Who is better: Steven Gerrard or Frank Lampard?

Why Gerrard and Lampard could have worked for Chelsea, but won't for England

You're in the playground with 20 of your mates lined up against the wall. It's not often you and your best friend, Fabio, get to pick the sides.

You already know that Fatty Arbuckle, the lovable yet slightly uncoordinated misfit, is going to be the last choice and he will be stuck between the jumpers. ("Sorry Fatty, no rush goalie in this game. Just lie down and hopefully the ball will hit your body and cannon to safety").

But also in the line-up are Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard. You can only pick one, so who do you go for?

You want somebody who is going to get you goals, so let's look at the stats: in the last three seasons Lampard has scored a total of 72 times in all competitions for Chelsea and England, including five in the current campaign. Gerrard has hit the net 65 times for his club, Liverpool, and his country, four of them this season. Not much in it there.

How about the discipline - you want somebody who is not going to be sent to the bike sheds in disgrace. Over the same period, Lampard has accumulated 22 yellow cards and one red, as opposed to Gerrard's 13 yellows and one red. So perhaps the Liverpool midfielder has the edge.

In your guise as The Gaffer you also want to assert your authority and tell your players what to do. Gerrard's penchant to drift from side to side and romp forward at every given opportunity may go against the strict orders you have given him to hold, whereas Lampard's selflessness has endeared him to each and every one of his club and national managers. Advantage Lampard?

What about their overall effect on their team-mates? Lampard is hardworking and respected but Gerrard's inspirational attitude forces those around him to up their game to another level. His late and important goals are what the term "never-say-die" was invented for. It must be the Red.

But wait, current form has to be taken into account. No more is the school yard a place where the right wing slot goes to "Lefty" Patterson just because he carried your tray in the dining hall.

So what happened in their last game? Martin Samuel described Lampard's display in Chelsea's 2-0 victory over Aston Villa as "one of the great individual performances of the season to end any debate over who should be at the centre of the midfield action for the national team."

Gerrard, on the other hand, was quiet early on until a tactical switch helped him drive Liverpool's tremendous comeback from 2-0 down against Manchester City to their 3-2 win.

Sorry, too late. The bell has gone and all you have to look forward to is double home economics and whether to make blowfish sushi, which delights the palate when cooked correctly but could kill you with its poison, or meat and potatoes, which never fails to deliver. Which will you choose?

Vote in our poll below and let us know why you think Lampard or Gerrard is the better player.

Online Surveys & Market Research

Comments

[Graeme]

Look what happened when Spain had the courage to drop Raul! You have to pick the best team, not the 11 best players! Gerrard every time for me.

[Sam]

Oh come on!! Why is this debate being had?

[N/A]

I agree with most people that Lampard has been exceptional for Chelsea, but as far as I am concerned Lampard has only performed well in only a handful of England games. If England was a club side Lampard be on the bench or sold off. Personally I favour Gerrard. In the past, for Liverpool, he has been surrounded by a set of average players and has literally drag the club to cup-winning ways. Personally I think the England forwards are mediocre (in comparison to other nations i.e. Spain. Argentina etc) and they need someone from midfied to support them etc. So I would infact remove Barry (over-rated) and stick in a holding midfielder with Gerrard as an attacking midfielder.

[Andre]

Steven Gerrard inspires his teammates to do more and better things than Frank Lampard does with his. Lampard may have more individual skills than Gerrard but he does not "push" a team to play outside of its skin,

In my opinion, if Lampard and Gerrard swapped teams, Liverpool would slump to being a mid-table team while Chelsea would be almost unaffected.

[Goonter]

Gerrard every day for me.....

[Howard_b]

There's a sneaking feeling that, deep down, Gerrard might be from the same Scouser school of thought as Jamie Carragher - 'I'd rather miss a penalty for England than Liverpool'.

And, such is the nature of football, that Gerrard was absent when England achieved its most notable win of recent times in Croatia. You can't argue with a winning team; Gerrard's luck is that Joe Cole is injured and there's a slot for him on the left.

There's ample evidence that Gerrard/Lampard haven't worked as a central midfield pairing. But how much of that was down to the coaches in charge at the time? Before the Croatia game Capello had detailed discussions with each player about their role in the game. Who's not to say that Capello couldn't make it work? (even though Kazakhstan and Belarus would hardly be a stringent test of the pairing)

Over the years great teams have had a playmaker and a defensive holding player. Lampard's performance against Villa at the weekend strongly supported his credentials for the former role. Gareth Barry, even though less than ideal, is ahead of Gerrard for the latter.

So the bottom line is that inbalances are created by accommodating Gerrard in the midfield.

Happily, Stevie, football is rarely this logical and I'm not going to vote either way in the poll!

[paul]

no contest. steve gerrard every time. although, as a red, i'm perfectly happy for lampard to play instead of gerrard all day long.

[Burnley Bob]

Lampard gets picked because he plays for a London club. The newspapers are based in London and it is they that have largely picked the England team over the years. Add the 'West 'Em' effect and The Great Lampardo is a worldbeater in the eyes of some.
Lampard is dull enough to believe in a reputation gifted by the media. Hence his 23 shots - no goals in the last World Cup. In the real world, he's not fit to lace Gerard's boots.

[Paul]

The idea that they can't play together is moronic and i'm sick to death of hearing about it. Leaving out two players who have forwards strike rates is insane, especially if the idea is to now have Heskey doing the donkey work and creating space.
During the time in which people refer to them playing badly together, the whole England team was pathetic. That goes for shocking goalkeeping, erractic defense, un-imaginative midfield, and poor strike rates from the forwards.

They are two of the best midfielders in the world and should both play for england. If Capello has turned a corner then next task is keep the momentum going and fit Gerrard in. He has plenty of games from now to the World cup to get them in tune. I mean if you can't beat Belarus and Kazakstan even with half hearted displays from Stevie G and Lampard then why bother qualifying for the world cup? you'll only end up wasting everyones time. Not to mention the hard earned money people will spend travelling to South Africa.

