Premier League Fixtures 14/15/16 September 2013

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

messiah wrote:

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

Carragher's point was that Gerrard and Lampard have single handedly saved their teams in many instances and sometimes at the very top level such as in cup finals etc.

Personally I don't know how you can rank these players - all of them have been superb for their clubs during the last 10-15 years or so.

Neville would rank Scholes as the best, Carragher would say Gerrard, John Terry will say Lampard.

Luis wrote:

messiah wrote:

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

Carragher's point was that Gerrard and Lampard have single handedly saved their teams in many instances and sometimes at the very top level such as in cup finals etc.

Personally I don't know how you can rank these players - all of them have been superb for their clubs during the last 10-15 years or so.

Neville would rank Scholes as the best, Carragher would say Gerrard, John Terry will say Lampard.

Most neutrals seem to favour Scholes.

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I think his problem was.. He'd thought of an argument for why he thinks Gerrard is the best.. But hadn't really anticipated arguing that Scholes wasn't.. And that totally stumped him.

But Neville didn't come up with any argument at all, except for scholes is the best player he's played with. It's an opinion not an argument.

Yeah you're right. Neville made no arguments for why he thought it at all(apart from the ones he made) . Absolutely none(apart from some) . Everyone else just misunderstood. Scholes wasn't very good and Gerrard is the best. You've convinced me.

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

messiah wrote:

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

Carragher's point was that Gerrard and Lampard have single handedly saved their teams in many instances and sometimes at the very top level such as in cup finals etc.

Personally I don't know how you can rank these players - all of them have been superb for their clubs during the last 10-15 years or so.

Neville would rank Scholes as the best, Carragher would say Gerrard, John Terry will say Lampard.

Most neutrals seem to favour Scholes.

You're neutral?

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

messiah wrote:

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

Carragher's point was that Gerrard and Lampard have single handedly saved their teams in many instances and sometimes at the very top level such as in cup finals etc.

Personally I don't know how you can rank these players - all of them have been superb for their clubs during the last 10-15 years or so.

Neville would rank Scholes as the best, Carragher would say Gerrard, John Terry will say Lampard.

Most neutrals seem to favour Scholes.

You're neutral?

Yes.

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I think his problem was.. He'd thought of an argument for why he thinks Gerrard is the best.. But hadn't really anticipated arguing that Scholes wasn't.. And that totally stumped him.

But Neville didn't come up with any argument at all, except for scholes is the best player he's played with. It's an opinion not an argument.  

Yeah you're right. Neville made no arguments for why he thought it at all(apart from the ones he made) . Absolutely none(apart from some) . Everyone else just misunderstood. Scholes wasn't very good and Gerrard is the best. You've convinced me.

Neville gives his "argument": "he's the best player i've ever played" with at 1.20

He then repeats it at 1.39, with the addition of "unique talent, controls tempo", after that he decides controls tempo is the thing that he's going to go with so he starts talking about keeping possession at manu and comparing him with pirlo and xavi, for whom you could easily provide a list of games at the top level where they have been credited with controlling the tempo. I can't remember a single game against a big team in the CL (I mean barca, real madrid, milan level etc) where scholes has been credited for controlling the tempo of a game, but I am sure you must be able to provide a long list of them?

Kimbo wrote:

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:

messiah wrote:

Luis wrote:I agree with Carragher. Scholes was a brilliant player but I prefer players who always find that bit of magic when you need it and score that winning goal or a goal to set you on your way. People will remember Messi and Ronaldo more than Xavi and Iniesta in 50 years time, fact.

and people will remember xavi and inietsa more than gerrard and lamps in 50 years, so it all depends on who is being compared when one looks back

Carragher's point was that Gerrard and Lampard have single handedly saved their teams in many instances and sometimes at the very top level such as in cup finals etc.

Personally I don't know how you can rank these players - all of them have been superb for their clubs during the last 10-15 years or so.

Neville would rank Scholes as the best, Carragher would say Gerrard, John Terry will say Lampard.

Most neutrals seem to favour Scholes.

