Steven Gerrard - Centre Midfielder?

[Eds]

Think it's a good idea to take this discussion out of other threads and stick it in one thread, tidy others up.

If the mods disapprove, just close it.

 

[Mike.]

Think it's a good idea to take this discussion out of other threads and stick it in one thread, tidy others up.

If the mods disapprove, just close it.

oh ed why would you make this? you know my view on gerrard and central midfield

 

[Eds]

I know your view, and I know my view. It's certainly makes a good debate and therefore deserves a thread.

 

[Mike.]

I know your view, and I know my view. It's certainly makes a good debate and therefore deserves a thread.

lol agreed. im staying out of this one though cos i cant see us ever agreeing

 

[Eds]

His defensive side is completely wasted in the CAM or Second Striker role, and Steven Gerrard is not shabby defensively.

 

[frederickooo]

he can play anywhere and still be the best player on the pitch

 

[CJACKO11]

hes best position is behind the striker, especialy for pool because of his relationship he has with torres. gerrard is a player who bursts into life, not a typical centre midfielder like Lampard.

 

[Eds]

hes best position is behind the striker, especialy for pool because of his relationship he has with torres. gerrard is a player who bursts into life, not a typical centre midfielder like Lampard.

This isn't a discussion about where his best position is. It's about whether or not he should/can play Centre Midfield.

 

[IlPrincipino]

His defensive side is completely wasted in the CAM or Second Striker role, and Steven Gerrard is not shabby defensively.

I totally agree. I think that Gerrard's best position is in the CM spot. As you said, he is so complete that playing him in the ACM role wastes some of his attributes.
Plus, I think that he doesnt have the creativity needed to be an advanced playmaker.

 

[GodCubed]

he can play anywhere and still be the best player on the pitch

Goalkeeper? Don't be naive.

His defensive side is completely wasted in the CAM or Second Striker role, and Steven Gerrard is not shabby defensively.

But his attacking side is hugely enhanced further up the field. Its a trade-off.

 

[*Jones*]

His defensive side is completely wasted in the CAM or Second Striker role, and Steven Gerrard is not shabby defensively.

he isn't shabby defensively, but rather than holding his position, or track a runner, he goes for the hollywood challenge, and it could cost us. I tend to agree with madsheep on this one, i don't think he's tactically disciplined enough, nor got the legs to play box-to-box anymore.

Plus, Torres & Gerrard is as deadly a partnership as there is, and with Poulsen and now hopefully Mereiles, our midfield could be good this year. Particularly if Woy see's that Cole's best position isn't AM, and Cole will play wide left. I think it could be the start of a beautifull midfield for us

 

[iNickStuff]

I think it defers between such roles.In the game vs. Arsenal,Gerrard,made a good partnership with now-wantaway Mascherano in the heart of the Reds midfield and,combined,they made a fiersome,industrial midfield that squandered the majority of their chances.

Skip to international level and you have a different story where if he were to play alongside Lampard in a 4-4-2,he would not have that same strong midfielding partnership that he would have at club level.The creator-destroyer partnership doesn't work and Gerrard would not venture forward anywho.

It really depends.

 

[Eds]

he isn't shabby defensively, but rather than holding his position, or track a runner, he goes for the hollywood challenge, and it could cost us. I tend to agree with madsheep on this one, i don't think he's tactically disciplined enough, nor got the legs to play box-to-box anymore.

Hollywood challenge? Ummmmm... what?

Hasn't got the legs? We're talking about the same Steven Gerrard, right?

 

[Zebedee]

Some analysis to help inform debate:

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/08/23/man-city-3-0-liverpool-hodgsons-4-4-2-completely-outplayed/

Perhaps the biggest problem with Liverpool playing a 4-4-2 is that it forces Steven Gerrard to play a very deep role, especially if he is playing alongside Lucas (rather than Javier Mascherano, who is much more able to cope by himself in the centre of midfield, as he does for Argentina). Following Liverpool’s disastrous final season under Rafael Benitez, a myth seems to have emerged that Gerrard is somehow better in the centre of midfield than he is playing just off Fernando Torres. Nothing could be further from the truth – Gerrard played the best football of his career at the head of a midfield three, and is much more subdued in a four. In a 4-4-2, he is too far from goal, unable to influence attacking moves, less likely to combine with Torres (a partnership that works well) and too likely to play wasteful diagonal balls that are easily intercepted. He didn’t have a particularly bad game, but he wasn’t in a position to inspire Liverpool.

http://timhi.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/manchester-city-liverpool-report230810/

The hard time the Liverpool were destined to have was increased further through Steven Gerrard playing in a position that is becoming more and more difficult to justify his selection there – central midfield.

His positional sense last night was as questionable as Javier Mascherano’s moral fibre; time and time again Gerrard was found waltzing up field, leaving Lucas as the only protection in front of the back four. Against the surprisingly well-oiled City trio, Liverpool’s midfield stood no chance. This was shown for the first goal, his willingness to chase the ball, rather than observing players movements lead to James Milner’s having a free one to the bye-line.