If however it is deemeed that they are incapable of coexisting send one of them to Belfast and we will gladly put them in our national team. (personal preference would be Gerrard, as he has experience dragging a average team to glory)

Green and white army!

[Kay]

Drop Rooney or play him from the left, play Gerrard behind Heskey, play Lampard and Barry in the middle. Walcott right wing. DONE.

[Alan Gourlay]

The question isn't whether the two can play together, it is just that neither of them is a holding midfielder and neither of them could protect a back four if England where losing the midfield battle.
As long as they have a defensive midfielder in the team things should be OK.
The question then of course is where to play the two of them.
I must admit that the best balanced England sides are when one or the other is missing, like when Gerrard missed out on Englands world cup in Asia where Butt was the star of the show.

[StevieG]

great quote from Carra on lampard and gerrard issue....

" Lampard became World class but Stevie was born World class"

enough said!!!!

[Sumeet]

There is no question of a doubt that Gerrard is a better player but from a Liverpool persepective (as I am scouser) I would prefer for Lampard to be picked and play his socks off while Gerrard rests and keeps giving those exceptional performances for his club.

[Alan]

Is it just me who sees the solution to this supposed problem ?
Gerrard has played for Liverpool in the right back position before and done well.
As the modern game requires all wide players to have the ability to get up and cross the ball Gerrard brings a zest not normally provided by our defenders.

[Sumeet]

Stevie G all the way. As a scouser and a passionate liverpool fan, I would prefer for him not to get picked. Liverpool fans are not interested in England, they are from a different country!

[Chaka]

Gerrard is the problem.Look at Chelsea,Lampard has pair perfectly with players like Ballack and Deco.But Gerrard his disrupting Lamps game anytime they are paired together.One moment of magic is not enough to be labeled a top class.You have to be a team player,work hard on the pitch,connect with your strikers perfectly,and be a good passer of the ball.Thats why Lamps have always been rated in the world's stage more than Gerrard.Peace with loe from Africa.

[Paul Owen]

Given how much money Capello is being paid and his vast experience surely it is incumbent upon him to find a way and a system which works for two such vastly talented players. On balance I would take Gerrard and not just because I am a Liverpool supporter, but Lampard is in superb form and played well in the last game. Thus if we must choose he should get the nod. But find a formation which accommodates them both, if necessary with a holding midfielder behind them. We are lucky enough to have two truly world class midfielders so use them.

[A-V]

How can anyone with a football brain leave Lampard out, Gerard is scoring close to Lampard's total but often plays much higher. They both have to play but you cannot leave a midfield player who scores at that rate out of any team, any other country would want him. So many Liverpool fans have time to go on about Gerard, and I agree he is a great player, but just stop whining on about it, Gerard needs to learn to play with other class midfield players, with Ballack, Deco, Essien etc Lampard does this every day

[Peter]

As was posted the other day; "this debate has been raging for over 5 years now, so clearly they cannot play together". Lamps is the current incumbent after playing well enough in the last games to keep his place. Stevie G. gets to warm the bench until he gets his chance. Thats life as Frank (Sinatra) would say.. Meanwhile do you not think the global financial meltdown is more important than who plays in midfield for England.

[Paul, Colne, Lancs]

Ditto a few previous I think, but why not do as does Benitez - i.e. 4-2-3-1:

Heskey
X - Gerrard - Walcott
Barry - Lampard
Cole - Terry - Ferdinand - Y
James
Where X = Rooney or Cole or...
And Y = anyone better than Wes Brown.

[marcus]

Little point discussing this as Gerrard would make every real football fans team

He epitomises what a professional should be and on bad days drags Liverpool kicking and screaming
As someone has written Liverpool would be mid-table without Gerrard and would be out in the group stages of Europe

There have been very few players that can individually influence games
Saying all that neither have been much good for England

[Anton]

The problem is that Gerrard, when asked to play the holding role, wide role (left and right) is still expected to score goals by the press (the dumbest of the lot) and the fans (not so dumb but getting there for believing all that is written in the press). He has played everywhere for England, including having to take over from Ledley King as holding midfielder against Argentina. Ledley was substituted but had to get dragged out of Riquelme's pocket. In the same game he moved to right back and setup Owen.s winning goal. He played the holding role against Barzil to a MOM performance. The press always harps back to same point. Where are the outstanding goals? Give the guy a break. FF Lampard can and only will play in one role...

[neil]

Gerrard brings more to the table (pitch). Hence the reason why he has been shifted all over the place. But in truth, they should both be in the starting 11. The problem is trying to accomodate the likes of Rooney, as well as these two.

Shove the big guy (Heskey) up front and let Gerrard and Lampard feed off him. with a holding guy behind them and Walcott on the right and A.N Other on the left.

[Russell]

It's not who's the better player, it's about who slot's into his given role and has the displine to stay there and do the job he's asked.

Frank it is then.

As for all the Liverpool fans saying they would rather SG played for his club etc, surely you should be supporting England as they have done much better than Liverpool over the recent years.

[Barrie Collins]

Gerrard has lots of talent, but Lampard is far and away a better player in both individual and team categories. Gerrard gives the impression always that he is only interested in individual glory, while Lampard is the consummate team player. His defensive play and ball distribution are far superior to Gerrard's, and his goal scoring abilities are the icing on the cake. I'd pick him over Gerrard even if he didn't score.

The reason he and Gerrard don't play well together is that Lampard has to cover Gerrard's rear end during Gerrard's undisciplined wanderings all over the pitch.

So, how to use Gerrard's talents for England? I'd start him on the bench, and bring him in for Lampard late in the game if, and only if, his long-range goal scoring ability was needed, or possibly if the game was already won, and it wouldn't matter how much his prescence would disrupt the team.

I think Gerrard missed a great opportunity when he turned down Chelsea a few years back. Mourinho would have taught him the team discipline he so badly lacks, and would have made a complete player of him. Right now he's a bundle of talent without any real direction. What a pity.

[Chris Taylor]

It's not who's the better player, it's about who slot's into his given role and has the displine to stay there and do the job he's asked.

Frank it is then.

As for all the Liverpool fans saying they would rather SG played for his club etc, surely you should be supporting England as they have done much better than Liverpool over the recent years.

