Scholes won 11 PL titles....Gerrard and Lampard may have won more popularity contests, for whatever reason, but they can still suck on all those medals.
Some amazing logic in here... if he was that good how come he never made the world XI? seriously?
If he wasn't that good how come he was the lynchpin of a side that usually won the title?
I know which measure makes more sense to people that don't judge their players according to their rating on FIFA
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
Without wishing to diss you here Analog, you are forever singing Jack Wilshere's praises.
He is not fit to lace Paul Scholes' boots, never has been
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
Analog, why do you say you'd like to hear reasoned answers, and then only engage with the disparaging ones?
TOOR, rosso replied to a comment of mine where I suggested there was not much of a taste in the UK media for Scholes' game.
It's them who contribute the most towards shaping public opinion, because by and large they're the ones selecting and pushing the topics that are up to debate.
If Scholes' drum wasn't really banged in the UK, it had precious little chance of being thrust into the spotlight abroad.
Just to explain what I mean, in time more or less everyone has come to appreciate and understand Xavi's role in Guardiola's great Barça side, but at a time he was already recognised nationally and internationally, award-winning journalist Matt Lawton was writing headlines to "The best players of the world (and Xavi)".
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 9 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's have some love for a few more Madrid players then!
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is is also a player with just 1 league title to his name in 9 years.
Scholes more than held his own v Europe's best all through his prime. Zidane, Effenberg, Vieira, Seedorf whoever. He was a big beast in an era when that position was full of amazing players
comment by Arthur Johnson (U6426)
posted 8 minutes ago
Analog, why do you say you'd like to hear reasoned answers, and then only engage with the disparaging ones?
TOOR, rosso replied to a comment of mine where I suggested there was not much of a taste in the UK media for Scholes' game.
It's them who contribute the most towards shaping public opinion, because by and large they're the ones selecting and pushing the topics that are up to debate.
If Scholes' drum wasn't really banged in the UK, it had precious little chance of being thrust into the spotlight abroad.
Just to explain what I mean, in time more or less everyone has come to appreciate and understand Xavi's role in Guardiola's great Barça side, but at a time he was already recognised nationally and internationally, award-winning journalist Matt Lawton was writing headlines to "The best players of the world (and Xavi)".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not really interested in what the media tell me to believe. I just go by what I see as I'm sure their peers did when they regularly voted players above Scholes when they played. I'm sure if the votes were done now Scholes would come out on top as he has improved year on year since his retired.
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Case in point
Every time the subjest comes up it is full of bitter fans like you cranking in to their keyboard.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm not really interested in what the media tell me to believe. I just go by what I see as I'm sure their peers did when they regularly voted players above Scholes when they played. I'm sure if the votes were done now Scholes would come out on top as he has improved year on year since his retired.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're not making sense.
On the one hand you state that when pro footballers had to vote for him, you're sure they were just going by what they saw, whereas if they had to do that today, they'd be influenced by popular opinion.
Either they can be influenced by media and public opinion or they can't - you can't have it both ways.
Ftr, the one thing I do agree with you about is that I try to form my own opinion.
By that very token, I always felt that Scholes didn't get the recognition he deserved.
Perhaps if he's getting more now it's precisely because perceptions about the game are changing somewhat, as, indeed, has the way the game is played in England.
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Case in point
Every time the subjest comes up it is full of bitter fans like you cranking in to their keyboard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which subject? Scholes?
In case you hadn't noticed there was a debate going on between fans of various clubs. Then you, the fool that you are decided to say that Liverpool fans were here in their droves being bitter. Wind your neck in.
I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi.
==============
I'd be interested to know why seeing as you didn't get to watch any of them play
comment by Robbing_Hoody - How dare you call me a bigot you left wing soft nonce (U6374)
posted 16 minutes ago
I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi.
==============
I'd be interested to know why seeing as you didn't get to watch any of them play
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same reason he doesn't rate Maradona all that much.
Anaknob is 20 years old.
He's just about old enough to have seen Rooneys best years let alone scholes.
Apparently I was too young to watch Xavi. How patronising. It just so happens he was the no 1 midfielder in the world throughout my teenage years. And of course I watched Scholes too, albeit in his later years
Josh Onomah > Pogba and you can't deny it cos you've never seen Onomah play. So you can't compare. This is your logic
I dont know who josh onamah is so I cant make a call on that one.
