Scholes the Pundit

[Dante]

Paul Scholes has dismissed claims he is using his role as a pundit to help Ryan Giggs become the next Manchester United manager as 'a load of b******s'.

Scholes delivered an impassioned analysis of United's 2-0 surrender to Liverpool on Thursday night alongside former teammate Rio Ferdinand, describing the performance as 'shambolic'.

The United great has quickly established himself as a forthright pundit, generating accusations he is attempting to undermine Van Gaal.

When asked by fanzine United We Stand what he thought of supporters' suggestions his criticism is 'part of Sir Alex Ferguson's way of keeping control of United in a battle with Ed Woodward' to have Giggs installed as the next manager, Scholes replied: "What a load of b******s. What I've always done is nothing more than say what I think I've seen on a football pitch, whether that's been good or bad.

Scholes has refuted claims about his punditry
"The thing with Van Gaal is that everything he has read and everything I say that gets printed, is only the negative stuff. There are times when I have tried to be positive. The best example I can think of was PSV away when we got beaten and didn't play great but I felt that I could see something happening in the United way. By that I mean we had two wingers in - I think - Ashley Young and Memphis.

"But when only my negative comments are picked on, it looks worse than it actually is."

Scholes is a forthright pundit
Scholes added: "It's not the regime I've had a go at, I've criticised the style of play." The 41-year-old also acknowledged he has been softer in his criticism of Wayne Rooney since it is 'sometimes a little more difficult to be critical of the lads you've played with'.

Scholes also rejected the assertion United had been in decline since Cristiano Ronaldo left the club in 2009, opining "it's got to be more of a post-Ferguson thing. Okay, when Fergie left, it probably wasn't the best or most fluid of United teams, but they won the league by 10 points."

"I think Varela has done better than I ever expected him to and I probably think he's surprised a lot of the coaching staff at United, too," he explained.

"As a lad at United, he was probably struggling to get into the Under-21 team at one point, so I think he's been the biggest surprise of them all.

Rashford was told to be more like Ruud van Nistelrooy by United coaches
"Marcus Rashford, however, is no surprise to me at all. I've seen him play since he was 14 or 15 and then in Paul McGuinness' side. You always knew the talent was there. He's obviously only played a few times for the first team and his goals have been what you'd call 'goalscorers' goals' but he's got much so much more than that.

"You've not seen it yet, but he hits free-kicks in a dipping fashion, almost the way Ronaldo does."

True to form, Scholes could not resist another dig at Van Gaal.

"The manager has taken a lot of credit giving these youngsters a chance, but they've been very lucky really with the amount of injuries United have had," he stressed.

"If it wasn't for that, most of these young lads wouldn't have been anywhere near the first team yet. If anything, it's probably shown how bad his signings have been that these young lads have come in and and have looked brilliant in comparison."

 

[clarkydaz]

that last bit is brilliant

 

[Jinn]

Scholes is just awesome.

 

[RedRover]

Each to thier own; I expect more from pundits. Just been there and done it isn't really enough for me.

It's not the "been there, done it" I'm talking about - it's the honesty and frankness in what he sees, rather than coming out with the same old nonsense the other pundits do or sitting on the fence.

I'd take a Scholes real opinions, over Jamie Redknapp's (or others) standard, cliched, boring punditry any day of the week.

 

[Xaviesta]

As for the conspiracy theory doing the rounds on Scholes being critical about van Gaal with end game resulting in Giggs replacing van Gaal, i don't completely believe Scholes. To me, he has sounded a lot like a mouthpiece for Ryan Giggs.

 

[Pexbo]

"The thing with Van Gaal is that everything he has read and everything I say that gets printed, is only the negative stuff. There are times when I have tried to be positive. The best example I can think of was PSV away when we got beaten and didn't play great but I felt that I could see something happening in the United way. By that I mean we had two wingers in - I think - Ashley Young and Memphis.

That is just hilarious from Scholes.

So the best example of Scholes being positive is when we got beaten by PSV, didn't play very well but played two wingers - Ashley Young and Memphis and played the "United Way".


That is just absolute confirmation of his bias. The performance - poor, the result - bad. But we played the United Way with two wingers and that is something that must be encouraged even though it didn't work.

 

[acnumber9]

That is just hilarious from Scholes.

So the best example of Scholes being positive is when we got beaten by PSV, didn't play very well but played two wingers - Ashley Young and Memphis and played the "United Way".


That is just absolute confirmation of his bias. The performance - poor, the result - bad. But we played the United Way with two wingers and that is something that must be encouraged even though it didn't work.

He's talking about the best example of him trying to be positive following a defeat. It follows perfectly with him saying it's the style of football he's being most critical of.

