Viera or Gerard!!!!

Raising the quality of average teams is hardly something to shout about and you can't really use the European argument as we were beaten by a team that finished 5th in the EPL.

Over a decade ago Lazio and Parma become a force but now their cycle is over. The chance is there for other teams to step up but without major investment it won't happen and as serious threat Roma are finished.

Originally Posted by Mehdi

Raising the quality of average teams is hardly something to shout about and you can't really use the European argument as we were beaten by a team that finished 5th in the EPL.

Over a decade ago Lazio and Parma become a force but now their cycle is over. The chance is there for other teams to step up but without major investment it won't happen and as serious threat Roma are finished.

I do not agree with your first paragraph because to loose a final with penalty shout out and from 120 minutes Milan absolutely dominated for 110 minutes shows the high level of the Italian league.

In fact Milan till April were playing the best football in the continent. Consider the way how Man Und were dominated.

What exactly happened during the month of May is very hard to explain but for sure Milan had a big disadvantage compered to their european rivals, that had to compete in a very stressfull domestic league while most of their competitors were focusing only on the champions league. During this month phisical and mental tiredness were clearly seen.

I also agree with Zlatanov when he mentioned Parma and their advance in the eufa. Also 2 years ago in the champions league there were 3 italian teams with the last 4. These are very strong argument that shows the high standard of the Italian leauge.

I think that nowadays the teams are more balanced than the 80's (exception for the big 3 teams) is due to the foreign players allowed to play in the league.

In the 80's it was only permitted to have 3 foreigners in each club, so the big clubs were not running after the best players that suits them worldwide like nowadays but had to look into the Italian market. This means that the supply was shorter, and the price for a good player was extremely high.
In this situation the so called small teams found it very difficult to built a competitive team with the others.

Nowadays a small club can buy very good unpopular players for a reasonable price, and that's why in my opinion the so called small clubs are very competitive.

Actually from all those English players you mentioned none was successful in the real meaning of the word "success" - it is more like they didn't fail in the Serie A and had some very good, even great, games in Italy.

But my point is, only Gazza did worse in Italy than he was doing in England when he left, and that can be blamed on his serious (career destroying) injury much more than him struggling because of Serie A itself. Platt and Ince just carried on in the same way they played in England and Sharpe wasnt good but he was no worse that he had been for some time in England too. His next move was to Bradford iirc which tells you which direction his career was heading (he's now on a reality tv show here so it appears he has hit rock bottom )

As for Steza's dislike of Ljungberg:

I should have clarified last night and saved you some time so my apologies. I actually thought signing Ljungberg would be a good idea, and if you read the thread on it i was quite clear about it. I stand by the fact that he isnt any more skillful than Gerrard but both of them good players. The point i was making is that to excel Ljungberg relies on the things that would supposedly be deinied him in Italy. It is my opinion that both he and Gerrard are good enough to overcome the differences in the leagues. MK has made a similar point regarding Lampard and Gerrard and i agree with him on that too, if one could succeed then the other could. Zlatanov, if Gerrard isnt going to be able to make use of his shooting abilities then what of Lampard??

why should this imply that he necessarily has to hate Gerrard too, just because the latter plays for a rival club.

on this one you're correct

I do hate Liverpool and next season is going to be hell (Robbie Fowler waving 5 fingers instead of 4 now ) but i have always liked Gerrard. Fergie has been very public in saying he wanted Gerrard to replace Keane and even though Utd dont buy Liverpool players and vice versa, this is one occasion id be happy to see them break that unwritten rule.

I'll have to come back to this later as im off to play football myself now

Originally Posted by Stezagud

Zlatanov, if Gerrard isnt going to be able to make use of his shooting abilities then what of Lampard??

I tried to make it clear but I guess it got lost in the rest of those long posts - I find Lampard to be a more complete player - better technique on the ball but also better off-ball movement i.e. tactically more aware than Gerrard. I believe these two would be absolutely essential in overcoming the difference in the on-field environment between Serie A and EPL for Lampard would find it much easier to create time and space for himself instead of rely on the lack of tactical discipline in the opponent. In the EPL, both players enjoy sort of a "free-ride" of a game but in Italy, I believe, it would be a very different story with opponents trying to close them down even before they get the ball, opponents, who will be much more disciplined tactically and better trained at stiffling the opponent. For these conditions, I find Lampard to be better suited for the reasons I mentioned at the beginning.