Spurs player. 20 years old. You cannot say that Pogba is better
In fact you can't say Pogba is one of the best CMs in the league, or in Europe. Because there's loads of Ms you haven't seen play
I didnt say that about Pogba though...?
I believe Pogba has a lot of talent but also loads of improvement needs to happen to be a good enough consistent starter for United
It was an example to demonstrate the lack of logic behind the argument
OP I can see what you are coming from but Scholes was an excellent player at his best but Lampard and Gerrard were better than Scholes.
comment by ZahraIhsanphile (U20361)
posted 55 seconds ago
OP I can see what you are coming from but Scholes was an excellent player at his best but Lampard and Gerrard were better than Scholes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahaha behave lampard was in no way the same class a footballer as scholes. No way
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 6 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is is also a player with just 1 league title to his name in 9 years.
Scholes more than held his own v Europe's best all through his prime. Zidane, Effenberg, Vieira, Seedorf whoever. He was a big beast in an era when that position was full of amazing players
----------------------------------------------------------------------
League over CL every time, especially considering Real Madrid had a bye to the final in 2016.
Sign in if you want to comment
If Paul Scholes was so good...
Page 7 of 15
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 4/7/17
Scholes won 11 PL titles....Gerrard and Lampard may have won more popularity contests, for whatever reason, but they can still suck on all those medals.
posted on 4/7/17
Some amazing logic in here... if he was that good how come he never made the world XI? seriously?
If he wasn't that good how come he was the lynchpin of a side that usually won the title?
I know which measure makes more sense to people that don't judge their players according to their rating on FIFA
posted on 4/7/17
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
posted on 4/7/17
Without wishing to diss you here Analog, you are forever singing Jack Wilshere's praises.
He is not fit to lace Paul Scholes' boots, never has been
posted on 4/7/17
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
posted on 4/7/17
Analog, why do you say you'd like to hear reasoned answers, and then only engage with the disparaging ones?
TOOR, rosso replied to a comment of mine where I suggested there was not much of a taste in the UK media for Scholes' game.
It's them who contribute the most towards shaping public opinion, because by and large they're the ones selecting and pushing the topics that are up to debate.
If Scholes' drum wasn't really banged in the UK, it had precious little chance of being thrust into the spotlight abroad.
Just to explain what I mean, in time more or less everyone has come to appreciate and understand Xavi's role in Guardiola's great Barça side, but at a time he was already recognised nationally and internationally, award-winning journalist Matt Lawton was writing headlines to "The best players of the world (and Xavi)".
posted on 4/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 9 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's have some love for a few more Madrid players then!
posted on 4/7/17
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is is also a player with just 1 league title to his name in 9 years.
Scholes more than held his own v Europe's best all through his prime. Zidane, Effenberg, Vieira, Seedorf whoever. He was a big beast in an era when that position was full of amazing players
posted on 4/7/17
comment by Arthur Johnson (U6426)
posted 8 minutes ago
Analog, why do you say you'd like to hear reasoned answers, and then only engage with the disparaging ones?
TOOR, rosso replied to a comment of mine where I suggested there was not much of a taste in the UK media for Scholes' game.
It's them who contribute the most towards shaping public opinion, because by and large they're the ones selecting and pushing the topics that are up to debate.
If Scholes' drum wasn't really banged in the UK, it had precious little chance of being thrust into the spotlight abroad.
Just to explain what I mean, in time more or less everyone has come to appreciate and understand Xavi's role in Guardiola's great Barça side, but at a time he was already recognised nationally and internationally, award-winning journalist Matt Lawton was writing headlines to "The best players of the world (and Xavi)".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not really interested in what the media tell me to believe. I just go by what I see as I'm sure their peers did when they regularly voted players above Scholes when they played. I'm sure if the votes were done now Scholes would come out on top as he has improved year on year since his retired.
posted on 4/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
posted on 4/7/17
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Case in point
Every time the subjest comes up it is full of bitter fans like you cranking in to their keyboard.
posted on 4/7/17
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm not really interested in what the media tell me to believe. I just go by what I see as I'm sure their peers did when they regularly voted players above Scholes when they played. I'm sure if the votes were done now Scholes would come out on top as he has improved year on year since his retired.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're not making sense.