 

[Jig1234]

Who heard Scholes say De Gea should've saved Payet's free-Kick because it was not a 'Ronaldo type kick' - absolutely clueless

 

[Jig1234]

United Way doesn't exist. Scholes is deluded. It was just Fergie's way, his philosophy. No manager in the planet is going to replicate that!

 

[Jinn]

United Way doesn't exist. Scholes is deluded. It was just Fergie's way, his philosophy. No manager in the planet is going to replicate that!

So, Barca way doesn't exist as well? It was just Guadiola's way, should they just revert to playing shit football before Pep took charge?

 

[Jig1234]

So, Barca way doesn't exist as well? It was just Guadiola's way, should they just revert to playing shit football before Pep took charge?

Luis Enrique current teams walks all over Pep's. He sold Sanchez & Pedro and they are not looking back, Barcelona are better than ever. That's Luis Enrique doing not Pep's. He did his own thing, his way, made big calls and signings. He deserves the credit for taking Barcelona to another level. To suggest Pep did things for him is ridiculous. He hasn't just carried on the good work he has taken it to another level.

If you watch them now they don't play the same way, of course they keep the ball but they are far more clinical than ever. They have evolved

 

[RedChip]

So, Barca way doesn't exist as well? It was just Guadiola's way, should they just revert to playing shit football before Pep took charge?

Sorry to jump in but this is illogical: just because there is no united way doesn't mean there is no barca way as well.

Or, at least, the quoted post didn't say that.

 

[MancFanFromManc]

Scholes is great. He shoots from the hip and doesn't stop to worry what people will think. Very refreshingly honest. You don't have to agree with everything he says, but you can't deny his integrity

Anyone who doesn't think there's such a thing as a "United way" simply doesn't know their history. Every manager will have their own style of course they will. The same applies to the players too. But they have to respect the club and its values

Fellaini is a great example. He clearly has ability, but he simply isn't a United style player and never will be. It's not his fault, he was a Moyes panic buy and he's given his all. But he's at the wrong club

 

[SteveJ]

True to form, Scholes could not resist another dig at Van Gaal.

What's the point of getting Scholes to clear the air regarding his United punditry if you're going to make sly comments like that in the article? That kind of sneaky crap is F365's territory, not a proper newspaper's.

 

[Rykker_4united]

Scholes: "I don't always criticize the fat, Dutch, long-faced bastard. The team may play bad on occasions but its not his fault he's a very bad coach who isn't as good as my dad Fergie."

 

[SteveJ]

Scholes: "I don't always criticize the fat, Dutch, long-faced bastard. The team may play bad on occasions but its not his fault he's a very bad coach who isn't as good as my dad Fergie."

Source?

lol

 

[Jinn]

Luis Enrique current teams walks all over Pep's. He sold Sanchez & Pedro and they are not looking back, Barcelona are better than ever. That's Luis Enrique doing not Pep's. He did his own thing, his way, made big calls and signings. He deserves the credit for taking Barcelona to another level. To suggest Pep did things for him is ridiculous. He hasn't just carried on the good work he has taken it to another level.

If you watch them now they don't play the same way, of course they keep the ball but they are far more clinical than ever. They have evolved

So they still play the Barca way, except more clinical. Ok.

 

[Jinn]

Sorry to jump in but this is illogical: just because there is no united way doesn't mean there is no barca way as well.

Or, at least, the quoted post didn't say that.

I was using Barcelona as an example of a team who changed managers and still hold on to their beliefs of how they want to play football.
Utd has always had a certain style of playing, cannot believe some people are saying we never had a style.
Even if it existed only in SAF tenure (which it didn't, clearly!), lets just erase the last 25 odd years of our history to suit some peoples agenda.

Scholes is absolutely right when he says that we are not playing the UTD way. Flying wingers, fighting midfielders, guile, genius and freedom to express. Even if we lose, it's still worth watching.

 

[Big Andy]

United Way doesn't exist. Scholes is deluded. It was just Fergie's way, his philosophy. No manager in the planet is going to replicate that!

What a load of absolute shite...

Our identity goes back to the 40's and 50's and Matt Busby...attacking football, entertainment and promoting youth...

Scholesy, for all his heart on his sleeve way of putting things, is bang on about pretty much everything...

The Manager is a cnut, the players are all spineless shithouses...he was bang on about players on twitter as well (well, apart from saying that they're tweeting on facebook, anyway)

 

[Jinn]

What a load of absolute shite...

Our identity goes back to the 40's and 50's and Matt Busby...attacking football, entertainment and promoting youth...

Scholesy, for all his heart on his sleeve way of putting things, is bang on about pretty much everything...