I tried to make it clear but I guess it got lost in the rest of those long posts - I find Lampard to be a more complete player - better technique on the ball but also better off-ball movement i.e. tactically more aware than Gerrard.

Im not so sure thats the case, imho Chelsea make space for Lampard better than Liverpool do for Gerrard. Drogba is the target man and then 2 of Robben, Duff and Cole are given free reign to move infield or out at will, this makes a lot of room for Lampard as he is the most attack minded of Chelseas central midfield 3.

In contrast Liverpool play with one main striker too but they dont have the same attacking options to support, only Garcia has the same attacking license as the Chelsea wingers. Consequently Gerrard doesnt get the same time and space as Lampard always does but it doesnt necesarily mean its because he doesnt have the same understanding Lampard does.

The main criticism of Gerrard is that he tries overly ambitious passes , which is certainly true at times. Again though, he has been playing in a side which before the arrival of Xabi Alonso expected him to do everything. When a world class player plays alongside weaker players it no surprise when they try to do things themselves instead of trusting their teammates. If Pirlo or Kaka had been in the same team i dont think they would pass the playmaking duties onto the likes of Igor Biscan either

As for the oft criticised EPL defenders, they are well aware of Gerrards threat and do try to stop him, its just hard to stop someone as energetic as Gerrard who is quite capable of scoring from 35 yards. Remember that he has scored in Europe too, He was only pushed into an attacking midfield role in the final for about 20-30 mins and in that time Milan really struggled to stop him.

Originally Posted by Maltese Charlie

I do not agree with your first paragraph because to loose a final with penalty shout out and from 120 minutes Milan absolutely dominated for 110 minutes shows the high level of the Italian league.

It shows the high level of Milan, it has nothing to do with the Italian league.

I also agree with Zlatanov when he mentioned Parma and their advance in the eufa. Also 2 years ago in the champions league there were 3 italian teams with the last 4. These are very strong argument that shows the high standard of the Italian leauge.

No it doesn't. It shows the strong level of 3 teams, the same teams over and over again.

I think that nowadays the teams are more balanced than the 80's (exception for the big 3 teams) is due to the foreign players allowed to play in the league.

Teams are balanced in the sense that most of them are equally mediocre.

Originally Posted by Mehdi

Teams are balanced in the sense that most of them are equally mediocre.

Truth is that no one can say this for sure - you first argument is that there is a small point gap among UEFA CUp spot and relegation zone. I don't know what your mathematical background is but a simple mathematical intuition should be more than enough to tell you that this could very well mean two, totally different things: 1) what you claim - that most serie A teams are equally ballanced in their mediocrity or 2) that most teams are equally ballanced in the sense that they constitute a stronger nucleus of "smaller" teams in Serie A.
Yet, somehow, you show absolute certainty that it is 1) disregarding any possiblity for 2) being true. And, what's even worse, is that you do so based on nothing close to being a "fact" but more like a gut feeling.
Your second argument is that the number of title contenders has decresed over the past 6 years or so - from 5-6, maybe even 7 to 3-4. I don't think anayone can disagree with this, however, these "title contenders" have always managed to break away from the other teams in the league, and this is true for avery big European League since 3 points began to be awarded for victory and only for a draw - I mention this for this allowes for much more noticeable point gaps between top teams and the rest. Yet, I claim, and I would like to see how you argue about this, that the number or even the level of the top teams, who tend to break away one way or the other, has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the smaller teams, the only difference is that instead of 4-5 teams breaking away in Serie A of 6 years ago, now there are only 2-3 of them.
What I am trying to say is that the number of title contenders obviously relates to the number of top quality teams in Serie A, however, it has no relation to the quality, financial stability and capabilities, etc of smaller teams, and a more competitive league is measured not just by the deteriorated performance of used-to-be strong teams but also of how the the majority of all teams, i.e. smaller teams, has changed as well. And in our case, what we see is teams with improved qulaity for they are financially stable and are able to attract better players.

