Paul Scholes

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
24,223
Location
New York City
Bad tackles undermine Paul Scholes's perfect passes

Oliver Kay's Final Word
Has there ever been a player quite like Paul Scholes? A player who passes the ball with such economy, elegance and intelligence, yet, the moment his team lose possession, crashes around in such reckless fashion that he becomes a threat to the very art he purveys.

The observation that Scholes is a less than proficient tackler is hardly a new one, but consider the following: in the three Barclays Premier League matches in which he has appeared for Manchester United this season, he has been sent off for two bookable offences away to Tottenham Hotspur on Saturday, booked for scything down Jordi Gómez away to Wigan Athletic and, although this one has been glossed over, fortunate not to be sent off, let alone booked, for an outrageous challenge on Barry Ferguson that somehow went unpunished by the referee in the opening game against Birmingham City.




And now consider this: against Birmingham, he made 100 passes, 97 of them successful. Against Wigan, he made 41 passes, 40 of them successful. On Saturday, in a game played at a breathtaking pace, he made 49 passes, 47 of them successful, before taking his leave early in the second half — a little unfortunately in this case, if we give him the benefit of the doubt over his sliding challenge with Tom Huddlestone. In the Premier League those figures are astonishing.

Scholes has started this season looking brighter than he has done for some time, so much so that he and Darren Fletcher appear to be Sir Alex Ferguson’s preferred pairing in central midfield. The problem is that United are in serious danger of falling a man short; his tackling, whether out of carelessness, cynicism, incompetence or malice, really is that bad.

The rules of modern-day football do not allow for the kind of tackles that Scholes regards as fair game. Ferguson suggested on Saturday that he had been sent off “because his name is Paul Scholes”, but whatever the sympathy in this case, he has far more often got off lightly, as against Birmingham, than been punished severely. Clatter into opponents with your studs up often enough and you will get sent off every now and then.

It is a shame because he seemed to be enjoying himself at White Hart Lane on Saturday. He does not have that look often these days, which is one reason why it is tempting to predict, a couple of months shy of his 35th birthday, that he will retire when his contract expires at the end of the season. As such, we should savour him while we still can, treasuring every one of those passes. Scholes will be sorely missed when he is gone, but his tackling will not. :lol:
 
Fair article, Scholes was a joy to watch on Saturday. The sheer cleverness of the passes, he can have three men on him and still he'll generally find something interesting to do with the ball. He's a class apart from any other midfielder we've got, and along with Gerrard I'd say he's got the best technique of any English player since Gascoigne.

It is odd that such an intelligent player can't control himself off the ball. It must be a pace thing, he was always dirty but it's got much worse, I don't think it's malice so I guess he thinks he can get there a lot of the time.
 
Plechazunga said:
Fair article, Scholes was a joy to watch on Saturday. The sheer cleverness of the passes, he can have three men on him and still he'll generally find something interesting to do with the ball. He's a class apart from any other midfielder we've got, and along with Gerrard I'd say he's got the best technique of any English player since Gascoigne.

It is odd that such an intelligent player can't control himself off the ball. It must be a pace thing, he was always dirty but it's got much worse, I don't think it's malice so I guess he thinks he can get there a lot of the time.
Click to expand...

his technique is from a different planet to stevie me. Only Rooney can be compared for me.

Gerrard can tackle though :lol:
 
FranklyVulgar said:
his technique is from a different planet to stevie me. Only Rooney can be compared for me.
Click to expand...

To be fair, virtually no-one's got better technique than Gerrard. The way he strikes (and heads) a ball is pretty much perfect. Where Scholes is miles ahead of him is decision-making, economy, consistency, general discipline (on the ball, that is). Where Gerrard's miles ahead of Scholes is athleticism, it will be interesting to see if he can keep going at the top level as long as Scholes has.

Rooney's a good shout though. His control still lets him down sometimes, but that's usually because he's trying something very hard, like bringing it down and shifting it on in the same movement. Rio's also got great technique, and so has Joe Cole.
 
I think when it comes to harnessing power Stevie Me's technique is top notch, but for elegance and finesse usually implied by 'technique', Scholes is way ahead of him.
 
