gerrard can. But that is still a laughable comparison. Ask 100 really neutral football lovers (it is better the are not english or scouser) and if 20 says Gerrard is as good as Messi, then make a career as  hypnotizer.

It is inapt to compare him to Messi - they are very different kinds of players. When he is compared to the same kind of player like he is - I can only think of Bryan Robson who had the kind of effect that Gerrard had and still has on the right day. And Gerrard had more of every technical attribute that Robson ever had. 

[subroc]

Call me a idiot or fool    I don't think Gerrard is the best player we ever had... Ian Rush will always be the best and most vital LFC-player - in my opinion. He just needed 1/8 of a chance - then he scored. We will never get a player like him again 

What about Fowler in his pomp?

[myrlas]

No.

[Old No7]

The best we ever had?  I think its impossible comparings eras personally.

However he undoubtedly deserves to be included amongst the greastest players to have graced our club

[Rococo]

Never really been into comparisons like this.  He's a very very good player and the best we've had in his time playing. 

The game's changed so much since the days of Souness and Dalglish that it's impossible to tell.  I haven't seen enough of the likes of Heighway, Hunt, Liddell and many more before so can't really compare.  It's a shame youtube wasn't around back then.

[koolkamal]

Dalglish
Barnes
Gerrard

(By the end of his career Gerrard may overtake Barnes - but right not yet).

[Ikki.Fenikkusu]

You guys should sometimes watch other leagues and our enemies, too:) Yes, Gerrar can do things that is very rare and his versatility is 10/10 for me too. But at passing he is far from the best. He's technique? There are a few much better. And yes, there are things Messi can't do and Gerrard can. But that is still a laughable comparison. Ask 100 really neutral football lovers (it is better the are not english or scouser) and if 20 says Gerrard is as good as Messi, then make a career as  hypnotizer.

His passing is usually around 75-80% completion success - putting him alongside Fabregas and Lampard. This year it is 78% IIRC. More importantly, Gerrard has a lot of assists. Torres said that he has played with both Xavi and Gerrard and says Gerrard is Xavi's equal in passing but is a better player overall for all his other abilities.

If you were to rank players on all-round talent, the likes of Messi, Kaka, Dalgish and others can't compare to Gerrard. Gerrard might be slightly less prolific attacking-wise, but has them covered easily in other areas. If we are comparing players, why not mention that the aforementioned players suck at defending or heading? Why pick at Gerrad if he is slightly worse passer than Dalglish or scores less than Kaka?

The problem with the neutral fan is that he is likely unable to comprehend that step-overs aren't the be-all and end-all.

[ac]

Best player I have seen at Liverpool, by a mile. Dalglish and Barnes must have been some players (which they were) if they were better than him.

Only thing to be noted is that Gerrard played in sides that were and are much, much worse than the brilliant teams Dalglish and Barnes played in.

Agreed - although was going through some you tube clips the other day of digger and it looks like he was some player - would have loved to seen Barnes in his pomp in the flesh. Question for those that did, which modern player would you most liken to Digger in terms of ability?

[scatman]

Agreed - although was going through some you tube clips the other day of digger and it looks like he was some player - would have loved to seen Barnes in his pomp in the flesh. Question for those that did, which player would you most liken to Digger in terms of ability?

he is what Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi have now become, a winger who scores for fun and is equally adept on the outside as going on the inside. those sort of players don't come along very often, once or twice in a generation, this is where England fucked up.

[The 92A]

Don't let the shit football pundit detract from Souness's abilities, Barnsie and Kenny and Kevin Keegan all have a shout and are right up there and Gerrard has got his name up there but i wouldn't say best.

[Spanish Al]

It's debatable, seeing as he has been so fucking good in some shite teams, and certainly teams that were no way near as good as the ones in ther 70's and 80's.

[Jokerman]

Don't let the shit football pundit detract from Souness's abilities, Barnsie and Kenny and Kevin Keegan all have a shout and are right up there and Gerrard has got his name up there but i wouldn't say best.

It's amazing how little Keegan is mentioned in these kind of discussions. He was before my time, and I would probably have overlooked him too in the past, but I saw the 1977 European Cup Final for the first time a few years ago, and Keegan was absolutely immense in that game. His work rate, his strength, his intelligence, his movement ... all phenomenal. He should be right up there in this discussion.

[red_pete]

In all sports the contrast between greats of different eras is made, and often the argument put forward is that the sport has moved on to the point when the past great would not be as great in the current era, whereas the current would have been in the past.

The misses the fundamental point - you can only be as great as you can in your era.

What makes a great?  Natural ability allied with application.  King Kenny would play differently today - nutrition and training would probably account for greater athleticism, and tactics have changed.  But fundamentally he would still be the same great player.  True greats adapt to whatever the circumstances are.

