Frank Lampard is better than Steven Gerrard?

I know this has been debated for years and what I find amazing is that the majority of people still say Steven Gerrard is better than Frank Lampard. Well why? Lampard has won more trophys, scored more goals and been more consistent over his carrer.

Let's compare them both.

Lampard has scored 226 goals in total through out his club carrer.

Gerrard has scored 149 through out his club carrer.

Lampard has scored 23 International goals for England.

Gerrard has scored 19 International goals for England.

Lampard has won 4 FA Cups.

Gerrard has won 2 FA Cups.

Lampard has won 3 Premier leagues.

Gerrard has won 0 premier leagues.

Lampard won England player of the year 2 times.

Gerrard has won England player of the year 1 time.

Lampard has won 0 Champions Leagues (but that could change in two weeks)

Gerrard has won 1 Champions League.

So Look at that! statistics say Frank Lampard is superior to Steven Gerrard.

I know it isn't fair to judge just on statistics, but I think they definately have to be looked at and taken into consideration.

People might say that it isn't all about scoring goals and because Lampard is a better goal scorer doesnt make him the better player. Well what are the players assist records? im sure there's no significant difference there.

The argument that Steven Gerrard is a better player because he is a bigger part of the team doesn't make much sense considering Lampard has been a huge part of Chelseas success since 2005.

Also the argument that because Gerrard is a captain makes him better also makes no sense, because since when did being a captain make you a better player. Are you telling me that Patrice Evra (for Man United) is better than Lionel Messi for Barcelona because Messi isn't a captain?

So I think I have backed up very well on why Lampard is a better player than Gerrard, to those who are going to say Gerrard is better, well Why? I think you're going to have to put up a good argument

9 Answers

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago
    Favourite answer

    I agree with you.

    Most of the pundits on TV and radio either played for or support the northern red teams and are unprofessional and as biased as hell.

    They nearly always debate the negatives when it comes to Chelsea and the positives when it comes to Man Ure or Liverpool.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Lampard is clearly a better player, the argument that Gerrard has had to carry his team is not a valid one, he has a had player such alonso, torres and now suarez around him. Lampard has been the most consistent midfielder in the premiership for 8 or so years there is no midfielder in the history of the premier league that can match or get even close to lampards goal scoring stats!

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 8 years ago

    With all your facts and forget to mention that Lampard has been playing with much better players around him for years now. Lampard has been a cog in the wheel of Chelsea but poor Gerrard has had to carry Liverpool for a long time. Imagine how good Gerrard would be with other top class players around him when playing for Liverpool FC.

    As for when they both have played for England, Gerrard has mainly been played out of position out on the left.

    I think 99% of unbiased neutral football supporters (football managers and players come to that) would say considering these facts, Gerrard is a much better all-round footballer than Lampard.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    I agree with you mate. the only argument you could have for gerrard is that he doesn't have as good players playing with him. lampard is just a better player in my opinion, gerrard has past it whilst lamps has still maybe got another good season in him. though what i would say is that gerrard has had better moments, he's scored more important goals at important times. take his goal against olympiakos as an example. final minute of the match, liverpool had to score one more goal to progress to the next round of the champions league, gerrard produces a screamer to put them through in the dying seconds. lampard hasn't done this, i can't tink if he's done it once, but obviously your stats say he's scored more throughout his career. altogether, i would say lampard is better, he's a great player, underated if you ask me. heres the link of gerrards last minute goal:

    Youtube thumbnail

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • And his brilliant performance today, as well as his assist to Drogba, proves it to this date too, as always! Did it against Barcelona too, set up the first and assisted the first away from home!

    SuperFrank > Gerrard

    And that has always been the truth!

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 8 years ago

    oh please - this is absurd.

    Gerrard played well in the Final I felt - he was the central midfield general for us and knocked some beautiful long passes with pinpoint precision into excellent areas of the pitch or into the vicinity of our front runners like Downing, Enrique and occasionly Agger.

    I gave him an 8/10 and I gave Lamps an 8/5/10.

    Lampard and Terry have had the luxury to play alongside some of the finest foreign talent thanks to Abramovich's wealth and the masterstroke that was, bringing in Mourinho - they've enjoyed some great success.

    I rate them both v.highly but one thing you must remember is how the teams have changed considerably down the years from 97 to present - Gerrard has had to adapt and learn to play alongside so many new players each season - that the team itself has never really settled down and we've never quite managed to either keep our best XI for more than a season (case being 2008/09 - 2nd in prem ) because time was up on one or two key players who were over the hill, but almost irreplaceable (hypia) or simply guys we were forced to sell to European Giants (Arbeloa, Xabi Alonso, Sissoko, Masherano).

    Also remember under Abramovich some of the worlds best players were brought to Stamford bridge - players who at the time were in their prime, guys like Makelele, Duff, Gallas and slightly before that Mutu, Gudjohnson, etc etc

    they have enjoyed great success actualy since they went down the 'foreign manager' route in the mid 90s - when Gullit was appointed as Player-Manager. He brought in guys like Gianluca Vialli and one or two other star players who blended in with the Chelsea team that already had some established good players.

    Gradualy they began to make some noise and I think they were starting to show ambition after the 1997 European Cup Winners Cup triumph which was followed by the FA CUP in 2000 under Dennis Wise. Chelsea looked sexy, as a squad - with some glamour names in it - neutrals and sceptics wondered how much it woudl take to make them a force in the league and in europe.

    Then there was Zola, Poyet, Desaily, Hasselbaink big names in world football - and the stars just kept on coming and coming to Stamford Bridge and Chelsea were playing attacking footie and were being feared.

    Ranieri took them to 2nd in 2003/04 but that was not good enough for Abramovich having seen Chelsea spend a fortune on stars and get out done by Arsenal that year so he sacked him and replaced him with know the story goes.

    They've had financial muscle as well as appeal for some of the brighest and best in European and World Football as well as in British football.

    Their trio of Lampard-Terry-Drogba is amazing.

    Ours use to be Gerrard-Alonso-Torres , for a season and a half though only.

    Lampard Terry and Drogba have played what seems like centuries - around those 3 teams have been built around - and Chelsea have managed to build teams around those three almost at will.

    They wanted to Ashley Cole - they got him. Same story with Torres and Meireles.

    After Alonso left we had Gerrard-Carra and Torres but Gerrard and Carra between them would spent time on the surgery table and would rush themselves back to match fitness for big games, meanwhile we'd have a seriously out of form Torres and a young Lucas with no leader on the pitch to show him the ropes.

    Gerrard has shown plenty though in terms of going down as one of the best English midfielders of all time imo.

    imo Gerrard is a fraction bit better lol

    not being biased ^_^

    just SAYING - that hes not experiened a career at a club where a insanely rich sugar daddy can throw money at players like its a joke and assemble dream teams to buy titles and cups lol

    imagine if our owners werent so shady in their dealings and actualy HAD assets lol

    the previous ones - and imagine if they reassured Rafa that no matter what happened, Xabi Alonso would remain an LFC player and that w/e Real offered in terms wages - they'd match it and then offer 25% more. Same with Javier Masherano. Our foreign players became disalussioned with the clubs ownership and ambition as our rivals were outdoing us in bringing big name stars from overseas.

    feck me - infact feck you, for making me annoyed with this question - basicaly Gerrard is better lol

    go away now you fool ^_^

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    both of them are good players.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • James
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    Frank Lampard's attitude and moral is better also..

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Ian
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    He's a better goalscorer but I think Gerrard is better.

    But they are both past their best.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.