Scholes simply has got better since he retired. When he actually played he wasn't rated as highly. However in regards to player of the year at United it was a difficult to win in regards to the period Scholes played in. Not only that but Scholes never produced a remarkable season that made people say 'wow' he simply produced remarkable consistency over a long period.
What I find most intriguing about the opinions people have about Scholes are the myths. The biggest one that he was forced to retire from England duty after being shunted out to left midfield. This is something he disputes himself, not surprisingly considering he only played there seven times or something for England and actually said he enjoyed playing on the left and had his most productive season for United from there.
The second myth is the type of player he was. He's portrayed as this Pirlo/Xavi type player who sat deep and sprayed the passes around, which he did do in many of his years playing, when he'd lost what pace he had and was moved back. Before then he was a very good goalscorer who was excellent at arriving late into the box.
I do think he was perhaps a little underrated when he aged but without overrated when he retired, in most part in my opinion, due to coming out of retirement and doing a job to help the team. Many will point to team trophies to show his brilliance when his lack of individual achievements are pointed out but we all know some poor players(not to say Scholes was one) achieved some great team trophies.
I think a big thing with Scholes, is that he spent a large part, the majority in the end, as a holding midfielder, the "Pirlo" role. Imo there's a reason Pirlo played there and it's because he failed as an AM (read up on it). Whereas Scholes moved there for longevity once his legs went.
In late 1999 Uefa published their top 50 players in Europe. On the back of our treble winning season, Paul Scholes didn't even make the list.
Sometimes being quiet and keeping to yourself works against you in these things. He was better than at least 40 names on that list. Genius.
Scholesy was a genius trust me. He absolutely oozed class. For me there has never been a better long range passer in the premier league. I remember one game against Portsmouth think it was back in 2007 season. He must have played 30-40 40+ yard passes straight to Ronaldos feet every single time. I remember well because people in the crowd at one point stood up and applauded him. He was never a consistent goalscorer although he was a scorer of great goals. He didn't get the credit because he didn't score numerous goals but what he did was control games. With him and Keane no team in Europe could dominate our midfield on a consistent basis.
There is a reason the best players in the world at the time sing his praises. There are no better judges than them and your colleagues and the very best claim he was up there
Giggs Scholes Keane Beckham......Is the greatest midfield this country has ever seen. End of story.
I'm only old enough to remember back to 1990/1991 but my dad has been going since the 60's and despite him thinking that 1 or 2 players maybe better individually he's never seen a quartet as strong before or since for any English team, not just United.
That midfield literally had everything.
It doesn't matter what individual honors he won, or what others think of him. We all know how good he was.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Pirlo? What's your opinion on him GT?
SAF got him out of retirement, he was that good lol.
comment by merrysupersteve - Jose'd he wouldn't be our Special One? (U1132)
posted 2 hours, 49 minutes ago
I think a big thing with Scholes, is that he spent a large part, the majority in the end, as a holding midfielder, the "Pirlo" role. Imo there's a reason Pirlo played there and it's because he failed as an AM (read up on it). Whereas Scholes moved there for longevity once his legs went.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I had an Italian mate back then who was a huge Inter fan and he absolutely idolised Pirlo. What needs remembering is that Inter in those days were similar to today's PSG, hoovering up the best talent in world football. A 19/20-year-old Pirlo was competing for the attacking midfield role withe the likes of Djorkaeff or Baggio, and also ran into a brick wall with Lippi.
It's not always a question of "failing" in one position, but of finding another that suits you even better, whether by design or by chance.
In Pirlo's case, it was because he was sent on loan to Brescia, who already had Baggio, and Mazzone tried him out as a deep-lying playmaker.
Now we had to pay around £89m for Pogba as Pogba left after SAF played defenders in midfield and got a retired midfielder ahead of him lol.
Yes, but, he couldn't have played the way he did as an attacking midfielder. He was a quarter back. Whereas Scholes is bizarrely rated on goals and adsists, mainly because he didn't gave to be given space to make something happen. He created space and made things happen. It's all about perception
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 33 minutes ago
Did he ever make a PFA team of the season? Definitely a player that got better after he retired.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose all the top international players who sing his praises overrate him aswell ey
I always rated Scholes very highly but aside from Utd fans.. I don't think many rated him quite as highly as Utd fans/ex players did.
I know the Barcelona players came out and said they'd have wanted Scholes at the Camp Nou but even if he was there I doubt hed have started over Xavi/Busquets.
comment by Manc Python (U17527)
posted 2 hours, 11 minutes ago
Scholesy was a genius trust me. He absolutely oozed class. For me there has never been a better long range passer in the premier league. I remember one game against Portsmouth think it was back in 2007 season. He must have played 30-40 40+ yard passes straight to Ronaldos feet every single time. I remember well because people in the crowd at one point stood up and applauded him. He was never a consistent goalscorer although he was a scorer of great goals. He didn't get the credit because he didn't score numerous goals but what he did was control games. With him and Keane no team in Europe could dominate our midfield on a consistent basis.
