Gazza v Gerrard

Gallant_Few

Well-Known Member
Love Gazza but Gerrard was far more complete as a player. Gazza couldn't tackle. Couldn't play all over the pitch. Didn't score a lot of goals from outside the box, not in comparison with Gerrard anyway. Gerrard was also good in the air and scored a number of headed goals which I never recall Gascoigne doing. You could argue that Gascoigne had more God given talent maybe, he was certainly more skilfull, but out of the two you would have to be an absolute idiot to chose him over Gerrard for your team.
I respect your decision but the the fact you would label someone an "absolute idiot" if choosing Gascoigne over Gerrard is a bitidiotic in itself. Both where World class players in different eras and both very different in style. It wouldn't be a bad choice to have to make at all bit I dont think anyone should or would be branded an absolute idiot for choosing either.

My love for both of the players and human beings will stop me from making such a decision and just be happy both have represented my club.
 

Alex Venters

Well-Known Member
Yeah, it wasn't his quality that won games for Liverpool. Just hard work and a bit of elbow grease...

Name me a game where Gazza virtually won a game by himself for his team as Gerrard did against West Ham in the FA Cup Final?
There are numerous examples,but winning 8in a row v Aberdeen springs immediately to mind.
If I'm picking a team to save my life and the choice is Gazza or Gerrard then I'm afraid Stevie G would be benched.
 

HandsomeHead

Well-Known Member
Gascoigne is the more gifted of the two. I suspect even Gerrard would agree with that.

However, if the choice was signing peak Gazza or peak Gerrard for Rangers, I’d actually go for the latter.
 

Moses McNeil

Active Member
Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes all had better careers than Gazza but every English man i have spoke about football with through work etc all say gazza is the best.



Prob because his performances at world cup 90 and Euro 96 right enough.


On his day Gazza probably better but he never had for whatever reason the dedication and proffesionalism of the others mentioned.
I think the reason was that he was just a naturally gifted player so he probably felt that he didn’t have to put in the effort that other players did.
 

Damsidebear

Well-Known Member
I hold Lamps and Gerrard in high regard and they are two of the best (in my lifetime) I've seen and witnessed in English football but Gazza was well unplayable at times and is by far the better footballer.

He had a natural talent that couldn't be taught,he glided past players and could single handedly alter the course of a match, he was an absolute marvel on the field.
 

Chocolateleftfoot

Well-Known Member
I'm too tired for more talk on Gerrard and Gascoigne at the moment.

As for England, you're judging them on individual quality. If you're going by that then they should have been one of the top 3 or 4 sides in Europe. But they were largely horrendous in tournament football, especially after Sven. They were a bunch of individuals that clearly didn't like playing with each other due to club rivalry and also often looked terrified to being representing their country. England's current team look like they're enjoying the ride under Southgate and I'm standing by my point that they are a better team. The fact that they made a World Cup semi, regardless of who they played, a Nations League semi and are currently 4th I believe in the Fifa World Rankings only back up my belief.
Made a semi final, largely on the luck of the draw. As for the nations league and World Rankings? Nobody gives 2 fucks about them.

BTW, England made 2 semi finals in the 90s pretty much on Gazzas back, but that was about 10 years before you were born.
 

TheStandardBearer

Well-Known Member
But he didn't. He only has himself to blame for that. Football genius with the ball at his feet but thick as pig shit and mentally weak.
It’s all about opinions however strange yours appear to be.

Gerrard is of the opinion that he’s not in Gazzas league though so I think it’s safe to say your strange, almost hateful ramblings about a former Ranger should be ignored.
 

Earl of Leven

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Gazza would be ahead in natural talent but way behind in career terms. Injury, stupidity, and lack of discipline meant he didn't achieve half of what he should have. In terms of maximising talent I'd say Lampard who was not as talented as Scholes or Gerrard and yet won more. In any team I was picking I'd have Gerrard and Lampard ahead of Gazza.
 

Boldvale

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
So all these replies and not one actual argument that Gascoigne was a better (more complete) player overall than Gerrard yet. I should probably rest my case.
For the last time as you're at it, best player and most complete player are two different things. This thread is about who was the best football player, not who was the most complete footballer.
 