On the one hand you state that when pro footballers had to vote for him, you're sure they were just going by what they saw, whereas if they had to do that today, they'd be influenced by popular opinion.
Either they can be influenced by media and public opinion or they can't - you can't have it both ways.
Ftr, the one thing I do agree with you about is that I try to form my own opinion.
By that very token, I always felt that Scholes didn't get the recognition he deserved.
Perhaps if he's getting more now it's precisely because perceptions about the game are changing somewhat, as, indeed, has the way the game is played in England.
posted on 4/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 20 minutes ago
Modric is another who has is better appreciated since he stopped playing in English football.
To me it is simple - the type of underated player both are is largely overlooked by English football's obsession with goalscorers.
Scholes was part of many two-man midfields in 442 formations who dominated English football and more than held their own against European opponents despite being numerically disadvantaged. He was an outstanding football player
Not sure why Liverpool fans are so bitter about Scholes and herd like sheep. I despise Arsenal but have no problem acknowledging how good Petit, Vieira et al were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you blabbering on about fool? It was a Spurs fan who created the article. There have been numerous comments from people who support various clubs and at no point did anybody say Scholes wasn't a good player. Just because they are some that doesn't elevate him post retirement doesn't mean they aren't acknowledging his ability, it just means they rate his ability at what it was before his elevation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Case in point
Every time the subjest comes up it is full of bitter fans like you cranking in to their keyboard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which subject? Scholes?
In case you hadn't noticed there was a debate going on between fans of various clubs. Then you, the fool that you are decided to say that Liverpool fans were here in their droves being bitter. Wind your neck in.
posted on 4/7/17
I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi.
==============
I'd be interested to know why seeing as you didn't get to watch any of them play
posted on 4/7/17
comment by Robbing_Hoody - How dare you call me a bigot you left wing soft nonce (U6374)
posted 16 minutes ago
I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi.
==============
I'd be interested to know why seeing as you didn't get to watch any of them play
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same reason he doesn't rate Maradona all that much.
posted on 4/7/17
Anaknob is 20 years old.
He's just about old enough to have seen Rooneys best years let alone scholes.
posted on 4/7/17
Apparently I was too young to watch Xavi. How patronising. It just so happens he was the no 1 midfielder in the world throughout my teenage years. And of course I watched Scholes too, albeit in his later years
Josh Onomah > Pogba and you can't deny it cos you've never seen Onomah play. So you can't compare. This is your logic
posted on 4/7/17
I dont know who josh onamah is so I cant make a call on that one.
posted on 4/7/17
Spurs player. 20 years old. You cannot say that Pogba is better
In fact you can't say Pogba is one of the best CMs in the league, or in Europe. Because there's loads of Ms you haven't seen play
posted on 4/7/17
*CMs
posted on 4/7/17
I didnt say that about Pogba though...?
I believe Pogba has a lot of talent but also loads of improvement needs to happen to be a good enough consistent starter for United
posted on 4/7/17
It was an example to demonstrate the lack of logic behind the argument
posted on 4/7/17
OP I can see what you are coming from but Scholes was an excellent player at his best but Lampard and Gerrard were better than Scholes.
posted on 4/7/17
comment by ZahraIhsanphile (U20361)
posted 55 seconds ago
OP I can see what you are coming from but Scholes was an excellent player at his best but Lampard and Gerrard were better than Scholes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahaha behave lampard was in no way the same class a footballer as scholes. No way
posted on 4/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 6 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm not even saying I don't rate Scholes. He was a fantastic player. I just don't think he should be grouped with the likes of Zidane and Xavi. It's hyperbole
It's also a debate whether he was better than Modriv. The latter is a key player in a team which has won 3 CLs in 4 years
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is is also a player with just 1 league title to his name in 9 years.
Scholes more than held his own v Europe's best all through his prime. Zidane, Effenberg, Vieira, Seedorf whoever. He was a big beast in an era when that position was full of amazing players
----------------------------------------------------------------------
League over CL every time, especially considering Real Madrid had a bye to the final in 2016.
Page 7 of 15
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12