Please tell me that's not a joke and he actually did that?
made it up
But it is possible
comment by Wumpatrol (U5046)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
Spurtle
Still, balls or no balls. Someone with as much influence as people here claim he had would NEVER even be considered to play out of position by so many managers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Mourinho said he'd have played a different formation to suit both Lampard and Gerrard had he got his hands on Gerrard, which is what none the England managers did. I would go with Mourinho on that one personally.
comment by The Number 4 Shirt. (U19487)
posted 7 hours, 31 minutes ago
Lots of Arsenal fans who can't stomach Scholes being among the very best midfields of modern football. Bitter & jealous, not not even close to being subtle with it. It's also sad seeing them all be so transparent with their adoration of Xavi to get some reflective glory on Arsenal.
Arsenal aren't Barca. Arsenal have nothing in common with Barca. In recent years, Arsenal have been made to look like a pathetic joke by Barca both on, and more seriously, off the field.
If you can't accept Scholes was among the very best, thats fine. The peole who've player the game all do. The masses do as well. You're entitled to think what you want. But maybe you should think about WHY you think what you do. It's apparent it's only out of resentment and biased, it's not even a touch difficult to see.
----------------------------------------------
what a mess of a reply
should have waited a bit rather than post such drivel only for several united fans and liverpool fans to agree that Xavi was the superior player. A lot of misguided fans think Xavi was only good at 3m passes unaware of his multitude of defence splitting passes.In some games as many as 12.
whats this nonsense about him playing with better players? Howcome he had similar influence for a spainish team that did not have the same type of attackers barca had. And why is his influence at international level so great that he has won a euro and a world cup yet scholes never came close to either.
A liverpool fan posted Xavis honours the other day. Go to wikipedia and check them out. This for a guy who only staerted playing regulary at the age of 24.
what scenes
Dubbed, is this the same guy who said Gerrard is currently a top 5 midfielder in the premiership
Zidane was played out of position quite a lot as well.
I also remember Xavi playing on the right for Spain or further forward as an attacking mid.
Scholes wasn't as good as either, but I don't agree with the argument about position, because the other two played out of position as well.
Plus it was only Sven that played him out of position.
Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
Zidane was played out of position quite a lot as well.
I also remember Xavi playing on the right for Spain or further forward as an attacking mid.
Scholes wasn't as good as either, but I don't agree with the argument about position, because the other two played out of position as well.
Plus it was only Sven that played him out of position.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And then McClaren followed suit by playing Gerrard and Lampard in midfield, with Scholes out of the picture.
Capello tried to recall Scholes didn't he? So he might have ended up getting it right with all 3 of them had Scholes come back.
I doubt it. There just wasn't a great understanding between Lampard and Gerrard, bringing back Scholes and playing three in midfield probably wouldn't have made a huge difference.
"Dubbed, is this the same guy who said Gerrard is currently a top 5 midfielder in the premiership"
Yep. Same bloke.
comment by Wumpatrol (U5046)
posted 5 hours, 9 minutes ago
"It's just one of those annoying phases in football of suddenly recognizing an underappreciated player's talent and massively overcompensating by overhyping him to ludicrous levels."
Same with that farce of awarding Giggs with the POTY when they realized he was never good enough at his peak to win it. Not saying he wasn't a great player but there was always someone better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah.... like Ginola...
I don't really think we can use not winning one in his peak as a stick to hit him with as much like the people who should have won the year Giggs won it, Giggs was a better shout than some previous winners in the year they won it...
I would probably rank Scholes as the no.1 midfielder of the PL era, followed closely by Lampard, followed closely by Gerrard. Very difficult to separate the 3 as they all contributed greatly to very successful teams in different ways, Scholes with his control in a 2-man midfield, Lampard with his killer runs from midfield, and Gerrard with his tempo-setting energy. I give the edge to Scholes because he could combine his goalscoring game (although obviously not as prolific as the other 2) with a very measured continental passing game.