You're neutral?

Yes.

 

I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

110% wrote:
 

Well i'm hardly a Man U fan.  

Kimbo is about as neutral as a cat.

Anyone who has a strong opinion either way can't really be considered neutral.

Oh i'm sorry, I didn't realise we were using Glenn rules.  

I don't take any pleasure from talking up a Man U player, they were our rivals once and we had to deal with Ferguson's tyranny, Chelsea and Liverpool have never been our rivals.

You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

Kimbo wrote:

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

Haven't you used the same basis to label me a liverpool fan?

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

Haven't you used the same basis to label me a liverpool fan?

You are a Liverpool fan.

Kimbo wrote:

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

it's not a rule, it's an example of how you can't consider yourself neutral

Kimbo wrote:

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

Haven't you used the same basis to label me a liverpool fan?

You are a Liverpool fan.

you hate gerrard and are not neutral then

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

Well that's not something I really care about.

And his point on it being the easy option makes perfect sense. Is he right and is it true? Don't know, but I'd say Neville seems more likely to know than you and me.

Carragher didn't just not answer well.. He just didn't answer. He couldn't.

If Gerrard was a bit more lanky, drank 30 jaigerbombs the night before a match and had a daft pony tail Kimmy would be dismissing Scholes as a slightly more able Steve Sidwell.

If you ask Kimmy why he thinks Scholes is better than Gerrard he'll come up with some tosh about England. The sooner people realise not many people give a shit about England the better. At club level Gerrard has done it all near enough, has excelled in a number of positions, has won a European cup, single handedly won us an FA cup, won countless other trophies, awards, etc

I couldn't give a toss if you think Scholes is better but I want reasons why other than 'he's not done it for the three lions'

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

Well that's not something I really care about.

And his point on it being the easy option makes perfect sense. Is he right and is it true? Don't know, but I'd say Neville seems more likely to know than you and me.

Carragher didn't just not answer well.. He just didn't answer. He couldn't.

In the same way no-one can list 3 games against top teams in the CL where scholes controlled the tempo  

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

110% wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

will.i.glenn wrote:You seem to get a lot of pleasure slagging off Gerrard. It's like a form of masturbation for you. You would struggle to take Gerrard's side if we were comparing him to Ian Huntley.

Yes, 2b.1.2 in the Glenn rule book, you can have an opinion on a player, but it shouldn't be too strong, and you shouldn't bring it up too regularly.

Haven't you used the same basis to label me a liverpool fan?

You are a Liverpool fan.

you hate gerrard and are not neutral then

I think he's a c**t, but that's an objective opinion.

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

Well that's not something I really care about.

And his point on it being the easy option makes perfect sense. Is he right and is it true? Don't know, but I'd say Neville seems more likely to know than you and me.

Carragher didn't just not answer well.. He just didn't answer. He couldn't.

In the same way no-one can list 3 games against top teams in the CL where scholes controlled the tempo  

We're not being paid to and embarrassing ourselves though

I've no problem with Gerrard. No more so than with Scholes. I just think Scholes was better. They've both scored lots of goals and both won lots of games. They've both excelled in more than one role. It's a pretty pointless comparison. Probably why Carragher fell apart.

I think Scholes is better than Gerrard, as he's just better at football than Gerrard. Thought I'd clear that one up for you.


Technically, they have a similar level, in their ability to pass, shoot. But Scholes has a far better understanding of how to control a game, dominate the tempo, and when to play the right pass. Gerrard's got better at this in the past couple of years, but is still fairly poor in that regard.

Luis wrote: At club level Gerrard has done it all near enough, has excelled in a number of positions, has won a European cup, single handedly won us an FA cup, won countless other trophies, awards, etc

So has Scholes.. And several premiership titles on top.

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

Well that's not something I really care about.

And his point on it being the easy option makes perfect sense. Is he right and is it true? Don't know, but I'd say Neville seems more likely to know than you and me.

Carragher didn't just not answer well.. He just didn't answer. He couldn't.

