How good was Paul Scholes?

[Rozay]

Scholes was better than Xavi. There is no question about it. I can't believe I have to post this on a Utd forum.
Xavi played in excellent teams that controlled possession completely. Scholes had everything in his game - Xavi was a level below in every aspect to Scholes. Shooting, Long Passing, Heading, Movement etc.

Fabregas over Scholes? Dear God.

Come on guys behave, you might think Xavi is much better but don't sh1t on scholesy and say players like fabregas are better than him.

Can see the argument why xavi is better, but scholes isn't that far behind.

It wasn't as simple as me saying Fabregas was better, I said 'Fabregas at his Arsenal best'. Not sure what is meant by 'players like Fabregas' either.

Cesc in his final seasons at Arsenal was a marvellous midfielder, the leader at Arsenal and the best midfielder in England for me. For the stat lovers, he also recorded very impressive numbers. That incarnation of Fabregas was a better PL midfielder than Scholes for me.

 

[Red4Life_#7]

Scholes was a more complete player than Xavi.

 

[caid]

If that was the case, why wasn't he never our best and more important player. First was Cantona, then there were Keano, Beckham and the two strikers (in the treble season), then RvN, then Ronaldo, then Rooney, then RVP. All while Scholes was playing for us. In the treble season, it could be argued that he was the least important midfield player we had, and was even benched for big matches in favor of Keane.

He was great. But he is also the most overrated player in the Caf (although Danny Welbeck almost got that award from him).

He was for about 5 years.
You've just listed a bunch of goalscorers of varying degrees of quality and Beckham which must be a joke.
Keane was more important but scholes overtook him from about 2000 / 2002 and no one else got close till Ronaldo really got going
(except when he nearly went blind i guess, hard to be good in them circumstances)
By 2009 when ronaldo left he was about 35 so I think its a bit harsh to expect him to be our best player at that stage.

It wasn't big matches he was benched for Butt, it was the away matches.
And by the end of the season he was just first choice - he played in the away semi against Juventus
Keane gets all the credit for us running rampant against them but scholes was great that day too.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

He was for about 5 years.
You've just listed a bunch of goalscorers of varying degrees of quality and Beckham which must be a joke.
Keane was more important but scholes overtook him from about 2000 / 2002 and no one else got close till Ronaldo really got going
(except when he nearly went blind i guess, hard to be good in them circumstances)
By 2009 when ronaldo left he was about 35 so I think its a bit harsh to expect him to be our best player at that stage.

It wasn't big matches he was benched for Butt, it was the away matches.
And by the end of the season he was just first choice - he played in the away semi against Juventus
Keane gets all the credit for us running rampant against them but scholes was great that day too.

Butt started away at Juve too.

 

[Revan]

He was for about 5 years.
You've just listed a bunch of goalscorers of varying degrees of quality and Beckham which must be a joke.
Keane was more important but scholes overtook him from about 2000 / 2002 and no one else got close till Ronaldo really got going
(except when he nearly went blind i guess, hard to be good in them circumstances)
By 2009 when ronaldo left he was about 35 so I think its a bit harsh to expect him to be our best player at that stage.

It wasn't big matches he was benched for Butt, it was the away matches.
And by the end of the season he was just first choice - he played in the away semi against Juventus
Keane gets all the credit for us running rampant against them but scholes was great that day too.

No, he wasn't. Ruud Van Nistelrooy was our best player (by a large distance) from the moment he came until his last season there. Then Ronaldo and Rooney.

Beckham was likely our best player in the treble season, and he almost won a Ballon D'Or for that. Keano was better than Scholes that season too.

And when King Cantona was here, he was our best player. So, where do those 5 years come from?

 

[Jaybomb]

People go with fancy names and international stars. Scholes was as good as any as a player and if he was playing in a better international team, you wouldn't say what you said. Zidane was better yes - but even Pirlo is debatable.

England was a very good team during Scholes' era. He played alongside some of the best English players ever.

It's pointless saying "If he did this, if he was that"... he just wasn't better than them. Xavi and Iniesta were on a different level and Zidane is arguably the greatest midfielder of all time. I don't think Paul Scholes was ever the best midfielder in the world.

Not that any of that really matters anyway. Scholes has his legacy at United and that's enough for me. I just feel like he became a bit overrated after his retirement. I don't remember him getting compared to those guys in his playing days and I've been watching him since the early 00s.

 

[caid]

No, he wasn't. Ruud Van Nistelrooy was our best player (by a large distance) from the moment he came until his last season there. Then Ronaldo and Rooney.