Well, he started off as a striker and matured as a midfielder next to Keano. Tacklings never really been on the agenda for him.
 
moses said:
I think when it comes to harnessing power Stevie Me's technique is top notch, but for elegance and finesse usually implied by 'technique', Scholes is way ahead of him.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Look at that little pirouette he did the other day to set up the goal against Stoke, fecking brilliant bit of improvisation that took real delicacy of touch, athleticism, imagination. Gerrard's about a lot more than power, he's got brilliant all-round technique.
 
Plechazunga said:
I don't think so. Look at that little pirouette he did the other day to set up the goal against Stoke, fecking brilliant bit of improvisation that took real delicacy of touch, athleticism, imagination. Gerrard's about a lot more than power, he's got brilliant all-round technique.
Click to expand...

Yup.

gerraaaard.gif


Yeah, I know. feck it though, any excuse to post that gif.
 
Plechazunga said:
I don't think so. Look at that little pirouette he did the other day to set up the goal against Stoke, fecking brilliant bit of improvisation that took real delicacy of touch, athleticism, imagination. Gerrard's about a lot more than power, he's got brilliant all-round technique.
Click to expand...

In flashes maybe, I don't he has enough technique to base his game around it and still hold down a place in the country's top team.

We'll see if Stevie is still at the heart of a top 4 midfield at 35.
 
Scholes would still be in the England team if he wanted to play.

He has wands for feet and I am appreciating him more now that I know his career is approaching the end.
 
Come out of retirement for the World Cup :(
 
Plechazunga said:
You've all let your hatred of Liverpool get the better of you. Gerrard's technique is unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Plech,

Gerrard is not bad at all. He is a world class player. Although, he tries too hard and makes himself look like a right Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime at times. You could see that Scholes' pass completion percentage is almost up there and there are quite a few risky passes in that count. He always pulls it off, because he has the right technique.

Although Gerrard possess' the skill to pull off something like that, he tries way too many Hollywood passes and that in turn makes him look less endowed when it comes to technique and more as an all action midfielder. He's the more complete midfield player than Scholes, no doubt. He can tackle, defend, attack. Scholes can pull the strings better than Gerrard.

Gerrard is no mug, but in my opinion, he tries too hard and let his emotions do the talking than his head, which makes him look like a bit of a donkey. Amazing player though.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's so hard to define, pretty much every debate about 'technique' on here ends in a bit of a spaz-fest.

I'm just amazed Scholesy hasn't waded in yet.
Click to expand...

He's probably in a park screaming 'This is as good as it gets for you cnuts' at a bunch of 16 year olds.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Plech,

Gerrard is not bad at all. He is a world class player. Although, he tries too hard and makes himself look like a right Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime at times. You could see that Scholes' pass completion percentage is almost up there and there are quite a few risky passes in that count. He always pulls it off, because he has the right technique.

Although Gerrard possess' the skill to pull off something like that, he tries way too many Hollywood passes and that in turn makes him look less endowed when it comes to technique and more as an all action midfielder. He's the more complete midfield player than Scholes, no doubt. He can tackle, defend, attack. Scholes can pull the strings better than Gerrard.

Gerrard is no mug, but in my opinion, he tries too hard and let his emotions do the talking than his head, which makes him look like a bit of a donkey. Amazing player though.
Click to expand...

I agree with that, apart from the Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime and donkey bits which are OTT.

But as you say, it's a question of mental attributes, not technique. He can hit a fifty-yard ball just as precisely as Scholes. It's just Scholes is too disciplined to try it all the time and has the judgement to know when to do it.

Re completeness, he's not actually as complete as he should be. In some ways, he's ended up presenting a similar problem to his club as Scholes - it's hard to accomodate him in a 4-4-2. We got away with it with Keano, and it worked well with Carrick in 06/7 because Scholes changed his game. But it was always an issue which is why we bought Veron and pushed him up into the hole.

It should never have been an issue with Gerrard - he should have learnt how to consistently run a game from midfield, but he never did. One in four he'd dominate with some Roy of the Rovers shit, but that's not good enough to win leagues (cups, maybe, sometimes). I don't know why it didn't happen - partly I think it was :wenger:, fecking him up like he did Owen by giving him too much responsibility too young. Partly he just seems to be a bit thick as a player. It's got to the point that Benitez is now basically playing him up front. But it's nothing to do with technique... the fact that he can play on the wing and up front as well only goes to show how good his all-round technique is.