The Manager is a cnut, the players are all spineless shithouses...he was bang on about players on twitter as well (well, apart from saying that they're tweeting on facebook, anyway)

Sometimes, I get the feeling some on here have only been watching football for the past 5 years.

 

[Big Andy]

Sometimes, I get the feeling some on here have only been watching football for the past 5 years.

Even under Big Ron the football was entertaining and attacking with width and pace...its just that we were up against the Liverpool Machine at the time...

 

[Jig1234]

What a load of absolute shite...

Our identity goes back to the 40's and 50's and Matt Busby...attacking football, entertainment and promoting youth...

Scholesy, for all his heart on his sleeve way of putting things, is bang on about pretty much everything...

The Manager is a cnut, the players are all spineless shithouses...he was bang on about players on twitter as well (well, apart from saying that they're tweeting on facebook, anyway)

I am sorry mate, I am wrong. I forgot Manchester United are the only club on the planet that want 'attacking football, entertainment and promotion of youth'... All other clubs want something other than that, I'm sure they all have different a identity to us the great Man United.

- Scholes sounds like a disgruntled man doing a fan cam. If he has any actual insight on how to fix change or alter things I'm willing to listen but if all he is going to do is cry and how rubbish we are, who cares? Does Woodward care what he thinks?
Scholes just sounds like a man who gets it. I assure you every fan up down the country get it also. A better question for Scholes is why his friend Ryan Giggs doesn't get it? Why is he the no.2 if we have drifted so far from our ' identity' and the 'United way'. Surely that's why he was there.

The Manager is awful but Woodward hired him. The players are terrible, Van Gaal signed them.

What players do on Twitter - Let's be serious for a minute. If we were winning and everything was great. No one, I mean no one would give a damn about something like that. Who cares?. What they do on Twitter does not affect their natural ability on the pitch. They just suck! end of. Let's not picking up on such redundant things. Either you're good at football or management or you aren't. Van Gaal isn't. Scholes is a horrendous pundit.

If you want to believe the United Way is some urban legend that must be passed on generation after generation you go ahead. I have no time for such nonsense. Every club on the planet want the same things. Thinking our way is different or ideal is deluded. Ferguson and those before did things their own way. If you believe the man after Ferguson was going to do things the same way, I think you are kidding yourself. Every manager does things differently.

Is it the United way to be chasing Jose Mourinho? It wasn't before Moyes but here we are, most fans want him now. I'm sure he's all for the promotion of youth and all that.

Because things change we have evolved some need to move on, stop living in the past. No one is going to run Man United like our passed managers they will run it the way they think it should be run. Just because the winning has stopped does not mean the United way has been abandoned it just means they aren't as good as managers.

 

[Big Andy]

Someone is on her period...Christ...

 

[Florida Man]

That is just hilarious from Scholes.

So the best example of Scholes being positive is when we got beaten by PSV, didn't play very well but played two wingers - Ashley Young and Memphis and played the "United Way".


That is just absolute confirmation of his bias. The performance - poor, the result - bad. But we played the United Way with two wingers and that is something that must be encouraged even though it didn't work.

In all fairness to him, he really had to dig deep for something positive to say considering how shit we were during that period.

 

[Devil may care]

He was in on LvG early in the season, then when the Christmas disaster happened he was relatively quiet as the Jose rumours started to swirl, but he's been back in with both boots recently. It's amazing how many of our old players think 4-4-2 with wingers is the United way.

 

[Golden Nugget]

Someone is on her period...Christ...

I agree.... I don't even know what she is on about... That said, it is the same poster that made me chuckle, as he/she claims a guy who's played the game at the top level as absolutely clueless...

Some people just aren't worth arguing with.

 

[Perrick Dubois]

That is just absolute confirmation of his bias. The performance - poor, the result - bad. But we played the United Way with two wingers and that is something that must be encouraged even though it didn't work.

I think he just meant they kept trying to go forward and never gave up. Not the tangible aspect of relentless wing play being "The United Way".

 

[Xaviesta]

Re the ''United Way'' and the style of play aspect of it, if it was as sacrosanct as Scholes would have you believe, why did United appoint Moyes and van Gaal?

 

[Honest John]

What a load of absolute shite...

Our identity goes back to the 40's and 50's and Matt Busby...attacking football, entertainment and promoting youth...

Scholesy, for all his heart on his sleeve way of putting things, is bang on about pretty much everything...

The Manager is a cnut, the players are all spineless shithouses...he was bang on about players on twitter as well (well, apart from saying that they're tweeting on facebook, anyway)

Spot on mate.

