Lampard vs Gerrard - Who was the better player? | BBC Sounds

Gerrard.

Gerrard was a better all round player

Poor knowledge from micah, Gerrard doesn't dictate the tempo as well. That role belongs to Scholes.

Gerrard was Liverpool.
Lampard wasn't Chelsea.
Scholes wasn't United.

Lampard Scored more, Assisted more and won more trophies…

If im going to war gerrard is right there beside me... do not tell me any different who the better footballer is...for me keane ,gerrard and de bryune are in the all time 11 premier league

Steven Gerrard is the better player. Lampard played with Essien, Makalele, Ballack , Deco, Obi Mikel in midfield while Gerrard had only Alonso, Mascherano and Coutinho in his midifield career. Gerrard had to consistently play with average players and had to carry Liverpool out of trouble time and time again.

#10 Shearer #14 Henry

#11 Giggsy #8 Lamps #4 Stevie G CR7

#3 A. Cole #5 Ferdinand #15 Vidic #2 G. Neville

#1 Schmeichel

Gerrard because I think he still didn't fulfil his potential he had more to give under a better manager and in a better team

I'm neither a Chelsea nor Liverpool fan. My favourite team is FC Barcelona but as a fan of the game I can confidently say that Gerrard is the better player. Gerrard was in a team with very little stars whereas Lampard was surrounded by superstars in a Chelsea side led by Mourinho. Gerrard at times won games single handedly for Liverpool.

Gerrard was a better player than lampard, but lampard scored goals with a strong Chelsea team, Gerrard in an average Liverpool team saved Liverpool on many occasions 2 different abilities, but Gerrard for me

Gerrard all day

Last time i checked its the gols that wins matches ..I'll give it Gerrard for that UCL win that was phenomenal...but lampard consistently kept chelsea in the top 4 and carried to our 1st UCL win in 2012... Not to mention the most gols scored by a midfilder period.

Lampard was better CM...go away with your ifs and buts nonsense

Gerrard is technically better but i will go with Lamps for his consistency scoring abilities

If they were greatest midfielders than why did they fail in national team? Why didn’t they win World Cup?

Scholes should be nowhere near this conversation. He's miles ahead of them both

micah arguing about something all three agreed on prior to said argument

I'd take Gerrard over Lampard (just) but I think Scholes was better than both of them.

I hate revisionist history especially by Chelsea fans, talking about how Chelsea would not be worse off without Lampard. That’s because he has never missed out a game you melt. We have never seen a worse off Chelsea without Lamps, because he always played. Thats how important he was. He holds the record for the most consecutive apps for an outfield player in the PL by 50 games (164 games).

I hate how Gerrard is painted as the well-rounded player when Lampard was able to do the things Gerrard did except that he went berserk as a goalscorer and assist maker. What midfielder records at least 20 goals (not g+a, but goals specifically) for 5 seasons, hitting double digits goals every season for 10 years?

Why not highlight the fact that despite the quality of that Chelsea team, Lampard was the best player. Even going so far to almost winning both the Ballon d’Or and World Player of the Year? Only second to prime Ronaldinho. No other English player came closer than that.

Ken vs Ryu

All this talk about gerrard changing the course of a match, ofcourse he did the team was built around him... Just because lampard didnt shout and scream and give it the biggun he doesnt get a look in? Look at the stats, goals, trophies, also the amount of matches lampard would play in a season compared to gerrard considering when he was in the squad because chelsea would be in all 4 comps late on into the year. Youd be better off with a reliable lampard all day.

Always Gerrard. Not even a debate. Scholes is better than lampard too

Bar Scholes, and even then it's arguable, Gerrard is bar far the greatest midfield talent England has produced, people forget Chelsea wanted him, Real Madrid wanted him, but he stayed loyal, and with all due respect to his teammates at Liverpool, without Gerrard, some of those sides are mid table at BEST, he was the difference, Lampard was fantastic, but for me Gerrard is in a different tier altogether

Steven Gerrard was Graeme Souness with pace and Graeme Souness just like Gerrard was an all-rounder. Both could do everything. Lampard just like Bobby Charlton was a one trick pony. Scholes was a good player but if he is measured up against the best deep lying playmakers ever he falls short, the likes of Pirlo, Alonso, Molby, Thiago Alcantara, Scholes is nowhere near them.