When in possession, Gerrard showed the passing discipline that engulfed the whole English National team in the World Cup. His willingness to make things happen, although a wonderful footballing trait to have, is often misplaced in its manifestation. For all the long, raking balls that he’s applauded for, there are many that show his frivolousness. In last night’s game, he had the worst passing statistics than any of the other central midfielders on show (49 passes completed out of 63 attempted).

Arrigo Sacchi, always quotable, none more pertinent then this gem:

“When I was director of football at Real Madrid I had to evaluate the players coming through the youth ranks. We had some who were very good footballers. They had technique, they had athleticism, they had drive, they were hungry.

“But they lacked what I call knowing-how-to-play-football. They lacked decision making. They lacked positioning. They didn’t have the subtle sensitivity of football: how a player should move within the collective. And for many, I wasn’t sure they were going to learn”.

“You see, strength, passion, technique, athleticism, all of these are very important. But they are a means to an end, not an end in itself. They help you reach your goal, which is putting your talent at the service of the team and, by doing this, making both of you and the team greater.

“In situations like that, I just have to say, Gerrard’s a great footballer, but perhaps not a great player.”

Perhaps Benitez saw the same when he placed him in a more advanced role? His performance on Monday would suggest that Sacchi has a point.

 

[Mally]

Everyone knows where his best position is and im not arguing that. I was just saying hes still more an capable to do a world class job in a CM role. I also agree with the hollywood business but everyone has there flaws.

 

[Eds]

I agree with Mally.

I also think Gerrard is certainly able to adapt. Look at Bastian Schweinsteiger. Two years ago he was the glory boy winger in the Bayern Munich team, but he's been brought back into a central role and is know, possibly, one of the best in the world in the role he now plays, in the Centre of Midfield.

Gerrard is prone to the hollywood ball, and alongside lack of tactical discipline, they're his glaring flaws, but if you look at it, everyone has flaws. Frank Lampard, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality Central Midfielder. Paul Scholes, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality.

 

[GodCubed]

I agree with Mally.

I also think Gerrard is certainly able to adapt. Look at Bastian Schweinsteiger. Two years ago he was the glory boy winger in the Bayern Munich team, but he's been brought back into a central role and is know, possibly, one of the best in the world in the role he now plays, in the Centre of Midfield.

Gerrard is prone to the hollywood ball, and alongside lack of tactical discipline, they're his glaring flaws, but if you look at it, everyone has flaws. Frank Lampard, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality Central Midfielder. Paul Scholes, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality.

Right, but you're asking a player to be what is essentially a deep-lying creative force here. A creative player with poor decision-making skills is like a defender who can't tackle - not very good. You -need- tactical discipline and nous to play in the centre of midfield far more than a second-striker role.

 

[Eds]

Right, but you're asking a player to be what is essentially a deep-lying creative force here. A creative player with poor decision-making skills is like a defender who can't tackle - not very good. You -need- tactical discipline and nous to play in the centre of midfield far more than a second-striker role.

Of course you need a certain degree of Tactical Discipline, and I actually believe Gerrard has that. I think we'll be shown that this season, he can stay back when asked. But, when have we seen him have an extended run of games from the centre of midfield?

It's not as if Gerrard is an absolute ****** when choosing passes. He can keep possession, despite what everyone seems to think. Yes, he plays the 60-yard pass to often, and it sometimes goes wrong, but alot of the time, it goes right.

 

[Zebedee]

Frank Lampard, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality Central Midfielder. Paul Scholes, Central Midfielder, the best tackler in the world? I think not. He's still International quality.

Absolutely. But Gerrard has to be willing to drill that side of his game. Rafa tried and Gerrard did not respond well. And so Rafa moved him somewhere where Gerrard's desire to kick every ball didn't unbalance the team defensively.

Can Mr.Hodgson have more success with Gerrard? Will Joe Cole really be a better option behind Torres than Gerrard has been?

It did seem like Rafa was trying to move Gerrard further back with the Aquilani purchase. However, I'd suggest that's because of our lack of money to go out and buy Martinez or a similar 'Alonso' type of player and were looking to 'make do'. Mr.Hodgson has the same problem, so I'm not going to give him grief for doing the same thing as Rafa obviously was considering doing. But to me, it's still trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

 

[Mike.]

Right, but you're asking a player to be what is essentially a deep-lying creative force here. A creative player with poor decision-making skills is like a defender who can't tackle - not very good. You -need- tactical discipline and nous to play in the centre of midfield far more than a second-striker role.

exactly

bastian adapted because he is a more intelligent footballer than gerrard, hes better tactically and much more disciplined, key aspect of being that deeper player

scholes job as a central midfielder is to keep possession which he doesn exceptionally well, gerrard not so well

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/07/30/central-midfield-role/

can you honestly truly say gerrard can achieve whats required