Originally Posted by zlatanov

Truth is that no one can say this for sure - you first argument is that there is a small point gap among UEFA CUp spot and relegation zone. I don't know what your mathematical background is but a simple mathematical intuition should be more than enough to tell you that this could very well mean two, totally different things: 1) what you claim - that most serie A teams are equally ballanced in their mediocrity or 2) that most teams are equally ballanced in the sense that they constitute a stronger nucleus of "smaller" teams in Serie A.
Yet, somehow, you show absolute certainty that it is 1) disregarding any possiblity for 2) being true. And, what's even worse, is that you do so based on nothing close to being a "fact" but more like a gut feeling.

Who is Serie A top scorer? Lucarelli. Who are the champions? Juventus, a team who play the type of football Birmingham City and Everton play. That's how far standards have fallen. Serie A no longer has the highest number of International class players, Serie A is no longer attracting the cream of European and South American talent. While the top clubs in England and Spain are splashing out, Milan, Juve, Inter and Roma are signing ageing players on free transfers.

Your second argument is that the number of title contenders has decresed over the past 6 years or so - from 5-6, maybe even 7 to 3-4. I don't think anayone can disagree with this, however, these "title contenders" have always managed to break away from the other teams in the league, and this is true for avery big European League since 3 points began to be awarded for victory and only for a draw - I mention this for this allowes for much more noticeable point gaps between top teams and the rest. Yet, I claim, and I would like to see how you argue about this, that the number or even the level of the top teams, who tend to break away one way or the other, has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the smaller teams,

It has everything to do with the quality of the seven sisters as they were known, teams loaded with World Class and international class players.

the only difference is that instead of 4-5 teams breaking away in Serie A of 6 years ago, now there are only 2-3 of them.
What I am trying to say is that the number of title contenders obviously relates to the number of top quality teams in Serie A, however, it has no relation to the quality, financial stability and capabilities, etc of smaller teams, and a more competitive league is measured not just by the deteriorated performance of used-to-be strong teams but also of how the the majority of all teams, i.e. smaller teams, has changed as well. And in our case, what we see is teams with improved qulaity for they are financially stable and are able to attract better players.

Mediocre teams are mediocre teams no matter which league they play in. As for finances. 2 years ago the difference in revenue between Serie A and the Premiership was €150, last season that widened to €1.23 billion.

Pathetic defensive tactics ? Classical, that really was. I'll tell you something Zlatanov, the reason i stopped was because you think you are always right. Why should i bother making my case when you will turn around and say that i'm biased and brush off any arguments i do make ? You will also bring out an old chestnut like how you get less time and space in Italy and how players are quicker to close you down. What a load of nonsense. I guess our midfield must have forgot to do this when we all charged out to block Smicer's rocket ? Why i don't bother doing this sort of thing isn't because i don't think of arguments, it's because whatever i say will be replied by some idiot saying "well Gerrard misplaced a pass in one game so he must be rubbish" or something equally pathetic. Whatever i reply with is the arguments i've taken from others here, so i'm just using their logic. You've made up your mind, but to amuse you here goes.

Well Kris i do watch Milan games and unfortunately the ones i have see are where Pirlo and Seedorf fall over when they're tackled and expect a foul ... but play carries on and they get nothing. Maybe i've just been unlucky in the games i've watched, but that's my experience. Plus you can see better more committed tackling in games i play with my mates on a Sunday then you would with some of their challenges. Of course, sometimes they do their job, no doubt about it ... we wouldn't have won what we did over the last few years if our midfield was rubbish. But they're not the super great all conquering midfielders that some posters seem to think they are.

You're quick to point out how well Pirlo played against Man Utd, well done to you for that. Now if i point out how badly he played in a game it's deemed to be not relevant. Hwmook says that Gerrard was absent and non exsistent in the first half of the final and yet if i tell him about the many games where he was exceptional, it would be dismissed because you know .... it's only in the premiership. Plus on your basis Hwmook we might aswell sell Kaka and Shevchenko because they were pretty anonymous in the second half of the final. Just using
your point here, so if you pick holes in it, maybe you should think of a better argument
in the first place.