I watched Gerrard play every outfield position like he owned it. He could score goals with both feet and his head. He could ping a ball sweetly from 5 yards to 65 yards. He could defend, attack, go past players, he could tackle. Stevie G didn't have world class players around him throughout his Liverpool career either. There was periods when he did but not regularly like lampard and scholes had.

Stevie G in my opinion was the complete player. He could do it all. Even Messi can't do all that I've described Stevie G of doing.

Lampard and scholes could not do all of that.

For me its always Gerrard he carried Liverpool for many years.

As a neutral, its gerrard. Could do everything, the other two couldn't. Throw in the leadership as well. Gerrard was in the pfa team of the year EIGHT times. The other two didn't get close to that.

Lampard was a great, Chelsea the best player Ever but Gerrard was better than him.

neither. the answer is paul scholes.

Stevie carried liverpool so long time on his own, never really had a chance to be among so many great players or to be managed by great managers like mou, fergie, etc. Still he could prove his worth especially in the range of 2004-2012 (before bad injury). In his prime, almost all the great manager all over the world would love to see him in their squad as it would obviously turned every team to be the better side. Unfortunately, his loyalty made him not able to lifted the trophy. If you say that he was worse than player like lamps scholes and keane just because he never won trophy, he would just won every trophy if he joined chelsea, inter, madrid and bayern as he turned them all down. That logic also make nonsense as so many player like anderson, fletcher, essien won more trophy than stevie. But still it cant be the reason they are a better player than stevie.
meanwhile lamps, keane and scholes surrounded by great player over his time. Keane scholes lamps would just looked shite if he played for liverpool in those era.
The last thing, if you say lampard is better than gerrard because of the goals and assist, then by that logic scholes and keane is way worse than gerrard regardless of he still managed to contribute to the defensive areas(box to box player).
Those players are great, just different type of plays,teams and a bit of era. So enjoy their legacy rather than comparing each other especially by those stats.. :)

Answer is of course... Paul Scholes

Gerrard all day, any day, and twice on Sundays.

Stivie g is a great football player but he has never made the top three as the worlds best player lamps did came in second to Ronaldinho

If you made Gerrard be what Lampard was, I think he would have done just as well. If you made Lampard be what Gerrard was, I doubt he would have done just as well.

Lampard 🐐

who was better lampard or gerrard? answer paul scholes

The media love Liverpool and hate Chelsea, If Lampard played for Liverpool people would say Lampard is better.

Gerrard is like Lampard and Scholes merged into one. Complete, but confused.

Gerrard is all time the best midfielder in EPL!

Most naturally gifted is Scholes

GERRARD EASY ❤

Steven Gerrard any day any time because Liverpool haven’t replaced him in 25 years but Lampard still a world glass player and played 218 England games together and 50 goals between them incredible players.

Secanrio. England vs Germany. All subs used. England's right back comes off injured, can't replace. Midfield is lamoard, Gerrard and scholes. Who would you move to RB so they can do at least a solid job.

Only Gerrard won the cl with very very average teammates.. Facts...look at harry kane for god sake.. He plays with far better teammates than gerrard and he is trophyless..
Facts and facts dont lie...Steven Gerrard carried a mediocre team at best to won the freaking cl against the best team ever arguably losing 3-0 at half time.. Why are we even debating these?

Micah Richards, a premier league winning professional, a NEUTRAL in this debate with no ties to either Liverpool or Chelsea, who has played and trained with both Gerrard and Lampard live, therefore would have the best insight and better insight than any of us, who has played at a higher level than any of those Chelsea twitter nerds will ever play at, has just said its chalk and cheese when comparing the two and said Gerrard is better, end of debate, not like there ever was one.

Fact: Lampard has more PL goals than Henry.

Completely agree with Micah Richards here, and honestly, that’s the most sense I’ve ever heard him talk. How can you compare Lampard or Scholes to Gerrard. Gerrard was the complete player who could literally do anything or play anywhere and could singlehandedly and routinely change the course of a match on his own. The other two were great at what they did, but they did not have that sort of impact on a game in general. It’s not a debate.

Take either Scholes or Lampard and put them in the Liverpool team Stevie played in… would they still be the legends they are