Posted by: Russell | October 08, 2008 at 03:46 PM

Are you sure Russell? Obviously not qualifying for the last major championship is 'doing much better over the recent years' than winning the Champions League, getting to another final and winning the FA Cup. No wonder you think Lampard is better as your evident unaware of the meaning of the word 'better'.

[Zack]

Istanbul 2005. Need I say more?

[Nadim]

Steve Gerrard evry single time, how this is even debatable is beyond me.

Ask any fan world wide who the better player is and every single non Chelsea fan one from Montevideo to Melbourne would all tell you Steven Gerrard.

He is the most complete footballer of his generation. He can tackle, shoot, pass long, pass short, play off the striker, play in the centre, play on the right, in defensive midfield even at right back... Not a single player in the world can show the same amount of quality in every single position like Gerrard does.

Lampard's a good player, nothing more. In 15 years he won't be remembered. Gerrard however has stamped his mark on the footballing world during his career and will be remembered as one of the greatest players of his generation.

Sure he may not perform with the samwe consistency for England, but like so many other class players (Barnes, Hoddle, Waddle, Fowler, Gazza post Italia 90,Scholes...) that's more to do with the England set up than it is his talents.

[neil]

Barrie Collins,

It's Gerrard's individual ability that has won so many game single handed with moments of brillance. Something Lampard is incapable of.

Lampard does the simple things very well. Which is all he has to do with so much talent around him in the Chelsea side. For England it's not enough and the national sides over reliance on the likes of Lampard only doing 'the simple things' is a major part of their downfall.

And as for the comment about defensive ability? Lampard has no defensive qualities about him, which is why Gerrard has at times had to play a holding role. I don't recall anyone asking that of Lampard.

Barrie Collins... what a pity.

[Johnny Laird]

Both are phenomenal players and yes Gerrard can play centre mid, right back, right wing, second striker etc but that doesn’t make him a better player? His most important position is in the middle of the park and in that position he just loses out to Lampard. Anyone who says Lampard doesn’t dictate a game like Gerrard, doesn’t have a clue what they’re talking about. He’s the heartbeat of the Chelsea team and on his current form the best central midfielder in the world.

We’re lucky to have both and I’m sure Capello will get them both playing well together. I’d have Heskey up front on his own with Rooney and Walcott left and right. Gerrard and Lampard in the middle with Barry playing the holding role.

[Gareth]

Its no contest...Gerrard is the better all round player. I think the players votes (domestic & European) confirm this, as well as Euro journos who all hail Gerrards obvious natural ability...Frank whilst a good player has to try to be a good player. Additionally anyone who is critical about this as a subject matter vs the 'Global financial crisis' would do well to bury there heads in the unreality that is the Premiership it dulls the pain of entrusting £50bn+ to the same financial gillerati whos codes and conducts got us in this current mess. A better blog may be about parrallels between greedy premiership clubs and the banking system.

[Tim Hussey]

Let's not forget that Frank is playing with hundreds of millions of £s worth of team mates hence his enhanced goal tally. If your team is dominating all who they play, you're bound to look good - especially if you goal hang. Half of the Liverpool squad of the last couple of years have been average and Gerrard has shone and driven the team on to win (alas not as often as Chelsea.)

When Lampard is playing for England amongst (unfortunately) lesser quality players the footballing genius suddenly but predictably disappears.

Also, Gerrard was joint top scorer in the last finals England got to. Where was Frank then? Answer, missing the many many chances he had in front of goal.

[AS]

Lampard by a country mile...He's the best goal-scoring midfielder in the world, let alone England, and this season he has improved and became an all-round midfield player. His displays v Villa, Portsmouth, Man City, Croatia were out of this world and on current form he's the best central and attacking midfield player in the world. Barry/Hargreaves/Carrick should fight for the other CM role, Joe Cole is the permanant LM and Walcott should be first-choice RM (very good backup in Becks, SWP & Bentley in the RM role).

[Mark]

Got to be Frank for me, he was perfect against Villa, has to be the signing of the season for me.

Anyway how many Premierships has Gerrard won, zero and it ain't going to change this season especially when the luck dries up at Anfield.

[Tim Hussey]

Don't get me wrong, Frank is a great player - and he rarely gets injured which is a priceless attribute to his team. However, he's not better than Gerrard - even a few years ago when he (Frank) was playing better than he is now - still no Gerrard.

The poll speaks for itself - these aren't just Liverpool supporters voting

[Rob Walmsley]

It's obvious, Gerrard is simply a better footballer.

[Jim Brophy, Devon]

Steven Gerrard has been at his best for club when he has had the responsibility of Captaincy. After the first retirement from captaincy of D Beckham M Samuel of the Times voted for J Terry to be captain and now appears to be favouring F Lampard over SG. Do I detect a hint of pro-Chelsea bias or is this a dispassionate assessment.

SG has a greater ability to make things happen esp scoring when the match is tight. Marauding in from the right and the ability to turn a defender causes more problems than FL whose ability to beat/go past a player is not as great. His European record is better than that of FL's but neither has played as well for their country as they have both done for club.
nb INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL is a different game than even Champions Lg and especially prem lg.
Styles / strengths are slightly different FL is more of a central player SG better on the rhs.

Overall the question is not who is the better player but how can you pick a team that has both players playing at the same time and still be nippy/ clever/techniquely adroit with both feet in all aspects to use them to full advantage. It should be possible but then I am not England's manager.

Why can't professioal playersesp Brits use both feet - ans they do not practice enough with a tennis ball from an early age.

[Peter]

Let's face it they are both better for their clubs.

Stevie G may be inspirational, but also only for Liverpool - I cannot recall him ever driving or inspiring England to a notable result. And Lampard was voted England's best player for a couple of years (by the travelling fans). Though this was a year or two ago, too.

It's all about balance, and they clearly can't seem to complement each other in 4-4-2, so it has to be one or the other - I'm not even sure it makes a huge difference which.

Or play a different system to fit them both in? Lampard seems to do OK with Ballack alongside him, so why not Gerrard?

