I have lost count of how many times I have heard the same question. Frank Lampard, Paul Scholes or Steven Gerrard: who was the best? In 2026, a decade after Lampard and Gerrard retired, and 13 years after Scholes hung up his boots, the debate still burns. I still argue about it with friends. I still change my mind. So when Joe Cole finally gave his answer, I listened closely.

Cole was a brilliant midfielder himself. He played with and against all three legends. Speaking to Rio Ferdinand on the FIVE channel, he was first asked to name the best midfielder in Premier League history. His answer was not one of the three. It was Patrick Vieira.

I laughed when I heard that. Cole said Vieira gave him the most trouble. He called him a machine and joked that he felt like an Under-14 player against him. He even remembered winning one header against Vieira and said that was all he had. That story told me everything about the level Cole was used to. He was not dodging the question. He was being honest.

The Answer That Made Me Think

Then Ferdinand asked the real question: Stevie, Scholesy or Frank? Who are you taking?

Cole thought about it and said Gerrard was the most complete because he could do everything. That is a strong phrase. Most complete. Not best. Not most decorated. Most complete.

He added context, and that is what made the answer stick with me. If he were managing a mid-table team and could have any of those players at 21, he would take Gerrard. Why? Because even when things are going wrong, Gerrard can drag you out. I have seen that with my own eyes. Gerrard could run, tackle, pass, shoot and lead. He could turn a lost cause into a win. That is rare.

Cole also admitted it was a hard question. He said I might ask him tomorrow and he would change his mind. I appreciated that. This debate is not a maths problem. It depends on what you want.

The Trophy Argument

I cannot ignore the trophies. Some fans use them as the whole argument. I think they matter, but they are not the only thing that matters. Cole said most people would probably put Lampard third on that list, unless they are Chelsea fans. That line was honest and a little brutal.

That table shows why the debate never dies. Lampard scored goals no midfielder should score. Scholes won everything and controlled games with his brain. Gerrard won no Premier League title, and that counts against him for some people. But Cole was not picking the most decorated player. He was picking the one he would trust in a difficult job.

The England Problem

I also remember the England problem. In the early-to-mid 2000s, Sven-Goran Eriksson never solved how to fit Lampard, Scholes and Gerrard into one midfield. Pushing Scholes out to the left wing is still criticised. When I look back at that era, I do not see a lack of talent. I see a lack of balance. Three great players can still be a puzzle if they all want the same spaces.

Cole's answer makes sense to me because he was thinking like a manager, not like a fan making a list. A fan asks who had the best career. A manager asks who helps me win this specific match with this specific squad. Those are different questions. Cole chose Gerrard for the mid-table rescue job. I might choose Lampard if I needed goals from midfield in a title race. I might choose Scholes if I wanted control in a possession machine.

My Takeaway

So no, I do not think Cole ended the debate forever. I think he gave the most thoughtful answer I have heard in years. He respected all three. He refused to pretend there was one simple truth. He picked Gerrard as the most complete and explained why. Then he admitted he might change his mind tomorrow.

That is exactly how I feel in 2026. If I am managing a mid-table team and I get one of them at 21, I am taking Gerrard too. If I need goals from midfield, I am taking Lampard. If I want a midfielder who makes the whole team breathe, I am taking Scholes. The debate is still alive because all three answers can be right depending on the question. ⚽