Premier League Fixtures 14/15/16 September 2013

Nah, I knew what you'd do next. You're a bit predictable

You asked for examples, got some, your response is basically "can't really remember those games so they don't count" and links to match reports.. Wow.

@ 110%

So totally expected. ... "Ahh you must support Man Utd!" You lost all credibility with that one.

You asked for examples, you got them. "AH THEY DON'T COUNT!". Whatever.

And he would've been the hero against Porto in 2004 but for a poor Linesman's decision (already scored earlier in the match)

You also have to take into account that for a long time in Europe Ferguson would play in a very naive manner, His Basic United Game plan (which was still existent to this day) is to get it wide quickly and flood the box. It's only since the San Siro beatdown in 2007 that they became more about PROGRESS.

If Scholes grew up in a possession based environment he would have been even better.


I found this btw:



Yeah they lost, but his ability to pass between the lines stands out. Forget how good he was when he still had a bit of acceleration.

Twain's definition of a cynic often feels apposite here.

Has Scholes vrs Gerrard never been done on here before

Who is the winner after that wonderful debate ?

Deluded F*ck wrote:

@ 110%

So totally expected. ... "Ahh you must support Man Utd!" You lost all credibility with that one.

You asked for examples, you got them. "AH THEY DON'T COUNT!". Whatever.

And he would've been the hero against Porto in 2004 but for a poor Linesman's decision (already scored earlier in the match)

You also have to take into account that for a long time in Europe Ferguson would play in a very naive manner, His Basic United Game plan (which was still existent to this day) is to get it wide quickly and flood the box. It's only since the San Siro beatdown in 2007 that they became more about PROGRESS.

If Scholes grew up in a possession based environment he would have been even better.


I found this btw:



Yeah they lost, but his ability to pass between the lines stands out. Forget how good he was when he still had a bit of acceleration.

Isn't that game where he miscontrolled on the edge of united's box and presented the ball to Zidane, who then slipped in Raul to make it 2-0? Pretty sure it is.  United had 3 v Madrid's 2 in the middle and in truth this was a game that Scholes should have made much more of an impact in.

There is massive revisionism amongst press and pundits when it comes to the early part of Scholes' career - he was never a deep lying playmaker until recent seasons, nor was he expected to really dictate play.

I would agree that I can't recall a game against opposition of the highest calibre where Scholes has dictated play. That's because he hasn't.

He was a very good player, but he lacked the ability to dribble/manipulate the ball in tight areas demanded at the highest level, an ability so visible in players like Redondo, Pirlo, Xavi etc.

I am not doing a gerrard vs scholes, I am doing a "did scholes really control the tempo of games at the highest level" debate. I am still building up to my actual agenda which coops has no idea about, but will claim he did once we get there.

@TS: It was a genuine thanks. No disrespect, I thought it was one of those well-known forum secrets that you are a closet manu fan, so you were the perfect guy to give us a list of games to discuss. I just didn't realise two would be in the last century.

I haven't said "those games don't count". I said "how far back?" and "do you know what controls the tempo of a game actually means?".

Of course I barely remember them, I have to go back 13-14 years for the earliest ones. Who remembers a game from 1999? The latest one, Milan 2007 is one where Kaka stands out, and milan score 2 goals away from home while having plenty of chances, and manu only winning due to a last gasp goal from rooney. How can the standout player be on the opposite team, if scholes controlled the tempo of the game? I am not dismissing the game, I am actually very happy to discuss it, as I want an explanation of how this collective delusion of scholes having controlled the tempo of that particular game works. So please explain in what way scholes controlled the tempo of that game in your opinion?

For everyone else here is a three and a half minute highlights video of the game, scholes touches the ball twice  :
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xq1z1w_man-utd-3-2-ac-milan-24-04-2007_sport
Now I know highlights video isn't everything, but still you would think since everything was flowing through scholes, he'd touch the ball more often

TS
You're right about Scholes playing behind the striker during one season but I was also thinking in terms of playing style he was simply a different player. And for me Scholes showed his tempo setting skills plenty of time after during the period where the EPL was by far the best league and the Big 4 games were of Cl quality.

Apparently in the Neville owns carragher debate, everyone missed carragher owning neville first:
http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/17/jamie-carragher-says-no-one-wants-to-grow-up-and-be-a-full-back-like-gary-neville-4035976/
‘If you’re a full-back, you’re either a failed winger or a failed centre-back"

Super Laudrup wrote:TS
You're right about Scholes playing behind the striker during one season but I was also thinking in terms of playing style he was simply a different player. And for me Scholes showed his tempo setting skills plenty of time after during the period where the EPL was by far the best league and the Big 4 games were of Cl quality.

If you can name a specific game where that actually happened I would be happy to discuss it, but I already see how we've moved away from the CL against big teams (since TS is not willing to discuss Milan 2007) to "the EPL when it was good". The reason I wanted a more recent game is that we can get hold of more information, see if a team dominated possession, chances created, get heat maps of the play areas etc.

110% wrote:Apparently in the Neville owns carragher debate, everyone missed carragher owning neville first:
http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/17/jamie-carragher-says-no-one-wants-to-grow-up-and-be-a-full-back-like-gary-neville-4035976/
‘If you’re a full-back, you’re either a failed winger or a failed centre-back"

This is what's commonly known as banter. And good banter it was. Similar to how Neville basically implied Carragher was your classic scouse theif a few weeks ago.. So technically still "owned him" (who would've thought that'd still be being said) first...

