You do realise that every time you disagree with me, i take that as proof that my opinion is on the right path.

......................

Trouble is that most people agree with Stretty on this one.

In reality both in their prime are so far superior to anything we have have now, it just isn't debatable.

However, as far as I can tell a lot of our fans think that one of the major things we are missing is, on filed leadership.

That is my reasoning for Keano, anyway.

Keane for me. Yes, we're lacking creativity, but I actually think the quality there in attack, with the likes of Mata, Mkhitaryan and Martial; it's just a case of getting them to gel. Keane would make our midfield formidable and, as has been said, was a better "footballer" than he's often remembered as being.

But why choose between Keane and Scholes, when Fellaini encapsulates all that made both of them great players?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I am incredibly biased when it comes to anything scholes
I love his football brain

Trouble is that most people agree with Stretty on this one.
............
He was not calling out my view on schools/keane.... But my view that our attackers actually do have decent movement and are not the statues that some were making them out to be

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Scholes gets better and better each season after he's retired. In 10 years you'll have fans proclaiming him the greatest United player ever ffs

...................................

It is always hard to get it right when you have had so many.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Scholes by a mile.

comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 3 hours, 31 minutes ago
With him in the team, I was always confident we'd win.
________

Me too. I was far more concerned about losing Keane for the CL final in 1999 than losing Scholes.

However, I think it is worth clarifying which version of Scholes (and Keane for that matter) that we are talking about.

The older Scholes was great at dictating tempo and long range passing etc. The younger Scholes was more of an attacking player who would get into the box at every opportunity.

Thus, I think it is a bit misleading to say that Scholes would do all of those things at the same time because he never did. When he transformed into a deep lying play maker his goals all but dried up...


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I've never thought of it like that really.

You imagine Scholes as someone who could everything bar tackle. But he did go through stages of excelling at both sides of the midfield game.

Which itself is an art, and very few players can master both sides of the coin.

Keane just seemed to be able to do everything all the time.

That's how it felt anyway.

I was younger and more excitable back then. And grew up in an era of winning all the time.

I'd have been a fckin nightmare on here at 16 when we pretty much destroyed everyone barring a few blips


So we must remember that when berating the majority of the Arsenal board from now on.

comment by Shinjury list (U1700)


I'd have been a fckin nightmare on here

----------------------------------------------------------------------
interesting use of the past tense

On purely footballing terms, Keane, playing next to Pogba with both ahead of Herrera, would be a superb addition.

But I'm not sure he could cope with modern PL football - attitudes have changed, modes of play have changed, and he hasn't. He'd spend the entire time getting himself sent off and arguing with other players and the staff.

So on balance, I'd have Scholes as regista, with Herrera buzzing about in the middle of the pitch ball-winning and Pogba at number eight.

Putting Rosso's point about era aside...

What this current United seems to struggle with is that feeling of inevitability that United of old hand when it came to getting that late winner.

At the moment, when it's still all square and we get to 60-70 minutes, you don't sense a goal.

So on that basis I'd plump for Keane, because he'd get 10% extra from the players, encourage them to take the sort of risks that I feel some of the players aren't taking at times. His sheer force of personality and desire to win, coupled with those bursting runs beyond the forwards to make something happen would have turned some of these home draws in to wins.

An arguement could be made for either but I will always prefer Scholes as a player and midfielders of his ilk and to pick up on what some others have said, Scholes's calm and quiet manner would be more in keeping with the modern day footballer and dressing room.

While we usually dominate possession, we don't have a midfielder capable of controlling and setting the tempo like Scholes could. In terms of passing, Pogba has the range but lacks the speed of thought of Scholes. He was brilliant at isolating opposition full-backs.

----------------------Scholes----------------
-----Fosu-Mensah------------Pogba--------

Yeah, give me some of that.

It is only Liverpool fans who claim Scholes gets better every year after he retired. Must make them feel better about how he played at the same time as possibly the best player they've ever had made made him look average by comparison.

To the OP, Roy Keane. Not as good as Scholes but still one of the best midfielders of his generation and the best natural leader the premier league has seen. We need that more than a genius right now.

It would also be good to see Pogba and Lingard walk out of their first training session with Roy. They'd leave paler than him.