Most over-rated/under-rated players?

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Modric should be recognised as one of the best midfielders ever (not just generational talent) not sure he is. Probably coming from a smaller country counts against him
 
Eden Hazard.

The guy went a whole year without scoring a goal and guess what he's about to do that again at Real Madrid.

Yet people think he's top 5 in the world or on Ronaldo/Messi's level. No lol. No way can you be world class with those sort of stats.
 

Tomo

Supporter
Gerrard was overrated, scored a blinder every now and then but added little more. Fat Frank was actually a very good and potent AM.
they should never have been teamed together for England though

I have to disagree with that. I thought Gerrard was a far superior footballer to Lampard, his work rate, tackling was outstanding and he was only just behind Beckham as the best long range passer and crosser of that generation. I still rate as Scholes as the best midfield in the Prem of that era but Gerrard was a close second, he was far more than score a screamer and I felt Lampard was much more limited in his game outside of goal scoring.
 
What more does Gerrard have to his game beyond shooting and running around? Poor positional sense, average passer, poor tackling, poor vision. Gerrard is the typical example of effort over susbtance.

Average passer? Poor tackling? I genuinely don't think you've ever seen him play, other than when against us.

Not one single Liverpool fan would say Alonso was better than Gerrard. Not anyone sane or not related to Alonso anyway.
 

Tomo

Supporter
While everyone has a right to an opinion, and I'm not wanting to come across as some sort of Gerrard fanboy, I genuinely think you've been on the shandy's. "Not a bad player". "Headless chicken". "Incomplete midfielder". Either that or just on a wind up.

Gerrard was absolutely outstanding in his peak, at least in a Liverpool shirt. A genuinely elite player that would have improved any club side.

Agreed he was a great player. Torres who played with Xavi and Iniesta for Spain called Gerrard the best player he had ever played with over his career.
 
If you have actual evidence in support of the greatness of Gerrard, please feel free to share, but leave the personal attacks behind in the confines of your mind.

I can answer for him for now. The fact that he's rated as one of the two greatest ever Liverpool players? And no, it's not because he's a Scouser. How about coming third for the Ballon d'Or in 2005? Or the fact that the same year he won the UEFA Club footballer of the year award. How about being named Liverpool's player of the season on 4 or 5 occasions, and the UEFA team of the year on a few occasions? Does being man of the match in a Champions League final mean anything at all? Or winning an FA Cup final virtually by yourself when he put in one of the best individual performances you will ever see against West Ham?

I literally found most of that information within 2 minutes on Wikipedia. But I think the fact that he's arguably Liverpool's best ever player say's an awful lot without the rest, considering their history.
 

ShutUpPatrik

Supporter
Now I'm a big fat dynamo!
Under-rated is interesting, Sergio Busquets should probably get more credit. Basically been the best player in the world in his position for close to a decade.
From that same Barca team I would argue that Puyol always ended up in the shadows of his more creatively talented teammates. Despite being one of the all time best defenders. But on the flipside he was the captain and obviously highly valued by Barcelona.
 

Tomo

Supporter
I'm gonna say that Beckham was somewhat under-rated. Because there's definitely some people that think without his looks and fame he wouldn't have played for the clubs he did. There's others who think he was just all about set-pieces.

But his crossing, passing and work rate were elite attributes too. He was also one of the very few England players that actually often produced club form for country, unlike the likes of Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard. Brilliant player. His performance against Greece was ridiculous - Roy of the Rovers stuff.

I think with Beckham it was more he was amazing for a few years but then declined somewhat. But you are right he did perform for England. Scholes for me is the best of the United lot but England played him on the left wing to make way for Lampard etc, he was badly misused. The tactics we used for that group of players was crazy and outdated.

I worry we will repeat this with the current group under Southgate. If he can’t make Grealish, Foden, Kane and Sancho play with swagger then he will have failed.
 

VirginiaSpur

Supporter
"Intelligent but stupid" - Ahab
Eden Hazard.

