That's a bit unfair because Scholes had such a high bottom level. His consistency was unreal.
How good was Paul Scholes?
- Thread starter Paxi
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
That's a bit unfair because Scholes had such a high bottom level. His consistency was unreal.
Best of his generation. He could pick out a pass like nobody else and put it on a forwards toe from 60 yards.
One of the best midfielders Ive ever seen play the game, hands down and certainly the best English player I have ever seen.
Unfortunately the video "Paul Scholes in his prime (2): "Nobody wanted to face Scholes"" got banned on youtube. Has anybody downloaded it and can send me? Was my favourite vid about my (as the username already says) favourite player and i really want to watch it again.
Imo most of the videos about Scholsey don't show the footballer he was. They only show his unbelievable long-range passing and his shooting, but Scholes was so much more than that. Beside his sometimes terrible timed tacklings he was absolutely complete. Prime-Scholes had such an excellent movement when receiving the ball and was also a good dribbler. Often just with a little smart move he had already outplayed his opponent when receiving the ball.
Imo most of the videos about Scholsey don't show the footballer he was. They only show his unbelievable long-range passing and his shooting, but Scholes was so much more than that. Beside his sometimes terrible timed tacklings he was absolutely complete. Prime-Scholes had such an excellent movement when receiving the ball and was also a good dribbler. Often just with a little smart move he had already outplayed his opponent when receiving the ball.
Brilliant, brilliant footballer. Loved watching him.
I still think the midfield of Beckham, Keane, Scholes & Giggs is the best I’ve seen for United and in the top 5 best midfields I’ve ever seen.
They had it all.
I still think the midfield of Beckham, Keane, Scholes & Giggs is the best I’ve seen for United and in the top 5 best midfields I’ve ever seen.
They had it all.
The best ever midfield in English football. Easily top 5 ever.
dont have that video but this is my favorite one and here you can see how good he was, remove his long passing completely and he is still comfortably the best midfielder in the league at the time.
I remember 2008 we went to Barcelona in the semis and he was brilliant. Made so many interceptions on the edge of our box.
Then they came back to OT and he banged one in the top corner. Brilliant
Then they came back to OT and he banged one in the top corner. Brilliant
The "problem" with Scholes, and the reason many opposition fans don't appreciate him as much as United fans who watched him week in week out, was that he made everything look ridiculously easy, especially in the centre of the park. It sounds strange but it's true.
His awareness, positioning, first touch, vision and passing were at such a high level, that when he received the ball and laid it off to a team-mate, your average bloke in a pub wouldn't see anything special.
They just thought he was playing an easy pass. In reality, Scholes had found a position and transferred the ball perfectly, whilst other midfielders wouldn't have had the intelligence or ability to either get into the position or find a teammate.
This type of skill (transitioning between different parts of the pitch, creating new phases of play, increasing the speed of ball movement, quickly creating attacking opportunities, and essentially controlling a football match) isn't what makes highlights.
Again, when your average fan watches Match of the Day or whatever else it is, they'll be seeing goals, saves, penalties and red cards. Not necessarily the action 5 or 6 seconds earlier which started the beginning of the opportunity.
It's why you have lots of younger supporters, and people who don't understand the game, saying that Gerrard and Lampard were better players, whilst the majority of professionals tend to opt for Scholes.
Anyone who has ever played in midfield at any level of football will tell you that Scholes was the best English midfielder of his generation, one of the best in the world in recent years, and we were so lucky to have had him.
His awareness, positioning, first touch, vision and passing were at such a high level, that when he received the ball and laid it off to a team-mate, your average bloke in a pub wouldn't see anything special.
They just thought he was playing an easy pass. In reality, Scholes had found a position and transferred the ball perfectly, whilst other midfielders wouldn't have had the intelligence or ability to either get into the position or find a teammate.
This type of skill (transitioning between different parts of the pitch, creating new phases of play, increasing the speed of ball movement, quickly creating attacking opportunities, and essentially controlling a football match) isn't what makes highlights.
Again, when your average fan watches Match of the Day or whatever else it is, they'll be seeing goals, saves, penalties and red cards. Not necessarily the action 5 or 6 seconds earlier which started the beginning of the opportunity.
It's why you have lots of younger supporters, and people who don't understand the game, saying that Gerrard and Lampard were better players, whilst the majority of professionals tend to opt for Scholes.
Anyone who has ever played in midfield at any level of football will tell you that Scholes was the best English midfielder of his generation, one of the best in the world in recent years, and we were so lucky to have had him.
Last edited:
Xavi says Scholes is the best. Argument over...
FUnny thing is, for all those years the England managers were busy trying to partner Gerrard and Lampard in a 4-4-2, when they should have been playing a 3 man midfield of Scholes, Carrick and one of Lampard or Gerrard. But if it had to be a 4-4-2 then Lampard and Gerrard shouldn't have even seen the pitch...
FUnny thing is, for all those years the England managers were busy trying to partner Gerrard and Lampard in a 4-4-2, when they should have been playing a 3 man midfield of Scholes, Carrick and one of Lampard or Gerrard. But if it had to be a 4-4-2 then Lampard and Gerrard shouldn't have even seen the pitch...
Gerrard or Lampard behind the striker probably. Who should have partnered Scholes in the middle?
Really? Lampard best scoring midfielder in the history of game? Second best player in the world in 2005 after Ronaldinho who played best season seen in football. Never seen Scholes on these lists...
In the end, ask Mourinho who is better? Lamps before Zidane, Pirlo, Iniesta any day...
