Let's be honest, If it wasn't Gerrard, Liverpool would have been mid-table team at best, even might have faced relegation. I doubt any other midfielder would be able to do for Liverpool what Gerrard has done. The guy has everything, scores from penalties, with headers, from distance, free-kicks, great defensively and posses outstanding leadership and vision of the game. If I want a midfielder for my team, I would choose prime Gerrard with no hesitation.

People would follow Gerrard into Hell. The guy is a folk hero and led like no other. Dragged mediocre teams to Champions of Europe against some of the elite teams of an era. Swap him with any of the other names and Liverpool don't win a thing.

Gerrard and by a mile, only people with club loyalties say otherwise, Gerrard could do anything, Scholes and Lamps went on to have better careers and won more trophies and if that’s the question then they win easily but if it’s about who’s the better player, Gerrard could do it all, every single facet of the midfield play, we were made to watch Gerrard’s clips in the academy, both defensive, attacking and central/holding/ box to box midfielders because he was the one at that time who had it all.

Gerrard for me. I'll never forget the cup final against West Ham. He was phenomenal, whilst the rest of his squad ran around like lemons.

There's a reason why Jose Mourinho want to sign Gerrard at Chelsea when he already had Lampard at his disposal. And Mourinho try to sign Gerrard when he was at Real Madrid as well.

Chelsea fan since 96, Steven Gerrard wins this one easily for me. If players swapped clubs during their playing time then Liverpool would have been a lot worse off. Gerrard took so many games by the scruff of the neck and you could argue he's defensive game is better and he was a stronger captain. Both could pass, finish, create and take set peices. Lamaprd arguably had the better technique, but Gerrard's overall game was stronger and he influenced games where Liverpool had no right winning.

Both were definitely great players and very well decorated, Lampard in particular. Gerrard did have a number of decent and good players around him during his career, but he was definitely the key man at Liverpool from the time of Rafa Benitez until Luis Suarez' final season with Liverpool... Not only was Gerrard the better athlete in terms of pace and explosiveness, but he was a true box to box midfielder who would play any role in midfield and also as a second striker, he had great technique with the ball at his feet and he had such an extraordinary range of passes as well... Lampard was a very intelligent and highly disciplined player with excellen positional sense who played his role excellently. While he did not have those explosive runs with the ball, beating several defenders with pace and power to finish off a shot or lay a great assist for a clear-cut chance for a teammate, he had good ball control, excellent short passes, and was very effective at not turning the ball over. He was a better and more instinctive goal scorer than Gerrard, who considered himself a defensive midfielder at heart, while Lampard was an offensive midfielder who played mostly in the centre or slightly left. On the whole, I go with Gerrard, because individually, he was more capable of influencing and taking control of a game than Lampard was.

Lampard is highest midfielder for goals in the league, and 3rd for assists. U can say Gerard is better but don’t dismiss Lampard like he’s didn’t have an amazing record

Would Chelsea have been worse with Gerrard in the team rather than Lampard? No chance. Would Liverpool have been better with Lampard in the team instead of Gerrard? Never.

Yes, Lineker just said it! Why can't any England coach back then move out of a 4-4-2?! If Lampard can play successfully with Ballack in a 4-3-3, he can play well with Gerrard in that formation too!

Gerrard was the better player 👏 Lampard has the better career 👏 👌

Lampard influences in big games are very underrated, yes hes got the better team, but even though he is surrounded by superstar, he is always the one who brings the win or the orchestrator. his goalscoring records always overshadowed his other ability, he is more than that. Comparing Lampard with Gerrard is like comparing an silent assassin with a general.

Some player can attack, some player can assist, some player can score, some player can defend and some player can motivate their team, bu Gerrard can do all those.

Only way to answer this question is, could Lampard or Scholes do what Gerrard did in lfc? I think not. Gerrard defo could have done it in Chelsea and utd what them players did in their respective teams.