I'm glad you bought up the biased issue Zlatanov because most posters in here are ripe with it and it seems even if Pele was f*cking English he wouldn't be good enough for any of you and it makes me sick. If you want to talk about bias talk to Maradona (10) and 2 or 3 other South American posters in here who ALWAYS suggest we get players from Brazil or Argentina. I don't see many of you having a go at him. But Steza (who is a Man Utd fan and yet he can still see that Gerrard is a good player !!!!!!!!! ) and i stand up for 1 player and we're bias ..... that's bullsh!t. Subconcious ? Don't make me laugh, that's just complete rubbish, you're really scraping the barrel there. Why would i not stick up for the rest of the English players you mentioned ? Yes, because i'm a Liverpool fan i do argue his case with more vigour but that's only because he is a player i know more about ! Did that ever cross your mind when you were making up these psychological excuses ? I don't see much of Lampard, Cole or the rest of them, because i don't see much of their teams play. I'm only commenting on what i have knowledge on.


Zlatanov, no Gerrard doesn't have Brazillian ability, but then neither do Pirlo, Gattuso or Seedorf ..... how many times have you seen them do stepovers and many dummies to get past people ? So you know, not having the techniques of Ronaldinho or whoever isn't something just associated with Gerrard. Imprecise passes ? Watch the final or Semi final first leg again and see how many imprecise passes our midfield makes, it's shocking for a midfield that is supposed to be part of the best team in the world !

The one thing with Gerrard is he's direct, direct when beating people, direct when shooting (strikes a ball as easily and as hard as Seedorf can) and direct when passing. To say he doesn't have vision or isn't inventive is a bit harsh i think. Some of his passes to Owen when he played for Liverpool were bordering on the Telepathic ! We all raved about the pass Kaka did for our 3rd goal, Gerrard has done many like that but these must have been forgotten about. Oh and Hwmook, you must have missed the many games when Gerrard runs god knows how many yards to tackle on his own 18 yard box, win the ball and start another attack, just like Gattuso. Gerrard has the tenacity of Gattuso, anyone with half a brain can see that so maybe you need to watch the games he plays in a bit more. But i forgot, it's in the Premiership .. it doesn't count .. sorry !

I'll say this, Gerrard is prone to many "Hollywood" passes that go astray, he can lose the ball, he doesn't always beat people, sometimes he can dive in. In truth he's rough around the edges, but surely people can see the potential and recognise he's a very good player ?? Given the quality of players and coaches around him if he came to Milan, he would only get better. He'd become tactically more aware and better at holding the ball. If you add in his energy and ability to drag a team forwards (something none of our midfielders can really do) plus his drive and constant running ( we all see how great Gattuso is at tackling, now imagine a player who does this but can start attacks aswell at a high pace) this would surely be of benefit to Milan. You saw in Europe that whenever Liverpool went at a team, full on attack ... no one could cope with it. Gerrard would add something to our midfield that we currently don't have, that's all i'm saying.

Sorry if my tone is rash but i'm quite frankly fed up with the arguments of some people. If i carried on like some do in here, not liking any player from another country or always discounting them, i'd probably be called a racist or something ! I accept that people don't like players and i'm damn sure i don't know everything about football or other players, but credit where it's due and i think Gerrard should be more deserving of that credit than many give him in here.

Jim_UK, obviously you have your opinion and arguments on the matter and I have mine. And in all honesty no one could say for sure if Gerrard would make it in Serie A or he would be just another flop. However, claiming that Serie A and the EPL don't differ in terms od the tactical awareness and arrangement of the players - a "load of nonsense" as you called it - undermines the credibility of the rest of your arguments for one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist or a certified football coach in order to see that this quite simply isn't true. And I guess this is where the whole argument started from - whether he would be able to overcome these diffrences. Again, using arguments, which state the oposite of something that is so obvious, can only put a question mark upon the validity of the rest and nothing more.

You are right, no one can say if he would or would not make it in Serie A, but you can apply this uncertainty to every player in football. When someone moves to a new club, even if it's between two clubs in the same country, there is never a 100% guarantee that they'll be more or less of a success at their new club compared to their old club.

