SharkyMcShark
Horrified
I thought it would have been more prudent to leave him for next weeks game (given the international game midweek).
In the first half he was the worst player on the pitch - he was excellent after we went 2-0 down though. But he wasn't helped by the fact that our attacking players were lack-lustre before the break. When Hernandez started making runs, Scholes had someone to aim at and he improvedHe didn't play that badly, it is just the system that we play when he is in the team, and in that formation. It is predictable as hell and Villa's game plan was designed to exploit it. They let us have the ball and when it inevitably ended up at Valencia's feet they had two men snuffing out his crosses, which were appalling when they actually were delivered into the box. They proceeded to counter attack us, on a few occasions, we saw our centre midfielders huffing and puffing to get back as Villa headed towards our goal.
Just stop this nonsense. That shows nothing towards how off the pace he was. Carrick had 155 passes but half of them had any purpose. When Scholes has a bad day, it rarely has anything to do with his passing.106 passes in 72 minutes, his 92% accuracy was best among starters.
This is Paul Scholes on a bad day.
That could be Jones ... in a year or two. Alas, not yet.If we have to play with of Scholes or Giggs they need to be combined with a mobile, tough tackling midfielder with solid defensive attributes. Unfortunately, we don't have that player. Carrick doesn't have the mobility to cover the gaping holes left by Scholes or Giggs when they start in a midfield two with him.
That's not Fergie's MO, he's supposed to be ruthless with players who can't meet his high expectations.If we have to play with of Scholes or Giggs they need to be combined with a mobile, tough tackling midfielder with solid defensive attributes. Unfortunately, we don't have that player. Carrick doesn't have the mobility to cover the gaping holes left by Scholes or Giggs when they start in a midfield two with him.
I was just making the point that Schmeichel once made, that his worst game, his lowest level is better than anyone else's worst game or lowest level. Even when he's considered to have a terrible game by his standard he still leads the starters in pass efficiency and creates a goal.Just stop this nonsense. That shows nothing towards how off the pace he was. Carrick had 155 passes but half of them had any purpose. When Scholes has a bad day, it rarely has anything to do with his passing.
My main gripe with him was that all those balls to Valencia weren't that useful, because Scholes was off the pace and took an eternity to deliver them. Valencia was basically marked closely by two players whenever he got the ball.I agree, put him in midfield three and enjoy, he can play at least one more season(plus this season). It was ridiculous how many usefull balls he passed to Valencia, and he did nothing.
I recognize that. Point being, I'd be surprised if no one knew that. This is Paul Scholes we're talking about.I was just making the point that Schmeichel once made, that his worst game, his lowest level is better than anyone else's worst game or lowest level. Even when he's considered to have a terrible game by his standard he still leads the starters in pass efficiency and creates a goal.
just looking at the bright side.
Not really, he was couple of times in one on one situations after scholes' passes.My main gripe with him was that all those balls to Valencia weren't that useful, because Scholes was off the pace and took an eternity to deliver them. Valencia was basically marked closely by two players whenever he got the ball.
Someone like Rooney excels at setting Valencia up in good positions 1 v 1 much higher up the pitch after drawing teams in centrally, because he takes up smart positions in behind the oppositions midfield. So we don't need to sacrifice Valencia's usefulness in order to play a functioning midfield I.E. one without Scholes.
Not as a starter for Manchester United, not for me. We have better options now, players that might not ping it as lovely as Scholes but offer more with their all-round games.I agree, put him in midfield three and enjoy, he can play at least one more season(plus this season).
Not all the time, but he is still too good sometimes to sit on the bench.Not as a starter for Manchester United, not for me. We have better options now, players that might not ping it as lovely as Scholes but offer more with their all-round games.
You can almost always trust him to deliver those if players get in the right positions, but it's true that him and Carrick don't serve against everyone... Paul needs to be relieved of the duty to be hurtling back to defend if the opposition break against us. That said, yesterday wasn't his finest outing in any way. I can't remember having seen Scholes misplace that many fairly simple passes in a single half before.Not really, he was couple of times in one on one situations after scholes' passes.
These are few examples:
I know only first one is adressed to valencia, but all 3 gifs show how usefull his diagonals were yesterday. In all 3 situations, our players had time to control the ball, and only one player around them.
I disagree, he should be used like Giggs this season, nothing more.Not all the time, but he is still too good sometimes to sit on the bench.
We'll agree to disagree then.I disagree, he should be used like Giggs this season, nothing more.
Aye.We'll agree to disagree then.
That is what I want to be seeing.as a bench option to come on against tired opposition.
The alternative is just to not play them against decent opposition, but stick to the guys who at least can do the basics of their job. It's no good being able to land a 80 yard pass on a coin if the rest of your game simply doesn't cut it at all.Him and Giggs have started as part of a midfield three a few times and generally it always fails miserably. Do not want.
This.In no circumstances should we tinker with our team and formation in order to accommodate Giggs and Scholes anymore.