Beckham was likely our best player in the treble season, and he almost won a Ballon D'Or for that. Keano was better than Scholes that season too.

And when King Cantona was here, he was our best player. So, where do those 5 years come from?

The 5 years come from there and I disagree with you.
Beckham was never our best player, ever. The only season he was close was 99 after which every decent full back had his number and he never got to the byline,
relying on crosses from miles out (which were still good tbf to him)

 

[paulscholes18]

One of those great players along with Xavi & Pirlo that already knew what they were going to do with the ball before they got it, unlike watching us now, don't think they know what to do with the ball when they have it let alone before they get.

 

[Zii]

No it's not and I've seen Xavi - infact followed each Barca game during the 07-09 period. Xavi had great control and vision but lacked a lot of the qualities scholes had. Xavi couldn't lace the ball like Scholes - he couldn't ping the ball 60 yards inch perfect like Scholes. Also, Xavi played in a weaker league. Xavi/Scholes both couldn't tackle. Xavi was a poor header of the ball.

It's clear Scholes was better at pretty much everything.

It depends what you look for. Xavi was the ultimate player in terms of possession finding space and just generally being amazing. He didn't need to lace a ball or ping a ball because he was always in the right spot to assist or play a simple pass. Just so you know, I actually think scholes was better. If you go back up the page you can see my response was to someone saying "It's not even a debate", ofcourse its a debate. We aren't comparing Scholes to Robbie Savage here, they are both class players with pros and cons

 

[caid]

I cant be fecked comparing him with Van Nistelrooy or Fabregas for one season
thread needs moar videos



MOAR



This video has arrows and circles and junk if your into that

(probably a better example of why he was great than his admittedly brilliant goals)

 

[Billy Blaggs]

Scholes was a more complete player than Xavi.

You reckon? Its a bold statement to make.

 

[frank lee madeer..]

The truth of the matter is, scholes was underrated during his playing career & overrated in retirement.

 

[DavosOfManc]

I don't think i could like a player more after hearing they successfully plant a long shot on the head of people taking a piss in the wooded area by the training ground. Says it all.

 

[Cantona'sCollar]

At the peak level, the only player in the history of Britain to be on the level of George Best, in my opinion. Rio Ferdinand and Bobby Charlton are close for us, but he remains the best midfielder I have ever seen for this club, and this is the greatest club in the history of the country. If he played for Real Madrid, Ronaldo would be scoring 80 every season.

 

[Stadjer]

But Beckham, Keane, Giggs, Scholes, Cole, Yorke and Sheringham all had the exact same idea. They played football their way; which was more about high intensity, natural wide play and the quality of delivery to the strikers.

There's more than one way to play football.

True. That tactic however wont highlight the stuff central midfielders do as much as tiki taki football does though. Alves was hugely important for that tiki taki but Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets and Messi are usually the players people mention when talk about the all winning Barcelona tiki taki period. I think if Xavi was placed in that United team you mentioned he wouldnt do as good as Paul Scholes would do when he was in that Barcelona midfield.

Xavi also played with better players than Scholes, the player you named have been world class or close to it but Scholes never played in a team which had the 3 Ballon d'or finalist who all came from the same football education in the same team.

I am a huge Scholes fanboy so i might not be totally unbiased... i started following United because van Nistelrooij joined but i became a fan because of Fergie and Scholes.

 

[caid]

I'm not sure Xavi did play with better players though.
They were really, realy strong around midfield but other areas were more ... functional,
anyway.

United players have always struggled with personal awards too.
At our best we've always been a great team but look at '99 and Rivaldo won the Ballon D'Or with a team that went out of the CL group stage.
There isn't even an international tournament to give credit for is there?
Offhand the only time i can remember one of our players winning the PFA award is Ronaldo when he scored 40 odd goals and it was borderline impossible to argue he wasn't the best player
and Giggs years and years after his best (he deserved it for having been overlooked for 15 odd years previously)
I think generally when one player overtakes the rest of the team our results often suffer really. We were much better in 2008 than 2009.
Theres lots of reasons but i think we suffered with the extra emphasis on Ronaldo (amongst a dozen other things).

I think Xavi is better anyway tbh.
I hated and hate tiki-taka but it was spectacularly effective and he was the difference between being good at it and being that much better than everyone else at it.
Give me Iniesta every time though, I'd just rather watch him play. Its not even close to being a hard decision for me.

