gza the genius
Full Member
I think Gerrard could take the game by the scruff of the neck in a way Scholes couldn't but other than that Scholes is clear in pretty much every way. That's not a dig on Gerrard either because he was extremely good.
Ferguson rated Gerrard highly while he was still coaching, if I remember correctly. Something seemed to change towards the end of his management career and he was scathing in his autobiography.if fergie could gave swapped scholes for gerrard do you think he would have? i would say yes he would tbh.
It's not only the mice that are on methWould he feck!
I am not into discussion = will not reply backAnother thing, I don't consider VvD better than Vidic in general. I just said that VvD had the best calendar year for a CB in this century. I expressly said that in the career there are many CBs ahead of VvD in this century. Another guy came and mentioned that Vidic was better in 2011 and it was in that context that I compared their UCL final. Besides, I didn't "just" compare the final. The fact that you are taking texts out of context and making ad-hominem attacks calling me a Liverpool fan instead of refuting my arguments just shows what kind of person you are and mainly that you have no arguments to prove me wrong.
Anyway I'm not interested in debating with anyone who does that sort of thing so I won't reply to you anymore even if you quote me.
Some real strong shit as well. He on that Blue Sky meth!It's not only the mice that are on meth
These stats aside, how do you accurately measure Scholes' value as a deep lying playmaker in his second half of his career though? He plays in a different role to the other two, and luminaries such as Xavi and Pirlo are his peers instead. Gerrard and Lampard could not control games the way Scholes could, even if their output is more (freed up to play higher)Thowing my United bias over board, I think Lampard was the best of them:
His peak and longevity was just ridiculously good:
In 8 out of 9 seasons between 2001 and 2010 Lampard played 36 or more PL games a season (minimum 3115 minutes), 9 total (He played every minute (3420) of the 98/99 season for West Ham), Stevie played more than 3000 minutes twice (36 games both times), Scholes never played more than 35 games or 2757 minutes in a PL season in his career.
In 6 seasons in a row between 2004 and 2010 he had 31 or more goal contributions in all comps from his midfield position and maxed it in the 09/10 season with 45:
04/05 17 G + 21 A
05/06 20 G + 12 A
06/07 21 G + 20 A
07/08 20 G + 11 A
08/09 20 G + 21 A
09/10 27 G + 18 A
Lampard did it 3 times (05/06 - 23G+15A, 07/08 - 21G+18A and 08/09 - 22G+13A) and his best ever was 39.
Scholes never did it and his best ever goalcontribution season was the 02/03 season with 27 (20G+7A).
They were all great though.
Even Keano was agreeing with Jamie Carragher about Gerrard being a better big game player than Scholes and Gerrard being more versatile. All Keano had for why he chose Scholes was "loyalty".It's not only the mice that are on meth
Yeah I'm not sure that claim makes much sense. If you look at the achievements and trophy counts of both players, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would pick Scholes' ahead of Gerrard's.Yeah, when you actually sit down and think about it, that penalty shootout win really blows Scholes' 11 Premier League titles out the water.
To be honest I don't trust Keane's views on much about football and I'm always sceptical when he talks about United. It tends to be coloured by his feelings around how he was treated at the end.Even Keano was agreeing with Jamie Carragher about Gerrard being a better big game player than Scholes and Gerrard being more versatile. All Keano had for why he chose Scholes was "loyalty".
I am not into discussion = will not reply back
Scholes retired at 38 while still playing to a high standard in the Premier League.Thowing my United bias over board, I think Lampard was the best of them:
His peak and longevity was just ridiculously good:
Am I not reply = will back into not discussionI am not into discussion = will not reply back
Another MOTM performance. Wait, what year is this?Scholes ended this debate today.
Do you envisage Scholes as the DM in this formation?If England played a 433 at the time they could have incorporated all three reasonably well -
.....................CF.........................
.....LW...........................Gerrard......
..........Lampard......B2B...............
..................Scholes.........................
I can't think who could have played the B2B role off hand.
Edit - Just checked England's 2004 Euro squad, which is their best, B2B could have been Owen Hargreaves.
Scholes also had the better team around him for the most part too.Thowing my United bias over board, I think Lampard was the best of them:
His peak and longevity was just ridiculously good:
In 8 out of 9 seasons between 2001 and 2010 Lampard played 36 or more PL games a season (minimum 3115 minutes), 9 total (He played every minute (3420) of the 98/99 season for West Ham), Stevie played more than 3000 minutes twice (36 games both times), Scholes never played more than 35 games or 2757 minutes in a PL season in his career.
In 6 seasons in a row between 2004 and 2010 he had 31 or more goal contributions in all comps from his midfield position and maxed it in the 09/10 season with 45:
04/05 17 G + 21 A
05/06 20 G + 12 A
06/07 21 G + 20 A
07/08 20 G + 11 A
08/09 20 G + 21 A
09/10 27 G + 18 A
Lampard did it 3 times (05/06 - 23G+15A, 07/08 - 21G+18A and 08/09 - 22G+13A) and his best ever was 39.
Scholes never did it and his best ever goalcontribution season was the 02/03 season with 27 (20G+7A).
They were all great though.
All opinions but I have the completely opposite one. Personally though a grat player for Chelsea, I always find it strange he is ever even in these deabtes. For me Scholes and Gerrard were both on a completely different level to Lampard.Scholes and Lampard are clear of Gerrard, with that said Scholes is also clear of Lampard.
Deep lying playmaker. A bit like Pirlo in the early 2000s Milan side.Do you envisage Scholes as the DM in this formation?
You have to understand that Gerrard's reputation on here and online especially amongst United fans bares no resemblance to his status and impact when he was actually playing.All opinions but I have the completely opposite one. Personally though a grat player for Chelsea, I always find it strange he is ever even in these deabtes. For me Scholes and Gerrard were both on a completely different level to Lampard.
Scholes should be next to lampard on your formation with a dedicated DM behind the 2.Deep lying playmaker. A bit like Pirlo in the early 2000s Milan side.
Modric.I don’t know why they are compared just because all of them were midfielders. It’s like comparing Modric, de Bruyne and Thomas Muller and asking which one is better.
Whatever formation England used after Beckham was forced to retire after the WC 2006 worked wonders, no? and resulted in England’s non qualification for the Euros 2008. England without Beckham was even worse than with him and only slightly improved once Southgate of all people took over.Apologies if this has already been said, but in terms of England, the one name that always seems to get forgotten in this debate is Beckham.
as great as he was… as captain, he had to play… and Beckham completely dictated the shape of the team. A flat midfield 4. England only started to move to other formations once he retired
I think Scholes (deep lying playmaker), Gerard (box to box 8), and lampard (No 10) would have made a great midfield 3…
it’s just unfortunate that generation was wedded to 442, and wasn’t blessed with glut of technically great, pacey wide forwards England has now.
that 00’s midfield, with the current front 3 of Saka, Kane, and any of the great LW options, we would have been some team.
especially with the 00’s defence too.