The guy went a whole year without scoring a goal and guess what he's about to do that again at Real Madrid.

Yet people think he's top 5 in the world or on Ronaldo/Messi's level. No lol. No way can you be world class with those sort of stats.
I'd say he was world class in his prime.

I don't think anyone is arguing with you about his current level.
 
Gerrard was an average passer and not even comparable to Alonso. You need to watch more of the European leagues to see what a good passer is like, talk less of a great one like Alonso who also had a great vision to compliment it.





Gerrard was also a poor tackler, more brutish than clean - unfortunately many in England see it as being 'hard'. Anyone that has seen a true practitioner win the ball will see the clear difference in technique and class.

Gerrard is a scouser through and through, and is not surprising that many Liverpool fans worship him, but that does not make him a better footballer. Same Liverpool fans would also think Gerrard is much greater footballer than a dimunitive croat.


Most Liverpool fans aren't Scouse. To say that it's the only reason anyone would say he was a better player than Alonso is ridiculous.

I suppose Zidane being on record as saying he was the best player in the world at the time was just him being nice for some strange reason? Modric and Gerrard are completely different midfielders with different attributes. If you want to compare, Modric was better technically and positionally but everything else Gerrard was superior. Pace, long balls, tackling, heading, scoring... Not to mention he was far more versatile than Modric.
 
I don't give much credence to Zidane's opinion, particularly of English midfielders.

What you see as versatility, I see as an incomplete midfielder who managers struggled to build around and kept looking for which square hole to plug the ill fitted triangle into

But then that you think Gerrard is better than Modric raises serious concerns about what you think makes a good midfielder.

I don't give much value to someone running around like a headless chicken. I will gladly take technical ability and great football iq over sheer effort and physicality

While everyone has a right to an opinion, and I'm not wanting to come across as some sort of Gerrard fanboy, I genuinely think you've been on the shandy's. "Not a bad player". "Headless chicken". "Incomplete midfielder". Either that or just on a wind up.

Gerrard was absolutely outstanding in his peak, at least in a Liverpool shirt. A genuinely elite player that would have improved any club side.
 

Dr Rocktopus

🎃🦇🎃🦇🎃
whatever you see in Gerrard that makes you think he is a great player, I definitely don't see it. I care more for what a player can do with the ball, than what he can do with his body and Gerrard leaves me unconvinced.

I look at players like KDB and simply don't see Gerrard at the same level. I can't even think of a game in which he dominated the midfield against a top quality midfield opposition.

But to show you that my opinion is not as unique as you think
You come across as a bit of a footballing moron. Alonso was a great player but you clearly haven't seen Gerrard outside of a few England International games.
 
Well whatever the argument between the two of them in my view Scholes was better than both Modric and Gerrard. I have seen all three live on several occasions (well Modric many games at Spurs) and Scholes was a different level technically. I didn’t see Zidane live, would love to have seen him but Scholes is the best player I have seen in the premier league.

Well I'm not going to argue with that. I certainly think out of the usual three that regularly get mentioned here, Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes, the latter was the only one that could really dictate the tempo of a game in the way that players like Prlo, Alonso and Modric could. Gerrard was much more everything at 100mph and Lampard was somewhere in-between. All three were world-class though for the different things they offered their teams.
 
Different players and shouldn't be compared. But out of the two I'd say Gerrard was the better player overall. Both world-class but Gerrard elevated Liverpool more than Modric did for us or Real Madrid if I'm not being biased. But it's like comparing Suarez with Batistuta. Prefer to just call them both world-class as they offer completely different strengths to each other, and could easily play together in the same midfield.
Good Lord.

It's not even comparable.

Gerrard was a great player, but not on the Modric level, never.

How did he not elevate Madrid? They won 4CL ffs with him as the best midfielder.

Gerrad wasn't even better than Scholes.

Modric won everything and got rhe smallest country ever to be part of WC Final, while Gerrard with England did, what?

Stop the nonsense.
 
Top Bottom