To be completely truthful i wasn't even thinking about whether he would adapt to Serie A or not, after a point in time that wasn't my issue anymore. My case was whether he would be good enough for Milan's midfield, not "would he succeed" (although i guess that plays a part) or "Should we buy him". It got to a point where people in here didn't rate him because of idiot suggestions like "he plays in the premiership/England, he's rubbish", "he plays for Liverpool, he's rubbish", "he was non existent for half a game once, he's rubbish". Agreed, you didn't say that, but others did.

What i find ludicrous and i hope you will agree with me Zlatanov, is how people can dismiss Gerrard because he plays in an average team, even though if he transferred some of his Liverpool performances to another team, such as Milan, Madrid, Barca, etc, he would be immediately referred to as world class. YET, we go on and rave about Gilardino who scores for fun in an average team and yet he is (according to some) already the best thing since sliced bread. It's that inconsistency that annoys me more than anything, the unwillingness of some to look beyond their own personal narrow mindedness.

Some of my points were probably lost in amongst anger yesterday, so with a clearer head i can retrieve this slightly. I do believe that Serie A relies more on tactics in league games than almost any other league in world football. However, i still don't buy this argument that you get less time on the ball in Serie A. A good defence will pressure you into mistakes and a bad one won't, no matter where you play. There is a difference, however subtle. But that's another argument altogether, one which isn't for today

Anyway, lets buy Salif Diao instead

So i guess....we could just sell Gattuso to Manchester Utd, and buy Gerrard to fill the right central midfield role....

No offense, i adore Gattuso....but if he played without his heart just like the last years....he is plain mediocre. He seemed to loose his motivation in this year's campaign.....

I would love to have Stevie to fill in Gennaro position......

The problem with having Gerrard at Milan is not just whether he would be able to adapt to Italian football and Italian lifestyle but also if Galliani would be keen on paying 30 mil euros for such an "experiment". And this is very doubtful given our transfer policy, especially when there are other excellent midfielders who would cost 1/2 and even 1/3 of what Gerrard would thus making those other "experiments" far less ricky and thus much more acceptable. I, for example, may believe that Gerrard will not make it in Italy, however, I wouldn't mind having him at Milan - just to try and make sure what the otcome would be - if his price was say 10 mil euros. But at his current price ... he is a risk Galliani is very unlikely to take.
Apart from that, I agree that Gattuso has been less of a lion this past year and wouldn't mind seeing another another player with similar characteristics come to Milan and give Genarro a run for his money. I still hope however, that Istanbul will bring the old Gattuso back, although it's highly unlikely to teach him how to pass a ball

I'm 100% sure that gerrard's soccer skills are well enough to play with milan. The only problem is wether he would like it in Italy and is he willing to adapt.

Do players understand enough they really have to adapt to the certain way of live in a new country?
That's according to me the main reason why brazilian and argentinian players adapt almost everywhere they want to leave their home country, they really want to adapt. while english, spanish and yes even italian players usually not make it abroad. I've heard becks still doesn't talk 'decent' spanish? if that is true isn't helping him to adept and to play to his full potential and just allianates him with the thoughts and concerns of the common people in spain.

The italian fleet of players in valencia this season almost constanly said they wanted to return to Italy, it's like they didn't want to play in spain. Fiore for example was IMHO forced to move to spain since lazio owed valencia money of the mendieta deal and lazio just couldn't pay. I don't think fiore was really enthousiastic about the deal to begin with.

In that mental very difficult, adapting period people just expect to much of foreign stars, putting huge pressure on them. most south american players are young players when they arrive so people don't pressure them that much.
we paid 23 mil euros for jose mari and he had to deliver in a team that was undergoing serious changes but was in comparison with today's squad just not good enough.
another example is Riquelme, he was a south american he could speak spanish but still he failed to live up to the great expectations of being the true heir of Maradona. I've heard now he is the leader of villareal, 'he' even got them in the CL...

my point is players must want to adapt and clubs, fans, media must give them time to adapt to the certain livestyle of the country. those things combined aren't the key of succes sometimes the player and the country really don't match

It will have to be Vieria because Gerrard is going no where!! I think Xavi would have been a good target but he has signed a new deal!!