Brophs said:
He's probably in a park screaming 'This is as good as it gets for you cnuts' at a bunch of 16 year olds.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Abbsta said:
Hello.

What techkneechk are you reffering to plech?
Click to expand...

Hell Abbs

Something like "ability to use your feet and body to make a football do what you want it to"
 
Plechazunga said:
I agree with that, apart from the Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime and donkey bits which are OTT.

But as you say, it's a question of mental attributes, not technique. He can hit a fifty-yard ball just as precisely as Scholes. It's just Scholes is too disciplined to try it all the time and has the judgement to know when to do it.

Re completeness, he's not actually as complete as he should be. In some ways, he's ended up presenting a similar problem to his club as Scholes - it's hard to accomodate him in a 4-4-2. We got away with it with Keano, and it worked well with Carrick in 06/7 because Scholes changed his game. But it was always an issue which is why we bought Veron and pushed him up into the hole.

It should never have been an issue with Gerrard - he should have learnt how to consistently run a game from midfield, but he never did. One in four he'd dominate with some Roy of the Rovers shit, but that's not good enough to win leagues (cups, maybe, sometimes). I don't know why it didn't happen - partly I think it was :wenger:, fecking him up like he did Owen by giving him too much responsibility too young. Partly he just seems to be a bit thick as a player. It's got to the point that Benitez is now basically playing him up front. But it's nothing to do with technique... the fact that he can play on the wing and up front as well only goes to show how good his all-round technique is.
Click to expand...

I agree with the essence of your post. He can also play competently as an emergency right back. He has it in him, but he's not disciplined enough to show it consistently.

Should we count this lack of discipline as well, as a facet of technique? Maybe stretching it a bit, but I can never give credit to Gerrard without calling him a donkey. :lol:
 
Plechazunga said:
Hell Abbs

Something like "ability to use your feet and body to make a football do what you want it to"
Click to expand...
I would have agreed with you if yo were referring to shooting or heading and to some extent passing but not in general as a ball master. Being a good (or excellent) player is not the same as being a master. Scholes is a master.
 
Plechazunga said:
To be fair, virtually no-one's got better technique than Gerrard. The way he strikes (and heads) a ball is pretty much perfect. Where Scholes is miles ahead of him is decision-making, economy, consistency, general discipline (on the ball, that is). Where Gerrard's miles ahead of Scholes is athleticism, it will be interesting to see if he can keep going at the top level as long as Scholes has.

Rooney's a good shout though. His control still lets him down sometimes, but that's usually because he's trying something very hard, like bringing it down and shifting it on in the same movement. Rio's also got great technique, and so has Joe Cole.
Click to expand...

Gerrard as a footballer is useless apart from a wonderful striking technique with his right foot, if not I cant see much difference between him and El Hadji Diouf.
 
Plechazunga said:
I agree with that, apart from the Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime and donkey bits which are OTT.

But as you say, it's a question of mental attributes, not technique. He can hit a fifty-yard ball just as precisely as Scholes. It's just Scholes is too disciplined to try it all the time and has the judgement to know when to do it.

Re completeness, he's not actually as complete as he should be. In some ways, he's ended up presenting a similar problem to his club as Scholes - it's hard to accomodate him in a 4-4-2. We got away with it with Keano, and it worked well with Carrick in 06/7 because Scholes changed his game. But it was always an issue which is why we bought Veron and pushed him up into the hole.

It should never have been an issue with Gerrard - he should have learnt how to consistently run a game from midfield, but he never did. One in four he'd dominate with some Roy of the Rovers shit, but that's not good enough to win leagues (cups, maybe, sometimes). I don't know why it didn't happen - partly I think it was :wenger:, fecking him up like he did Owen by giving him too much responsibility too young. Partly he just seems to be a bit thick as a player. It's got to the point that Benitez is now basically playing him up front. But it's nothing to do with technique... the fact that he can play on the wing and up front as well only goes to show how good his all-round technique is.
Click to expand...

Roy Keane was a complete midfielder, even when he partnered Scholes and made his marauding runs upfront how many time have we seen him crossing the line of the ball and whenever he partnered Butt, he was able to push the midfield from behind and also cover up the attacking players. It tooks years of reading the game playing as a CB, FB and one full season along with Ince in the middle for Keane to develop in to top class midfeilder.