Best Morgan Coppell Hill Sharpe Giggs Valencia Young the list goes on.....we have always played with width and pace. That is the United tradition. This keep-ball bollocks doesn't cut it and that is 90% of the reason that the fans are so pissed off. I can tell you from experience that they were less pissed off in the 70's and 80's living in Liverpool's shadow because we always tried to play with a style and panache befitting the clubs history.

It always pissed Liverpool off that even though they were the best side in the country by a mile and probably the best in Europe, they still couldn't match the glamour and magnitude of Manchester United. We out-gated them even when we were in Div 2. That is the United tradition and for someone to come along and try and turn us into Don Revie's Leeds is frankly an insult to those of us who have grown up with, and totally love the United way.

 

[Jinn]

Re the ''United Way'' and the style of play aspect of it, if it was as sacrosanct as Scholes would have you believe, why did United appoint Moyes and van Gaal?

I think that if any manager fancies managing at one of UTD, Barca or Bayern, they would need to conform to the clubs traditions not the other way around.
When we hired Moyes, I would have thought he would have been totally aware of the clubs traditions/style of play etc. It just didn't work out with him because he is a dead poor manager who didn't have the respect of the players. He also tried to change things, and when it didn't work he complained the players needed changing and weren't good enough anymore (add more excuses, he had plenty).

Van Gaal was Woody's call. Not sure who he consulted with for the appointment, but Woody is no football person.

In both cases, the managers tried to change things at the club, and clearly it didn't work. We the fans hate it and that's the biggest indicator that it's not working.
In saying that, it's rumoured that Mourinho will be here this summer. We all know his style of football is different from how we expect UTD teams to play. It's either Mourinho changes his approach or he will be criticised like the others regardless if we win consistently or not.

 

[Will Absolute]

I think that if any manager fancies managing at one of UTD, Barca or Bayern, they would need to conform to the clubs traditions not the other way around.
When we hired Moyes, I would have thought he would have been totally aware of the clubs traditions/style of play etc. It just didn't work out with him because he is a dead poor manager who didn't have the respect of the players. He also tried to change things, and when it didn't work he complained the players needed changing and weren't good enough anymore (add more excuses, he had plenty).

Van Gaal was Woody's call. Not sure who he consulted with for the appointment, but Woody is no football person.

In both cases, the managers tried to change things at the club, and clearly it didn't work. We the fans hate it and that's the biggest indicator that it's not working.
In saying that, it's rumoured that Mourinho will be here this summer. We all know his style of football is different from how we expect UTD teams to play. It's either Mourinho changes his approach or he will be criticised like the others regardless if we win consistently or not.

Doubtful. During the last three years, United fans have looked into the Abyss, and the Abyss has looked back into the fans. They might be a little less picky for a while.

 

[itso 7]

He was in on LvG early in the season, then when the Christmas disaster happened he was relatively quiet as the Jose rumours started to swirl, but he's been back in with both boots recently. It's amazing how many of our old players think 4-4-2 with wingers is the United way.

I found it strange when Scholes called for Van Gaal to be spared the sack then and completely toned down his criticism. I think Jose becoming available had something to do with his change of tone...

 

[itso 7]

I think that if any manager fancies managing at one of UTD, Barca or Bayern, they would need to conform to the clubs traditions not the other way around.
When we hired Moyes, I would have thought he would have been totally aware of the clubs traditions/style of play etc. It just didn't work out with him because he is a dead poor manager who didn't have the respect of the players. He also tried to change things, and when it didn't work he complained the players needed changing and weren't good enough anymore (add more excuses, he had plenty).

Van Gaal was Woody's call. Not sure who he consulted with for the appointment, but Woody is no football person.

In both cases, the managers tried to change things at the club, and clearly it didn't work. We the fans hate it and that's the biggest indicator that it's not working.
In saying that, it's rumoured that Mourinho will be here this summer. We all know his style of football is different from how we expect UTD teams to play. It's either Mourinho changes his approach or he will be criticised like the others regardless if we win consistently or not.

Some could argue that Mourinho's Real Madrid played more in the United Way than Fergie's latter teams. It's not Moyes that abandoned the United Way it was Fergie when he significantly lowered the standars of our wingers, a process which ended with us having Valencia and Young as first choice wingers and a horribly lacking central midfield. The results were coming but let's not kid ourselves claiming that it was edge on the sit stuff.

 

[Moriarty]

David Squires has produced a good cartoon about the upcoming game that features Scholes and Ferdinand. It's quite funny.

http://www.theguardian.com/football...n-manchester-united-v-liverpool-europa-league

 

[acnumber9]

I found it strange when Scholes called for Van Gaal to be spared the sack then and completely toned down his criticism. I think Jose becoming available had something to do with his change of tone...