The orphan (Nasri) played well yesterday. People will naturally talk about the spine (Kompany, Toure, Aguero) but I haven't seen Nasri influence a game like that in a while. Pellegrini obviously has much better man-management skills than Mancio and it's been evident so far. Central midfield is a slight worry for them if Toure or Fernandinho get injured though.

Scholes is/was obviously better then Gerrard! 

Anyway, let's let the winner play against Schweinsteiger!

Fey wrote:Scholes is/was obviously better then Gerrard! 

Anyway, let's let the winner play against Schweinsteiger!

He's not English does not count.....

Fey wrote:Scholes is/was obviously better then Gerrard! 

Anyway, let's let the winner play against Schweinsteiger!

That's not the topic of the discussion, the topic is whether or not scholes has controlled the tempo of a game at the highest level. I forgot you are a manu fan since the last 2 or 3 years, so you would be able to give us a good example of the last 2 or 3 years, if there is one.

Because I say he hasn't and there seems to be some kind of collective delusion that he has. Everyone who has replied has just generally said "of course he has", so I ask for an example and no-one is able to give me a clear one. The only person to provide some examples was TS who went back to 1999 for 2 games, with the latest game against Milan in 2007 where kaka was the game's outstanding player. I would be very happy to discuss that game or any other game (preferably more recent) that anyone would like to put forward as an example.

No wonder you misinterpreted that banter..

christmasborocooper wrote:No wonder you misinterpreted that banter..

Was neville's point, about scholes controlling the tempo of the midfield, banter? If so I completely misunderstood and no wonder no-one can give me a good example of him doing it against a top side. At least I was right about scholes, even if I didn't get that you were all joking about him controlling the tempo.

I doubt that will suffice. But ultimately, your whole argument is mongified.

Scholes played for a Man Utd team that was defensive and counter attacking for most of the time in Europe when they were one of the best teams in Europe.

Ultimately, playing in such a way, you won't have a player that controls the tempo in a way that you want him to. As using your rebuttal of previous arguments, to control the tempo, you need 60% possession or some stupid arbitrary figure. This is mongified, as you could put Xavi in that Man Utd team, and other teams would still have dominated possession against you. Like Vallecano did against Barcelona, or why Mata doesn't get into Chelsea currently, or Pirlo against Spain in the EC final. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE PLAYER. THE SYSTEM AND THE OPPOSITION ARE IMPORTANT. What can be shown, is that in every game, top or otherwise, he's capable of using, retaining and advancing the ball in a way that Gerrard has been unable to do throughout his career.

That's all i'm gonna say on this, as your argument is about as tedious as your personality.

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:No wonder you misinterpreted that banter..

Was neville's point, about scholes controlling the tempo of the midfield, banter? If so I completely misunderstood and no wonder no-one can give me a good example of him doing it against a top side. At least I was right about scholes, even if I didn't get that you were all joking about him controlling the tempo.

This is poor banter.

Hlebagone wrote:

I doubt that will suffice. But ultimately, your whole argument is mongified.

Scholes played for a Man Utd team that was defensive and counter attacking for most of the time in Europe when they were one of the best teams in Europe.

Ultimately, playing in such a way, you won't have a player that controls the tempo in a way that you want him to. As using your rebuttal of previous arguments, to control the tempo, you need 60% possession or some stupid arbitrary figure. This is mongified, as you could put Xavi in that Man Utd team, and other teams would still have dominated possession against you. Like Vallecano did against Barcelona, or why Mata doesn't get into Chelsea currently, or Pirlo against Spain in the EC final. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE PLAYER. THE SYSTEM AND THE OPPOSITION ARE IMPORTANT. What can be shown, is that in every game, top or otherwise, he's capable of using, retaining and advancing the ball in a way that Gerrard has been unable to do throughout his career.

That's all i'm gonna say on this, as your argument is about as tedious as your personality.

Seems such a big deal to go against the forum collective opinion on something, but we're getting to my agenda (coops knows of course). I agree with almost everything you say except that it is not a mongified argument, it is in fact a perfect argument. You admit that scholes didn't control the tempo against big teams as man united didn't control possession. Pirlo didn't control the tempo against spain, because spain controlled possession. Basically it is THE TEAM, THE SYSTEM AND THE OPPOSITION that decides who controls possession, and whoever controls possession controls the tempo. It is NOT A SINGLE PLAYER at all.

The whole team works to keep the ball, if the team needs to score a goal the whole team attacks more and if they are trying to hold a lead, the whole team defends more. Sometimes there is a dominant midfield and they pass the ball around and owns the other team (this is actually barcelona where xavi gets all the credit). Sometimes there is a central player who is a great passer, and the team works to get the ball to him, and then give him outlets for the ball, and he does what he is great at, passing it around (this fits the likes of pirlo). In both cases the player seems to gets credit for controlling the tempo when in fact it was possession of the ball and the work of the team or at the very least the midfield that did that, and not a single player. That player has skills, in that he is a brilliant passer, and that is something they do deserve credit for. If neville had simply said scholes was a brilliant passer and better than gerrard at passing, I would agree with it, but saying he controls the tempo of the game and that's what makes him special, well it's the team that controls the tempo not him, and his team or him (for those that believe a single player does it) never did it at the highest level.

The agenda is that "tempo controllers" are overrated, if they even exist.