[Tom Birkert]

Interesting that the Liverpool manager doesn't play Gerrard in central midfield. Indeed, he was at pains to point out that Gerrard was "a great offensive midfielder", which sums up the problem with Gerrard - he is tactically naive and lets his man run off him too often. He does the Hollywood stuff going forward, but neglects the other side of the game.

Lampard is tactically much more disciplined - as evidenced in his performance against Croatia - and is a more consistent player.

For central midfield then the choice is Lampard. For versatility it's Gerrard, he's better out wide or playing off a striker where his lack of tactical discipline doesn't cost the team.

[james]

im not sure any of these comments are fair as we all have a serious bias one way or the other. but i do think we are all wrong to say Gerrard has an inspiring effect on the team. I dont know that even though he captains liverpool carragher is the real captain on the pitch. How can any of us fans know weather he inspires the players on the pitch. I bet unless your a fan of chelsea or liverpool you would be happy playing with either. I think that lampard is the best player in the world at what he does and i cant see why 2 midielders that are according to every single one of the quote pure class cannot play together. i think someone was right when they said that gerrard missed out on playing for chelsea a few years back. of course scousers wouldnt want him to go and probably most other fans of clubs but if they had played for 4/5 years together then we could have the best midfield in the world on an international level. You have to remember that frank will want liverpool to lose every week and the same for gerrard. So you have to think that in about 3 days they have to become an awesome midfield partnership. Thats why we played well against croatia because the team had time to know each other. my final point is that the 2 can obviously play together as why would Jose Mourinho try and buy him. He would not buy a player like Gerrard to sit on the bench every week

[barry]

lampard would play for england with a broken bone sticking through his skin. gerrard timed his operation so as to miss international games but not liverpool games.

i'll always take the guy who wants it more. it's lampard for me.

[tana]

ENGLAND is not playing aston villa STEVIE G everytime

[R Arconian]

Both can play. You got to pick your best players & get them playing together, ball on the ground, à la 'Fat' Phil Scolari:

Cole Rooney Walcott
Lampard Barry Gerard
A.Cole JT Rio erf
James

[Joe]

2006 World Cup.

Player who had the most shots compared to ANY other player during the WHOLE tournament? Lampard.

How many goals did he score? 0.

[Andy]

Unquestionably, Stevie G. Can you imagine Frank delivering THAT performance in Istanbul in 2005? Or scoring THAT goal against Germany in 2001? Exactly.

[denton]

lampard scores more goals, is more disciplined and more positionally aware - a quality that evades gerrard to his peril. Benitez would rather play Lucas leiva than gerrard in central midfield and he sees him week in week out. that says a lot. furthermore, since HE and not frank, is the jack of all trades - why wont he just sit and hold and let lampard do what he does best - an attacking central midfielder that conducts the team like an orchestra.

[David Martinez]

One is a very good player.

One is world class.

Gerrard every single time. He has far more to his game than Lampard. He wins more games on his own, gets up and down more, has more speed, a better shot, is better in the tackle, is one of the best crossers of a ball in Europe and is more inspirational to his side. Both have under performed for England but in most games Gerrard still features regualrly in the man of the match stakes while Lampard is often invisible.

Gerrard hands down despite Lampard's good form. You don't drop your one undesputed world class player. Every other country in the world would laugh their heads off if Gerrard was on the bench just like they do when he's asked to play wide left or as a defensive midfielder to accomodate the less talanted and less versatile Lampard.

[RT]

Neither has yet managed to consistently bring their club form to the England side. Both, however have a better scoring record than the saintly Wayne Rooney. Why not start one up front in his place? Their real problem is that each fulfills pretty much the same role for their clubs as each other, and there may not be room for two of those in the England team at the same time. Capello needs to pick the best balanced side, not necessarily the 11 most talented players. Purely on decisive contributions I would pick Gerrard, but Lampards current form cannot be ignored. Looks like 45 mins each!!

[Stewart]

Both Great Players
Lampard is the more complete player
Gerrard a better leader
Lampard more capable from set pieces, even though SG is great too
Gerrard more powerful
Lampard scores more goals
Gerrard awesome tackler

Probably say Lampard Just

Despite being a huge Liverpool fan I have always thought that Lamps is the better c/m. No doubt Gerrard is great player, inspirational, talismanic and passionate, the epitome of the English bulldog spirit hence why the English fans love him. But being an admirer of Paisley's, and now Rafa's, idea of football, I think when it comes to composure, running from the blindside/deep, range, weight and choice of passes, Lamps wins hands down. He may not dominate games physically like Gerrard but his positioning, thought process and awareness during a match is uncanny and what I feel sets him apart from Gerrard and many c/m in the world. Whereas Lamps has greater trust in his teammates, Gerrard is only learning to do so as Liverpool sets out to improve the overall quality of players around him. Another factor is probably Lamps earlier and longer exposure to various continental coaches and their methods.

I was best pleased last season when Rafa took Gerrard off for showing too much passion v Everton last season as this was the misgivings I have had about him all this while. Since then his improvement in his allround game has improved which will only make Rafa's job easier.

I note that Lamps has not translated his form for Chelsea into England but this I believe is due to managers not allowing or trusting him to play his natural game where he runs the show from midfield. For a while Gerrard was almost undroppable and almost accomodated despite Lampards obvious qualities. But now with Capello in charge I'm sure we will get to see them play sucessfully together in specific roles. Gerrard to provide the grit and inspiration and Lampard to provide the brains and patience needed at international level.

For England I believe Gerrard should play the role Ballack plays so successfully for Chelsea, and the role he made his own for Liverpool last season with Torres, complimenting the attack and concentrating on the last third of the pitch whilst allowing Lampard the freedom of the pitch to be the brains of the operations. With a terrific coach like Capello all the misgivings about the pair not being able to play together for England will be put to rest.

Saying that I hope Lampard will slip on a banana skin and injure his testicles with a shaving blade while doing the Rio wax and rule himself out of the Liverpool game in two weeks time.

[Ash]

For me Gerrard is not a midfield player. His best position is as a second striker (note end of last season behind Torres).