There is a reason the best players in the world at the time sing his praises. There are no better judges than them and your colleagues and the very best claim he was up there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xabi Alonso and Fabregas weren't too bad.
Since Scholes retired, Man Utd haven't come close to wiinning the league. In the last 8 seasons or 7 and a half if you want to be accurate Scholes and SAF was here we averaged 86.5 points per season. Now was Scholes the main reason for our success in the league?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Is a weird one with Scholes. Was a great player. Fantastic even. But since he retired he became the most overrated player I can remember
Great player. It’s personal preference, but I always rated Keane higher and of more importance to that United team.
Scholes neve had much of a chance winning United player of the season.
He was a great player among many. But as we know from the likes of POTY it is usually attackers who win it.
Scholes was up against RVN, Giggs, Ronaldo, Rooney, Beckham etc.
Personally Scholes lack of any personal awards won't dampen how I rate the guy as he was prominent in our success under SAF.
Even in his mid 30's he was far superior to any midfielder who we have had at the club since he retired.
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 53 minutes ago
Is a weird one with Scholes. Was a great player. Fantastic even. But since he retired he became the most overrated player I can remember
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He genuinely went from being the most underrated player around to the most overrated.
Would I have ever swapped Scholes for either Gerard or Lampard, no. All 3 were great in their own way and very different too but for me Scholes was prefect for us either as a partner to Keane or playing the regista role, neither of which I feel Gerard or Lampard could have done better.
It’s strange that opposing fans feel the need to put down players, but I guess it doesn’t matter. Scholes was great for us and I’m delighted we had the pleasure of him playing for us and being instrumental in 11 PLs and 2 CLs.
It's probably due to finally understanding what a player we had and would have been more appreciated if he were from Europe or South American.
Scholes was good but nowhere near a complete midfielder. Not even comparable to Xavi who had similar stats.
He could ping a ball brilliantly but he didn't have great vision in terms of matching a pass to a run. Instead he'd see a guy in space and pick him out (he could do this incredibly well)
He couldn't dribble well or tackle at all.
Sign in if you want to comment
Scholes Never Won Player of the Year?
Page 1 of 3
posted on 23/9/18
Scholes simply has got better since he retired. When he actually played he wasn't rated as highly. However in regards to player of the year at United it was a difficult to win in regards to the period Scholes played in. Not only that but Scholes never produced a remarkable season that made people say 'wow' he simply produced remarkable consistency over a long period.
What I find most intriguing about the opinions people have about Scholes are the myths. The biggest one that he was forced to retire from England duty after being shunted out to left midfield. This is something he disputes himself, not surprisingly considering he only played there seven times or something for England and actually said he enjoyed playing on the left and had his most productive season for United from there.
The second myth is the type of player he was. He's portrayed as this Pirlo/Xavi type player who sat deep and sprayed the passes around, which he did do in many of his years playing, when he'd lost what pace he had and was moved back. Before then he was a very good goalscorer who was excellent at arriving late into the box.
I do think he was perhaps a little underrated when he aged but without overrated when he retired, in most part in my opinion, due to coming out of retirement and doing a job to help the team. Many will point to team trophies to show his brilliance when his lack of individual achievements are pointed out but we all know some poor players(not to say Scholes was one) achieved some great team trophies.
posted on 23/9/18
I think a big thing with Scholes, is that he spent a large part, the majority in the end, as a holding midfielder, the "Pirlo" role. Imo there's a reason Pirlo played there and it's because he failed as an AM (read up on it). Whereas Scholes moved there for longevity once his legs went.
posted on 23/9/18
In late 1999 Uefa published their top 50 players in Europe. On the back of our treble winning season, Paul Scholes didn't even make the list.
Sometimes being quiet and keeping to yourself works against you in these things. He was better than at least 40 names on that list. Genius.
posted on 23/9/18
Scholesy was a genius trust me. He absolutely oozed class. For me there has never been a better long range passer in the premier league. I remember one game against Portsmouth think it was back in 2007 season. He must have played 30-40 40+ yard passes straight to Ronaldos feet every single time. I remember well because people in the crowd at one point stood up and applauded him. He was never a consistent goalscorer although he was a scorer of great goals. He didn't get the credit because he didn't score numerous goals but what he did was control games. With him and Keane no team in Europe could dominate our midfield on a consistent basis.
There is a reason the best players in the world at the time sing his praises. There are no better judges than them and your colleagues and the very best claim he was up there
posted on 23/9/18
Giggs Scholes Keane Beckham......Is the greatest midfield this country has ever seen. End of story.
I'm only old enough to remember back to 1990/1991 but my dad has been going since the 60's and despite him thinking that 1 or 2 players maybe better individually he's never seen a quartet as strong before or since for any English team, not just United.