This statement should win some sort of RedCafe award.
Like I said, play Lampard in a 3 man midfield. That's what he was playing at Chelsea. But for England they always played a 4-4-2. "If" Lampard was in that role for Chelsea he wouldn't have scored nearly as many goals. Not even close. He's a great attacking midfielder with players like Essien and Makelele doing the dirty work. But Scholes was an all around player and creator. He was a far superior midfielder. One of the best of all time. Lampard? As good as he was at scoring goals, he wasn't nearly as good as the ginga ninja...
Carrick...unfortunately Scholes and Carrick are probably the two most under rated players England has ever had. SAF knew how good they were and would play them together as much as possible...
Wish we had one of these in our midfield today. Someone who can see and play an early pass. The current bunch hog the ball ie. Pogba and Matic.
Carrick was taken for granted far too long when he was here. His critics (which he had many) just dont understand football
Great player. Not much between him and Iniesta.
Can't believe Fergie was willing to let him go back in 2000
If he did go to Inter Milan (there was no chance btw) the transfer would've funded the move for Figo.
If he did go to Inter Milan (there was no chance btw) the transfer would've funded the move for Figo.
Hargreaves, don't know why people said Carrick never get opportunities for England, he did but he never played that well for England, Hargreaves on the other hand is always one of England's best performer
Should have been this:
GK
Neville Ferdinand Terry Cole
Carrick
Scholes Gerrard
Lampard
Rooney Owen
Unfortunately Eriksson was a weak and clueless manager who could only survive by massaging the egos of his senior players. Hence Beckham playing every game even though he was already on the downslope.
The fact that we paid that fool 6m a year just demonstrates how incompetent the people who run English football really are.
A diamond against Portugal with Ronaldo on one wing and Figo and the other? We'd have been absolutely destroyed.
8/10 - Striker/Support Striker - I remember the hype before his early opportunities that he was akin to a Kenny Dagleish. Lived up to the hype
9/10 - Attacking central midfielder - As part of a central midfielding pairing he was the one given the license to roam forward and ghosting into the opp box. Scored his fair share.
9/10 - Deep lying central midfielder - His latter years post Roy Keane (2005-2013) era pulled the strings in midfield. Played like he had a baton in his hand.
World-Class
9/10 - Attacking central midfielder - As part of a central midfielding pairing he was the one given the license to roam forward and ghosting into the opp box. Scored his fair share.
9/10 - Deep lying central midfielder - His latter years post Roy Keane (2005-2013) era pulled the strings in midfield. Played like he had a baton in his hand.
World-Class
I remember watching some Eng game where Scholes was shifted way to the left wing, and still produced his magics and a constant busy threat, than the two CMs of that day who were having silent game.
Lampard was surely a great goalscorer, often playing more advanced midfield position, everything else he was easily inferior to Scholes but even his goalscoring record, take away the penalties he scored, then his record won't sound as exciting, Scholes was a top goalscorer, while deployed deep and never taking penalties or freekicks he could score any kind of goal with any part of his body.
Even the most ardent Chelsea fan can't truly believe that...
This is the same guy who thinks Chelsea were unlucky not to win the Champions league four times in five years and Hazard is the second best player to have ever played in the Premier League. I don’t know why but I have suspicions that he may be a little biased.
Fixed it for you.
Euro 2004 against France. Him and Rooney ran the show and we were very unlucky to lose that game in the end.
Just like Spain were destroyed when they played without any wingers between 2008 and 2012?
Young people appreciate Gerrard and Lampard because they have shined as the best midfielders year in year out and at the highest level too. Scholes was often outperformed by other midfielders in the EPL alone, most seasons where as Gerrard and Lamps were usually the best along with Cesc. what was Scholes' best seasons and how did they compare with his peers at the time?
Means nothing. Many pros compared Gerrard to Messi and Ronaldo.......
When some of the greatest midfield players of all time consider Scholes to be the greatest of them all, it says a lot.
If England had built the side around him, rather than try to shoe-horn him in at left-midfield, we would have been a lot more successful than we have been over the last 20 years. Same goes for Carrick in this regard.
If England had built the side around him, rather than try to shoe-horn him in at left-midfield, we would have been a lot more successful than we have been over the last 20 years. Same goes for Carrick in this regard.
Yeah, because that's comparable.
Pirlo, yea I'd probably go with that. Iniesta and Zidane though? Not sure I'd agree, both did it at club level and are both world cup winners...
All three did it at club level and are World Cup winners
That midfield won't provide anything like Spain's possession dominance, which was the key to their defensive achievements.
If you asked those same midfielders "in what year was Scholes the best midfielder on the planet" they would end up stuttering profusely.
The minute or so from 0:50 is exactly what we are missing. Forget the long passes, skills or carousel short passing, those medium length first touch passes through the lines are practically impossible to play against. I can't really think of anyone in modern football who can do that consistently.
What are you comparing him to though? He started off as a world-class goal-scoring attacking midfielder and ended up as a world-class deep-lying play-maker. As far as midfield players go, he could do absolutely everything at the very highest level.
There were definitely better individual players in specific midfield positions, but not one of them was as complete a midfield player as Scholes, so consistently for as long as Scholes.
Last edited:
The problem with the perception of Paul Scholes is obvious. He wasn’t good when he was younger, a player you wouldn’t want in the team as a forward. Then he became a midfielder and the rest is history. And he’s ginger, that never helps.
He was good.
He could kick a ball at a tree.
He could kick a ball at a tree.