Scholes Never Won Player of the Year?

I missed it out because vieira did not have a solid partner then. Flamini was good but no petit.

I'm not battling for either side, but by your yard stick I can say that no midfield dominated chelseas midfield through the 00s. No midfield dominated arsenals through the 90s etc.

So can't really use it as a yardstick to measure people's greatness. keane and scholes were two of the best midfielders in the PL's history, but to say vieira won the "odd" game against them doesn't hold weight.

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 minutes ago
I missed it out because vieira did not have a solid partner then. Flamini was good but no petit.

I'm not battling for either side, but by your yard stick I can say that no midfield dominated chelseas midfield through the 00s. No midfield dominated arsenals through the 90s etc.

So can't really use it as a yardstick to measure people's greatness. keane and scholes were two of the best midfielders in the PL's history, but to say vieira won the "odd" game against them doesn't hold weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes you can because like i said nobody ever consistently dominated them both together. And you mentioned vieira not having a partner in 05 well keane didn't play for a lot in 98 as he had a serious knee injury and was just coming back

So you admit you were wrong saying vieira didn't only win the "odd" game against those two?

Either way saying they were not dominated doesn't really have any context or help anyone in determining how good scholes and keane were.

Chelsea consistently performed well against utd, beat them more times than utd beat us in the PL era. But I wouldn't say we had a better midfield than scholes or keane.

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 3 minutes ago
So you admit you were wrong saying vieira didn't only win the "odd" game against those two?

Either way saying they were not dominated doesn't really have any context or help anyone in determining how good scholes and keane were.

Chelsea consistently performed well against utd, beat them more times than utd beat us in the PL era. But I wouldn't say we had a better midfield than scholes or keane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did win the odd game and I was talking about games across the whole of Europe and the premier league. Chelsea during that period when you really weren't great were still our bogey side. Every club has them but Chelsea also during that period I believe we're regularly dominated by Arsenal and in Europe.
I felt every single game we went into regardless of who we played we could win especially at OT I expected a win no matter who we played

how can it be the "odd game" when he won more games, or atleast half of the games?...

The chelsea points are not valid as I am not saying they were dominant.

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 6 minutes ago
how can it be the "odd game" when he won more games, or atleast half of the games?...

The chelsea points are not valid as I am not saying they were dominant.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't think he did win more but my point still stands as no team ever consistently dominated them

And no team consistently dominated barcelona, ac milan, chelsea, arsenal, so doesn't really offer a insight into how good scholes and keane were.

I Simply said no other team dominated them on a consistent basis. You seem to have jumped on it and really have an issue with it. I was using it an example along with other examples to prove they were top top players. Like I said and I honestly believe it we were one of the best teams in Europe between 97-01. We should have won 1 or 2 more CLs during that period. We threw some of them games away

I don't really have an issue with it. Just don't really get how what your saying in regards to scholes and keane has answered what the OP is saying. you then said you said you should have won 1 or 2 more Cls from 97-01 and were one of the best teams in europe.

You then cite one game against juve to back up your points, but then ignore in that same period that arsenals team from 97-01 had the following against utd:

8 wins
4 losses
3 draws

Much bigger sample size.

Just feel what you are saying doesn't help OP get a gauge on how good scholes was.

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 10 minutes ago
I don't really have an issue with it. Just don't really get how what your saying in regards to scholes and keane has answered what the OP is saying. you then said you said you should have won 1 or 2 more Cls from 97-01 and were one of the best teams in europe.

You then cite one game against juve to back up your points, but then ignore in that same period that arsenals team from 97-01 had the following against utd:

8 wins
4 losses
3 draws

Much bigger sample size.

Just feel what you are saying doesn't help OP get a gauge on how good scholes was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What
I was pointing out a magnificent display from Keane in that game. I also said we were one of if not the best in Europe around that time which we were. We handsomely best Arsenal in regards to trophies during that period to and consistently went further in Europe at the same time