Lampard better without Gerrard

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

Holy Jebus motherf***ing Christ. I don't believe what I'm reading. READ THIS - GERRARD 2-0 LAMPARD

 

It was one of those nights when Sven-Goran Eriksson might have awoken in a cold sweat. If, that is, he managed to get any sleep in the first place. England's manager confided recently that he struggled to switch off after matches and this was a night when his mind must have been burdened by the long inventory of faults that is making the idea of Sven becoming Sir Sven seem faintly preposterous

 

His angst will have begun with the defining image of Michael Owen collapsing to the floor with the anguished look of a man who knew it was all over. There was the inability to defend from crosses, the way the team disintegrated after the interval, then the shock factor of seeing key players going AWOL when they were needed the most. And when all that is done, Eriksson must return to the nagging problem of how to reconfigure what is essentially a malfunctioning midfield when Steven Gerrard returns to the starting line-up against Ecuador on Sunday.

 

Everyone knows the answer, of course - that Eriksson will return Gerrard alongside Frank Lampard in a flat midfield quartet, with Owen Hargreaves stepping down. Whether that is the right solution is another matter entirely. For the opening hour, before everything went horribly wrong, Lampard certainly gave the impression that he was far more comfortable playing without Gerrard than with him. Or, to put it another way, he was happier with a holding midfielder beside him rather than one whose natural instinct is to attack.

 

It is a curiosity. If there were such a thing as an overrated world XI, then Lampard would have been offered the captaincy after his performances against Paraguay and Trinidad & Tobago. Suddenly Gerrard is taken out of the starting line-up, a more defensive replacement is brought in and, hey presto, Lampard is back to looking like the player he is for Chelsea rather than the player he was for West Ham. Does Eriksson ask Gerrard to drop into a more defensive role? Or would that be too great a sacrifice in terms of losing Gerrard's attacking thrust? Eriksson is not sure, and he is not alone.

 

About the only certainty is that a wound-up Gerrard took his omission last night as a personal affront. He is said to be bewildered by what he sees as undue caution and, demonstrating a level of selfishness with which he is not usually associated, Liverpool's captain is irritated that, in his mind, Eriksson did not trust him to get through the game without collecting his second yellow card of the tournament.

 

To the rest of us it made perfect sense. Imagine the hullabaloo if Eriksson had involved Gerrard from the outset and a slightly mistimed challenge, an instinctive curse or an accidental brush of limbs had resulted in him picking up a one-match suspension. Imagine the hostility of the anti-Sven headlines. The Swede's conservatism may have triggered Gerrard's reflex outrage but Eriksson was right to play safe and, as someone who prides himself on being a team player, it is disconcerting to learn that this largely admirable midfielder has been sniping behind the manager's back.

 

As the Professional Footballers' Association's player of the year stepped out, in came the guy who is rapidly gaining a reputation as England's odd-job man. Quietly, effectively, Hargreaves set about the task of mopping up in front of defence, laying the ball off simply, making his usual crisp challenges while, all the time, hoping to prove to the sceptical English fans that his relationship with Eriksson extends far beyond that of teacher and pet.

 

It cannot be easy being asked to play like Dunga when there are Englishmen in Germany who have loudly let it be known they think he is dung. Fair? Undoubtedly not, but it has become a fact of life that the 25-year-old is the player the fans dislike the most. They don't like the way he speaks with a Canadian twang. They don't like the fact he bypasses the football vernacular to talk about zones and sections. They don't like the fact he is one of the few players who does not sing God Save The Queen. They don't even like his hair. Most of all, they say, they don't like the way he passes the ball.

 

Football can be brutal but even the most ardent critic would struggle to argue that Hargreaves did his job anything but diligently. He is not a player to conjure up the sort of moment Joe Cole delivered after 34 minutes but neither is he the dud that has been made out. He got a thumbs-up from Eriksson midway through the first half and, as well as a number of telling interceptions, his presence at the base of midfield allowed Lampard to press forward without worrying about cover.