In the same way no-one can list 3 games against top teams in the CL where scholes controlled the tempo  

We're not being paid to and embarrassing ourselves though

I've no problem with Gerrard. No more so than with Scholes. I just think Scholes was better. They've both scored lots of goals and both won lots of games. They've both excelled in more than one role. It's a pretty pointless comparison. Probably why Carragher fell apart.

Why do you think Scholes was better though? You can't criticise someone for not backing up their argument when you very rarely do it yourself.

Hlebagone wrote:I think Scholes is better than Gerrard, as he's just better at football than Gerrard. Thought I'd clear that one up for you.


Technically, they have a similar level, in their ability to pass, shoot. But Scholes has a far better understanding of how to control a game, dominate the tempo, and when to play the right pass. Gerrard's got better at this in the past couple of years, but is still fairly poor in that regard.

Gerrard seemed to play the right pass to Torres quite a lot on top of scoring about 20-30 goals himself that season.

Has anyone mentioned the fact that Scholes' tackling was an absolute fucking disgrace to the English game yet or are we laughing it off like Martin Tyler?

Luis wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:I think Scholes is better than Gerrard, as he's just better at football than Gerrard. Thought I'd clear that one up for you.


Technically, they have a similar level, in their ability to pass, shoot. But Scholes has a far better understanding of how to control a game, dominate the tempo, and when to play the right pass. Gerrard's got better at this in the past couple of years, but is still fairly poor in that regard.

Gerrard seemed to play the right pass to Torres quite a lot on top of scoring about 20-30 goals himself that season.

Has anyone mentioned the fact that Scholes' tackling was an absolute fucking disgrace to the English game yet or are we laughing it off like Martin Tyler?

Scholes' tackling is clearly his major downside, Stevie(as the pundits call him) is pretty filthy himself mind.

Luis wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:

110% wrote:

christmasborocooper wrote:I tend not to retain my yearly lists of who gives a shit information to be honest.

I think Neville made it clear early on that he wasn't in to comparing the three. He just thinks Scholes is the best and gave his reason. Carragher gave his for Gerrard. The problem came when Carragher tried to argue with easily dismissable arguments.

I didn't hear Carragher answering why Gerrard was put on the right wing. I did hear Neville give a reason for Scholes being on the left.

I heard Neville being asked "did Scholes win enough games" to which his answer was yes and gave reasons why.. Carraghers argument again basically being "but that's not scoring goals la".. Showing he missed the point..

I don't say carragher answers well, but he made a good point on veron, for which he was ridiculed, including on here. I don't get that ridicule, while at the same point support for neville who was equally as bad in trying to make his points. Carragher didn't get a chance to answer the question on gerrard being on the right for liverpool, and neville's answer of "easy option" for scholes being on the left for england made no sense.

You don't need to provide a list, but since everyone seems to think "Scholes control tempo" is a given, it must be pretty easy to name 3 games in the CL, against top teams where scholes has controlled the tempo. I can't think of even one

Well that's not something I really care about.

And his point on it being the easy option makes perfect sense. Is he right and is it true? Don't know, but I'd say Neville seems more likely to know than you and me.

Carragher didn't just not answer well.. He just didn't answer. He couldn't.

In the same way no-one can list 3 games against top teams in the CL where scholes controlled the tempo  

We're not being paid to and embarrassing ourselves though

I've no problem with Gerrard. No more so than with Scholes. I just think Scholes was better. They've both scored lots of goals and both won lots of games. They've both excelled in more than one role. It's a pretty pointless comparison. Probably why Carragher fell apart.

Why do you think Scholes was better though? You can't criticise someone for not backing up their argument when you very rarely do it yourself.

I can criticise someone for not doing it when it's their job to do it. I'd get criticiseda at work if I was doing a bad job too.

I just preferred Scholes' style. Enjoyed watching him more. I do think he could control games more where Gerrard was always more of an engine room bombing around. Nothing wrong with that. I just saw Scholes as a rarer type of player but one that was capable of some spectacular moments too.

If you wanted more.. I guess I'd say He also won more than Gerrard is ever likely to.