PL's best midfielders

[Prometheus]

Lampard played in midfield 3 in most attacking role, players like Scholes played in midfield 2 in almost all their careers. Gerrard was moved all over the place.

What's is also overlooked is, Lampard scored many penalties (He was very good at it)
In 609 PL games, he scored 177 league goals, 134 from open play. 4.5 games per goal
In 499 PL games, Scholes scored 107 league goals, 106 from open play, 4.7 games per goal. He played as deeper player from 2006-07 season at least.

Best ever goal scoring midfielder in PL wasn't all that better than Scholes in goal scoring from open play. Scholes played in midfield 2 almost all his career and from 2006-07 as deeper player.

You removed all those goals in free kicks/penalties and he still has 134! I find it incredible. The amount you removed is equivalent to about 40% of Scholes total tally, and he still ended up with better numbers. Lampard also has twice as many appearances as a sub in the league as Scholes; largely due to his time at City. But while I won't miss the point that Scholes himself was an incredible goal scoring midfielder, I'd like to point out the other disparity in terms of assists:

------------------------------------ PL ------------------------------------------

In 609 PL games, Lampard assisted 102 league goals, 6 games per assist.

In 499 PL games, Scholes assisted 55 league goals, 9 games per assist.

------------------------------------ CL ------------------------------------------

In 105 CL games Lampard has 28 assists: an assist per every 3.7 games.

In 124 CL games Scholes has 10 assists: an assist per every 12.4 games.

-------------------------------- FA Cup ---------------------------------------

In 63 FA Cup games Lampard has 15 assists: an assist every 4.2 games.

In 47 FA Cup games Scholes has 6 assists: an assist every 7.8 games.

 

[mwake]

I'm not sure i'd agree Gerrard was more gifted than Scholes. When Gerrard's legs went, he was very close to finished.
Whereas Scholes was controlling the pace of games in his late 30s without needing to gallop up and down.

Gerrard was a flashier player. But that doesn't mean more gifted necessarily.

Gerrard had a flashier style and generally was the best player in his team by a long way.
Scholesy on the other hand wasn't flashy and played in some great teams.

Things like this are why you got scenarios like Ginola winning the 99 player of the year.

Gerrard was definitely the better all round more complete footballer compared to Scholes, shouldn't even be a debate... Also, I know some will think it's sacrilegious and that I'm being partizan but I would would put Gerrard above Roy Keane as well. Yes Roy was a more vocal leader but technicsl wise Gerrard was a more complete player, teams used to get the better of Liverpool but rarely did players get the better of Gerrard, he constantly got 8/9/10 ratings... You have to be a special player to be able to drag that 2005 team to a CL final and then influence a winning comeback.

 

[Prometheus]

Are we talking about peak season or overall quality? I think the latter.


Great point? When did Lampard and Gerrard dominate Europe's elite? It's a terrible point which isn't even grounded in reality. You'd think they were Xavi and Iniesta destroying every midfield.

They won a CL each and both did really well to do that of course. But a bit of weird point to make that they went up against the cream of Europe and dominated as others didn't, given that never actually happened. I mean, Lampard's CL win as wonderful an achievement as it is for anyone was the worst CL win I've ever seen.

Lampard had pretty incredible campaigns in the CL. He's actually one of the few players that Iniesta/Xavi didn't dominate. He lost two games to Barca; one was the Drogba red card in the Camp Nou and the other was the one where long-haired young Messi had Del Horno sent off, where Deco and Motta started. Even in 2012 he was responsible for both of our crucial goals - the Drogba goal at the Bridge and Ramires goal when we were up against the ropes in the Camp Nou. From '04 - '12, I think 6 semi finals including 2 finals one of which was a win is exceptionally good!

If we're gonna talk about luck, then an English side should be holding the '09 CL and also the 2 Scholes CLs required a miraculous injury time equaliser/winner and a famous slip for a penalty that would have won it for the other team! The Gerrard one required for a Milan team that totally destroyed them in the first half have to switch off for about 6 minutes, including Gerrard himself getting mercilessly turned for the second goal by Kaka, and a phantom goal in the semi final. I think the recent domination of Ronaldo and Madrid made the CL seem easier to win than it really is.

 

[roonster09]

You removed all those goals in free kicks/penalties and he still has 134! I find it incredible. The amount you removed is equivalent to about 40% of Scholes total tally, and he still ended up with better numbers. Lampard also has twice as many appearances as a sub in the league as Scholes; largely due to his time at City. But while I won't miss the point that Scholes himself was an incredible goal scoring midfielder, I'd like to point out the other disparity in terms of assists:

------------------------------------ PL ------------------------------------------

In 609 PL games, Lampard assisted 102 league goals, 6 games per assist.

In 499 PL games, Scholes assisted 55 league goals, 9 games per assist.