As for the comparisons with other European midfielders, I don't think any of them compare to Xavi who has won everything there is to win in football, delivering numerous MOTM performances in finals and crunch games.
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
I doubt it. There just wasn't a great understanding between Lampard and Gerrard, bringing back Scholes and playing three in midfield probably wouldn't have made a huge difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He recognised that Scholes would have been a very useful player to have which is a start.
We were a mess at the 2010 WC and the players looked overtrained or something, but Scholes might have made some difference in the fact that he'd have been quite fresh, and it may have meant we wouldn't be starting with Heskey.
Under Sven would have been the time for Scholes to be played in his best position. PL-era England was at its peak then, and I think we'd have got more out of Gerrard and Lampard, especially in 2006.
And as silly as it sounds, I think all of the aforementioned players were better performers than Zidane, who I think was slightly deceiving with his high-profile big game performances which masked a more fluctuating level of performance over the course of a 50-game season (hence his poor league titles tally). Not doubting his talent on the ball, which is greater than any other player I've seen in my lifetime.
Fair point about 2010.
I think the problem with the suggestion under Sven is that it was too big a risk to mess around with the Beckham and Owen dynamic.
They were our two best players and had a proven understanding. Playing those three in the middle messes that up because Owen needed a strike partner.
The issue wasn't of playing all three, it was of dropping one of Lampard and Gerrard as well as finding a left winger.
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 5 minutes ago
Fair point about 2010.
I think the problem with the suggestion under Sven is that it was too big a risk to mess around with the Beckham and Owen dynamic.
They were our two best players and had a proven understanding. Playing those three in the middle messes that up because Owen needed a strike partner.
The issue wasn't of playing all three, it was of dropping one of Lampard and Gerrard as well as finding a left winger.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, ideally you'd have to change the formation around to fit all 3 in, and that would mean missing out a good player from the Sven-era, although Beckham was pretty woeful in 2004.
As I said above somewhere, I'd have gone with a Lampard/Scholes partnership. Gerrard is a jack of all trades player but in terms of passing and possession, and getting forward and scoring, he's below both Scholes and Lampard respectively, and those are the skills I'd want most in my midfield. Sven-era already had a strong defence so wouldn't have to worry as much about that side.
comment by Andre's Samba Scarf (U6253)
posted 1 hour, 35 minutes ago
Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously Lampard was better than Alonso. His scoring record and contributions to title winning seasons, speak for themselves.
"Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better"
lol.....you think Alonso is better than Lampard? Seriously? Alonso's status was enhanced by being a cog in the wheel, featuring for Madrid and Spain. Sure, he can hit a good 50-yard diagonal, but he wouldn't rank as a great at all. Lacks the guile, the creativity, the attacking power or anything really special. I find it bemusing how so many people put down Lampard. He's the one I find "criminally underrated".
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 29 seconds ago
"Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better"
lol.....you think Alonso is better than Lampard? Seriously? Alonso's status was enhanced by being a cog in the wheel, featuring for Madrid and Spain. Sure, he can hit a good 50-yard diagonal, but he wouldn't rank as a great at all. Lacks the guile, the creativity, the attacking power or anything really special. I find it bemusing how so many people put down Lampard. He's the one I find "criminally underrated".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lampard and Scholes for me should have been England's midfield pairing from about 2003 onwards, the 2 best English midfielders IMO
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I'd rather have Scholes over Lampard.
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 2 hours, 34 minutes ago
He's even managed to squeeze it into the 'Islam: religion of peace' article
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I missed this first time round, would be hysterical!
Scholes - even as United fan - is not a patch on Zidane. Pirlo too. And Zidane is better than Xavi.
-----
Zidane never achieved half of what Xavi did as a player.
Zidane was a better player, Xavi a better midfielder.
