Bwuk
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2012
- Messages
- 17,352
People who don't rate Scholes don't understand football.
Sweet Jesus.Great player but starting to get quite a bit overrated since his retirement, especially by United fans.
Comfortably better than Scholes: Xavi, Iniesta, Modric
Comparable to Scholes: Alonso, Pirlo, Gerrard, Kroos, Silva, Schweinsteiger, Busquets
Not the best example to use when Keane (and Scholes) missed the final. There's a big difference between Beckham, Keane, Scholes and Giggs and the midfield that played the final of Blomqvist, Butt, Beckham and Giggs.United had 58% possession in the 2008 Champions League final against Chelsea, while you had only 53% possession against Bayern in 1999, so I don't agree with the claim that United were more reliant on their midfield in 1999 than they were in 2008.
I personally rated Scholes higher than Keane as a player, but each to their own.
Remember the build up and some thinking that Ronnie Johnsen might play midfield alongside Butt, could keep Giggs on the left, Beckham on the right, but Fergie opted for Beckham in the middle for the passing option. Never his position though, especially as he and Butt had rarely played as a pair in the first team. Still wonder how the game would have gone if he had put Giggs alongside Butt, kept Beckham right.Not the best example to use when Keane (and Scholes) missed the final. There's a big difference between Beckham, Keane, Scholes and Giggs and the midfield that played the final of Blomqvist, Butt, Beckham and Giggs.
The final was one of United's worst performances of the tournament because their midfield was severely weakened and unbalanced through suspension. The midfield was the clear strength of that team.
I was happy with the team selection at the time. Beckham was a much better central midfielder than that version of Giggs. Stam and Johnsen was definitely the best defensive pairing so I was glad he didn't break that up.Remember the build up and some thinking that Ronnie Johnsen might play midfield alongside Butt, could keep Giggs on the left, Beckham on the right, but Fergie opted for Beckham in the middle for the passing option. Never his position though, especially as he and Butt had rarely played as a pair in the first team. Still wonder how the game would have gone if he had put Giggs alongside Butt, kept Beckham right.
Watched that game back a few years ago and it was a much tighter affair than I had recalled. Had this memory of Bayern controlling the game, creating chances but Utd played better than I had remembered. Had a number of half chances, Giggs gave Tarnat a really tough night at LB. Bayern should have killed it on the counter late on but Schmeichel redeemed a poor season by his standards(along with that key penalty save against Bergkamp)
He wasn't. Scholes' prime was 02/03 by which time it was four seasons since Butt/Johnsen had sometimes taken his place for away games.what I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer to is, if scholes was so great why was he benched for Nicky butt in his prime?
well okay i could have phrased that better. he was 25 and getting benched for Nicky butt?He wasn't. Scholes' prime was 02/03 by which time it was four seasons since Butt/Johnsen had sometimes taken his place for away games.
Occasionally yes.well okay i could have phrased that better. he was 25 and getting benched for Nicky butt?
doesn't that mean that either a) he wasn't in that top tier of players with zidane and xavi or b) he was in that tier and sir froggie still chose to bench him?Occasionally yes.
Even though he played in a 2 next to Keane, he was more a forward than a midfield player at the time. He couldn't tackle, lacked athleticism and was suspect defensively. Against top quality opposition Butt played to make the team more solid.well okay i could have phrased that better. he was 25 and getting benched for Nicky butt?
Even though he played in a 2 next to Keane, he was more a forward than a midfield player at the time. He couldn't tackle, lacked athleticism and was suspect defensively. Against top quality opposition Butt played to make the team more solid.
He got better defensively with experience and it was a credit to him that he could play with Carrick in a 2 with forwards like Ronaldo on the wing. He still couldn't tackle though.
Agreed.right, and he was a great player. but not on the level of zidane and xavi.
I personally don't rank him alongside those two, but the answer to a) is not necessarily since players tend to develop at different rates in different ways. In fact Xavi and Zidane at 25 had yet to hit their own prime (or Zidane was just hitting his), while Scholes' second best season came when he was 32.doesn't that mean that either a) he wasn't in that top tier of players with zidane and xavi or b) he was in that tier and sir froggie still chose to bench him?
At that time he wasn't. That's why Butt was brought in against teams that would over run Keane.right, and he was a great player. but not on the level of zidane and xavi.
The guy was a sensation.
Still remember this. Came on, and absolutely took the piss. What a player.
