'Best central midfielder of the past 15-20 years'... Xavi
It is crazy to suggest that the 'Ginger Prince' to some extent underachieved relative to his talent but how else do you explain the fact that the supposed 'best central midfielder' of the past 15-20 years's' according to Xavi, only had 2 UCL win's in his resume (one campaign in which he didn't feature in the final and was rotated with Nicky Butt) and a host of international exits before the semi-final stage, despite being part of two 'golden generations' by English standards.
When you break down the various phases of Scholes' career and the sheer range of attributes he demonstrated over the course of it - you're struck by how complete he was, outside of his defensive fallacies and an inability to strike a set piece. This was a man who could control the tempo of games against elite opposition (towards the end of his career), possessed the movement of an elite second striker (in the early phase of his career) and had the composure and finishing technique of a top striker encompassing chips, volleys, headers (in the middle phase of his career). Yet in truth, he never really managed to combine all these elements to a world class standard at the same time.
Why did this happen? well it could just be that unlike guys like Zico, Platini... Scholes was learning on the job. He was constantly developing new aspects of his game and did not arrive fully formed in terms of what was his best position and his overall approach to any given game - unlike the former duo who knew they were number 10's from Day 1. Furthermore in Fergie, he had a manager who whilst he had a lot of appreciation for the Ginger Prince's talent, did not fully grasp what type of player Scholes was tactically and who, in Fergie's defence, was a peculiarity in the British game.
Tactically Scholes was always having to adapt his natural game to United rather than being afforded the opportunity or guided towards being a classical number 10 who can run the game and score goals in equal measure. Unlike Juve and Platini, United never changed their style and set up to bring out the best of Scholes - he was simply one down to earth talented player in a team full of grounded stars.
Finally there is the psychological aspect which could be cited as a major factor as to why Scholes didn't hit the heights he could have. He had a well-documented distaste of the limelight and whilst that in turn made him a 'loveable' cult figure - to some extent it explains why Scholes never really maximised his talent to become the untouchable star of both his club side and internationally. He was happy to score goals but he did not want to be the 'heir' to Gazza or prove that he was better than Beckham... and in hindsight it meant especially for England, he was pushed to the sidelines when he was entering his prime - see Euro 2004 for example where Lampard and Gerrard's greater ego's required massaging by Sven. Paradoxically, being made a mere support member and a left sided midfield player during those Euro's ignited the fire in Scholes and he ended up walking away. Thus demonstrating that he was a man who could not help being the heartbeat of his respective sides and secretly craved being at the centre of the action yet almost equally feared being the best player on the pitch because he'd have tonnes of media attention on the back of it.
Your thoughts on Scholes' legacy.. did he underachieve? where does he rank in the annals of English football history... where does he rank amongst the world's all time registas?
@Gio @harms @Enigma_87 @Invictus @Šjor Bepo @Fortitude @Joga Bonito @golden_blunder