On how many occasions did Lampard or Scholes pick a team up on there own and win games??? Gerrard could play any position on the football pitch and he’d still be world class. This really has never been a debate……

Gerrard was a heroic captain who single-handedly carried that mediocre Liverpool team to cup success ....He led from the front... Lampard would not be able to play to his max in a mediocre team....

vs AC Milan in Istanbul Gerrard play 3 position in single match, midfiled then on the second half switch to central forward and then in extra time swith to rightback

Love both. Absolute beasts im their day but Gerrard for me just had more. Lamps was goals in a very talented chelsea teams. Gerrard gave you not as many goals but did score, assist, make something out of nothing in Liverpool’s mediocre days. Tbh lamps played with freedom to go forward.

Its a tight one but I would have Gerrard in my team ... He is an all action midfielder ..can shoot can tackle can assist and can lead the team by example

If you gave each Premiership Manager a choice between prime Scholes, Lampard or Gerrard to go straight into their team, I believe most of them would pick Gerrard, especially mid-table and bottom-table teams. Gerrard could play almost all positions at a high level. Scholes and Lampard could only play as attacking mid or second striker well (though it has to be said perhaps better than Gerrard in these positions). But in all other positions, it's not even close.

The distinctive point that Gerard is more of versatile player. He can paly anywhere. Plus he has a great leadership character!

Frank Lampard was a great player in his own right but it's Steven Gerrard all day every day. The closest player you'll ever see to Roy of the Rovers. Started off as a right back, turned into a brilliant box to box midfielder, won PFA player of the year playing on the right wing and as a number 10, then finished off his career as a brilliant number 6. A freak footballer.

I always love discussions that are based on "what if", "I know for a fact, because "reasons"". The fact is, Lampard played at Chelsea, Gerrard played at Liverpool. And although some similarities were present, they played in specific systems in specific teams. Lampard leads in terms of goals and assists, Gerrard was more mobile, and more oriented on the center of the field. Discussions like "would that team be better with Lampard/Gerrard" are pointless per se, because both of them played where they played, the rest is pure speculation with 0 proof and vague arguments like "I know for sure".

It’s pretty easy for me…Gerrard is better all day every day and twice on a Sunday! I’m with Micah on this, he nearly says it, it’s not even a debate!

I'm a united man! And ima say Gerrard Gerrard had heart and passion!! Midfielder goals scorer and could defend!!!!!!! And lead a team even though I like lampard it's gerrard

Okay lampard played for a better team, but he also was frequently the best player on the pitch for those great teams. He's the first name in chelseas 11 from any fan

This debate only ever happened AFTER their time in the premier league. If you’re objective and ACTUALLY watched both of them Gerrard is easily the better player. Shameless debate in my opinion.

Lampard was definitely better, Gerrard just looked better cause he ran around a bit more. Lampard's passing was better, he was a MUCH better goalscorer (one of the PL all time top scorers, as a central midfielder ffs), he was better positionally, and also much better defensively than he's given credit for.

You all said Gerrard. It’s not a debate

Gerrard never played in teams even close to as good as Lampard has. You can’t say Lampard for goals. Lampard played further forward to Gerrard and Gerrard still bagged a lot of goals and assists. If Gerrard played in Lampard role or vice versa, Gerrard would be miles ahead of Lampard

Gerrard for me, it's not even a debate

Gerrard not even a debate

Gerrard. A goalscorer; tackler; leader. Closest player I've seen to Bryan Robson. Lampard a fine goalscoring midfielder but Gerrard dictated games. As for Scholes the most talented of the lot and would've had 120 caps and statues built if he'd been Argentinian or Italian.

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.

Ppl will say Gerrard is better because he didn’t have a team around him as good as Chelsea. Lol but when they played each other back in them days it was always battles, and who did Liverpool really have in them seasons who wasn’t world class, plus this isn’t a question about how they played with their team it’s individual so if we are going on stats Lampard

For me I’d say Lampard. Lampard beats him in every stat possible. More Goals, Assists & Trophies.

Gerrard is the best individual player of the three. He could do everything. Score, assist, tackle, free kicks, leadership, play in a DM role, the CM, box to box, a 10, on the wing. More individual iconic moments. Scholes was the best passer of the three. And Lampard was the best goal scorer. But Gerrard had way more to his game than the other 2.

