20 Feb 2024
New image uploaded to the
Manchester United Player Sightings page entitled, Just saying...

Click picture for larger image

1.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 08:55:59
LOL I almost uploaded this last week. Too funny.

2.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 13:25:11
If Gerrard was the player he thought he was then he'd easily have been the greatest player to have ever played the game.

He had all the skills required to a be a top player, strong, fairly quick, technically very good, good reading of the game, good in the air, with a wicked shot on him. His ability to slot into most positions on the pitch definitely didn't help him, especially at a club that at the time had a squad with real gaps and weaknesses in it, meaning he was often shifted to cover for injuries or inferior players.

He never really was able to tie down one position as his own, to develop in a specific role and truly make that role his own.

He played CDM, CM, CAM, CB, RB, RW and LW.

His real weakness though as a player was his ego, his need to always be the one to win it on his own. He thought he was Roy of the Rovers. As such he didn't get the best out of his teammates and that was what held his sides back.

I wonder how much Southgate saw the issue with Gerrard and Lampard for England and how that has factored into his decision to hardly use TAA despite him being technically one of the best English players. The problem with TAA is similar to the issue with Gerrard. A gifted player but one that seems to not quite have found a natural home/ role on the pitch.

TAA has clear deficiencies at RB, but hasn't developed the skills required to play in midfield. He maybe isn't quite suited to being a RW. He's a gifted player but always seems like a square peg in a round hole.

Unlike Southgate's predecessors though he seems to recognise that and instead of trying to crowbar the most gifted players into a team he picks the players best suited to play as a team.

Maybe England would have been more successful if they didn't try and force Gerrard into the team. Or Gerrard might have been more successful if he settled in one role and mastered that. He had all the skills to be one of the best midfielders in the world. But when talking about specific roles you'd want in your midfield you will always be able to name better/ more suited players. The best deeplying playmaker, the best CDM, the best CAM, the best box to box midfielders. Does Gerrard really stand out as any of those despite being able to play each role well.

Personally I think he should have either been a CAM like when he played off of Torres. Leaning into his tendency to try and be the match winner. Or alternatively I think he could have been a phenomenal RB if he developed his game in that position. He was strong and a good tackler, read the game well defensively, strong in the air, had great running power and a great delivery from wide. Also playing him deeper and in defence might have nullified his tendency to try and be the match winner, instead allowing him to focus on his own game and what was best for the team. If he's been allowed to develop there and played that position consistently for the first few years of his career then I think he'd be considered the best RB of his generation, possibly ever.

Yet he was that player who was sort of great at everything but never mastered a particular position/ role which ultimately I think stopped him from becoming the best player in a particular position.

3.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 14:11:41
Disagree with this one Shappy. I think England tried to force Lampard into the team and the expense of Scholes. We went to Germany and beat them 5-1 in their own back yard with a midfield pairing of Scholes and Gerrard. The year before we didn't even qualify from the group at Euro 2000 and Gerrard was never in the starting 11. You'll argue Lampards goals from Midfield but he only scored 3 goals at a major tournament for England, not a great return for a goal scoring midfielder. I begrudgingly think Gerrard was a fantastic player.

4.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 14:14:51
Gerrard was awesome, one of the best if his generation. Scholes summed it up, he carried Liverpool on his shoulders and single handedly won matches. The problem for England was he and Lampard were basically playing the same role.

My picture was posted in jest, even Scholes himself talks about what a great player Gerrard was.

5.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 14:39:31
Gerrard was a top player so was Scholes imo as was lampard.

6.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 15:50:33
I think it was the limitations of the managers who couldn't work out how to get the three of them into the same team with a system that got the best out of them.

7.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 16:44:18
There's no reason why a midfield three of lampard, gerrard and Scholes couldn't have worked with a decent coach.

Also, the season under Benitez where they almost won the league- didn't Gerrard play a lot at RW and was exceptional?

8.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 16:51:39
Three into two is not ever, ever, going to happen.
A good manager would have realised that and made an appropriate decision early on, it may well of resulted in success.
No doubt the criticism they would of received from an essentially hostile press, when it comes to England, would of made such a decision counter productive on a personal level.
Then again I'm Welsh so what the hell!

9.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 18:19:27
For those people who think that there was a way to make Gerrard, Lampard and Schole work as a midfield three, do you also think you could have made Kaka, Zidane and Modric work as a midfield three?

Because I'd argue that Kaka and Lampard are both players who are remembered for their ability to ghost into the box and score.

Zidane and Gerrard were both physically strong players who could win games on their own, but both probably were better being creative than defensive.

Modric and Scholes are diminutive technically superb players players who would occasionally put in a poorly timed tackle or score a screamer, but mostly just moved the ball around and found pockets of space.

So in theory if Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes could work as an effective midfield three then so should Zidane, Kaka and Modric.

The reality is that they couldn't work together as they lacked key components needed to balance a midfield.

A serious lack of defensive nous and work rate to start with. No one with real bite or aggression (controlled aggression) .

While with Gerrard and Lampard (less so with Scholes) there was too much ego and need to be number one. They couldn't work effectively together because both wanted to take the glory and play to their strengths and weren't willing to make sacrifices to their game for the benefit of the team.

Personally I think England have consistently made awful selections born out of outdated ignorance and plain stupidity.

Terry shouldn't have been a regular, he was a decent player carried by better players around him. He was a slightly better Harry Maguire. Slow, often out of place and regularly making last ditch tackles because he was in the wrong position. But he was a big name and captain for a league challenging side.

Carrick was woefully under used as was Scholes. Neither had the big personalities that England seemed to favour over talent and tactical intelligence. Despite both being central to the success of the most successful English team at the time.

The mistake with England was that it was always looked at as being a "Galactico" style team. Picked like picking the team of the season or an FPL team. Who scores the most goals and whose the highest rated. Pick them out and stick them in the blender together and you'll have a great team.

Yet team building isn't about picking the biggest name or supposed best player in each position. It's about create a unit of players who can work well together to get the most out of eachothers skills. Sometimes that means leaving a big name player out all together rather than trying to crowbar them in at the expense of the team just to have a glitzier team sheet.

10.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 19:20:14
Who was a better CB to play instead of Terry than at the time in question?

I would pick Terry in any ENgland team of that generation, same as would Pick Butcher of his generation, there are some players that have to be included.

Like the dropping Gazza idea, how can you go to a tournament without your generational talent!

But leaders like Terry, you don’t not take to battles with you, unless you have better and who was better?

11.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 20:38:09
Shappy, I'm lost with that sorry. Why are they similar?

12.) 20 Feb 2024
20 Feb 2024 22:13:12
Sepp, hats off to you if you read all of that.

13.) 21 Feb 2024
21 Feb 2024 01:15:01
Shappy.
Have you just really said that
Zidane kaka and modric is similar to Gerrard lampard Scholes?
Get off the bus will ya ???.