KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Torres vs Suarez

Of them souness was the only one you could compare like for like with Gerrard in terms of ability to run a game

Does that make him a bad player?

Stanley in your view was Souness one of our greatest? From what i've seen of him dont try tell me otherwise, he was fantastic, better than Gerrard ability wise maybe?

Youre a loon!
Youre very clearly contradicting yourself as youve just said that the reason Stevie G is not a club ledgend is because he stayed at the club his entire career and didnt leave for say Chelsea or Madrid.

Souness was strong and solid, very physical, hard tackler but, IMO Gerrard is better technically, probably less physical but better all round. Gerrard could play just off the striker, on the right, left and centre of mid field, even excelled at right back, so, much more valuable than Souness in a team.

how can anybody compare Gerrard to an all time great like Souness or any of the World Class players, Gerrard had ability yes but he has never played at the highest level hardly, two runs in the champions league to the final and that's it against a man who won the trophy 3 times and played in five League triumphs in about 6 years. All you people are basically saying Gerrard WOULD of done it where as Graeme Souness, Case, Terry Mac, Dalglish, Hansen e.t.c ACTUALY did it so your arguments are flawed. It's a bit like saying Andy Murray is better than Borg because he's faster around the court and is better from the baseline even tho he has only won one major grand slam and no Wimbledon titles, never put wanna be's ahead of somebodies.

It's worth noting that the game has drastically changed since the 70s/80s. It's much more technical, more fast paced and tackles that would have been acceptable back then are yellow/ red carded nowadays. Would Souness have flourished in today's PL, or would he have to adapt his game so much, his talent would have been lost?

Can you really compare two players who played in very different eras? In today's world, Gerrard is most definitely a legend imo, so are the team of the 70s + 80s. Same position, they're just different players and legends for different reasons.

yes but I ask the question again, how can you put a player who has yet to reach the heights of true greats who have won numerous Leagues and Europeam Cups on the same level footing or above, it's completely flawed.

It's a bit like saying somebody is as good or if not better than Usain Bolt even though nobody has seen him officially run under 10 secs or win Olympic gold just because he's really fast and MIGHT have it in him to run faster, you can't put wannabes on the same level as somebodies just on the basis of guessing, Souness ACTUALY did it on numerous occasions like Dalglish, Rush, Hansen and Ray Kennedy for instance.

Using your analogy...just because someone hasn't been recorded being able to run faster than Usain Bolt, doesn't mean they can't. Of course you would think that if there is someone that is capable of doing that, they would want to compete for that title, but just because no one has, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Back to Gerrard...just because he hasn't been tested at the highest level on a regular basis, doesn't mean he isn't that good. In his case, it's quite the opposite, it's the rest of the team that has prevented him from competing at that level. Maybe not now, but 2-3 years ago, he would have got into any team in the world, backed up be Chelsea & Madrid's interest in him. Just because he hasn't been tested does not mean he's not capable, he was world class in every sense of the word.

You can judge a 'team' based on cups & leagues but not necessarily a player! Gerrard cannot be overlooked just because his team mates weren't good enough to help him win the league. And if 'playing at the higest level' is the yardstick then giggs, souness, dalglish, best & rush aren't as good as phil neville because of their poor world cup exploits.