Gerrard more dynamic, better defensive ability, athletic, can give you a worldly at random Lampard smarter/decision making, better scorer, better positionally, more effective and consistent Lamps my fav so little biased but gerrard would fit better in more formations but if I was picking a team I could have lampard purely because he’s too damn effective and consistent. U will get more 7-8/10 performance from lampard where gerrard would dip here and there but would give u a handful of 10/10 performances….. plus gerrard makes more mistakes

Gerrard scored 21 Non-penalty goals for England and gave 24 assists. Lampard scored 20 non-penalty goals and provided only 11 assists for England. This with Lampard playing the entire 108 caps as attacking center midfield role. Gerrard literally played DM, LM, RM, CM, AM in his caps. He routinely showed up at every big tournament when no other star name showed up. Lampard only showed up at Euro 2004 and was awful in every other tournament.

Newcastle fan - Gerrard easy.

Gerrard on any day sure...

Jose M wanted Gerrard / Alex F wanted Gerrard… Yet each manager had Lampard / Scholes at the time 🤔

Lampard of course. I always thought that Gerrard was overrated, same as Michael Owen because Liverpool is the most famous team in England.

Totally agree

Gerrard no debate reached elite heights with much inferior squads . Scholes and lampard are class but so were 8 other players in their teams . Stevie G only had about 2 or 3 at max besides him best English midfielder in the prem .

If you have Keane in the midfield then Lampard is the best, if you have Scholes in the midfield then Gerrard is the best!

This is a very difficult comparison and honestly there is no wrong answer, one thing I always think works in Gerrards favour is that he had hollywood moments playing in an average team that make people perceive him as better. Lampard played in better teams so was never the stand out individual. For me the hardest thing to do in football is score goals, and to get a guaranteed 20 goals from midfield every year is outrageous, he'd win the golden boot this year with his 09/10 numbers, ahead of Son, Kane, KDB, Salah etc. It's because of that for me he edges it, but I'd never say anyone is wrong for picking Gerrard, an absolutely phenomenal player

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.

Gerrard

Gerrard all day long his all round game was better and he was a true leader

Gerrard by far the most complete player ever - he would pick Liverpool on dead days and make daunting runs through the middle ending up with some great screamers. 2004 Olympiakos - vs Rivaldo, he took the game away and mind you then we had zero world class players in the team. Gerrard would pickup the toughest battles on the pitch, unlike Lampard who was a brilliant No10 cum 8 but nothing close to Gerrrrrrrrrard

Stevie G

Xavi and Iniesta and Silva existed in their prime at that time... and that is one of many reasons why they never got remotely close.

I go by what scholes said; "i was a good player in a great side", "Gerrard was the big match winner in his side" "gerrard could probably do what i did at united" "i could never do what he did at Lpool". Q.E.D 🧐🧐🧐🧐

Nobody debates it, from an arsenal fan if you are neutral and not a chelsea supporter it’s obvious gerrard is the better player, ex pros mostly say gerrard, pundits often say gerrard. Even now they are both managers gerrard is better. Steven gerrard all day long apart from a few chelsea fans who don’t like to admit it.

According to me, Frankie Lampard is not only better playmaker than Steven Gerrard, but he’s arguably the most completed midfielder in football history! Lampard had a brilliant technique, finishing ability, accurate passes, amazing long shots, scored so many decisive goals for Chelsea! Most of the people don’t know, but Frankie is the top goal scorer in Chelsea’s history - he’s got 212 goals, despite being number 8! There have played so many great strikers through the years : Didier Drogba (110 goals), Diego Costa (60 goals), Fernando Torres (45 goals), Andriy Schevchenko (22 goals)!! Lampard surpassed all of them, so he’s definitely the best midfielder in Premier league!!

Just search for Gerard longshots only Wayne Rooney can do topspin like that most of Frank Lampard goals were tappings and penalties plus he was not even half as good in defence and Pace on the ball

Gerrard all day long

How scholes even gets into this debate is crazy. He could pass. That’s it. Gerrard could pass just as well and had better vision

If you see Ronaldo now at crumbling Man U, you would pick Gerrard everytime on this debate People and rivals always undermining Gerrard's effect on liverpool. In reality, he's the blood, he's the one that always been depended on, and he's always creating miracle

100% spot on

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.

Only Chelsea fans would say Lampard. Gerrard was an all round brilliant and better player

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.

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 is all time the best midfielder in EPL!