Monts1310

Well-Known Member
Gerrard was a 6,8,10 and 2. Was unreal at everything.

Gazza is the best attacking mid, I've ever watched.

But Gerrard was the best, all round midfielder. The ultimate captain. My favourite midfielder of all time. Gazza is more comparable with Lampard's midfield position.

Gerrard was better than any of them.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
A lot of blue tinted specs with regards to Gazza I think.

It's a really tough question this. Gerrard was an incredible footballer.

For sheer skill, Gazza is clearly better but if we are talking an all round midfielder then Gerrard ticks every box.
 

dt17

Well-Known Member
When you listen to most ex pro's talking about Gazza they all say he was a genius and the best they've played with etc. I know some rate Gerrard like that as well (Fernando Torres said he was the best he played with), but I don't think Gerrard had the same genius/creative spark that Gazza did.

When comparing careers it's a no brainer - Gerrard's is better.

Bit like comparing the likes of Ronaldinho and Ronaldo (R9) to Cristiano Ronaldo...I think they were both better players than him, but CR has probably had the better career, especially in terms of longevity and consistency.
 

Math1eson

Well-Known Member
Talent for talent Gascoigne was better. But if you lay his career side by side with Gerrard, Scholes, Lampard etc theirs are miles better. If only Gazza had the mind and mental stability of those men, who knows what he’d have achieved.
 

Mbear

Well-Known Member
Have to go for Sg
Both excellent footballers and both incredibly talented. I just get the impression that Sg continually worked harder to improve himself. Was always a leader.
Not a slight on Gazza but I don’t think he was as driven as SG.
Gazza prob slightly more naturally talented but I’d have Sg in my team over him as an all round point of view
 

SuffolkGer

Active Member
Gazza my favourite player of all time, but if you're picking one to build a team around, Gerrard's the winner. Doesn't matter how much better a footballer Gazza was (and he really was) he was just too unreliable. I despair at some of the sh*t that went on, with leeches like Chris Evans interfering with his career. In the right hands Gazza would have surpassed Stevie but can only look at what we have and in terms of doing it properly, leading by example, training and perfecting his football skills, Gerrard is better.

Gazzamania was something only George Best could match or surpass though (in Britain), which says a lot. England haven't seen anyone close to his talents since, Stevie G included, and that's why it's still "The new Paul Gascoigne" and not "The new Wayne Rooney/Lampard or Gerrard"
 

TylerB

Active Member
Have a few of you virgins calmed down yet or are you still butt hurt because someone doesn't quite hold Gascoigne in the same regard?
 

TylerB

Active Member
For the last time as you're at it, best player and most complete player are two different things. This thread is about who was the best football player, not who was the most complete footballer.
Get the %^*& out. To me the most complete player is the better player.
 

jimbear

Well-Known Member
It is a good thread that the op has raised. To be honest I could not split them. For sheer natural ability Gazza might just edge it, but for professionalism and power Gerrard had that over him by some distance imo. Regardless however, they are two giants of British football.
 

TylerB

Active Member
Made a semi final, largely on the luck of the draw. As for the nations league and World Rankings? Nobody gives 2 fucks about them.

BTW, England made 2 semi finals in the 90s pretty much on Gazzas back, but that was about 10 years before you were born.
So according to yourself only World Cup and perhaps Euro tournament games seem to matter at all. Makes sense...
 

TylerB

Active Member
It’s all about opinions however strange yours appear to be.

Gerrard is of the opinion that he’s not in Gazzas league though so I think it’s safe to say your strange, almost hateful ramblings about a former Ranger should be ignored.
Almost hateful? Have a word with yourself. The worst I've said about him was that he was thick as pig shit, and I even held my hands up after about that and implied that it was unnecessary.

Couldn't give a shit what Gerrard says about Gazza when they are standing less than a foot away from each other.
 
Get the %^*& out. To me the most complete player is the better player.
Get the %^*& out. To me the most complete player is the better player.
Having started this thread, it was great to read all the different opinions, what did disappoint me was your attitude to other bears and you’re lack of knowledge of a player who was one of the best to play for famous club we support.
 