Gerrard makes up his lack of footballing brains by chasing the ball like a yard dog, and it distorts the shape of the midfield, which ever manager be it Houllier, Keegan, Sven, McClaren that all tried to play him as a midfielder have all met a spiteful end. Benetiz first and then Capello quickly realized his inability to read the game and lack of defensive abilities - merely a physical presence and work rate cannot compensate his lack in defensive skills. They both rejected the folly created by the blinkered media and played him as a foward in which his striking technique can be utilized to the maximum and up went his repuatation as a footballer.


As for Scholes and England...work rate is something a wonderful term invented by the English media that masks the technical ability only of a footballer, Scholes doesnt have that much and he remains underrated only in England but can use the ball better than any one else including Keane..the only genuine number 10 England has produced in the last 15-20 years. Keane was a midfielder, he had everything, Scholes can run a two man midfield along with a player like Makelele and can make for his lack of defensive skills with his creativity whilst Gerrard is useless where ever you fit in the midfield ...he's a forward and hence gets more goals..he cannot be comapred with any of our midfielders.
 
keano got sent off a lot
zidane got sent off a lot
viera got sent off a lot

Maldini and giggs are exceptions where they've had a near enough perfect career

I mean maradonna might have been good if it weren't for drugs...

No ones perfect, but we accepted scholes faults and the truth is it should still only be 8 times as his sending off was a joke.
 
vijay said:
Roy Keane was a complete midfielder, even when he partnered Scholes and made his marauding runs upfront how many time have we seen him crossing the line of the ball and whenever he partnered Butt, he was able to push the midfield from behind and also cover up the attacking players. It tooks years of reading the game playing as a CB, FB and one full season along with Ince in the middle for Keane to develop in to top class midfeilder.

Gerrard makes up his lack of footballing brains by chasing the ball like a yard dog, and it distorts the shape of the midfield, which ever manager be it Houllier, Keegan, Sven, McClaren that all tried to play him as a midfielder have all met a spiteful end. Benetiz first and then Capello quickly realized his inability to read the game and lack of defensive abilities - merely a physical presence and work rate cannot compensate his lack in defensive skills. They both rejected the folly created by the blinkered media and played him as a foward in which his striking technique can be utilized to the maximum and up went his repuatation as a footballer.


As for Scholes and England...work rate is something a wonderful term invented by the English media that masks the technical ability only of a footballer, Scholes doesnt have that much and he remains underrated only in England but can use the ball better than any one else including Keane..the only genuine number 10 England has produced in the last 15-20 years. Keane was a midfielder, he had everything, Scholes can run a two man midfield along with a player like Makelele and can make for his lack of defensive skills with his creativity whilst Gerrard is useless where ever you fit in the midfield ...he's a forward and hence gets more goals..he cannot be comapred with any of our midfielders.
Click to expand...

good post, but if everyone says a player is underrated, then is he?
 
moses said:
good post, but if everyone says a player is underrated, then is he?
Click to expand...

who is every one there? May be the media that keeps banging on about old school values in rating a midfielder. Its no shock Scholes being the the only English footballer highly rated in the continent over the last 10-13 years.

Le Tissier remained underrated but was one of the few English players after Waddle and Gazza to be offered contracts from top European clubs, even Cantona initally got some stick before he established himself. The media has drawn out a glossary on how Alan Smiths and Hargreaves of the world are from top brass with all blood and thunder, heart and passion kicking and rolling on the turf. If these things can alone make a Roy Keane, every other premiership club has at least one water carrier that fits the attribute and England should've won all world cups.
 
vijay said:
who is every one there? May be the media that keeps banging on about old school values in rating a midfielder. Its no shock Scholes being the the only English footballer highly rated in the continent over the last 10-13 years.

Le Tissier remained underrated but was one of the few English players after Waddle and Gazza to be offered contracts from top European clubs, even Cantona initally got some stick before he established himself. The media has drawn out a glossary on how Alan Smiths and Hargreaves of the world are from top brass with all blood and thunder, heart and passion kicking and rolling on the turf. If these things can alone make a Roy Keane, every other premiership club has at least one water carrier that fits the attribute and England should've won all world cups.
Click to expand...

Aye but now everyone knows how good Scholes is, nobody undersells him, except Plech it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.