Seriously I miss the tackles on Sunday. Had there been Scholesy on the pitch, I dnot think result would have been different, But we would have surely seen some "late tackles". He was small but he use to play pretty fiercely on big games.2 out of 10 for Heading? Scholes scored some incredible headers in his career; against City, Chelsea and a late winner v Everton for example. Generated so much power through technique and neck muscles.
He also might have flown into tackles recklessly, which I loved and wish someone did on Sunday, but he also won possession back fairly on a regular basis also. Temper and not looking anyone in the eye are not just wrong but pretty weird things to give ratings on as well.
Zidane is a very special case. Xavi, I am not sure how can you compare? I personally don't know because he played his entire career in a system that is a midfielder's dream. Full backs making auxiliary wingers, high line, wingers tucking in, false nines. Every time he had the ball, he had significantly more passing options and movement around him than any midfielder in the planet. I consider Xavi one of the time greats and he was essential in making Barcelona and Spain the force they were but it also goes the other way around. When Scholes played in a similar role for us in his later years, he was asked to spread the ball as quickly as possible for our pacey forwards; Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney when we were playing a much more direct style of football. Let's put it this way, put Xavi in a midfield two with Carrick or Fletcher in a system with two old fashioned wingers and a defence that sits deep like Vida and Rio did, and I'd be amazed if he did better than Scholes. Same goes for Pirlo by the way. I view those 3 as the best at what they did with Xavi having been provided the best platform to elevate his game from an A to an A+right, and he was a great player. but not on the level of zidane and xavi.
Seriously I miss the tackles on Sunday. Had there been Scholesy on the pitch, I dnot think result would have been different, But we would have surely seen some "late tackles". He was small but he use to play pretty fiercely on big games.
The most disappointing period of the game was when they hold on to ball towards the corner flag for like 4-5 minutes straight. Its a fecking derby, why not take him out when they are taking a piss at us.
And which year would he have had a chance?If Scholes went on to other clubs like RM or Barcelona, we might have won Ballon dor.
Staying at United and becoming a legend has its beneficiaries, but moving around the top teams get you more recognized as footballer.
Giggs Scholes will always be underrated imo.
Exactly. The front four/five players didn't necessarily have to be able to 'beat their man'. Which meant the opposition was by default always forced to set up more defensively, which meant less pressure on our defenders and so on and so forth.The guy was a sensation.
Manchester United has become synonymous with great wing play over the years and many of these wingers that have a huge reputation have Scholes to thank for what he could do for them.
People see a long pass and throw them all into the same bracket. But Scholes was unreal in his passing. He allowed absolute flying machines like Giggs and Ronaldo to just take off full speed down the wing, knowing full well that he would ping that ball onto the tip of their toe in full stride. Absolutely wiping out the midfield and fullback. It really was an art.
It's one thing playing a long ball that somebody has to stop and control, but he could do it with such accuracy that they could just run full speed into space. I've not seen many do it over the distances that Scholes covered with his passing, yet he did it with 100% consistency and often first time passes. You can't teach it.
This sums up the thread.People who don't rate Scholes don't understand football.
One of my favourite quotes about Scholes is Schmeichel saying that his measure of a player is not how high their ceiling is, but how they play on an off day. He said that with Scholes you'd barely notice an off day, as his bottom level was so extraordinarily good.
Then add to that that his overview was world class, his passing at all ranges was world class, his first touch was world class... I'm inclined to agree with the gent in this thread that says that people who don't rate Scholes don't get football.
28How old are you both? Honestly?
Im 42.
Ok give me what you saw of Paul Scholes. Your probably right.
Paul Scholes has amazing football brain. Incredible passing. Long and short. Amazing vision. Great goal scoring player.. Remember him scoring 20 goals in a season playing behind Ruud circa 2003 iicr. He's was complete player despite being a scrawny ginger with asthma. I really don't know what else to say. He was just sensational.Ok give me what you saw of Paul Scholes. Your probably right.
That's just stupid. Players like Scholes, very rarely win Balon dor. Nedved is last player that comes to mind.Too bad he wasn't born 10 years later. Would have stolen some Ballon D'ors from Messi and Ronaldo. Anyone who disagrees doesn't understand football.
Yeah, but it's Paul Scholes you know.That's just stupid. Players like Scholes, very rarely win Balon dor. Nedved is last player that comes to mind.