Gerrard V's Lampard

[carefreeluke]

 

[Harry]

Gerrard was greater as a symbol.

Gerrard was more important/crucial to his team over the bulk of his career. 

As players they were about on par.

[Inverted]

On pure ability it's about even, or possibly a slight edge towards Lampard, but Gerrard's ability to drag Liverpool to results (the 2nd half at Istanbul being the most obvious example) makes him overall the greater footballer, for me personally. 

[SirBalon]

For me there's no difference on productivity between both Gerrard and Lampard...  The difference from a spectator's point of view (this spectator) was one was all passion while the other was all class where their football is concerned.

[Honey Honey]

From an opposition viewpoint Gerrard was better. Dictated games. Could cut you in pieces and turn a game on it's head from his own half. Practically single handedly beat us on a few occasions with goals and assists. Best midfielder I've seen against Newcastle along with Luis Figo.

Lampard was frightening when in space to shoot, which is a lot when you have defenders like we have had over the years. It's a toss up between Lampard and Scholes for that type of goal threat.

[Dr. Gonzo]

I'm biased obviously, but the way I look at it is Gerrard had at least one good season in virtually every midfield role for us except on the left (because no Liverpool manager was as stupid as an England manager, why the fuck would you take one of the best right footed passers and put him in a role that limits his effectiveness at crossing...). He also carried us for basically his entire career, so there's that. Lampard's best years came playing at a very good Chelsea side.

When we almost lost him to Chelsea I remember thinking if we got Lampard we'd get a good player but... they'd be fucking frightening with Stevie. And it's not like we'd have gotten Lampard lol.