That midfield literally had everything.
posted on 23/9/18
It doesn't matter what individual honors he won, or what others think of him. We all know how good he was.
posted on 23/9/18
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/9/18
Pirlo? What's your opinion on him GT?
posted on 23/9/18
SAF got him out of retirement, he was that good lol.
posted on 23/9/18
comment by merrysupersteve - Jose'd he wouldn't be our Special One? (U1132)
posted 2 hours, 49 minutes ago
I think a big thing with Scholes, is that he spent a large part, the majority in the end, as a holding midfielder, the "Pirlo" role. Imo there's a reason Pirlo played there and it's because he failed as an AM (read up on it). Whereas Scholes moved there for longevity once his legs went.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I had an Italian mate back then who was a huge Inter fan and he absolutely idolised Pirlo. What needs remembering is that Inter in those days were similar to today's PSG, hoovering up the best talent in world football. A 19/20-year-old Pirlo was competing for the attacking midfield role withe the likes of Djorkaeff or Baggio, and also ran into a brick wall with Lippi.
It's not always a question of "failing" in one position, but of finding another that suits you even better, whether by design or by chance.
In Pirlo's case, it was because he was sent on loan to Brescia, who already had Baggio, and Mazzone tried him out as a deep-lying playmaker.
posted on 23/9/18
Now we had to pay around £89m for Pogba as Pogba left after SAF played defenders in midfield and got a retired midfielder ahead of him lol.
posted on 23/9/18
Yes, but, he couldn't have played the way he did as an attacking midfielder. He was a quarter back. Whereas Scholes is bizarrely rated on goals and adsists, mainly because he didn't gave to be given space to make something happen. He created space and made things happen. It's all about perception
posted on 23/9/18
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 33 minutes ago
Did he ever make a PFA team of the season? Definitely a player that got better after he retired.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose all the top international players who sing his praises overrate him aswell ey
posted on 23/9/18
I always rated Scholes very highly but aside from Utd fans.. I don't think many rated him quite as highly as Utd fans/ex players did.
I know the Barcelona players came out and said they'd have wanted Scholes at the Camp Nou but even if he was there I doubt hed have started over Xavi/Busquets.
posted on 23/9/18
comment by Manc Python (U17527)
posted 2 hours, 11 minutes ago
Scholesy was a genius trust me. He absolutely oozed class. For me there has never been a better long range passer in the premier league. I remember one game against Portsmouth think it was back in 2007 season. He must have played 30-40 40+ yard passes straight to Ronaldos feet every single time. I remember well because people in the crowd at one point stood up and applauded him. He was never a consistent goalscorer although he was a scorer of great goals. He didn't get the credit because he didn't score numerous goals but what he did was control games. With him and Keane no team in Europe could dominate our midfield on a consistent basis.
There is a reason the best players in the world at the time sing his praises. There are no better judges than them and your colleagues and the very best claim he was up there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xabi Alonso and Fabregas weren't too bad.
posted on 23/9/18
Since Scholes retired, Man Utd haven't come close to wiinning the league. In the last 8 seasons or 7 and a half if you want to be accurate Scholes and SAF was here we averaged 86.5 points per season. Now was Scholes the main reason for our success in the league?
posted on 23/9/18
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/9/18
Is a weird one with Scholes. Was a great player. Fantastic even. But since he retired he became the most overrated player I can remember
posted on 23/9/18
Great player. It’s personal preference, but I always rated Keane higher and of more importance to that United team.
posted on 23/9/18
Scholes neve had much of a chance winning United player of the season.
He was a great player among many. But as we know from the likes of POTY it is usually attackers who win it.
Scholes was up against RVN, Giggs, Ronaldo, Rooney, Beckham etc.
Personally Scholes lack of any personal awards won't dampen how I rate the guy as he was prominent in our success under SAF.
Even in his mid 30's he was far superior to any midfielder who we have had at the club since he retired.
posted on 23/9/18
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 53 minutes ago
Is a weird one with Scholes. Was a great player. Fantastic even. But since he retired he became the most overrated player I can remember
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He genuinely went from being the most underrated player around to the most overrated.
posted on 23/9/18
Would I have ever swapped Scholes for either Gerard or Lampard, no. All 3 were great in their own way and very different too but for me Scholes was prefect for us either as a partner to Keane or playing the regista role, neither of which I feel Gerard or Lampard could have done better.
It’s strange that opposing fans feel the need to put down players, but I guess it doesn’t matter. Scholes was great for us and I’m delighted we had the pleasure of him playing for us and being instrumental in 11 PLs and 2 CLs.
posted on 23/9/18
Whose put Scholes down?
posted on 23/9/18
It's probably due to finally understanding what a player we had and would have been more appreciated if he were from Europe or South American.
posted on 23/9/18
Scholes was good but nowhere near a complete midfielder. Not even comparable to Xavi who had similar stats.
He could ping a ball brilliantly but he didn't have great vision in terms of matching a pass to a run. Instead he'd see a guy in space and pick him out (he could do this incredibly well)
He couldn't dribble well or tackle at all.
Page 1 of 3