Whenever he picks the ball up deep he tries to spray Paul Scholesesque passes around the park and relinquishes posession far too often. I have never seen him dominate a match as a centre midfield player. Don't get me wrong Gerrard has many attributes, great athelete and chips in with his fair share of goals. I'm not saying he is a bad player because that is obviously not the case.

Lampard has really come up in my estimations over the last couple of seasons and he can control a game, hit long accurate passes and score goals. In a choice between the two Lamps gets my vote

[Rocket Gopher]

Lampard. At least he shows up to play for England. I lost my enthusiasm for Gerrard after he snubbed England by using the international break to have his minor surgery performed.

[Rodney]

You ought to be an absolute plonker to think gerrard has ever been upto Lampards' standards. Not half as good as Lampard, gerrard is. Stupid comparison. Lampard gives you 9/10 every week. Gerrard gives you a long ranger twice a season and a hollywood long ball once in 50 attempts. Lampard does it every week

[Peter]

Gerard is one of the most over-rated players in the world. He is unable to stick to simple instructions, constantly drifts out of position & leaves team-mates to clear up his mess. Who can forget his mistakes against France where his selfish attitude gave a free-kick away in dangerous circumstances - we went on to lose 2-1, after leading comfortably by 1-0.
He is at his best when his team is losing & his gung-ho style inspires others, not when strategy & tactics need to be displayed from the off.
Lampard every time - he takes his responsibilities seriously, & is so much more effective when not partnered with Gerard, as he's not having to second guess where his midfield "partner" is going to turn up next.

[Nazim]

Lampard! NO CONTEST!

P.S its a disgrace to SUPER FRANK to compare him with a stray dog who can't provide half the number of goals or assists. Farcical comparison. Baffles me the scousers even think gerrard is as good, let alone better

[Rodney]

Lampard can only play one role? Attack mid. Central mid. Defense mid.(against the croats). Lampard can play anywhere and still score, assist(his proper goal was ruled out against the croats). He dribbles better than Gerrard and keeps possession far far better. Its tough for a 'central' player, cloistered by a chaotic crowd, to do that. Lampard has certainly got back to his top form and there is no looking back for Frank now. He proves time and again why he is the best in the business. Gerrard will keep scoring his 20 yard bullets once in a while but he will also keep over hitting passes and spurning good attacking possession with a wild shot from distance. Dump him and that'll make him realise he needs to stop whingeing and raise the bar

[Rodney]

Tana, Which midfielder scored the most goals at Euro 04? Who was England's top goal scorer in the WC quals?

ermm.. as far as i can recall, Lampard AGAIN!

One bad tournament does'nt make him a bad player. He's had a plethora top games, tourn.s ever since. He has more goals, assits than Gerrard for BOTH club and country, that settles it. innit?

[Rodney]

Gerrards' performance in Istanbul is SO VERY OVER-RATED and hackneyed. has'nt he had one good performance ever since so you wanna hark back and dredge it up everytime? Lampard does it every week

[Yoel M]

Gerrard is obviously a more talented player capable of exceptional last minute goals and turning a game single handed.

But i would play Lampard for England. He adds value, often in a simple way. He slots in to a system and doesnt disrupt other players.

[cotumely]

Yet again people try to airbrush Gerrard's past as an England player, and try to pretend he's England class. We've seen time and time again he's not up to it. Have people forgotten how he almost single-handedly caused us to fail to qualify for Euro 2008.

And as for his pathetic lie that he's only played in the centre 5 times; just for that lie he should never be picked again!

[The Eraser]

Quite a few hysterical mockneys, along with Martin Samuel sympathisers here...

Let's settle this one with good old fashioned reason and business sense. Which player commands the higher transfer fee (surely a true sign of worth)?

Gerrard £50-£100m
Fat Frank £8-10m at best

Go figure.

[IBNUL]

Stevie G is the driving force of a team. He is not selfish like Lampard but he also scores goals. he is better passer of the ball and he also takes better freekicks. So Stevie G should be chosen instea of Lampard

[Mike, London]

Gerrard is probably a better player, but not in an England shirt!

So if I'm choosing for England then Lampard, if playing in Liverpool Red then Gerrard.

Given a full choice of players for England I'd start with Lampard and if needed bring on Gerrard if things need to be shaken up a bit later on.

[Big Tony]

The results of the poll say it all.
Gerrard - without a doubt.
Forget Martin Samuel's bias towards Lampard (the West Ham connection was never so obvious than when that 'best individual performance' came out)) but sheer class, performance, intelligence, respect from other players and all round abilty that comes through as a genuine love of the game (rather than love of a pay packet) raises Gerrard head and shoulders above the preening Chelsea boy.

[Tony Russell]

Once again the great debate reigns supreme.
I've voted for Gerrard and would do so every time.
He's a better player, gives more to the team and he's got a great understanding with Barry or Hargreaves when he's playing.
Gerrard's lack of selfishness has even caused him to drift out of England games while he sits in the hold because Lampard has gone glory hunting for goals.
It amuses me when the 'hoe many premiership titles as gerrard got?' comes up against the 'how many champions league winning medals, final appearances, goals, scored penalties etc has lampard got?' is thrown in for good measure.
It's England we're talking about here, not Liverpool vs chelsea.
I noticed that Gerrard has 75% of the votes when I cast mine at the top, so it's pretty conclusive what the majority of England fans think - despite what a London biased media (and I live here in the greatest city on earth) try to convince us of otherwise.
Gerrard every time.
I bet Lampard will be all out to score against Boratland and some other place you couldn't pick out on a map, but Gerrard will be playing for the team and country as ever.
Let's be honest though, wouldn't we all love to see Lampard show a bit more team spirit, and drop back a few times to win the ball so they might show us they can play together.
Then we'll truly have an awesome midfield instead of the mish-mash it always seems to be.
Gerrard every time if there has to be a choice though.

[Ehido]

Again I think the question is slightly wrong. It should be who is better for current England team? Lampard would be my choice to start as control of the game is vital, with the emergence of Theo, J Cole, Shaun and Roney... the attacking component is there. What is missing is the middle platfrom to retain and provide the ball.

