Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam#1
Everyone know hows big a fan of Carrick I am, but I can simply not agree with that. For me, Scholes is still the master, while Carrick, the very talented apprentice.
Scholes regularly controls games in a way Carrick has only done a few times, and Scholes does it against the best. Yes, Carrick is better defensively, but Scholes is more important to the team then Carrick IMO.
|
The problem is that there are definite signs that Scholes is heavily reliant on Carrick, much more than Carrick is on Scholesy.
Scholes had a fairly poor few seasons leading up to the 06/07 season. We signed Carrick, and Scholes proceeded to have arguably his best ever season (perhaps 2nd best after 02/03). Then at the beginning of this season Carrick was dreadfully out of form, and Scholes struggled. As Carrick's form slowly improved, Scholes also was able to influence the game more. Then of course they both got injured, with Carrick coming back first. When Scholes did come back, he was partnered with Carrick in his first match and was sublime. Then he had five or so matches with other midfielders and struggled a bit. Against Liverpool he was once again partnered with Carrick and once again he was fantastic.
Co-incidence? Obviously Carrick does help Scholes play better, we all know that. But I think it's to a much bigger degree than what most realise.
Carrick is the glue that holds it together. Without him, Scholes, although more talented, finds it difficult to exercise that talent.