(For me the the King is a bad example as I believe him to be one of the few footballing geniuses I have ever seen.  A genius, not just a great.)

The Stanley Matthews you see in black and white film would be rubbish in the PL - high speed tackles would dispossess him in seconds, covering defensive midfielders would close him out of a game. 

But today's Stanley Matthews would be in colour (maybe even 3D) and he would skip the high speed tackles, and twist the covering defensive midfielders inside out.  He would be just as great.

[Danyaals Kop]

Good argument.. But. In Kennys era, the english clubs won 7 european cup and it would have been more if not for Heysel. The english game was really strong. Still, if you put Kenny Dalglish into any of our then rival teams, he is the best, undoubtedly. Think about Gerrard. Would he have been undoubtedly the best in that Arsenal? Or Manu? Or Chelsea? No way. Gerro had one or two years as good as almost any of Kenny's. I think you underestimate the importance of being the best player in a great team. What Kenny did, I mean hew as the most outstanding plyer of the best tam for god knows how many years is almost unequalled in football history. I can only think of Pele, Puskas (from his Honved era) and Di Stefano (Real) who could do that. Maybe Paolo Maldini was close but he was not the best Milan player in almost every year. I'm not saying that Dalglish is in their category because that would not be true but still he is well above Stevie in terms of quality.

One can say that a team  can make a player great. Right. However, in Kenny's and the above mentioned players' case I'd rather say that the team was made great by them as much they were by the team.

That's a good read, that is.

[its cold in the stands]

Good argument.. But. In Kennys era, the english clubs won 7 european cup and it would have been more if not for Heysel. The english game was really strong. Still, if you put Kenny Dalglish into any of our then rival teams, he is the best, undoubtedly. Think about Gerrard. Would he have been undoubtedly the best in that Arsenal? Or Manu? Or Chelsea? No way. Gerro had one or two years as good as almost any of Kenny's. I think you underestimate the importance of being the best player in a great team. What Kenny did, I mean hew as the most outstanding plyer of the best tam for god knows how many years is almost unequalled in football history. I can only think of Pele, Puskas (from his Honved era) and Di Stefano (Real) who could do that. Maybe Paolo Maldini was close but he was not the best Milan player in almost every year. I'm not saying that Dalglish is in their category because that would not be true but still he is well above Stevie in terms of quality.

One can say that a team  can make a player great. Right. However, in Kenny's and the above mentioned players' case I'd rather say that the team was made great by them as much they were by the team.

come off it mate, dalglish`s peak was nowhere near as long as gerrards, there`s a lot of mythology in your post.
for a start you make out that dalglish was clearly the best player in the team and in the league for years and years.
he wasnt, he joined for the 77-78 season and for 2/3 years he was probably our best player but i`d argue by the time 80/81 came around souness was our best player (by 83 rush would have a shout too), by 83 dalglish was well into his 30`s and was clearly past his best.
dalglish didnt join the club until he was 27 remember.
i saw dalglish have plenty of shite games but when you play in a great side someone else steps up to the plate and the performance is forgotten.
steven gerrard is for me, the best player i`ve ever seen in a red shirt, and i`m one of those people who always think the past was the best but i`ve got to be fair to him, a lot of people are comparing gerrard to the myth of dalglish, gerrard wont win that contest but having seen all of dalglish`s career at anfield i`m comparing gerrard to dalglish the player and imo gerrard is better.
at the end of the day they are 2 fantastic players.

[kasperoff]

I'd say so.

[alfonso]

Going to sound like an old fart now, but if all the fuss about Gareth Bale is anything to go by, can you imagine Barnes being around today?
Jesus... if Bale is now 'worth' £40m, what price Barnes?!
 

I know, he was better than Ronaldo ( the bellend one) I suppose like Messi today.

Bale has had a couple of good games against an aging Inter team whose coach could have used slightly different tactics to nullify him. And he is the new savior.

Anyway, Gerrard - No. There are a few I would put ahead of him.
Great player and if I had a choice of the 79 team and Gerrard available, I wouldn't pick him.

It would be nice to see what will be a legend pick up a league medal, but I can't see it happening unless it's a Byran Robson job who picked his up with the mancs as he was about to draw his pension.

[alfonso]

It's amazing how little Keegan is mentioned in these kind of discussions. He was before my time, and I would probably have overlooked him too in the past, but I saw the 1977 European Cup Final for the first time a few years ago, and Keegan was absolutely immense in that game. His work rate, his strength, his intelligence, his movement ... all phenomenal. He should be right up there in this discussion.

He was a top top player who was European footballer of the year twice.
And we tried to sign him back to play alongside Dalglish.
But he wanted something different and joined Southampton.