Gerrad should be used where the games needs an all out attacking approach as he's more natuarlly suited to this way of playing

[Abdulwahab Kassim]

I would switch the team's formation to accommodate both players. Both are fantastic professionals with excellent skills. The catch is to take advantage of their individual skills to the National Team's benefit. It is clear from their goal per season ratio they love going forward. How about going for a more attack minded formation 4-3-3 with Gareth Barry being the defensive midfielder. England has very very intelligent players. For the game against Kazakhstan, England need to go all out and attack since they are expect to have 10 players behind the ball. In such a case, high crosses will not do. England needs to keep the ball down, go through the middle but FAST. Ashley Cole and Wes Brown can be wing backs and cover the wings. The system can be changed I know that for a fact because I believe in all the players' strengths to adapt.

[Azmat Raza]

These are 2 separate questions. Who do I think is the better footballer? Gerrard. Who do I think should start for England? Lampard. We need to start picking players who can play together, not just our 11 best squad members. And as for the "good players can play together" argument, well I'll believe it when I see it.

[neil]

Maybe we should leave the answer to someone like Sir Alex Ferguson, who likened Gerrard to the most complete central midfielder of the last 20 years, Roy Keane.

I don't recall Sir Alex ever lauding over Lampard like that.

And just for you Rodney, the only time Lampard dribbles better than Gerrard is probably at lunchtime at the sight of all that food.

For the record though, i think they should both play, in front of 1 holding player.

[Alatar]

Some of the nasty comments people make about Frank Lampard really beggars belief (e.g. 'Big' Tony). Clearly, some people are so myopic, and so bitter/biased, it wouldn't matter a jot to them how well Lampard performed for England or how many goals he set up or scored.

What goes on in the minds of people who use phrases like 'fat frank' when the guy is clearly super fit, and doesn't have an ounce of fat on him ... and ... has been that way for years?

And one comment even used ridiculous and spurious 'facts' to claim Frank Lampard was 'valued' at 1/10th of Gerrard and claimed Lampards 'value' was a true sign of a players worth. Using this twisted logic, this 'sage' would have to claim Marouane Fellaini (who? - I bet you don't know who he is!) the Belgian midfielder who went to Everton from Standard Liege for £14.7m this year - is a 'better' player than Frank Lampard. Good grief!!

Some people are just too childish for words and reveal their true bias with posts like these. I bet they're the kind of idiots who boo Lampard too. Just insane. No wonder our current England manager Capello is also baffled by this kind of comment/behaviour against one of his best players.

More intelligent observers would say England is blessed with two outstanding midfielders in both Gerrard and Lampard. Each of them, when paired with the right holding midfielder, can do a fantastic job for England. It's like comparing a Mercedes and a BMW. Both top in their class - just different, with different qualities. Less of these snide comments. They really don't do the posters any credit.

[Bill]

When the going gets bad steve is up for a fight, just like me against the Talaban

[Saj]

I personally think lampard is the more valuable player. he scores so many more goals than gerrard and does an equally good job with his range of passing, long range efforts, assists and tracking back.

[DP]

Typical small minded Liverpool fans. How can half fo you all say Lampard is greedy and selfish? He gets so many assists every season, as well as his usually impressive goals tally.
Ask most professional players, pundits and journalists, and most will tell you Lampard is the more valuable player.

[shed]

'Big Tony' : 'Gerrard just plays for the love of the game'

So let me get this right:

£120k a week = love
£150k a week = greed

Righto.

[John]

England always try and accomodate the countries best 11 players. I other countries they will sacrifice talent for the benefit of the team i.e Fabregas during 2008. How much better to have either Lampard or Gerrard coming off the bench to give another dimension.

But to choose one and only on the basis that you dont change a winning team, Lampard should keep his place. Also it would send out the wrong message if Barry was dropped afetr performing well in Zagreb.

[William]

OF COURSE FRANK LAMPARD IS BETTER... MUCH MUCH BETTER - can't believe the readers' preference here. Gerrard is next to useless in the national team - selfish glory hunter who banks on luck with his wild shots!! NOT a team player!!

[Jon]

OF COURSE FRANK LAMPARD IS BETTER... MUCH MUCH BETTER - can't believe the readers' preference here. Gerrard is next to useless in the national team - selfish glory hunter who banks on luck with his wild shots!! NOT a team player!!

This comment does make me laugh!

Gerrard IMO provides the better package. Not a team player? How many times has this lad played out right, out on the left or even in the right back position!? He does this because he is just that good!!

Try getting Lampard to do this and you'd realise he cant and wont do it! Please by this comment dont think I am trying to say that Lampard is not a good player....far from it However, give a straight choice between the two give me the MIGHTY Gerrard any day.

[Rob]

It just baffles me how people can say that Gerrard doesnt play well for england so drop him, He has never once been allowed to play an attacking role because he is hindered by being very capable defensively. Therefore when England play him as a holding player thats essentially what his job is to do, it cant be his fault he doesnt score and assist as much for England as he does for Liverpool when he is pushed so far back, if he tried to attack people would moan and say he is shirking his defensive responsibilities. When it comes down to it Gerrard is a better attacking player than Lampard, but because he is a much better defensive player and all rounder, he suffers. Thats why Barry should be played with Gerrard, if that doesnt work, then fine, but at least give him a chance there.

And all these people saying he had an operation during an international break so he doesnt deserve it are so out of line, look at yourselves and can you honestly you would rather one of your best players to miss vitally important league matches and miss a chance of being fit for a game against man utd, to play a qualifier for England? Plus he'd have been only half fit and everyone wouldve slated him anyway!

Liverpool pay his wages, so his priorty should be with his club, not a bunch of turncoat idiots who boo their own players....Peter Crouch anyone? He was a 'freak' last year and ridiculed in a disgusting way, now the fans speak of him as if they've liked him all along. England fans are pathetic and until that changes players will side with the clubs.