His tone has been consistent throughout. Mourinho was available long before his rant after the Sheffield United game.

 

[devilish]

United Way doesn't exist. Scholes is deluded. It was just Fergie's way, his philosophy. No manager in the planet is going to replicate that!

there wasn't a Fergie way either. SAF had changed his mentality, management styles and tactics radically throughout his years. The man who gave Scholes his chance was the same man who insisted in playing an ancient Giggs/Scholes instead of Pogba forcing the most promising midfielder of his generation to leave.

Its trophies that matter.

 

[SqueakyWeasel]

there wasn't a Fergie way either. SAF had changed his mentality, management styles and tactics radically throughout his years. The man who gave Scholes his chance was the same man who insisted in playing an ancient Giggs/Scholes instead of Pogba forcing the most promising midfielder of his generation to leave.

There's a successful way and a non successful one.

But he was a much better man motivator and the exact opposite of an egoist - he often fell on his own sword when protecting the team and the club (which he always saw as two separate entities one fleeting and the other enduring). If he made some bad decisions towards the end it might have been deluded but I doubt it was ever formulated in a selfish way … he "thought" what he was doing was the best for the club. He structured behind-the-scenes so he could be more hands-off with lots of people doing a job but answering to him (read: in fear of him if you like) he was far less autonomous than van Gaal (all in MHO)

 

[devilish]

But he was a much better man motivator and the exact opposite of an egoist - he often fell on his own sword when protecting the team and the club (which he always saw as two separate entities one fleeting and the other enduring).

SAF was a great man motivator the best in his line and he did protected the squad (although he did threw players under the bus too, for example Rooney). However as said there's no SAF's way. He himself confessed to have changed alot throughout the years and this change was what irked the famous SAF-Keane spat

TBF his ability to change is what made him that great. Those who stand to a philosophy will die with it. (LVG, Capello, Sacchi etc). If there is a United's philosophy then it would be embracing change. We did that by forcing our way to participate in the CL, eliminating the pub club mentality and turning football in a commercial enterprise.

 

[SqueakyWeasel]

SAF was a great man motivator the best in his line and he did protected the squad (although he did threw players under the bus too, for example Rooney). However as said there's no SAF's way. He himself confessed to have changed alot throughout the years and this change was what irked the famous SAF-Keane spat

TBF his ability to change is what made him that great. Those who stand to a philosophy will die with it. (LVG, Capello, Sacchi etc)

Totally agree about his ability to change and think that was a factor of knowing he can't possibly run everything himself and having recruited people around him that he felt comfortable delegating to. A lot of his bad decisions in the later years of his reign were down to a lack of feedback from people that did not cut the mustard in my opinion which he will be loath to admit is probably down to the financial restrictions imposed by the leveraged buy-out.

EDIT: I also agree about the fault in the "written in stone" approach as, how can any manager stand by a philosophy throughout an extended 20 yr+ career when football changes (progresses) very rapidly over short periods of time?

btw: I'd edited my original post (that you replied to) since you replied - but before I saw you'd replied

 

[devilish]

Totally agree about his ability to change and think that was a factor of knowing he can't possibly run everything himself and having recruited people around him that he felt comfortable delegating to. A lot of his bad decisions in the later years of his reign were down to a lack of feedback from people that did not cut the mustard in my opinion which he will be loath to admit is probably down to the financial restrictions imposed by the leveraged buy-out.

EDIT: I also agree about the fault in the "written in stone" approach as, how can any manager stand by a philosophy throughout an extended 20 yr+ career when football changes (progresses) very rapidly over short periods of time?

btw: I'd edited my original post (that you replied to) since you replied - but before I saw you'd replied

If I had to go in detail about United's decline in the last years of SAF's reign then this post will be similar to one of Joga Bonito's chapter type of posts. A simplified version of it is

a- he was unlucky especially with injuries/sickness (Jones, Evans, Fletcher, the crocked twins etc)
b- he was slowly but surely becoming reluctant to change (his inability to tell the old guard to call it a day, his inability to understand the lack of patience of today's youths which costed us Pogba and Rossi and his inability to embrace today's players fees, salaries and agent's power)
c- he had a well deserved urge to finish the career on high (RVP signing made no sense on long term but it did won us our league title)

His man management and knowledge of the EPL was still top notch, the best in the world but he did started his slow decline. Ultimately age catches on everybody in football and all managers will end up dated and obsolete. The Pep Guardiolas and Jose Mourinhos of my generation are all at the wrong end of their career or deservably retired (Lippi, Capello, Sacchi, LVG, Wenger etc).