 

 

Piece of absolute s**** article if I've ever read one

[Maldini]

I really don't know where to start, that article is staggeringly stupid both in concept and execution.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I know. It couldn't be more wrong. I feel paralyzed with amazement & rage equally

[Guest Jack Bauer]

I didn't think there was much wrong up until the last highlight.

 

f***ing London press gobschites.

[Maldini]

I didn't think there was much wrong up until the last highlight.

 

f***ing London press gobschites.

Has somebody else hijacked your username in the last 24 hours?

[Guest Jack Bauer]

What?!

[Guest Scot]

Struggling to see the problem

[growler]

Its just another slant on Gerrard and Lampard cannot play in the same team, unless we are playing 5 across the middle.

 

Some come down and say Gerrard others say the turd should be in.

[R A Softlad]

Incredible - they should be calling for fat frank to be dropped.

[_00_deathscar]

So, where are the f*cks who say "Gerrard doesn't perform for England" now?

[Guest Jack Bauer]

he's a dirty chelsea fan,.

[Roarcelona]

The article isn't that bad, although it does seem to imply without saying it that Lampard should play and Gerrard be dropped which I don't agree with.

 

IF one of Gerrard and Lampard was to be dropped, and even if someone thought that Lampard was a slightly better player than Gerrard, surely Gerrard should get the nod on current form anyway. He's already scored two goals playing in a much more restricted role than Lampard and with about a third as many shots.

Edited June 21, 2006 by rossk

[Knox_Harrington]

The article is correct in that Lampard played better last night than he has done for some time. Stevie's still far and away the better player and should start ahead of him. Either way Hargreaves has to play. And so does Crouch. Between Hargreaves and Crouch it's any two from Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney and Walcott.

[_00_deathscar]

Honestly cannot believe anyone is even contemplating dropping Steven Gerrard.

[Gravy]

When Gerrard heads the ball into the net, the England players rush towards him to celebrate. Lampard stays in the penalty area and kicks the ball into the net in frustration rather than joy.

 

Yep, I noticed that. Like him saying to himsel;f, "wtf can't I do that".

 

 

I thought Hargreaves, along with J. Cole, was England's best player last night. Still, let's not do anything stupid eh Sven, like playing him again after a better performance than that t*** Lampard has given in 3 games for England (possibly more).

[Leo No.8]

Stevie has proved himself the man for the biggest ocassions - those comparable to World Cup matches, in Istanbul and the FA Cup final this year.

 

The more pressure and responsibility, the better he plays. He needs a holding midfielder to allow him to be that player.

 

He needs to be the central driving force for this England team, and unless Eriksson works that out before the quarter finals, England will be going home.

 

I'd go with 3 at the back and leave Crouchy on the bench as someone who can change the game; I'd favour this formation which makes the best use of the players we have, and means our best players can play the way they want to...

 

 

--------------------------------------Robinson---------------------------------------

 

 

------------------Ferdinand----------Terry-----------Carragher--------------------

 

 

-------------------------------------Hargreaves-------------------------------------

 

 

-Beckham--------------------------------------------------------------------A.Cole

 

 

---------------------------Lampard-------------Gerrard----------------------------

 

 

----------------------------------------J.Cole----------------------------------------

 

 

----------------------------------------Rooney--------------------------------------

 

In fairness, even though Lampard or Gerrard making way is a 'no brainer', you'd prefer to keep both. The way I see it is Beckham has been ineffective as an attacking force on the right, but you want to keep his delivery and set-pieces - this way you can. Also Joe Cole looks to be in great form, and I think could be really dangerous in the hole if supported by Lampard and Gerrard. Carra also hasn't looked comfortable at right-back, and would be happier in a more central defensive role.

Edited June 21, 2006 by Leo No.8

[johngibo YPC]

its not an article its just a blog. The Guardian do about 7 a day on the world cup to provoke debate. All its really saying is Lampard plays better with a defensive midfielder, and Lampard and Gerrard aren't clicking together in midfield as a two. If you want to read a very anti Lampard blog read the one yeaterday that says Sven had picked Lampard in the hope that he got suspended. If you don't agree with the blog you can always say so

[Gravy]

Stevie has proved himself the man for the biggest ocassions - those comparable to World Cup matches, in Istanbul and the FA Cup final this year.