[seamus]

gerrard has never had a good game for england in fact in the final game of euro against croatia he gave the worst proformance ever seen by and english player ever this of corse was glossed over by the pundits and press as he is there best mate now that beckham is gone for a english team they player well enough against crotia in the re match that team should start in the next game

[Midfield_General]

These are the facts; in the 64 games Frank has played England have lost 13 times and drawn 15 in this time he has scored 14 goals. Gerrard Has played 68 and lost 8, drawn 16 and scored 13 goals. Clearly England are more of a threat when Gerrard is playing. The only stat Lampard comes out on top in is goals scored. However Lampard because of his limited range has only every been played in his favourite role in Centre Midfield. Gerrard only the other hand has has played CM, Right and Left Wing, Holding Midfield, Right Back and support striker and has still returned respectable figures. This whole debate was put to bed ages ago when everyone knew Gerrard was number 1. It has only resurfaced because Lampard played ok in a very good England performance against Croatia. Don't get me wrong Lampard is a great player but to suggest he is better than Gerrard is madness. If Capello cannot get them to play together then Gerrard must be given the nod.

[Tim H]

This debate should really be limited to non Chelsea or Liverpool supporters. There's so much bias on here that most of it is basic lies about the unfavoured player.

I am a Liverpool supporter so I'm always going to choose Gerrard (and because he's the best! ha ha!) However, Gerrard is still on 70+% of the votes so this is not even close.

You can safely assume that England supporters are made up of fans of a range of club teams and yet they boo Lampard off the pitch half the time. Not so long ago they were singing 'You're the only one that's good' to Gerrard during a game.

As for Gerrard having a bad game against Croatia when we got eliminated for the Euros, I seem to recall him making a goal saving tackle when Croatia were through 3 on 1. That game was lost by the goalkeeper - simple as that. Two long range shots which you'd expect any decent keeper to stop. We still scored two goals which was a good haul against Croatia any other time - the fact that we conceded three was not the fault of anyone apart from Carson and our statuesque defence. And don't forget that the one amazing thing to come out of that result is that we got rid of Steve ('shtop, you are not ready') McLaren.

[Paulc77]

Just wondering, have any of lampard's 70+ goal's mentioned here NOT hit off at least one defender's arse before looping in? It's just I've never seen him score any other type of goal......

The English have always been great value for a laugh re their international team, and the current set-up is no exception. You have two of the most naturally gifted footballers in the WORLD in Rooney and Gerrard and what happens? You haven't a clue where to play one and debate as to whether the other should even get a game!!

The England team is the only reason I maintain anything resembling an interest in boring boring international football, but it's purely in a shadenfreude sort of way. Keep up the good work fellas!

[Rik]

I think the results of the vote say it all!
Gerrard is a far better player. This is proved by the fact he can play just about anywhere, which is why he gets played all over the place and not always in his favoured central role. Lampard is excellent at that role too, but that's his only role. This is the cause of all the problems for me.
I know who'd I've have in my team if I could only pick one, sorry Frank!
If they were any other nationality, you can bet they would both be playing all the time and there would be no debate about who was better. Just pick both of them and get on with it!

[Mike Sheard]

There is a great link here from the bbc showing the merits of Gerrard and Lampard playing either on their own, or together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7656414.stm

...here is a quote... "Claims that Gerrard has the edge over Lampard when he plays with another partner in centre midfield are backed up by results in 25 games since the 2006 World Cup.

Largely based on a successful partnership during Euro 2008 qualifying with Gareth Barry, the Liverpool midfielder helped England win six out of eight games when he has been given more licence to attack.

Contrast that with Lampard who helped England win 50% of the 12 matches where he had the central role. It should be noted, however, that Gerrard played in another midfield role in eight of those.

The worst scenario, in terms of results anyway, is that the pair play centrally together. When this happened England won only 40% of their games. "

I personally believe that if you are going to try and attack a team you need to have Gerrard in it, wherever you can fit him in. Also, people seem to forget that the 'Gareth Barry has to play' debate began from him playing so well next to Gerrard. My own preverence would be to have all three - Lampard, Gerrard and Barry (certainly against Kazakhstan) with a front three of Rooney, Hesky and Walcott/SWP.

[Derek]

Gerrard is at his best when he plays the middle, but neither he nor Lampard play well when paired together in the middle. Hence, the problem. But you can't drop either player - that's just foolish

The best solution is probably some form of 5 man midfield - either a 4-2-3-1 or a 4-3-2-1 - where Lampard plays a central mid defending role behind Gerrard with Barry, Cole and Walcott on the wings.

Honestly, it's a nice problem to have - but McClaren and SGE never figured it out. Hopefully Capello does.

[John]

Have just read an fact on this debate.
Gerrard has played 68 times won 44 drawn 16 and Lost 8

Lampard 64 times W 36 D 15 L13

Together the Record reads 40 Games W 24 D 8 L 8.

Gerards record without Lampard Played 28 W 20 D8 L0

Every time Gerard has lost with England he has played with Lampard. they cant play together

[David Taylor]

Will we ever be free of this question? If both are on form and deserve a place, stick Lampard in the middle then Gerrard on the wing. If no Frank, then put Gerrard in the centre of the park. You simply have to have Steven Gerrard on the pitch, he can win a game in an instant.

End of. Please.

Saying that, if Capello can make them both work in the centre somehow, he'll probably get knighted.

[Giordano Bennetti]

Either - but not both. I think Lampard fits into a team's system better. Gerrard seems to be a better individual player - but it is a conundrum as to where best to play him.

I'm not sure either of them are "great". Robson performed much better than either of them on the international stage.

[HUGH]

They are too different for one to be better. SG floats in and out of a game often with devastating effect late on. More energetic and disciplined FL influences the game throughout. They must be allowed to play as attacking midfielders. That means as they do for their clubs having a holding midfielder behind. Look at Chelsea/ManUtd/LPool success in Europe with that formation. Put bulldozing Rooney wide left out of their way, pacey Walcott on right Joe Cole sub for all four. No Beckham headless chicken moves inside that close space and we can get best from both FL and SG. Attacking fullbacks against the minnows a further justification for 4-1-4-1. Change formation to solve the problem Capello.

