kouroux
45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Then why have we played Scholes there for years?
Scholes is a genius and a much better player than Modric
Then why have we played Scholes there for years?
'Can play in a two man' midfield and 'could play in a two man midfield' are two different things. Modric could easily become a very good player in a two man midfield, just as Gerrard could have / should have done. Especially if they were at a club like United. Gerrard would have been an improved Fletcher if he were at United. An even more physical Fletcher who can shoot and has a good technique. Modric could become a Scholes like player (judging from what I saw at the Euros anyway, seen little for Spurs). Certainly the PL is a lot more physical, and I do think he needs to bulk up a bit.
Compared to Anderson, Modric is too lightweight, but he plays with more intelligence. Both have good techniques, Id be tempted to say Modric is slightly better technically though (at the moment anyway). Neither are yet in Scholes' league though, but potentially, they could come close. The one I really wish we had was Fabregas though.![]()
He is (as anyone can see if they watch him play much):Modric isn't two footed though.He can use his left but that doesn't make him two footed
Then why have we played Scholes there for years?
Because Scholes isn't a defensive liability, clearly.
I don't need articles when I've seen him play with my own eyes.Surely he can use his left but for me a true two footed player is one who could do exactly the same stuff with both right and left feet.I've rarely seen a player who could achieve that
That would be ambidextrous. Of which, only 1.1% of the worlds population is gifted with it. . .
Modric isn't ambidextrous, but he's pretty feckin good with both feet, so for me that would be classed as 'two footed'.
That would be ambidextrous. Of which, only 1.1% of the worlds population is gifted with it. . .
Modric isn't ambidextrous, but he's pretty feckin good with both feet, so for me that would be classed as 'two footed'.
Erm..
But can you roll a joint with the roach in either side of the rizla?
I think he'd be better behind the striker (Bent) but Keane is being accommodated so yeah.
He was average behind Bent/Pavlyuchenko for the first half of the season.
Thought he was good behind Bent when they were getting some results.
But can you roll a joint with the roach in either side of the rizla?
Because Scholes isn't a defensive liability, clearly.
I thought Scholes was a massive defensive liability against Inter at OT.
Good to know.
Are you trying to say Scholes is a defensive liability, in general terms?
In a two man midfield, in physical games, at times yes. But in most games, no.
The same applies to Modric.
Deary me.
He's been one of the best midfielders in the league for over 10 years, in the most physical league in the world, and you think he is a defensive liability at times?
i'd just like to point out there is a difference between having a bad game, and then being a defensive liability against phyiscal teams.
Patrick Viera, obviously a particularly physical player as well as having plenty of ability, said Paul Scholes is the hardest player he's played against. If Scholes struggled against physical midfields Viera would've been able to just bully him out of the game every time with raw power. He didn't, because you're talking bollocks.
Youre talking bollocks. Youre trying to over analyse things.
If Scholes had played with Zidane in central midfield, then there is a defensive liability. If Scholes plays with Keane/Carrick, there is no defensive liability.
In football, Vieira probably couldnt get near Scholes because of his footballing brain and awareness. Take Vieira running with the ball at Scholes, then there is a defensive liability. Scholes is a playmaker.
Without the ball, he can be a defensive liability. Thats why he needs to play alongside Carrick/Keane. With the ball, incredible.
If Zidane played with Keane/Carrick, would he still be a defensive liability? The obvious answer would be yes, so I fail to see your point.
Put Modric/Gerrard in a midfield two with Carrick and he'd be a defensive liability. Put Scholes in there and he's not. There's it put simply, no over-analysing.
Gerrard would be a defensive liability with Carrick but Scholes wouldnt?
Gerrard is better defensively. Scholes is rubbish when we dont have the ball.
Gerrard would be a defensive liability with Carrick but Scholes wouldnt?
Gerrard is better defensively. Scholes is rubbish when we dont have the ball.
Of course!
Funnily enough, I encountered some maniacs this weekend who actually skinned joints before putting the roach in. Any of you lot do that?
Actually he is Messi with even more pace. BPITW.Scholes with pace.
Scholes with pace.
Just something I thought of last night Scholesy: Did you feel gutted when he netted Tottenham's second, or was it ok since it was Modric?