Sign in if you want to comment
Scholes Being Placed Above His Station
Page 6 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 23/5/15
Please tell me that's not a joke and he actually did that?
posted on 23/5/15
made it up
But it is possible
posted on 23/5/15
Yep it's believable.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Wumpatrol (U5046)
posted 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
Spurtle
Still, balls or no balls. Someone with as much influence as people here claim he had would NEVER even be considered to play out of position by so many managers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Mourinho said he'd have played a different formation to suit both Lampard and Gerrard had he got his hands on Gerrard, which is what none the England managers did. I would go with Mourinho on that one personally.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by The Number 4 Shirt. (U19487)
posted 7 hours, 31 minutes ago
Lots of Arsenal fans who can't stomach Scholes being among the very best midfields of modern football. Bitter & jealous, not not even close to being subtle with it. It's also sad seeing them all be so transparent with their adoration of Xavi to get some reflective glory on Arsenal.
Arsenal aren't Barca. Arsenal have nothing in common with Barca. In recent years, Arsenal have been made to look like a pathetic joke by Barca both on, and more seriously, off the field.
If you can't accept Scholes was among the very best, thats fine. The peole who've player the game all do. The masses do as well. You're entitled to think what you want. But maybe you should think about WHY you think what you do. It's apparent it's only out of resentment and biased, it's not even a touch difficult to see.
----------------------------------------------
what a mess of a reply
should have waited a bit rather than post such drivel only for several united fans and liverpool fans to agree that Xavi was the superior player. A lot of misguided fans think Xavi was only good at 3m passes unaware of his multitude of defence splitting passes.In some games as many as 12.
whats this nonsense about him playing with better players? Howcome he had similar influence for a spainish team that did not have the same type of attackers barca had. And why is his influence at international level so great that he has won a euro and a world cup yet scholes never came close to either.
A liverpool fan posted Xavis honours the other day. Go to wikipedia and check them out. This for a guy who only staerted playing regulary at the age of 24.
what scenes
Dubbed, is this the same guy who said Gerrard is currently a top 5 midfielder in the premiership
posted on 23/5/15
Zidane was played out of position quite a lot as well.
I also remember Xavi playing on the right for Spain or further forward as an attacking mid.
Scholes wasn't as good as either, but I don't agree with the argument about position, because the other two played out of position as well.
Plus it was only Sven that played him out of position.
posted on 23/5/15
Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
Zidane was played out of position quite a lot as well.
I also remember Xavi playing on the right for Spain or further forward as an attacking mid.
Scholes wasn't as good as either, but I don't agree with the argument about position, because the other two played out of position as well.
Plus it was only Sven that played him out of position.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And then McClaren followed suit by playing Gerrard and Lampard in midfield, with Scholes out of the picture.
Capello tried to recall Scholes didn't he? So he might have ended up getting it right with all 3 of them had Scholes come back.
posted on 23/5/15
I doubt it. There just wasn't a great understanding between Lampard and Gerrard, bringing back Scholes and playing three in midfield probably wouldn't have made a huge difference.
posted on 23/5/15
"Dubbed, is this the same guy who said Gerrard is currently a top 5 midfielder in the premiership"
Yep. Same bloke.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Wumpatrol (U5046)
posted 5 hours, 9 minutes ago
"It's just one of those annoying phases in football of suddenly recognizing an underappreciated player's talent and massively overcompensating by overhyping him to ludicrous levels."
Same with that farce of awarding Giggs with the POTY when they realized he was never good enough at his peak to win it. Not saying he wasn't a great player but there was always someone better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah.... like Ginola...
I don't really think we can use not winning one in his peak as a stick to hit him with as much like the people who should have won the year Giggs won it, Giggs was a better shout than some previous winners in the year they won it...
posted on 23/5/15
I would probably rank Scholes as the no.1 midfielder of the PL era, followed closely by Lampard, followed closely by Gerrard. Very difficult to separate the 3 as they all contributed greatly to very successful teams in different ways, Scholes with his control in a 2-man midfield, Lampard with his killer runs from midfield, and Gerrard with his tempo-setting energy. I give the edge to Scholes because he could combine his goalscoring game (although obviously not as prolific as the other 2) with a very measured continental passing game.
