Well, since he's had his testimonial I wanted to ask for your thoughts on Scholes? Personally I think he's overrated, but that doesn't make him any less than a world class player, he is just looked at with rose tinted glasses now he's retired. He's lasted to the ripe old age of 36, possibly 8 years past his peak, yet still he went strong and formed an integral part of the Man United midfield. I think it's a shame that he wasn't utilised properly for England, the same as Gerrard never has been. I know this will spark a Gerrard v Scholes debate, so I might as well add something about Gerrard... He is quite possibly one of the best midfielders England and Liverpool have seen in the last 20 years. Whilst it seems he's past his peak he still has years left in him, and I would like him to retire with a premier league medal. Personally, I think it's virtually impossible to say which is the better player. Gerrard has a better scoring record, Scholes had his own attributes. If I had to pick one though, I'd take Gerrard.. simply for the reason he can completely carry a team when things look bleak.
The thing I liked about Scholes was his loyalty to his club.Never one to court publicity and he always gave his all to the team.A good passer and great ball striker he did score some fabulous goals. Not sure if he is comparable to Gerrard as he has never had to carry his team like Gerrard has at times. Terrible tackler but a good team player and I hope Utd miss him badly.
i think scholes was one of the best midfield players of the late 90s-early noughtys. great vision and passing ability and great technique. the best thing about him was the fact you never heard anything about him off the pitch. rarely gave interviews and never in the press about anything but his footy. maybe passed his best at the end but a top player. i know he was a manc player but he was probably the only one i'd like to have seen in a propper red shirt.
Scholes was a great player. His distribution was good, his vision was good and he could strike a ball. The greatest thing that I can say about him is that I knew nothing about him as an individual - he did his talking on the pitch. As has already been said he was totally loyal to his club and that says a lot about him in todays climate. I hope he has a long and happy reirement. Pity he never learnt to takle. He deserves the respect that should be accorded to all great players. As a true RED, I'm glad to see the back of him - now there's a backhanded compliment for you.
Great player in his prime, he was a great reader of the game. It was no coincidence that he turned up at the edge of the box so often to score a screamer. He was also a very effective passer of the ball creating chances and controlling the tempo of games. I am glad he has retired.
Yes the thought of Anderson coming off the bench to replace carrick doesn't fill you with the same trepidation as Scholes coming on to replace Roy Keane....
Great player and glad he is gone but it was an absolute disgrace that it took refs so long to start penalising him and dont even get me started on the media coverage of his "tackles"
He could not time a tackle it's as simple as that, I don't think he was one to go out and hurt someone intentionally.
When I spent a month in Portugal in 2004 for the Euro's,I was expecting to hear the locals asking about the likes of Rooney,Gerrard and Beckham but majority of fans based in europe were bigging up Scholes. They seem more impressed with his ability to create,his range of passing and his quickness in thought.
Thats like saying drunk drivers never mean to hurt anyone [video=youtube;W66JLyOAt7g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W66JLyOAt7g[/video]
No it's not, that's a ridiculous comparison. There are a lot of players that sometimes go over the top and some of them have been Liverpool players. We all back our own players and tend to turn a blind eye when it's one of our own, I'm guilty of that myself but Scholes was a good player and imo not a dirty player.
No it's not, I agree it's the extreme end of the scale but the principle is the same. If scholes cannot tackle safely then he is guilty whether he meant to hurt people or not. Liverpool had had a few players who have at times meant to hurt the opposition (eg gerrard) all clubs have them and scholes is one.
he was ****ing brilliant, world class, im neither a pool or a manc and i have to say hes one of the best midfielders ever IMO, his passing in his hey day was second to none and he can bloody strike the ball too, true, he was **** at tackling but thats part of him he wouldnt of been the same guy
That's exactly the media espoused view I mean; " that's a terrible tackle but hey it's scholes ha! ha! ha! we all know he can't tackle so what do you expect he! he! he!"
As a player I was always committed on the pitch and would on occasions go in for a tackle hard and get it wrong, there was never any intention to hurt anyone. I have broken someones leg and was gutted that I hurt someone so badly. Your comparison to drunk driving is not fair. Drink Driving is an act of a weak, irresponsible person who has no thought for anyone but him or herself. I take your overall point that no footballer should tackle with the intent of hurting someone but still think that Scholes was not the kind of player to go out to hurt someone.
In some ways I don't have a problem with trying to hurt somebody on the pitch, I have seen the red mist a few times on the rugby field and tried to hurt people. Footballers are human so it will happen, what is important is how those things are treated by refs and the media. The video I posted above, do you really think that was just a ridiculously badly timed tackle?
Ok Maybe I should have said learner drive who cannot really control the car, if they go out alone in a busy area and hurt someone is it ok because they didn't mean to?
