Manchester United banter 78420


Use our rumours form to send us manchester united transfer rumours.

(single word yields best result)

01 Mar 2018 13:53:41
What about Scholes? He was left out of the "all time best PL XI" by them pundits for Gerrard and Lampard. For me he is the best English CM to play in the PL just ahead of the two aforementioned guys. What is your opinion on him Ed1?
Just for fun what would everyone's 1,2 and 3 be from Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard?
For me it's:
But it's a tough call between Lampard and Gerrard and Gerrard's lack of title just edged it out.

{Ed001's Note - I think they are all very different players and it really depends on what you need for your team. Personally I find it comes down to who supports what team as to which of the 3 they think is best.}

Agree1 Disagree0

01 Mar 2018 14:08:36
But Scholes is always made to be like the third best by the English media and I think it is more because of him not hugging the limelight while a player. Just my opinion but he was phenomenal.

01 Mar 2018 15:23:24
Gerrard is more in the mould of bryan robson.
Lampard was a fantastically consistent goalscorer from midfield he played with much more discipline than gerard.
Scholes was the best english player of his generation.
All great players for their clubs and all great players. Why they did not play together as a 3 more often is a surprise to me.

01 Mar 2018 16:03:19
Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard; in that order for me.

01 Mar 2018 16:06:52
Me too Ken. They should have been played as a three. Gives a lot more balance.

01 Mar 2018 16:09:01

01 Mar 2018 16:16:44
Scholes for me, maybe biased but he was technically the best. Great range of passing.
Lampard second as he was an intelligent player who always seemed to pop up with a goal.
Gerrard distant third. To much Roy of the rovers. Shocking tactical awareness.

01 Mar 2018 17:35:20
The Liverpool game against Chelsea were they blew their chances of the title was why Gerrard was a distant third in that poll. It wasn't the "slip". Calling it a slip makes it sound unlucky. He miscontrolled the ball and gave it away, that's a mistake, it happens to every single footballer. That's not why. The second half is why.

Gerrard in the second half of that game was an utter disgrace. He took something like 15 shots from all different ranges trying to make up for his mistake. Consistently choosing the long odds of a 35 yarder going in instead of proping and trying to break Chelsea down.

I know boiling his fantastic career down to 45 minutes of football is quite ridiculous, but that summed him up. He wanted the headlines all for himself and cost his team a title. He was a MOTD player. Looked amazing in the highlights. Watch him for 90 minutes and he regularly went missing.

01 Mar 2018 18:21:06
Mumbles great post that. That is what spearates the best from the rest. Scholes without a doubt the best of all three.

The biggest difference between Scholes, Lampard and Gerrard was that Scholes couldve easily have played the way Gerrard or Lampard played where as Gerrard or Lampard couldn't play the way Scholes played.

01 Mar 2018 18:46:54
I’m not sure it’s that straight forward, each fan will favour their own player. Scholes is clearly a legend but look at Lampard’s goal scoring record, it is phenomenal for a midfielder. Having said that, I never bought into the Gerard hype, he’s a difficult bloke to like, thick as 2 short planks he would have been on the bins if he hadn’t been a footballer.

01 Mar 2018 19:02:16
Scholes Lampard, Gerrard distant third, not because of talent but because of impact.

For me in a team game its hard to judge a player by their achievements on the pitch as it is a team game which makes it hard to judge a player on what they "do" in a game. Would Lampard have scored as many goals for Chelsea had Drogba not been so good at holding up the ball? The tactics can be built around a key player to elevate their impact or for them to sacrifice their own "goals" for those of the team.

Scholes was all about the team game and played like it was more important that the team played well and won than if he did. Where as a certain scouse player was only happy if he was the best player in his team.

I think a better way to judge just how good and key they were as players is to see the impact they had on the team when they didn't play. At United we never looked like we had total control of a game unless Scholes was on the pitch, even though we had some great players on in his stead.

Where as bizarrely I thought Liverpool played better in the games Gerrard didn't play. That's not to say he wasn't a hugely talented player, just that Liverpool as a team played better when he wasn't overshadowing his team mates and trying to carry the club on his back. 11 men playing like a team just performed better than Steven Gerrard and 10 men trying to make him look good ever did.

Lampard's absence was felt by Chelsea, but he wasn't the heart beat like Scholes was so it was easier for Chelsea to adapt when he wasn't on the field.

01 Mar 2018 19:10:50
Scholes was the most underrated English player when he played,
The other 2 wouldn't lace his boots.
Didn't zidane, inesta all those big players rate amoung the best, the french italians spanish all wanted him and couldn't understand how engkand didn't build there team around him.
Scholes was a player.
I wouldn't have swaped him for no other midfielder in the world.

01 Mar 2018 21:13:55
All completely different but Scholes and Gerrard were miles ahead of lampard who worked incredibly hard to make up for his lack of overall talent.

Scholes, closely followed by Gerrard, then Lampard a good distance away.

02 Mar 2018 08:21:45
I think the biggest point was that both the Liverpool and Chelsea set up's were designed/ built around getting the best from Gerrard and Lampard. I think in Chelsea's case that was much to the detriment of Shevchenko, Torres and other strikers that weren't Drogba. Gerrard at Liverpool was in the main the reason the Xabi Alsonso was misused and never the player seen at Real and Bayern.

Scholes on the other hand dominated matches, had the ability and football brain to move positions on the pitch and adapt his game. All 3 were phenomenal players for their clubs, and each clubs fans would say their player was the best. Scholes for me was the best - again biased being a United fan. Scholes is appreciated more in Europe and by other world class midefielders.

{Ed001's Note - I think United fans need to remember, when they talk about Scholes being able to change positions making him better, that Gerrard was able to play far more roles than Scholes, so not sure how that applies. Scholes broke through as a forward, dropped back to attacking midfield and ended up a deep lying playmaker. Gerrard played as a centreback and right back initially, and did extremely well in the latter role as well. Then he moved to play right wing, with his best season, imo, coming on the right, before he moved inside to play off Torres. He also played as a central mid, deep lying playmaker and on the left (for England in particular) with varying degrees of success admittedly, but he played there. In fact the England staff used to move him wider because he was felt the best able of the 3 to adapt to different roles. So anyone suggesting Scholes ability to change positions makes him better should really think about it properly.}



Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass