How good was Paul Scholes?

[Ajax Treesdown]

An interesting debate, and Scholes is a great player.

But if you take him out of UTD’s team and put Gerrard in, you’re either as good, if not stronger.

Take Gerrard out of Liverpool, and put Scholes in, you get no Istanbul or the FA Cup win the year later.

Whilst Scholes was a great player, he never won Player of the Year, nor the Writers Player of the year. We can think what we will, but ultimately that says at any given time, in a dominant, winning all before them team, he was never seen by the wider public as the best midfielder in the league, or amongst his peers of course.

He wasn’t even the best midfielder at UTD, so let’s get things in to perspective.

Comparing him to Iniesta, as some have on here, is frankly amusing.

This doesn’t mean Scholes was not a great player, because he was.

Using the same argument United wouldn't have won the 2008 Champions league because Scholes wouldn't have been there to ping in a pile driver against Barca in Semi

 

[Stacks]

Using the same argument United wouldn't have won the 2008 Champions league because Scholes wouldn't have been there to ping in a pile driver against Barca in Semi

I think he means more on the lines of Gerrard dragged an average team to the tournament and was the outstanding performer where as United were not so reliant on Scholes as we had Tevez, Hargreaves, Rooney, Ronaldo, Carrick

 

[Ajax Treesdown]

I think he means more on the lines of Gerrard dragged an average team to the tournament and was the outstanding performer where as United were not so reliant on Scholes as we had Tevez, Hargreaves, Rooney, Ronaldo, Carrick

Fair enough but he did have top class players like Torres, Alonso and Mascherano around him its not like he was playing for a mid table team

 

[Stacks]

Fair enough but he did have top class players like Torres, Alonso and Mascherano around him its not like he was playing for a mid table team

Neither TOrres nor Mascherano were there in 2005. It was Biscan, Cisse, Hamann etc

 

[golden_blunder]

Dont understand the massive revisionism this player has had since retirement. Was never close to winning a top individual award during his playing career yet people are placing him with the likes of zidane iniesta xavi etc.
Did he ever win poty for Man Utd during his career ? A consitently top player like giggs for years but his ceiling has been massively overrated since he hung up his boots.

The question is, was he a world class player? Not how many individual awards he won. Just because he wasn’t flashy or gobby, and quietly went about performing game in, game out doesn’t mean he wasn’t world class. He clearly was

 

[Pow]

The question is, was he a world class player? Not how many individual awards he won. Just because he wasn’t flashy or gobby, and quietly went about performing game in, game out doesn’t mean he wasn’t world class. He clearly was

Im not disputing that. My issue is this level above lampard gerrard nonsense. Or the placing him along the likes of zidane/xavi/iniesta etc. He was rarely ever mentioned as one of uniteds top 2 or 3 players every season when he was playing yet somehow hes become this unparalleled midfielder. He was in and put the team for nicky butt and flattered to decieve for england. World class yes. But become massively overrated since retirement.

 

[Kinsella]

Im not disputing that. My issue is this level above lampard gerrard nonsense. Or the placing him along the likes of zidane/xavi/iniesta etc. He was rarely ever mentioned as one of uniteds top 2 or 3 players every season when he was playing yet somehow hes become this unparalleled midfielder. He was in and put the team for nicky butt and flattered to decieve for england. World class yes. But become massively overrated since retirement.

Some of what you say is true. I'd place Keane higher than all 3.

I don't like comparing players who are not alike. That said...out of this Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard trio - Scholes is the only one who could've played for the likes of Barcelona.

 

[Pow]

Some of what you say is true. I'd place Keane higher than all 3.

I don't like comparing players who are not alike. That said...out of this Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard trio - Scholes is the only one who could've played for the likes of Barcelona.

I wouldnt argue. Excuses are made for scholes short comings at international level yet roy keane who played for feckin ireland didnt need such excuses and put in some legendary performances against some top sides.
Keane had a quality where he raised the rest of the 11s performances and he did that for years. Never understood how people can say scholes is a different level from the other two. He was part of a top team but never the star. Even if he could play for barca it wouldnt come close to the standard the two mids they had. Both gerrard and lampards peaks were higher than scholes imo. Peak Ronaldinho was the only thing that stopped lampard winning a balon dor.

 

[Moonred]

Lampard was grotesque in comparison to Scholes when it comes to the ‘beautiful’ game.

 

[Foxbatt]

The Scholes who came out of retirement after his eye problems was a different player to the one before. He made United tick and it was his vision and his passing that made the other United players play. He is not an individual player who is flashy like Gerrard who tries the Hollywood passes all the time. Scholes does his job quietly.

As for his peers not admiring him then I guess you have not read what they have said about him. The list is too long to mention. Many foreign players were surprised that he has not won any personal awards. I guess that he does his job and gets on with it. As Keane said no celebrity BS about him. The only one at United who probably did not have an agent and he signs the agreements on his own.
Zidane said one of his regrets was not playing with Scholes and he was the most difficult opponent he played against. Xavi said he is the most complete midfield player he has seen in the 10 to 15 years. I think Scholes would fit into that Barca team without a doubt. Is he a leader like Keane or Gerrard? The answer is No. Is he a better football player? The answer is Yes.

 

[Irwin99]

In the Gerrard vs Scholes debates, Istanbul and the 2006 Cup final are often brought up to demonstrate Gerrard's big games (and rightly so) but people forget Scholes made the difference in some pretty crucial games for us over the years. 1 goal and 1 assist in the 1999 FA Cup final, a huge away goal vs Inter in 1999, the winning goal in the FA cup semi-final against the invincibles in 2004, a top performance in both legs against Barca in 2008. He also got a goal and an assist in 2003 in a huge early match against Arsenal that season.

 

[harms]

It’s an opinion, it can’t be false.

It is false nonetheless.

Gerrard wouldn't be able to replicate Scholes' role at United. Scholes, on the other hand, probably wouldn't be able to single-handedly overturn games like the 2005 final. But it's not a coincidence that Gerrard's team was in that situation in the first place many times, not only against the brilliant Milan side — he consistently failed to dictate the game and take control of it (something that Scholes was a master of). So he was forced to produce those individualistic performances that overcame the logic of the game.

 

[Prometheus]

... It was Biscan, Cisse, Hamann etc

God, I never hated a team more. Just reading those names now gives me the heebie-jeebies!

 

[Irwin99]

It is false nonetheless.

Gerrard wouldn't be able to replicate Scholes' role at United. Scholes, on the other hand, probably wouldn't be able to single-handedly overturn games like the 2005 final. But it's not a coincidence that Gerrard's team was in that situation in the first place many times, not only against the brilliant Milan side — he consistently failed to dictate the game and take control of it (something that Scholes was a master of). So he was forced to produce those individualistic performances that overcame the logic of the game.

He was pretty poor in the first half and i'm not just saying that as a United fan. I watched the game again a few years ago and the midfield was overrun, his passes were over-hit and the game was just passing him and Alonso by. The Hamann sub was the turning point and allowed Gerrard to play at his best.

 

[Halds]

He was pretty poor in the first half and i'm not just saying that as a United fan. I watched the game again a few years ago and the midfield was overrun, his passes were over-hit and the game was just passing him and Alonso by. The Hamann sub was the turning point and allowed Gerrard to play at his best.

Agree with that. Gerrard was never a dictating player like Scholes was. Alonso was the one dictating games in that team.

 

[Irwin99]

Got to say, Sir Alex was brilliant in managing Scholes in the early and later parts of his career. He tended to be dropped in favour of Butt whenever we played Arsenal in the early years of that rivalry (and I think when we played Juve in 99 too). I think his stamina was a bit of a problem in later years but he was managed really well, playing some games, rested for others.

 

[hungrywing]

Staggering England hasn't produced a similar player in midfield with technical skill and supreme vision.

I guess pace and power and dead ball skills are still over valued at grass roots level.

TBF his passing ability was pretty close to once-in-a-few-generations.

 

[Needham]

So good that he's the real reason Hollywood won't cast David Schwimmer anymore.

 

[Minimalist]

Half the player James Milner is.

Go on.

 

[harms]

Half the player James Milner is.

Go on.

Definitely - in terms of width.

 

[Davs]

Absolutely incredible player. He's up there with Zidane as my favourite player ever.

 

[Davs]

Half the player James Milner is.

Go on.

Half as boring as Milner, correct.

 

[ActionJackson]

No doubt Scholes was a very good player but the hype and myth surrounding him since he retired is ridiculous. This belief that he was the player who all fellow professionals rated as the best is proven to be incorrect when you consider the fact that every season players vote for the best player in the league and Scholes never won player of the season nor did he ever make the 6 man shortlist. Add to that the fact Scholes was only twice in PFA team of the season (again based on player votes) whilst Gerrard made the team 8 times, Vieira 6 times and Roy Keane 5 times it suggests Scholes wasn't up there with the elite Centre Midfielders in the Prem.

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

End of the day he was a very good player who, thanks to being part of a great side, had a World class career.

 

[2cents]

 

[RedDevilCanuck]

No doubt Scholes was a very good player but the hype and myth surrounding him since he retired is ridiculous. This belief that he was the player who all fellow professionals rated as the best is proven to be incorrect when you consider the fact that every season players vote for the best player in the league and Scholes never won player of the season nor did he ever make the 6 man shortlist. Add to that the fact Scholes was only twice in PFA team of the season (again based on player votes) whilst Gerrard made the team 8 times, Vieira 6 times and Roy Keane 5 times it suggests Scholes wasn't up there with the elite Centre Midfielders in the Prem.

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

End of the day he was a very good player who, thanks to being part of a great side, had a World class career.

Pick a random game from 2006. Watch the whole game and pay attention to the short ginger guy.

The term 'everything went through him' gets thrown around alot these days. With Scholes it is right on the money. He dominated from deep either playing wide and long balls or short and quick exchanges.

 

[2cents]

 

[Eric's Seagull]

No doubt Scholes was a very good player but the hype and myth surrounding him since he retired is ridiculous. This belief that he was the player who all fellow professionals rated as the best is proven to be incorrect when you consider the fact that every season players vote for the best player in the league and Scholes never won player of the season nor did he ever make the 6 man shortlist. Add to that the fact Scholes was only twice in PFA team of the season (again based on player votes) whilst Gerrard made the team 8 times, Vieira 6 times and Roy Keane 5 times it suggests Scholes wasn't up there with the elite Centre Midfielders in the Prem.

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

End of the day he was a very good player who, thanks to being part of a great side, had a World class career.

I think you are wrong in the fact that you don't think he was elite due to what the greats says about him. Although you are perfectly entitled to your opinion.

But when Zidane was asked who his toughest opponent is and he says Scholes and calls him the complete midfielder and also the greatest midfielder of his generation that means a lot.

Also when Xavi said that he was the most complete player of 15-20 the last years says a lot.

I particularly like what Peter Schmeichel had to say about him
"People say he is a great player, but you have to define what a great player is. For me, it is a player who has a bottom level that means his worst performance is not noticed. If he is having a bad game, a teammate might feel Paul Scholes is not quite on his game, but a spectator wouldn't notice. Scholes, of all the players I have played with, has the highest bottom level. He has an eye for a pass, for what the play or the game needs at that precise moment, that I have never seen anyone else have. These days he doesn't get into the box too many times, which is where you can see his age, but he has developed tactically. He controls and distributes the play and the game better than anyone I have ever seen."

 

[Raven]

Saw him in the Liam Miller match the other day. When he came off, the Ireland/Celtic team dominated the game. I know it's a charity match, but he was and still is a game controller.

 

[Moriarty]

He'd walk into any United team I've seen and that includes the one with Best, Law, and Charlton in it.

 

[Stacks]

I think you are wrong in the fact that you don't think he was elite due to what the greats says about him. Although you are perfectly entitled to your opinion.

But when Zidane was asked who his toughest opponent is and he says Scholes and calls him the complete midfielder and also the greatest midfielder of his generation that means a lot.

Also when Xavi said that he was the most complete player of 15-20 the last years says a lot.

I particularly like what Peter Schmeichel had to say about him
"People say he is a great player, but you have to define what a great player is. For me, it is a player who has a bottom level that means his worst performance is not noticed. If he is having a bad game, a teammate might feel Paul Scholes is not quite on his game, but a spectator wouldn't notice. Scholes, of all the players I have played with, has the highest bottom level. He has an eye for a pass, for what the play or the game needs at that precise moment, that I have never seen anyone else have. These days he doesn't get into the box too many times, which is where you can see his age, but he has developed tactically. He controls and distributes the play and the game better than anyone I have ever seen."

We have been over this many times. They all say this now but yet opted not to elect him as best player, midfielder or whatever, in any season and he rarely got elected into the team of the (insert here). Hence at any one season, he wasn't been considered as the best in his position by his peers, but in retirement he is suddenly the best they have ever seen. it doesn't add up

 

[luke511]

No doubt Scholes was a very good player but the hype and myth surrounding him since he retired is ridiculous. This belief that he was the player who all fellow professionals rated as the best is proven to be incorrect when you consider the fact that every season players vote for the best player in the league and Scholes never won player of the season nor did he ever make the 6 man shortlist. Add to that the fact Scholes was only twice in PFA team of the season (again based on player votes) whilst Gerrard made the team 8 times, Vieira 6 times and Roy Keane 5 times it suggests Scholes wasn't up there with the elite Centre Midfielders in the Prem.

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

End of the day he was a very good player who, thanks to being part of a great side, had a World class career.

This is very far from the truth.. Him and Giggs were Fergie's secret weapon, they made that side world class, not the other way round. Pick any game from 1995-2010 that Scholes were playing, and I can guarantee Scholes created several dangerous moves out of nothing from deep. You watch all the great goals from that era and half of them start off with Scholes playing a beautiful through ball. He was much more than a 'very good player', he's the most decorated english footballer in history for a reason.

 

[RedEM10]

Scholes at his best walks into any team on the planet now, and I mean any. That's how good he was

 

[Amar__]

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

Being late in tackling and receiving lot of yellow cards have nothing to do with defending. He was very good defensively with or without tackling, we were better defensively in midfield with him there when he was 35 than Rooney when he was 30 when he was playing midfield, even though Rooney was always praised for his tackling.

 

[Stacks]

This is very far from the truth.. Him and Giggs were Fergie's secret weapon, they made that side world class, not the other way round. Pick any game from 1995-2010 that Scholes were playing, and I can guarantee Scholes created several dangerous moves out of nothing from deep. You watch all the great goals from that era and half of them start off with Scholes playing a beautiful through ball. He was much more than a 'very good player', he's the most decorated english footballer in history for a reason.

just not true and adds to the "myth". Scholes loved to hit it out wide for a cross. that was his preferred MO hence he has a low amount of assists. United were very much a get it wide and cross it side and Becks was the chief creator along with Giggs. The way you described him was actually Cesc Fabregas, who funny enough holds the record for assists in the EPL, despite only being here half the time. Scholes assist ratio is 1 in 10 where as Cesc is 1 in 3

 

[luke511]

just not true and adds to the "myth". Scholes loved to hit it out wide for a cross. that was his preferred MO hence he has a low amount of assists. United were very much a get it wide and cross it side and Becks was the chief creator along with Giggs. The way you described him was actually Cesc Fabregas, who funny enough holds the record for assists in the EPL, despite only being here half the time. Scholes assist ratio is 1 in 10 where as Cesc is 1 in 3

Where did I mention assists? I was referring to exactly what you've said.. A pass from deep into open space on the wing for our winger to attack into and catch the opponent on the counter, ie a dangerous attack/move/counter.

 

[Le Red]

I'm intrigued by the people calling the appreciation he deserves "revisionism". More like "I only watched him a couple of times and I'm backing my opinion with FIFA and Best XI awards".
If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Sergio Aguero who never made it to the PL best XI at the end of every season?
I think that his role and playstyle weren't held in such high regard as much as today. Just look at how people rave (rightly so) about Modric. Today it is better understood just how much influencial this type of player is. And Scholes also weighed in with fantastic goals!
Also, it's not a crime not to be considered the best when he played alongside Giggs, Cantona, Ronaldo etc, but he was amazing in his own right. Claims that he wasn't ever rated amongst our best players and that even his starter condition had question marks over it are just false.
The fact that two of the greatest midfield savants (Zidane and Xavi) hold him in such high regard is telling. This is no revisionism. It's just recognition of a player who was held in very high regard in his playing time and who was possibly even better than we thought, in the light of the technical and tactical evolution of the game.

 

[RedFish]

English football struggled for respect on the continent when Serie A was flying high with the Spanish giants there or thereabouts. Scholes though, was one of the few players that everyone could see was different. A special, special player. Can't think of too many that had that extra ability on that kind of level, Gazza and maybe one or two others.

 

[Utd7]

He’s undoubtedly the best visionary and passser I’ve ever seen. He really didn’t have any weakness to his game, was strong all around and a great leader in the dressing room. Only player I would place above him in the MF is Xavi in his prime and even then, I don’t doubt Scholes would replicate him in the Barca system playing along Messi and Iniesta.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

No doubt Scholes was a very good player but the hype and myth surrounding him since he retired is ridiculous. This belief that he was the player who all fellow professionals rated as the best is proven to be incorrect when you consider the fact that every season players vote for the best player in the league and Scholes never won player of the season nor did he ever make the 6 man shortlist. Add to that the fact Scholes was only twice in PFA team of the season (again based on player votes) whilst Gerrard made the team 8 times, Vieira 6 times and Roy Keane 5 times it suggests Scholes wasn't up there with the elite Centre Midfielders in the Prem.

The fact he couldn't defend seems to get laughed off but ultimately if you have a player in the middle who can't tackle he can be a liability, the goal Rivaldo scored against England at 2002 WC is a classic example of this.

End of the day he was a very good player who, thanks to being part of a great side, had a World class career.

Rubbish.

The hype over him is nothing to do with retiring, most sensible people recognised him as a great player during his career never mind since.

The PFA TOTY stats shite argument has been thrown around so many teams (mostly by Liverpool fans......). Steve Stone was picked once, does that make him a great midfielder?

The Rivaldo goal is one game, one game where some Brazilian went for Scholes' ankle and he pulled out. Not sure how that meant the rest of the England team should do feck all to stop Ronaldinho running 40 yards? That's the same rubbish as people who say Maradonas goals was Peter Reid's fault.

Scholes was a genius, in my (and lots of non Liverpool/non kids) United AT elevens. It's just typical of some UK fans that they don't recognise players unless they score 50 goals/season

 

[RooneyLegend]

The hype around also has to do with how fashionable his type of player has become since the Pep era begun. Look at Pirlo and Modric, both have been more praised since 09 than they were before. Obviously he was always a great player but he didn't play in an era that was as focused on his qualities than the current one.

Football at the very top level today is far more technical than it was in the past. imo a player like keane would receive the recognition he used to in this era as he did in his heyday.

In today's game having players that gifted on the ball, with that sort of vision and passing and ball striking technique is what dreams are made of. Heck I'd argue Jamie Redknapp would be seen as a much better player today than he was back then.