If Gerrard weren’t scouse it would be easier for people to admit that he’s easily the best. Could do it all, could play right back and be the best player on the pitch.

I have this feeling that Mourinho would have gotten it right with Gerrard and Lampard. Sven and Fabio just made a mess out of them by their (managers) style or playing system. 442 or diamond didn't work for them.

I’m Nigerian , we call him Steven general . He a general on the pitch

Gerrard just had it all and was the only one of them 3 players that could of played in any position apart from keeper and done a good job playing there.

Frank scored more, created more and won more, simple.

Answer for who would be better for England is obvious it's best to play Lampard Gerrard and Scholes Hargreaves holding but England was stuck in their ways and it would mean playing either a diamond or 4231 ironically they did it in friendlies and it was ok but when he came to the big games didn't want to drop Joe and the Beckham in the stupid 442 evolved into 4141!

Gerrard is the most complete footballer I've ever seen. He was great at every facet of the game - scoring, passing, tackling, leading, good in the air, etc...

Gerrard didn't have Drogba and Ballack or peter Cech in his mediocre squad ,and he leads the team to win UCl final against that scary Ac Milan team .

Lampard played in a superior team. Gerrard carried a team. If Gerrard went Chelsea Liverpool wouldn't be where they are now. Liverpool would of gone downhill Gerrard kept us a float. Gerrard in a Chelsea team would of destroyed it. All the big teams wanted Gerrard Madrid Munich inter Chelsea

They could have got 2 world cups easily together. Maybe the God's of football didn't want that to happened🤷🏾‍♂️

I think this is easy to figure out. Switch the two players and see how they’d handle the pressure in each others shoes. Would Lampard have had the ability to overcome an AC Milan team in the CL Final like Gerrard did? Doubt it. Would Gerrard be able to contribute to Chelsea in the same way Lampard did? I think so. I don’t think there were any situations Lampards been in that Gerrard couldn’t handle. I don’t think Gerrard is WAY better than Lamps, but I do believe there is a difference between the two.

It’s pretty clear to most unbiased observers that Gerrard was the better player. Re Scholes, he controlled games. Gerrard won them.

Stevie G isn't in Lampard debate,people just like being polite by quoting Lamps in the same bracket

There is no debate.. gerrard wins hands down

Lampard no questions about that

It’s easy gerrard wins. Lampard played in a team full of world class players. Gerrard never.

Lampard great goal scorer. All round great player gerrard.

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.

Maybe there isn't a better player. Maybe you need to choose what you want. Lampard scored more goals, all day long. Lampard also won more. But Gerrard was mad.

Gerrard had everything Scholes and Lampard had but Gerrard in his prime was a stronger and quicker athlete, better defender and a better captain

I think Gerrard stood out more based on being in a less star studded team.

Gerrard heads n shoulders above.

It's Stevie G all day💯 the man had it all

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

How that golden generation didn't even get close to winning anything it's beyond me..what a waste,it's ashame really 🤷🏽‍♂️

They are all elites players But Gerard can play and give best performance in more positions than Lampard or 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.. :)

The comments all saying 'if Gerrard moved to Chelsea he'd have pulled miles ahead'--maybe, but he had the chance to do exactly that and turned it down. Both Lampard & Terry courted him heavily during England camps, plus R0man is known to have showed interest, so Stevie had more or less a guaranteed spot. If Liverpool's 2000s mediocity held him back and kept him in this debate, then, ultimately it's his fault and his choice. Stevie could have jumped ship, Grealish-style, at least five years before he aged out of his prime as a player.

It’s a shame Gerrard never signed for Chelsea, if he had Mourinho would have made the case for exactly how to play them in a 4/3/3

It's clear that... Liverpool became better than before when he (Gerrard) left, in opposite Chelsea became worse than it was when he (Lampard) left the club that means Lampard better than Gerrard simply

Not even a contest. Stevie g by a mile, all great players but his all round game makes him a clear winner. Even better than messi and ronaldo, stevie g would do a job up top but them 2 would struggle in the middle of the park. My logic is undeniable. GOAT

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

#10 Shearer #14 Henry #11 Giggsy #8 Lamps #4 Stevie G CR7 #3 A. Cole #5 Ferdinand #15 Vidic #2 G. Neville #1 Schmeichel

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.