 

The more pressure and responsibility, the better he plays. He needs a holding midfielder to allow him to be that player.

 

He needs to be the central driving force for this England team, and unless Eriksson works that out before the quarter finals, England will be going home.

 

I'd go with 3 at the back and leave Crouchy on the bench as someone who can change the game; I'd favour this formation which makes the best use of the players we have, and means our best players can play the way they want to...

--------------------------------------Robinson---------------------------------------

------------------Ferdinand----------Terry-----------Carragher--------------------

-------------------------------------Hargreaves-------------------------------------

-Beckham--------------------------------------------------------------------A.Cole

---------------------------Lampard-------------Gerrard----------------------------

----------------------------------------J.Cole----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------Rooney--------------------------------------

 

In fairness, even though Lampard or Gerrard making way is a 'no brainer', you'd prefer to keep both. The way I see it is Beckham has been ineffective as an attacking force on the right, but you want to keep his delivery and set-pieces - this way you can. Also Joe Cole looks to be in great form, and I think could be really dangerous in the hole if supported by Lampard and Gerrard. Carra also hasn't looked comfortable at right-back, and would be happier in a more central defensive role.

 

That's a good formation, but maybe better with Cole in Lampard's place and put Rooney behind Crouch.

 

It looks like Sven like previous England managers, may fall into his best line-up/formation due to Owen's injury - more by luck than judgement.

[Knox_Harrington]

Stevie has proved himself the man for the biggest ocassions - those comparable to World Cup matches, in Istanbul and the FA Cup final this year.

 

The more pressure and responsibility, the better he plays. He needs a holding midfielder to allow him to be that player.

 

He needs to be the central driving force for this England team, and unless Eriksson works that out before the quarter finals, England will be going home.

 

I'd go with 3 at the back and leave Crouchy on the bench as someone who can change the game; I'd favour this formation which makes the best use of the players we have, and means our best players can play the way they want to...

--------------------------------------Robinson---------------------------------------

------------------Ferdinand----------Terry-----------Carragher--------------------

-------------------------------------Hargreaves-------------------------------------

-Beckham--------------------------------------------------------------------A.Cole

---------------------------Lampard-------------Gerrard----------------------------

----------------------------------------J.Cole----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------Rooney--------------------------------------

 

In fairness, even though Lampard or Gerrard making way is a 'no brainer', you'd prefer to keep both. The way I see it is Beckham has been ineffective as an attacking force on the right, but you want to keep his delivery and set-pieces - this way you can. Also Joe Cole looks to be in great form, and I think could be really dangerous in the hole if supported by Lampard and Gerrard. Carra also hasn't looked comfortable at right-back, and would be happier in a more central defensive role.

Crouch needs to start and Beckham doesn't have the legs anymore, I don't think. I can see what you are going for though.

[andysama]

its not an article its just a blog. The Guardian do about 7 a day on the world cup to provoke debate. All its really saying is Lampard plays better with a defensive midfielder, and Lampard and Gerrard aren't clicking together in midfield as a two. If you want to read a very anti Lampard blog read the one yeaterday that says Sven had picked Lampard in the hope that he got suspended. If you don't agree with the blog you can always say so

 

It's in my fecking paper.

[Woodsyla]

If you want to read a very anti Lampard blog read the one yeaterday that says Sven had picked Lampard in the hope that he got suspended.

 

I was praying he got booked yesterday. I really really hope that is true because it would mean that Sven, although looking for hte easy wasy out, has recognised the problem and WILL do something about it. Maybe Fat Frank knows this and Stevie scoring again has guaranteed him a place on the bench. Please let it be true, a Hargreaves Gerrard midfield is the best England have.

[Snoeker]

I thought Fw***'s contribution was nicely summed up by that 5 minute cameo when he sliced a left footed shot wide, drove a hollywood ball out wide to Beckham at a height that Crouch would have struggled to cope with and hit a feeble shot (again with the left) straight at the keeper.