------------------------------------ CL ------------------------------------------

In 105 CL games Lampard has 28 assists: an assist per every 3.7 games.

In 124 CL games Scholes has 10 assists: an assist per every 12.4 games.

-------------------------------- FA Cup ---------------------------------------

In 63 FA Cup games Lampard has 15 assists: an assist every 4.2 games.

In 47 FA Cup games Scholes has 6 assists: an assist every 7.8 games.

I went with League only as that's the only competition where you play against same team. I didn't remove any FK goals, I removed just penalty goals.

So he scored 27 more goals playing 100+ more games and most of his career as attacking mid in midfield 3.

Yeah Lampard has more assists as he was final third player whereas Scholes was midfield conductor for many years.

Lampard - 48908 mins - 134 goals - 102 assists - 364 mins per goal - 207 mins per G+A
Scholes - 36110 mins - 106 goals - 55 assists - 340 mins per goal - 224 mins per G+A

Scholes has better mins per goal from open play and he played in midfield 2 all his career and at least last 8 seasons as deeplying playmaker.

Also regarding subs, Lampard played 65 games as a sub. Scholes played 95 games as sub.

Scholes also has better mins per goal (open play) in CL. With assists Lampard is better.

It's very simple, from open play, Scholes goal scoring record is as good as Lampard and he played in midfield 2 and deeper role for many years.

 

[Prometheus]

I went with League only as that's the only competition where you play against same team. I didn't remove any FK goals, I removed just penalty goals.

So he scored 27 more goals playing 100+ more games and most of his career as attacking mid in midfield 3.

Yeah Lampard has more assists as he was final third player whereas Scholes was midfield conductor for many years.

Lampard - 48908 mins - 134 goals - 102 assists - 364 mins per goal - 207 mins per G+A
Scholes - 36110 mins - 106 goals - 55 assists - 340 mins per goal - 224 mins per G+A

Scholes has better mins per goal from open play and he played in midfield 2 all his career and at least last 8 seasons as deeplying playmaker.

Also regarding subs, Lampard played 65 games as a sub. Scholes played 95 games as sub.

Scholes also has better mins per goal (open play) in CL. With assists Lampard is better.

It's very simple, from open play, Scholes goal scoring record is as good as Lampard and he played in midfield 2 and deeper role for many years.

I used the PL website (here) which gives 31 sub appearances for Scholes (which I see now doesn't make sense as it states Scholes made his first appearance as a sub in 2006). Do you have data as to the number of games where Scholes played deep etc? In all of this I'm most surprised by the the number of PL appearances for Scholes. He's not even in the top ten.

 

[roonster09]

I used the PL (here) website for the sub appearances which states Scholes made his first appearance as a sub in 2006 (which doesn't make sense in hindsight), and in total 31. Do you have data as to the number of games where Scholes played deep etc? In all of this I'm most surprised by the the number of PL appearances for Scholes. He's not even in the top ten.

Official PL site have many stats tracked from 2006 onwards.

I don't have how many games he played as deep but he played from 2006-07 at least with Carrick next to him. Earlier he was more box to box player making runs, after that for 1 or 2 seasons he was attacking mid but from 2005 or 2006 he was always deep playing playmaker alongside Carrick.

 

[adexkola]

Skipping over the current debate... Focusing on 2010 onwards:

Carrick
Silva
Toure
Kanye
De Bruyne

 

[Sandikan]

Gerrard was definitely the better all round more complete footballer compared to Scholes, shouldn't even be a debate... Also, I know some will think it's sacrilegious and that I'm being partizan but I would would put Gerrard above Roy Keane as well. Yes Roy was a more vocal leader but technicsl wise Gerrard was a more complete player, teams used to get the better of Liverpool but rarely did players get the better of Gerrard, he constantly got 8/9/10 ratings... You have to be a special player to be able to drag that 2005 team to a CL final and then influence a winning comeback.

Like I was saying at the start of this thread, you're a Liverpool fan, so obviously go with your man! Same with other teams with their man.

The one I can't believe anyone would go with, outside of Chelsea fans is Lampard. I'm sure even he has admitted he was a step down from the real top mids.

 

[Sandikan]

Lampard fans only have stats to go on. There's literally no other argument for them.

 

[adexkola]

Lampard fans only have stats to go on. There's literally no other argument for them.

Forgetting the stats, he was the most important attacking player in the 04-06 Chelsea side IMO. Very intelligent, kept it simple yet effective, knew the right moment to arrive in the box. What's the run of games he had without missing one?

See parallels between him and early Scholes.

 

[Sandikan]

Forgetting the stats, he was the most important attacking player in the 04-06 Chelsea side IMO. Very intelligent, kept it simple yet effective, knew the right moment to arrive in the box. What's the run of games he had without missing one?

See parallels between him and early Scholes.