As for the comparisons with other European midfielders, I don't think any of them compare to Xavi who has won everything there is to win in football, delivering numerous MOTM performances in finals and crunch games.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
I doubt it. There just wasn't a great understanding between Lampard and Gerrard, bringing back Scholes and playing three in midfield probably wouldn't have made a huge difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He recognised that Scholes would have been a very useful player to have which is a start.
We were a mess at the 2010 WC and the players looked overtrained or something, but Scholes might have made some difference in the fact that he'd have been quite fresh, and it may have meant we wouldn't be starting with Heskey.
Under Sven would have been the time for Scholes to be played in his best position. PL-era England was at its peak then, and I think we'd have got more out of Gerrard and Lampard, especially in 2006.
posted on 23/5/15
And as silly as it sounds, I think all of the aforementioned players were better performers than Zidane, who I think was slightly deceiving with his high-profile big game performances which masked a more fluctuating level of performance over the course of a 50-game season (hence his poor league titles tally). Not doubting his talent on the ball, which is greater than any other player I've seen in my lifetime.
posted on 23/5/15
Fair point about 2010.
I think the problem with the suggestion under Sven is that it was too big a risk to mess around with the Beckham and Owen dynamic.
They were our two best players and had a proven understanding. Playing those three in the middle messes that up because Owen needed a strike partner.
The issue wasn't of playing all three, it was of dropping one of Lampard and Gerrard as well as finding a left winger.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 5 minutes ago
Fair point about 2010.
I think the problem with the suggestion under Sven is that it was too big a risk to mess around with the Beckham and Owen dynamic.
They were our two best players and had a proven understanding. Playing those three in the middle messes that up because Owen needed a strike partner.
The issue wasn't of playing all three, it was of dropping one of Lampard and Gerrard as well as finding a left winger.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, ideally you'd have to change the formation around to fit all 3 in, and that would mean missing out a good player from the Sven-era, although Beckham was pretty woeful in 2004.
As I said above somewhere, I'd have gone with a Lampard/Scholes partnership. Gerrard is a jack of all trades player but in terms of passing and possession, and getting forward and scoring, he's below both Scholes and Lampard respectively, and those are the skills I'd want most in my midfield. Sven-era already had a strong defence so wouldn't have to worry as much about that side.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Andre's Samba Scarf (U6253)
posted 1 hour, 35 minutes ago
Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously Lampard was better than Alonso. His scoring record and contributions to title winning seasons, speak for themselves.
posted on 23/5/15
"Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better"
lol.....you think Alonso is better than Lampard? Seriously? Alonso's status was enhanced by being a cog in the wheel, featuring for Madrid and Spain. Sure, he can hit a good 50-yard diagonal, but he wouldn't rank as a great at all. Lacks the guile, the creativity, the attacking power or anything really special. I find it bemusing how so many people put down Lampard. He's the one I find "criminally underrated".
posted on 23/5/15
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 29 seconds ago
"Anyone think Alonso is criminally underrated? I once heard someone on here say Lampard was better"
lol.....you think Alonso is better than Lampard? Seriously? Alonso's status was enhanced by being a cog in the wheel, featuring for Madrid and Spain. Sure, he can hit a good 50-yard diagonal, but he wouldn't rank as a great at all. Lacks the guile, the creativity, the attacking power or anything really special. I find it bemusing how so many people put down Lampard. He's the one I find "criminally underrated".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 23/5/15
Lampard and Scholes for me should have been England's midfield pairing from about 2003 onwards, the 2 best English midfielders IMO
posted on 23/5/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/5/15
I'd rather have Scholes over Lampard.
posted on 23/5/15
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 2 hours, 34 minutes ago
He's even managed to squeeze it into the 'Islam: religion of peace' article
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I missed this first time round, would be hysterical!
posted on 23/5/15
Scholes - even as United fan - is not a patch on Zidane. Pirlo too. And Zidane is better than Xavi.
-----
Zidane never achieved half of what Xavi did as a player.
posted on 23/5/15
Zidane was a better player, Xavi a better midfielder.
Page 6 of 7
6 | 7