[Greg Spencer]

Steven Gerrard is my vote for the middle if I had to choose one and here's why

The facts speak for themselves but forget about facts their rubbish, Frank Lampard plays in a 3 man midfield last time Frank Lampard tracked someone back and made a last ditch saving tackle answers on a postcard.

In a 4-4-2 Lampard struggles for England, because more work is required of him in his own half which he is not prepared to do. Stevie G is all action the complete midfielder tackles, scores, creates, drives he is the complete midfielder in my opinion.

So in summary play a 4-3-3 with both because no manager has the meatballs to drop any of these when both fit, debate over nothing hope I’m proved wrong.

[KeZ]

Put it this way... They are both mega.

People who say Lampard is rubbish clearly do not know that much about football. As a play-maker he is one of the best in the world along with Kaka, Deco etc. His performances for Chelsea this season just keep getting better and better!

Gerrard changes games, there is no doubt about that... his shooting ability is unbelievably brilliant and his ability to connect with a striker is epic.

But for England...Lamps w/o Gerrard works better than Gerrard w/o Lampard.

[Rodney]

The eraser is a Rank Plonker! Lampard is now worth 100m after renewing his contract. Gerrard not more than 20m

[Stephen Lane]

I do not think it is a question of who is better, they are both world class, it is a question of who is right for the team and for now that must be Lampard. He showed against Croatia that he can forge a good partnership with Barry in the holding position, he keeps it simple and retains possession, which Capello insists on, and can make crucial forward runs in support of Heskey and Rooney. Gerrard is less disciplined, doesn't hold his position and tries too many ambitious long balls. Great to have to bring on after 70 minutes.

[Daniel]

The better player? Gerrard.
The better player for Fabio Capello's England? Lampard.

When Gerrard is on song he's phenomenal and able to single-handedly win matches. But to do that he needs to be able to do his Roy of the Rovers schtick and charge about the pitch. And that means making concessions in the rest of the squad to accomodate his maverick play.

In a Capello setup, Lampard is much better suited to being given a job and doing it well. When Gerrard has the reins put on him, he ends up being anonymous.

[Ken Moore]

Gerrard is more spectacular, Lampard is more consistent. The tortoise beats the hare.
Usually. Gerrard has the European Cup but wants the league title....Lampard has a cpuple of league titles but wants the European Cup.
Not a lot in it.....is there?

[steve]

I think there is no point comparing them because it's clear that both of them are able to give life to a game. It's surprising to see that it's never a foregone conclusion with this kind of player. They can kick a goal at anytime and make their team win. Besides it's meaningless to see who of them is the best in sofar as they don't really play at the same position. It depends on the team configuration and the team spirit. As far as Chelsea is concerned, they tend to recruit to many world famous players so that the team spirit is not as so developped as in Liverpoold where the strategy is far more consolidated. We can even talk about cohesiveness for the reds. They know each other by heart.

[Robert Hillery]

I think both are excellant players but, if I had to pick which one is better then I would say Gerrard.
Technically their is nothing to chose between them, it is a draw when it comes to fitness, the work both players put in for their teams is world-class. Both players have an excellant mentality, Lampard showed his strength against Liverpool last season taking that penalty, Gerrard has been the leader for Liverpool and lead the way for years. Both players have an excellant application to training and both are very professional. They are both match-winners which the stats show and both effect their teams play on the pitch. The one area that Gerrard gets ahead on is Tactical application. Gerrard is far more flexible then Lampard, he has played right, left, behind the striker, as a holding midfeilder and central midfeild during his career, he has been effective in all these postions. Lampard can only really be effective in central midfeild with a holding midfeild player and that is why Gerrard is better.

[DAN]

2 of the best centre midfileders in the world! I think Gerrard may just edge it but it's very close. Bot immense for their clubs and can do practically anything. Lampards play making is second to none, Gerrards match winning ability is second to none. Both have amazing shots, passing range, good tackling, decent headers of the ball, both actually very good dribblers altough they dont always have to run at defenders so you dont see it as much.. Both complete players.. Both world class!

[topcorner]

Gerrard by miles. Lampard cannot defend with menace .Gerrard is much more of a complete player. I think the solution is to put Gerrard as a free role player just behind Rooney. Allow him to run wherever he wants to run. He can support in midfield when required and be a potent link between midfield and attack.

[zekk67]

Funny that Chelski fans keep raving about the last England game against Croatia and how Lampard is like "totally awesome". They seem to forget that just a few months back, the partnership of Gerrard and Barry was touted to be the best choice for England. Some say "why not put them both in a 4-2-3-1 formation and drop Rooney" I have nothing against Rooney being dropped but realistically, as we have seen in every England game with Gerrard and Lampard playing, we won't see Gerrard in that position as Lampard will probably defy instructions and bully Gerrard into covering his arse (just by staying forward and not defending).
Every time Gerrard and Lampard plays together, the coach claims that they will alternate positions which almost definitely never happens. Gerrard makes his trademark runs forward and ends up having to make the dash back to cover the back four when Lampard screws up.
This is no longer a debate of who's better. Both are equally good, but Gerrard gets criticised more, due to him being out of his favourite position most of the time and the worldwide pro-Man U propaganda. This is now a question of the people making their minds up and Capello picking the best team not with all of his best players. If Lampard is playing well, then play him, keep Gerrard on the bench. If Gerrard is fired up, put him on. Simple as that.
People have been criticising Capello for playing Gerrard out of position on the left, but now once Lampard and Barry are doing well, why have you people started changing their minds about this? We all know only Joe Cole or Stewart Downing can fit into that role, now all of a sudden, in order to accomodate all of ENG's best players, Gerrard "works best on the left" now??
The bottom line is, you want to see the best from your player, play him in the right position. You can't accomodate for two, then drop one. You can't place a player out of his position and then criticise him for not trying!
PS: On the last comments by Capello on Gerrard to play as "part of the team", I would say Gerrard has always been playing as part of the team, he has never demanded to be the centre of attention. Capello is not giving enough credit to his contributions to the country, so I think, there is no point for Gerrard to play for England, at least not when Capello is still in charge.