What about peak Scholes v Iniesta...
Iniesta - Is there another? | Announces retirement
- Thread starter SAred
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
Modric was better than Scholes so picking Iniesta is even more of a no brainer here.
Is this a joke?
Let's be real. Scholes is not even on the same level as these players.
Take off your red-tinted glasses for a minute mate.
One of my earliest redcafe memories was in the newbies where there was quite a few posters arguing that Scholes is better than Xavi and Iniesta combined
.... Not even on the same level? Who needs corrective lenses
Last edited:
Modric was better than Scholes...I don't think so. I've been watching football my whole life, only on redcafe are our players so underrated. Newbie shit really?
Iniesta > Scholes > Modric
No disrespect to Scholes, but he wasn't as good as Iniesta and Modric.
Yea hilarious anecdote but I didn't suggest that did I..but feels great to follow the herd. Scholes was a genius, maybe just me but here come the devil's advocates. Scholes in the middle with xavi Messi etc. im sure rose tinted spectacles wouldn't be needed for neutral fans to see the diminutive ginger lad as being world class. People forget so quickly. Scholes was easily thes guys peers and to shoot me down for putting him in the mix is forgetting what he could do. Shame. I remember though, and I've seen all of xavi, Iniesta and luka's carrers.
You need to watch more vids, I think you've forgotten. He did go unnoticed though to be fair to you such was his style.
20 goals a season at one point. With the passing long range not just metronomic 5 yard stuff. But was a quiet lad so yea that counts against him compared to gerarrd, cus that's important.
Careful read the room. Modric is better that peak Paul Scholes..
All 3 are stunning players who are in the same top class bracket by the way
As a goalscoring midfielder, Scholes was better than Modric and Iniesta. But as a deep lying playmaker, though still very good, Modric was just a level above.
But, putting bias aside, Iniesta was better on the eye. Absolutely glorious ball carrier.
Where Modric or Scholes would pass their way out of trouble, iniesta was capable of doing that and much more, with him weaving himself out of danger with his brilliant ability 1v1.
But, putting bias aside, Iniesta was better on the eye. Absolutely glorious ball carrier.
Where Modric or Scholes would pass their way out of trouble, iniesta was capable of doing that and much more, with him weaving himself out of danger with his brilliant ability 1v1.
Iniesta has been MOTM in a WC final, a Euros final and a CL final. I really don't think Modric and Scholes belong in the same tier as him.
Regarding the "comfort zone" argument, I'm not sure it holds up so much when the "zone" only existed because of his (and a couples others') specific qualities.
Regarding the "comfort zone" argument, I'm not sure it holds up so much when the "zone" only existed because of his (and a couples others') specific qualities.
Not watched the vid as I know iniesta his close control was awesome, a true genius. But to say Scholes isn't in the same class is laughable. To see peak Scholes in that midfield would've been amazing. We forget how good Scholes actually was, but hey..I remember
Scholes being a level below Modric as a deep-lying playmaker isn't a bad thing y'know. Both great players but I think Modric just out-performed Scholes in that role more consistently in the big CL games and internationally.
Personally I'd also have Scholes just below Pirlo in that role too.
But we're splitting hairs, they're all great players.
All great players, sure. But you guys are literally forgetting how good Scholes was in my opinion. He was awesome.
Maybe it's just me..
I'm lucky enough to still watch him play (season ticket holder at Vissel).
He makes football look easy. It's been a joy watching him.
He makes football look easy. It's been a joy watching him.
Quotespam on Scholes incoming I guess?
Both Iniesta and Modric were a level above Scholes
Both Iniesta and Modric were a level above Scholes
What seperates Iniesta with Scholes and Modric, is his individuality. I know it sounds quite funny, given Scholes and Modric themselves were capable and did it time and time again, deciding the game and being more prolific than Iniesta. but Iniesta was simply a much superior ball carrier. Modric and Scholes have/had world class ball protection skills, but Iniesta not only had great ability to keep the ball(not as good as Xavi though) but he was arguably the best dribbler in the world not named Messi during his prime. So while stats of goals and assists can never describe him, but he was much more involved in the final stages of ball progression than the other two.
Scholes was the superior passer, the best long passer I've ever seen. Iniesta was a marvel on the ball, one of my favorites all time. On paper you'd think a midfield 3 with Xavi and Busquets would be too attacking, but they had incredible quality everywhere to just pass around you. Picking between them is more a matter of taste, imo.
The Ballon D'Or is not supposed to be a definitive litmus test for the overall greatness of an individual — the committee's intent is to highlight the most noteworthy performer within a calendar year (so there's an intrinsic undercurrent of arbitrary felicitousness). Modrić probably deserved it for being the most recognizable star for unexpected-finalists Croatia in the World Cup and winning a European Cup for the third consecutive year; and Iniesta's work was always cut out for him because the bulk of his peak accomplishments coincided with Messi (the crown jewel) and Xavi (the central architect) at club level, and again Xavi at international level (who cannibalized many of his votes, and vice versa). It's a bit like Cannavaro winning the award in 2006, when a superior centerback like Baresi didn't — or Rossi winning the award in 1982, when a superior striker like Riva didn't. Just the way things turned out in the grand scheme.
P.S. Iniesta - Is there another? Pedri.