Bill the Butcher

Well-Known Member
Love Gazza but Gerrard was far more complete as a player. Gazza couldn't tackle. Couldn't play all over the pitch. Didn't score a lot of goals from outside the box, not in comparison with Gerrard anyway. Gerrard was also good in the air and scored a number of headed goals which I never recall Gascoigne doing. You could argue that Gascoigne had more God given talent maybe, he was certainly more skilfull, but out of the two you would have to be an absolute idiot to chose him over Gerrard for your team.
Did Gazza not score the winner in a Rome Derby with his head, or am I havering?
 

WinkieWATP

Well-Known Member
Almost hateful? Have a word with yourself. The worst I've said about him was that he was thick as pig shit, and I even held my hands up after about that and implied that it was unnecessary.

Couldn't give a shit what Gerrard says about Gazza when they are standing less than a foot away from each other.
You continue to call fellow bears names even claiming one poster wants Gazza to shag him and argue even though you have admitted that you never even seen Gazza at his best.

The following morning you then call those that disagree with you virgins.

Your acting like a complete and utter bellend tbh.
 

TylerB

Active Member
Having started this thread, it was great to read all the different opinions, what did disappoint me was your attitude to other bears and you’re lack of knowledge of a player who was one of the best to play for famous club we support.
Well I apologise for not being 40 years old like some.

But ultimately a lot of what I've said people have agreed with whether they have meant to or not. That Gerrard was the more complete player. That Gascoigne, albeit he still had a great career with plenty of highlight moments, didn't make the most of his gifts...
 

HandsomeHead

Well-Known Member
Gazzamania was something only George Best could match or surpass though (in Britain), which says a lot. England haven't seen anyone close to his talents since, Stevie G included, and that's why it's still "The new Paul Gascoigne" and not "The new Wayne Rooney/Lampard or Gerrard"
As much as I think Gascoigne was a once in a generation type talent as far as English football goes, Gazzamania was more a product of his ‘mad as a brush’ personality than it was his actual ability.

His performances at Italia 90 never really matched the hype, certainly not in the same way Roberto Baggio did for Italy, yet the whole Gazza phenomenon took off on the back of that tournament.

He was a wonderful player and we were lucky to have him even for the short time we did, but had it not been for his loony tunes persona, I’m not sure he’d ever be as highly regarded as he was.

For example, I actually think John Barnes and Chris Waddle were just as gifted, but neither is spoken of with the same reverence as Gascoigne.
 

TylerB

Active Member
You continue to call fellow bears names even claiming one poster wants Gazza to shag him and argue even though you have admitted that you never even seen Gazza at his best.

The following morning you then call those that disagree with you virgins.

Your acting like a complete and utter bellend tbh.
In fairness you're probably the type of guy that cries when watching Titanic. Stop being a wuss. If anyone has been on the end of genuine insults it's myself.
 

TylerB

Active Member
One of his most famous goals with his head came in an old firm game. You'd think any Rangers fan would know that.
Why do you keep presuming what I do and don't know based on the fact I wasn't around to watch Italia 90? You're a right weirdy beardy you.
 

Unicorn

Well-Known Member
As much as I think Gascoigne was a once in a generation type talent as far as English football goes, Gazzamania was more a product of his ‘mad as a brush’ personality than it was his actual ability.

His performances at Italia 90 never really matched the hype, certainly not in the same way Roberto Baggio did for Italy, yet the whole Gazza phenomenon took off on the back of that tournament.

He was a wonderful player and we were lucky to have him even for the short time we did, but had it not been for his loony tunes persona, I’m not sure he’d ever be as highly regarded as he was.

For example, I actually think John Barnes and Chris Waddle were just as gifted, but neither is spoken of with the same reverence as Gascoigne.
England wouldn’t have got to the semi final without Gazza. He played a huge role in the wins over Belgium and Cameroon and was also outstanding against the Netherlands. He was excellent that tournament.

Barnes and Waddle always struggled to replicate their club form for England which is probably why they’re not treated with the same reverence.
 
Top