And Scholes too, every week he'd pull off at least one utterly crazy pass, you'd be disappointed if thats all he gave but you were guaranteed that much.
It wasn't even a gerrard thing where he was pulling one off and putting 4 more into row z.
Mistakes were just such a rarity for him and he always made the right choice, always. He was pretty brilliant.
Seeing that for ... 15 odd years makes me kind of love the guy

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Absolutely not better than Xavi but one of our finest ever midfielders. We all know the quotes and the teammates/opponents know best. He was incredible.

 

[Infordin]

There isn't even an international tournament to give credit for is there?

Copa America 1999. Rivaldo was tearing it up.

 

[caid]

Copa America 1999. Rivaldo was tearing it up.

Well that makes sense, he was pretty good, wasn't exactly undeserved.
Its more having a relatively low representation in the premier league stuff I guess.

 

[Berbasbullet]

I always liked the compliment that when Scholes gave the ball away you gasped in shock. Shows the high standards that he has made for himself.

 

[Moby]

Xavi did play in a time when everything came together for spain.

That's the thing though, he was the first and foremost name in the team and the one who 'brought' everything together. Even before Pep had set foot as a senior team manager, Xavi was at the heart of the Spain team under Aragones and won the man of the tournament in Euro 2008, while running the show. Spain had been underperforming in every tournament till then, they had quite a bit of talent but never really had the mental character and fighting spirit that Xavi added along with bringing that talent group together. Similarly, Pep wouldn't have been able to implement his tactic and create one of the greatest teams ever without him being at the heart of it and getting those instructions carried out in the middle - it took an incredible performer to execute such an extreme strategy and philosophy to perfection and while he had an immense supporting cast (as did pretty much all the names that have been compared here) he was always the orchestrator.

 

[11101]

The truth of the matter is, scholes was underrated during his playing career & overrated in retirement.

Depends who you ask really.

He wasn't as good as Xavi but he was more adaptable. Xavi did one job in one club better than anyone I've ever seen. I'm not sure how well he would have fitted in elsewhere.

Scholes is the only one who really challenges Xavi from that generation for sure.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

It's really interesting that people find it so hard to answer a question of "How good was Paul Scholes" without mentioning another players name.

I've been guilty of it so I'll try and walk it back a little.

The guy had the lot. He was a really exciting player and was one of the best players of his generation. He was suited to, and played in, possession & counter attacking systems. It's rare that one midfielder ever really demonstrates that they don't need a certain system to show their best.

He had one of the finest first touches in football, no matter the area of the pitch. He was also a fine tackler, despite all the eye rolling comments of him being a bad one. He was niggly and dirty at times but he could tackle.

He's one of my favorite United players and I think the best thing I could say about him is that at no point in his career would I have ever thought about signing a player to play where he did. I was beyond excited when we signed Veron. I thought we'd be untouchable with the pair of them in the side. Sadly that never worked out regularly enough.

Like Giggs, he had a pair of careers that were wildly different. My favorite iteration was his early career. Super creative, a ten in all but name, with the same kind of drive as Keano in a different package. Properly ginger, Wearing a shirt and shorts that looked at least two sizes too big, that stupid smile where his mouth would just open and then not really do anything. His later years as a withdrawn midfielder were arguably 'better' but I'd take the dynamic attacking version every day of the week.

The guy was a star without desiring any of the trappings of success. Could have played in any era. Wish we could find another like him.

 

[wolvored]

At the peak level, the only player in the history of Britain to be on the level of George Best, in my opinion. Rio Ferdinand and Bobby Charlton are close for us, but he remains the best midfielder I have ever seen for this club, and this is the greatest club in the history of the country. If he played for Real Madrid, Ronaldo would be scoring 80 every season.

wasnt as good as Robbo. Hes the best mifielder Ive seen at the club. If he had of been 5-10 years younger and played in that Fergie team after 94 we would of had another couple of EC Im sure of it.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Scholes and Keane were two great players but, the discussions that surround them are so annoying. When people talk about how great Scholes was the discussion becomes extremely pretentious early and with Keane people rarely even talk about Football when they mention his greatness.

 

[Lay]

This is the only place people would claim Scholes is better than Xavi.

 

[Will Singh]

There was a couple of good players who reached close to his level i.e. Xavi and Zidane but no one got to Scholes level. He could control a game like no other. People will say Xavi this and that but has Xavi player on a windy Wednesday night in Stoke? Has he feck!

 

[Cascarino]

The truth of the matter is, scholes was underrated during his playing career & overrated in retirement.

From reading this thread I'd have to agree with you.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Pep names the one ex-United player he wanted to manage

Date published: Wednesday 5th July 2017 8:50

Pep Guardiola says that the former Manchester United player he would most like to have managed is Paul Scholes.