[Barney_Rubble]

He was a top top player who was European footballer of the year twice.
And we tried to sign him back to play alongside Dalglish.
But he wanted something different more money and joined Southampton.

He never made any secret of looking after number one first.

Brilliant player and a legend for us with nothing more to prove, so who can blame him really?

Only what everybody else does anyway.

[betyar]

It is inapt to compare him to Messi - they are very different kinds of players. When he is compared to the same kind of player like he is - I can only think of Bryan Robson who had the kind of effect that Gerrard had and still has on the right day. And Gerrard had more of every technical attribute that Robson ever had. 

Yes, you are right. It was not me who brought up Messi. As for Robson and Gerrard, agree, again. 

[alfonso]

come off it mate, dalglish`s peak was nowhere near as long as gerrards, there`s a lot of mythology in your post.
for a start you make out that dalglish was clearly the best player in the team and in the league for years and years.
he wasnt, he joined for the 77-78 season and for 2/3 years he was probably our best player but i`d argue by the time 80/81 came around souness was our best player (by 83 rush would have a shout too), by 83 dalglish was well into his 30`s and was clearly past his best.
dalglish didnt join the club until he was 27 remember.
i saw dalglish have plenty of shite games but when you play in a great side someone else steps up to the plate and the performance is forgotten.
steven gerrard is for me, the best player i`ve ever seen in a red shirt, and i`m one of those people who always think the past was the best but i`ve got to be fair to him, a lot of people are comparing gerrard to the myth of dalglish, gerrard wont win that contest but having seen all of dalglish`s career at anfield i`m comparing gerrard to dalglish the player and imo gerrard is better.
at the end of the day they are 2 fantastic players.

I agree Dalglish had a few games where he played bad. Joe Fagan even dropped him.
But I wouldn't say he was 'well past his best' in his 30s. The double season when he came back into the team had a huge effect as we became champions after it looked like Everton would retain the league.

But Gerrard has also had his fair share of bad games where he disappears and you wonder why he is the captain. Chelsea away a few years ago springs to mind when Reina had an altercation with Terry. Our captain was nowhere to be seen.
I immediately though what would Souness have done? He would have had Terry by the scruff of the neck. But you can't compare Gerrard as a captain to Souness our best ever captain.

[john_mac]

I don't think he is, that crown will, forever, sit on the head of a Mr Dalglish.

He is, however, a brilliant player who could stand toe to toe with any player in our, or any other clubs, history- without looking out of place. Often under-rated by our own, god knows why? A fine player.

[longtimered]

We have had very few players that would walk into any team in world football for a period of 10 years.I can only think of two/three others in my time-Liddell,,Dalglish and Sounness (though not with us for 10 years).Gerrard is a phenomenal player by any standards.

[geoffstrong 1937-2013 RIP]

this is a age thing and about as accurate as talking about a length of string we have had many great players, however people will always put current players near the top of any list, they forget how good the former players were!

Best for me (and it can only be personal opinions:

Emlyn
Kenny
these two are head and shoulders above the rest,

then perm anyone from

Gerrard, Callaghan, Keegan, Souness, Elisha Scott, Phil Neal, Tommy Smith, Hansen, Lawler, Billy Whizz.

All either game changers or just the embodiment of what this club stands for in football.

[Sat1]

Kenny/Barnes
Gerrard

[john_mac]

this is a age thing and about as accurate as talking about a length of string we have had many great players, however people will always put current players near the top of any list, they forget how good the former players were!

Best for me (and it can only be personal opinions:

Emlyn
Kenny
these two are head and shoulders above the rest,

then perm anyone from

Gerrard, Callaghan, Keegan, Souness, Elisha Scott, Phil Neal, Tommy Smith, Hansen, Lawler, Billy Whizz.

All either game changers or just the embodiment of what this club stands for in football.

Just can't believe that you do not include Barnes in that list

[Tony18:5]

Top 3 for me...

and I was privileged enough to see Rush, Dalglish, Barnes, Hansen, Souness, Keegan et al...

[geoffstrong 1937-2013 RIP]

Just can't believe that you do not include Barnes in that list

sorry john forgot to add Digger!

[Young Young]

Yes!

[Xabisfeet]

Only started going the match at the fag end of Kenny's career so I can't really compare.  Since then we've had a good number of world class players at the top of their game play for us:  Barnes, Fowler, Owen, McManaman, but all faded after a few seasons at the highest level.  Gerrard has been consistently been one of the worlds best for 6,7+ years and it's been a privilage to be involved.  I'll miss him when he's gone

[JasbinderX]

John Barnes was the greatest ever in his prime, before injuries took their toll.

Those three seasons from 87-90 were the best i've ever seen from an individual player.