That's quite a claim in a team that had star wingers and Drogba.

 

[tenpoless]

Heeerrm yeah course Steven Gerrard course

 

[adexkola]

That's quite a claim in a team that had star wingers and Drogba.

Drogba came into his own later.

And as for Duff, Robben, (who else am I forgetting), they may have been more flashy but they just were not as consistent as Lampard in Chelsea's attack.

Happy to be corrected otherwise, maybe Chelsea fans can chime in also.

 

[Davìd Moyéz]

The real stat isn't how many goals or assists you can collect but how many league titles you can win. Paul Scholes has 11 premier league titles, the majority of which he was starting in central midfield most games. Not sure why this is so often overlooked in the Gerrard vs Lampard vs Scholes debate.

 

[Gringo]

In a highlights package Gerrard is spectacular. But if I am watching him week in week out he's too adventurous in his play as a CM. Trying ridiculous shots and audacious passes giving up possession needlessly. Would and did my head in especially for England. I've always been more of a Scholes and Lampard type of guy. As a kid Scholes never stood out for me but the more I understood about the game the more I took notice of what he was doing, exceptional footballing brain, hard stumped to find a better English CM in that mould.

 

[Prometheus]

Official PL site have many stats tracked from 2006 onwards.

I don't have how many games he played as deep but he played from 2006-07 at least with Carrick next to him. Earlier he was more box to box player making runs, after that for 1 or 2 seasons he was attacking mid but from 2005 or 2006 he was always deep playing playmaker alongside Carrick.

It seems to me that his goal scoring suffered severely after 2006. His record from 06/07 onwards contributes very little to his overall record, which obviously makes sense. So the notion that he put up very good numbers while spending a long time playing deep is correct, but people often make it sound as if he put up those numbers from deep.

 

[Pow]

Lampard fans only have stats to go on. There's literally no other argument for them.

Scholes has nothing. When he played no one give a shit about him. Funny how by far the best midfielder ever in the prem was never shortlisted for one of the best players in the world where was all the acclaim when he played ?

 

[roonster09]

It seems to me that his goal scoring suffered severely after 2006. His record from 06/07 onwards contributes very little to his overall record, which obviously makes sense. So the notion that he put up very good numbers while spending a long time playing deep is correct, but people often make it sound as if he put up those numbers from deep.

Yeah, his numbers when not playing as deeper midfielder is good. As any deeplying playmaker, his numbers dropped as he was more of a controller in the midfield than someone who made runs from the deep.

 

[Pow]

The real stat isn't how many goals or assists you can collect but how many league titles you can win. Paul Scholes has 11 premier league titles, the majority of which he was starting in central midfield most games. Not sure why this is so often overlooked in the Gerrard vs Lampard vs Scholes debate.

For how many was he the key player or even top 3 ?

 

[roonster09]

Scholes has nothing. When he played no one give a shit about him. Funny how by far the best midfielder ever in the prem was never shortlisted for one of the best players in the world where was all the acclaim when he played ?

 

[iHicksy]

Please not this.

He got out of retirement. Against all odds looks marvelous because he can still pull a decent level for united. But technically above all midfielder?

Oh please. Do tell, who in the premier league had a better range of passing and awareness than Scholes?

 

[Pow]

Its true. Whilst a good player post retirement he has become a myth. Some legendary player on par with zidane xavi etc far above lamard gerrard.
Yet his career doesnt reflect this. Never shortlisted for the balon dor yet the others were seldom voted in team of the year. How many times did his own fans vote him pots ?

 

[Sky1981]

Oh please. Do tell, who in the premier league had a better range of passing and awareness than Scholes?

In his 35s? Seriously there's no better premier league midfielder better than a 35 yo scholes?

 

[Prometheus]

Drogba came into his own later.

And as for Duff, Robben, (who else am I forgetting), they may have been more flashy but they just were not as consistent as Lampard in Chelsea's attack.

Happy to be corrected otherwise, maybe Chelsea fans can chime in also.

Correct. In fact, back then I preferred Crespo and wasn't happy when he kept getting sent on loan to the Milan clubs. Happy to have been wrong about this, though. What you said about Duff/Robben is also correct.

 

[Prometheus]

Yeah, his numbers when not playing as deeper midfielder is good. As any deeplying playmaker, his numbers dropped as he was more of a controller in the midfield than someone who made runs from the deep.

Yeah, I imagine his stats would have been truly phenomenal if he spent about another six seasons playing further up.

 

[JJ12]

Scholes has nothing. When he played no one give a shit about him. Funny how by far the best midfielder ever in the prem was never shortlisted for one of the best players in the world where was all the acclaim when he played ?

Embarrassing.

 

[Sky1981]

Yeah, I imagine his stats would have been truly phenomenal if he spent about another six seasons playing further up.