 

If the writer of this blog is happy with that shiit so be it. But we all know who is more efficient. Hope England lose soon if they persist with this travesty.

[D.Boon]

Stevie has proved himself the man for the biggest ocassions - those comparable to World Cup matches, in Istanbul and the FA Cup final this year.

 

The more pressure and responsibility, the better he plays. He needs a holding midfielder to allow him to be that player.

 

He needs to be the central driving force for this England team, and unless Eriksson works that out before the quarter finals, England will be going home.

 

I'd go with 3 at the back and leave Crouchy on the bench as someone who can change the game; I'd favour this formation which makes the best use of the players we have, and means our best players can play the way they want to...

--------------------------------------Robinson---------------------------------------

------------------Ferdinand----------Terry-----------Carragher--------------------

-------------------------------------Hargreaves-------------------------------------

-Beckham--------------------------------------------------------------------A.Cole

---------------------------Lampard-------------Gerrard----------------------------

----------------------------------------J.Cole----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------Rooney--------------------------------------

 

In fairness, even though Lampard or Gerrard making way is a 'no brainer', you'd prefer to keep both. The way I see it is Beckham has been ineffective as an attacking force on the right, but you want to keep his delivery and set-pieces - this way you can. Also Joe Cole looks to be in great form, and I think could be really dangerous in the hole if supported by Lampard and Gerrard. Carra also hasn't looked comfortable at right-back, and would be happier in a more central defensive role.

 

 

On current form and with time to give it a try i would prefer this myself.........

 

...........................Robinson

 

.......Ferdinand...........Terry...........Carra

 

.................Hargreaves.......Carrick

 

.....Gerrard...........Lampard...............Joe Cole

 

.......................Rooney..........Crouch

[Stevie H]

On current form and with time to give it a try i would prefer this myself.........

 

...........................Robinson

 

.......Ferdinand...........Terry...........Carra

 

.................Hargreaves.......Carrick

 

.....Gerrard...........Lampard...............Joe Cole

 

.......................Rooney..........Crouch

 

i still think that even that side has two selfish players too many in it.

 

lampard is reminding me this world cup quite how good a player paul scholes was at his peak.

[Raj]

Stevie has proved himself the man for the biggest ocassions - those comparable to World Cup matches, in Istanbul and the FA Cup final this year.

 

The more pressure and responsibility, the better he plays. He needs a holding midfielder to allow him to be that player.

 

He needs to be the central driving force for this England team, and unless Eriksson works that out before the quarter finals, England will be going home.

 

I'd go with 3 at the back and leave Crouchy on the bench as someone who can change the game; I'd favour this formation which makes the best use of the players we have, and means our best players can play the way they want to...

--------------------------------------Robinson---------------------------------------

------------------Ferdinand----------Terry-----------Carragher--------------------

-------------------------------------Hargreaves-------------------------------------

-Beckham--------------------------------------------------------------------A.Cole

---------------------------Lampard-------------Gerrard----------------------------

----------------------------------------J.Cole----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------Rooney--------------------------------------

 

In fairness, even though Lampard or Gerrard making way is a 'no brainer', you'd prefer to keep both. The way I see it is Beckham has been ineffective as an attacking force on the right, but you want to keep his delivery and set-pieces - this way you can. Also Joe Cole looks to be in great form, and I think could be really dangerous in the hole if supported by Lampard and Gerrard. Carra also hasn't looked comfortable at right-back, and would be happier in a more central defensive role.

 

I think that this is a very good formation with the players available. However, I would drop Lampard and play Crouch up front. Gerrard and Joe Cole next to each other.

 

The system would enable the team to keep the ball better too. I also think that if they were defending, that Ashley Cole could drop back and make a back four with Joe Cole moving over to the left hand side, therefore, not placing too much defensive emphasis on Beckham (which is very important as he is not up to it).

 

But Sven is far to conservative for such thinking and it will be back to Flat 442 with Lampard miscuing shots, whilst Gerrard has to curb his natural game.

Edited June 21, 2006 by roegahnn