Guardiola was the guest at a charity dinner held by Rory McIllroy and hosted by James Nesbitt, both United fans, on Tuesday.

The Manchester City manager discussed a range of topics, from Johan Cruyff to Lionel Messi.

The Spaniard was reticent to speak about City’s bitter rivals however, even when the topic inevitably turned to Old Trafford with Nesbitt leading the conversation.

“Don’t worry, I know United is a top club,” he replied when goaded by the actor.

Guardiola then refused to name which player from the current Old Trafford crop he would most like to sign for City.

But the Spaniard offered an instant response when asked which former United player he would most like to have managed.

“Ah, Paul Scholes,” he said. “My favourite player.”

http://www.football365.com/news/pep-names-the-one-ex-united-player-he-wanted-to-manage

http://metro.co.uk/2017/07/05/pep-g...ayer-he-would-like-to-manage-at-city-6756006/

Official, Pep, another one onboard the Paul Scholes fans train. Choo choo.

<\|Zidane, Xavi, Xabi Alonso, Socrates (Brazil), Edgar Davids, Fabregas, Blanc, Marcello Lippi, Ronaldinho, etc~~~

 

[wolvored]

Best Unitd player in history.

That would be Bryan Robson since the early 70s when I started watching

 

[Smoking_Owl]

Official, Pep, another one onboard the Paul Scholes fans train. Choo choo.

<\|Zidane, Xavi, Xabi Alonso, Socrates (Brazil), Edgar Davids, Fabregas, Blanc, Marcello Lippi, Ronaldinho, etc~~~

Pep wanted to sign in in 2011 before he retired the first time.

 

[Craig Ward]

Scholes was a genius, his talent undeniable, he always influenced the game and is probably the most natural footballer we have ever had at united.

He could control the tempo of a game from midfield, which only the best can do at this level. He is highly regarded by some great names across Europe, Pep, Zidane, Xavi, Seedorf etc.

It still baffles me how England pissed around and played him out wide etc when he was clearly ahead of all other options in central midfield. No England manager had the balls to drop Lampard or Gerrard, while they are extremely good players, Scholes should have been ahead of both for England.

Best player I've seen live, I have seen Barca but was only a friendly so Scholes get this one as Xavi, Iniesta & co we're not seen in a competitive game

 

[El cangrejo]

If he was Brazilian he would be playing as starter in our nt even in that amazing generation that we had.
Top wc player.

Is that really saying much though? Who was the last top Brazilian playmaking central midfielder?

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mi.../twitter-users-paul-scholes-rant-10734522.amp

wum or a nob, I'm.not sure

 

[RC89]

We tend to overrate our legends, as I believe we do with Giggs to an extent. Scholes however was incredible, too good for the English team for them to really appreciate his value. His passing was some of the best I've ever seen, to the point if he ever misplaced one I'd feel mortified that he actually managed to place a wayward pass. Above Giggs, truly world class.

 

[roonster09]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mi.../twitter-users-paul-scholes-rant-10734522.amp

wum or a nob, I'm.not sure

Clueless guy who was torn apart on twitter by few ManUtd fans.

 

[Adam-Utd]

He got even better when he got older too.

When he played as the deepest midfielder and dictated play he and Xavi where the best midfielders in the world.

It's just a shame he didn't play that way a bit more often before his legs went, I guess it wasn't so popular before.

When Scholes was on his game though nobody could get near him. His touch, vision and ability to avoid his opponents was out of this world.

Yes he didn't score as many goals as Lampard/Gerrard but they played very different roles.

If you want an AMC to chip in with goals then go Lampard. If you want a midfielder to control and dominate possession then Scholes all day.

 

[AshRK]

The truth of the matter is, scholes was underrated during his playing career & overrated in retirement.

If anything scholars has never been overrated ever. He is one of the most underrated player. I feel people never appreciated him enough especially the english fans and english media.

 

[broccoli]

My favorite United player. Class, technique, power and intelligence. He was an old school attack minded midfielder. Much prefer him to Xavi although very different players.

You can compare him to StevieG and Lampard but Paul was more complete than both. Always thought he was the best United player of that generation (Giggs, Beckham, RvN)

 

[AshRK]

Scholes was a genius. One of the finest players I have ever seen play. He was never a camera guy like a Beckham or Gerrard and that is why he never got his due applause. I bet if he was playing for barcelona or real madrid or ac milan , he would have been termed the best.

If anyone has doubt over his ability , just watch us play in 2006-07 season. He was our silent hero, unsung hero.