Yeah, Messi.
Scholes the goalscorer was not the same player as Scholes the playmaker.
Iniesta was one of a kind, as much as I love Scholes and Modric is my fav non untied player.
Iniesta was comfortably better than both.
Edit - Modric is my fav non united player after Messi.
Iniesta was comfortably better than both.
Edit - Modric is my fav non united player after Messi.
Scholes adapted to being a deep lying playmaker in his 30s, so it's no surprise he wasn't at the same level as the top players in that role. In his peak he was an attacking midfielder or number 10, and he was better than those mentioned in that role.
Impossible to say who is better overall. But put peak Scholes in La Liga and I think many people would change their tune.
Aye. One other reason to throw into the mix is the Ballon D'Or was a different beast during Iniesta's prime as it was no longer just journalist votes. The difference being that in 2010 the journalists' top 3 was Sneijder, Iniesta and Xavi, with the overall winner Messi 4th. The media being more likely to punt for a player who shined in the biggest tournament and who became the story of the year. Not having those voting conditions worked against the chances of a serial tournament performer like Iniesta.The Ballon D'Or is not supposed to be a definitive litmus test for the overall greatness of an individual — the committee's intent is to highlight the most noteworthy performer within a calendar year (so there's an intrinsic undercurrent of arbitrary felicitousness). Modrić probably deserved it for being the most recognizable star for unexpected-finalists Croatia in the World Cup and winning a European Cup for the third consecutive year; and Iniesta's work was always cut out for him because the bulk of his peak accomplishments coincided with Messi (the crown jewel) and Xavi (the central architect) at club level, and again Xavi at international level (who cannibalized many of his votes, and vice versa). It's a bit like Cannavaro winning the award in 2006, when a superior centerback like Baresi didn't — or Rossi winning the award in 1982, when a superior striker like Riva didn't. Just the way things turned out in the grand scheme.
P.S. Iniesta - Is there another? Pedri.
People are really going overboard with shitting on Scholes here, to say he wasn't as good as the others is one thing but to outright suggest he isn't even on the same stratosphere as them is frankly preposterous . Maybe it's the English style football's rather physical nature that is muddling people's perception of him but he was absolutely a giant in the midfield deserving of all the praise that goes on his way.
He 100 percent belongs in that list.
He 100 percent belongs in that list.
Last edited:
Isn’t comparing intestate to Scholes a bit stupid, iniesta although a great passer was more of a dribbler type and was pretty much a marauding player all around the pitch.
Fantastic though he is, it should be more about Modric, Scholes, xavi and in all honesty if I wanted one player for my team it would probably be xavi, second would be Scholes but it’s so so close.
I do remember a poster called scholsey say modric was the better than Scholes and most of the cafe laughed at him, few laugh now.
Fantastic though he is, it should be more about Modric, Scholes, xavi and in all honesty if I wanted one player for my team it would probably be xavi, second would be Scholes but it’s so so close.
I do remember a poster called scholsey say modric was the better than Scholes and most of the cafe laughed at him, few laugh now.
Scholes was for me the best of the lot he just had that special something. Long ball passing, short passing, drop off the shoulder, shooting just name it. I just think that if Scholes had been in this Barca team he would have gotten so much more recognition and appreciation for his outrageous talents as pinging a ball 50m to bring your teams counter attack to a blistering start isn't as sexy as possession football under Pep. Iniesta though was better than Modric. But who cares they were all great.
Definitely he was better at dribbling but you can't discount long range passing, goals and assists and on the other hand include dribbling.
Exactly, he would've shone.
For me its Iniesta > Mordic > Scholes, though Iniesta was a very different type of player to the other 2 and could be in the same lineup as one of the other 2 (like xavi).
Iniesta, though Modric isn’t too far away really. If he has a mega CL this season at the age of 36… he’s still behind Iniesta. But still. Xavi > Iniesta >> basically everyone else since that era
100 percent agreed
I do not like the question though, because they are the type of players you would play together. So unless you know the alternative for each (if you pick iniesta whos with him, and vice versa), how can you really decide?
I would argue that Modric type players are more rare than iniesta type players (no reflections on how good they were).
So in theory yes I would want iniesta, but for me a modric type player is more important so I would make sure I had one of those first.
Before Scholes became a deep lying play-maker, then I would class him as a goal scoring midfielder, yes.
That guy used to get absolute pelters for his love of Modric and suggesting him as a Scholes replacement. At the time, most of the cafe deemed Modric to be a slightly above average midfielder at a top 6 club. @dal
Of course Scholes was a better player than Modric.
Modric only had 6-8 top class years, Scholes was a top player for way longer.
Scholes was that good he was a top player as a striker, attacking midfielder, central midfielder and deep lying playmaker. How many players could play all 4 roles and still be world class.
Iniesta on the other hand is one of the top 5 midfielders of the last 30 years on the level of Zidane, Xavi and Matthaus.
Modric only had 6-8 top class years, Scholes was a top player for way longer.
Scholes was that good he was a top player as a striker, attacking midfielder, central midfielder and deep lying playmaker. How many players could play all 4 roles and still be world class.
Iniesta on the other hand is one of the top 5 midfielders of the last 30 years on the level of Zidane, Xavi and Matthaus.