Having the best teams for nearly all his career helps. Any other team scholes would probably not shine as bright as he was with us.

You need a good team to showcase passing abilities.

 

[duffer]

The real stat isn't how many goals or assists you can collect but how many league titles you can win

Danny Drinkwater > Stevie Gerrard.

 

[roonster09]

Its true. Whilst a good player post retirement he has become a myth. Some legendary player on par with zidane xavi etc far above lamard gerrard.
Yet his career doesnt reflect this. Never shortlisted for the balon dor yet the others were seldom voted in team of the year. How many times did his own fans vote him pots ?

Its not truth. People started creaming their pants when Pep showed how to use the midfielders, Scholes was the pass master, if he was playing post Barca 2008-09 then he would have got many plaudits.

In any case, you make it sound as if we are talking about O'Shea, fecking hell Scholes was one of the best midfielders in PL. Just because he wasn't THE BEST in any season doesn't mean he wasn't better than players from other team. Just because you are ignorant doesn't mean Scholes wasn't appreciated by ManUtd fans.

 

[roonster09]

Having the best teams for nearly all his career helps. Any other team scholes would probably not shine as bright as he was with us.

You need a good team to showcase passing abilities.

Being good enough to play regularly for the best team in the country also helps.

 

[Pow]

Its not truth. People started creaming their pants when Pep showed how to use the midfielders, Scholes was the pass master, if he was playing post Barca 2008-09 then he would have got many plaudits.

In any case, you make it sound as if we are talking about O'Shea, fecking hell Scholes was one of the best midfielders in PL. Just because he wasn't THE BEST in any season doesn't mean he wasn't better than players from other team. Just because you are ignorant doesn't mean Scholes wasn't appreciated by ManUtd fans.

Absolute nonsense. He isnt on the same level as xavi or iniesta.
Clearly im not the only ignorant one cause he was never voted for by anyone in his prime fans peers pundits etc. Like i said myth.

 

[roonster09]

Absolute nonsense. He isnt on the same level as xavi or iniesta.
Clearly im not the only ignorant one cause he was never voted for by anyone in his prime fans peers pundits etc. Like i said myth.

Nobody:
Chelsea fan: Scholes isn't on same level as Xavi.

Hilarious debating skills.

Just look at how Chelsea fans cream their pants just watching half decent midfielder like Jorginho who can pick a pass, if you had Scholes playing, maybe you would have died watching him pass.

 

[Pow]

Embarrassing.

Then why was he not nominated once.
Keane
Lampard
Gerrard
Toure
Silva
Kante
Heck nearly every one mentioned on this thread has been except him. Doesnt add up to the post retirement myth hes become.

 

[duffer]

For what it's worth, I do think Scholes was better than Lampard and Gerrard.

I'm still annoyed with him for quitting England to spend time with his family.

 

[Pow]

Nobody:
Chelsea fan: Scholes isn't on same level as Xavi.

Hilarious debating skills.

Youre talking nonsense again.
You said pep showed everyone how to use centre mids. Ignoring the fact they won euro 08 before pep with xavi pott.
Then you tried shoehorn scholes into it like he is on the level to do those performances they did which again is tripe.

 

[roonster09]

Then why was he not nominated once.
Keane
Lampard
Gerrard
Toure
Silva
Kante
Heck nearly every one mentioned on this thread has been except him. Doesnt add up to the post retirement myth hes become.

Scholes was nominated for Balon d'or 5 times, same as Lampard. The argument was, Scholes never received any votes.

 

[roonster09]

Youre talking nonsense again.
You said pep showed everyone how to use centre mids. Ignoring the fact they won euro 08 before pep with xavi pott.
Then you tried shoehorn scholes into it like he is on the level to do those performances they did which again is tripe.

I will keep it very simple, you have your head so firmly in your arse that you just can't read.

 

[Pow]

Scholes was nominated for Balon d'or 5 times, same as Lampard. The argument was, Scholes never received any votes.

I will keep it very simple, you have your head so firmly in your arse that you just can't read.

Youve got it there hed have gotten all the plaudits. For what. He isnt on the level of the two mids pep had to get those plaudits.
So why oh why if he was so good didnt he get any votes.

 

[iHicksy]

In his 35s? Seriously there's no better premier league midfielder better than a 35 yo scholes?

Why are you asking me? I'm telling you there wasn't a more technically able midfielder. The fact that you can't think of a single one would indicate that i'm right.

 

[Sky1981]

Why are you asking me? I'm telling you there wasn't a more technically able midfielder. The fact that you can't think of a single one would indicate that i'm right.

What are you talking about. He's playing next to a better midfielder in his 35, he's called michael carrick.

This is a united forum, we all love our ginger prince, but he's not the best midfielder in the league in his 35. Just like Giggs isnt the best midfielder when he's 35.