Frank Lampard answers to Steven Gerrard and Paul Scholes’ claim, calling it a “terrible question.”


Frank Lampard answers to Steven Gerrard and Paul Scholes’ claim, calling it a “terrible question.”

In a debate with Liverpool icon Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard has stated why he’sits on the fence.’

During his playing days, the former Reds captain was the topic of much controversy, with comparisons to Lampard and another England star drawn.

While at Chelsea, Gerrard was frequently compared to Lampard and former Manchester United midfielder Paul Scholes.

Lampard was asked who he thought was the better player, Gerrard or Scholes, when speaking on Sky Sports’ Overlap show with Gary Neville.

“It’s a dreadful question, and I get it all the time in London cabs, ‘what do you think, Lampard, Gerrard, or Scholes?'” Lampard remarked.

“It’s just too difficult because we all have our individual characteristics.” And I like both of them as young men; they were outstanding athletes.

“When I trained with Scholes in England, I will never forget the impact he had on me.”

“Manchester United players spoke so highly of him; they’d just say he’s fantastic, and he was, and I remember thinking to myself, ‘Wow.’

“But then there was playing against Stevie when he was at the top of his game.” He has a variety of physical and forceful characteristics that fit Liverpool and the fans.

“I’m going to sit on the fence because I can’t (choose who is the greatest).”

Another topic of discussion during Gerrard’s playing days was why he, Lampard, and Scholes couldn’t always get along in the same England team.

Lampard tries to explain how he would have set up the team so that himself, Gerrard, and Scholes could all play together.

“At the time, we played 4-4-2 in flat lines, and to be fair to Sven (Goran Eriksson), he tried to play a diamond in Euro 2004,” Lampard added.

“I know Scholes moved to the left, he had been playing centrally before, but he (Eriksson) was attempting to fit us all in with my arrival in the group.”

“It could have been done, and I believe it should have been done,” says the author.

“Scholes retired and recovered, but he went on to become an excellent deep-lying player.”

“So if he had done that and stayed with England and played behind me and Stevie, I’m sure he would have done well” (it would have worked).

“It would not have worked out.””

The summary comes to a conclusion.”


Comments are closed.