Genuine questions here, about a player has skyrocketed post-retirement to Xavi/Zidane/Seedorf levels
1) why did he never win Utd Player of the Year?
2) why did Fergie drop him for the 09 CL final? (Anderson and Giggs started)
3) why did he never make the World XI? (unlike Lampard/Gerrard multiple times)
4) why did he never come close to a Ballon D'or podium finish? (unlike Lampard/Gerrard)
^and this was a player famed for his reputation among peers. I suppose actions speak louder than words
5) why did he only make PL Team of the Season twice in 20 years? (Alli has the same already)
6) why was he never the players, journalists, or fans Player of the Season?
Proper debate from Utd fans would be nice, rather than getting on the defensive and not giving valid responses
If Paul Scholes was so good...
posted on 8/7/17
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 15 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 1 hour, 32 minutes ago
comment by RonaldVilliers - PEDRO OUT! (U21490)
posted 4 minutes ago
Gerrard and Lampard are moot. Their careers as orthodox central midfield players are nothing to write home about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fack me.
Lampard only started scoring regularly once he moved forward and had that freedom.
Gerrard too. Freed up to cause carnage was where his big moments came
I am talking about central midfield, one of a pair.
I cannot believe this has to be explained to idiots after 13 pages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerrard and Scholes were moved simply because their respective club sides adopted what was see as a more European style where their managers wanted two holding players which would take away their attacking abilities. In Gerrard's case more so than Lampard's he was just as good in the defensive role, as he'd proven when he played in a 4-4-2 until he was about 25/26 but at the time Liverpool lacked wide players and overall goalscorers from anywhere on the pitch apart from the striker and thus he was moved firstly to the right where if memory serves he scored his most in a season and then behind the striker.
This doesn't mean he wasn't capable of playing in a 4-4-2 firstly since he already proved he was and secondly because it was best for the team that we had more goals from him in the new system that had been adopted. He was then moved back to the deepest midfielder and 34 and was voted into the team of the season.
Strange that Gerrard didn't get the same re-write of history that Scholes got, even thought it was Gerrard when moved back who was recognised by his peers by being voted into team of the season and nominated for player of the season.
Scholes' change of position was in reverse to Lampard's and Gerrard's whereby he scored goals in the attacking position and then was moved back and worked in a double pivot with Keane was as we all know was a very successful partnership but for me Keane was the main part of that, one of my favourite players of the PL era, despite being a United player. He was everywhere, back in his box defender, next minute bombing into the opposition box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool conceded a horrendous amount of goals with Gerrard as a deep player that season. He then embarrassed himself at the World Cup playing there, and had no control of the games at all.
He scored a few goals (5 from open play, 4 penalties) and as per usual goals are what catches the eye. He essentially got in the team of the season because of Sterling, Sturridge and Suarez, as his team contribution was not great. Relying on outscoring teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes because we were all out attack, having a worse squad then at least four teams. When that's the case you have to play to your strengths. It nearly worked too.
Gerrard was outstanding controlling our play, not so good at the defensive side as his legs had gone at 34 and players could easily out run him but certainly worthy of team of the season and getting nominated for player of the year.
The whole England team embarrassed themselves at the World Cup. Gerrard was 34 and frankly it was more an indication of the quality of players at its disposal that an aging and tired Gerrard got in. He wasn't getting younger and not the player he was when he was voted England's best player or voted into team of the tournament like his previous tournaments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonhe got in the team of the year despite only doing half his job well, and the other half terribly?
Meanwhile Scholes came out of retirement to play there and United also narrowly missed out, with United having a better GD and more points than Liverpool did, conceding a third less and doing his his entire job well and it went under the radar.
And this somehow is a point made to disprove how underrated Gerrard was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His job was as a deep laying playmaker which he did excellently, recognised by his peers. It's not like Scholes was good defensively, in fact quite the opposite, even in his prime, so much so that it was often a joke abiut how he couldn't tackle.
You're making the mistake of comparing a teams stats with another teams to prove a point about two individual players. You're bordering on the United fans stupidity in this thread here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using two teams stats to show how one player got recognised, despite not doing his entire job well, because the team scored a lot of goals.
Gerrard was the shield that season. You conceded 51 goals, which means he 100% was not doing his job well, which as the deepest midfield player not just pinging balls about.
He made a huge mistake to lose the title.
He then performed terribly at the WC and made a defensive mistake v Uruguay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerrard wasn't the shield. We didn't have one hence consisting so many goals. However with this tactic we scored so many and nearly outscored our way to the title without having anywhere near the best squad of players.
Yes he made a mistake, however we would never have been in the position of that mistake costing us anything if he hadn't played so excellently that season.
You're again confusing a teams stats with an individual players. You're a bit dim to be honest as I've said this a few times now and it's still not sinking in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was your facking shield. That he was no good at doing the job cannot be ignored.
posted on 8/7/17
comment by The Post Nearly Man. Still partial to an Owsle... (U1270)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
Carrick's another one appreciated more by those that understand football properly rather than your tribal neanderthal.
Another one who seems to get more respect abroad, with La Repubblica declaring him 'magnificent' and another Italian paper noting that 'Carrick Plays Like an Italian' after a champs league match.
No doubt TOOR will start banging on about Liverpool players now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR will no doubt bang on about Alonso.
Forgetting how underrated he too was until he left and was appreciated
posted on 8/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR will no doubt bang on about Alonso.
Forgetting how underrated he too was until he left and was appreciated
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbf alonso was so underrated by his own manager that he tried to sell him to fund a move for gareth barry
posted on 8/7/17
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 15 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 1 hour, 32 minutes ago
comment by RonaldVilliers - PEDRO OUT! (U21490)
posted 4 minutes ago
Gerrard and Lampard are moot. Their careers as orthodox central midfield players are nothing to write home about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fack me.
Lampard only started scoring regularly once he moved forward and had that freedom.
Gerrard too. Freed up to cause carnage was where his big moments came
I am talking about central midfield, one of a pair.
I cannot believe this has to be explained to idiots after 13 pages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerrard and Scholes were moved simply because their respective club sides adopted what was see as a more European style where their managers wanted two holding players which would take away their attacking abilities. In Gerrard's case more so than Lampard's he was just as good in the defensive role, as he'd proven when he played in a 4-4-2 until he was about 25/26 but at the time Liverpool lacked wide players and overall goalscorers from anywhere on the pitch apart from the striker and thus he was moved firstly to the right where if memory serves he scored his most in a season and then behind the striker.
This doesn't mean he wasn't capable of playing in a 4-4-2 firstly since he already proved he was and secondly because it was best for the team that we had more goals from him in the new system that had been adopted. He was then moved back to the deepest midfielder and 34 and was voted into the team of the season.
Strange that Gerrard didn't get the same re-write of history that Scholes got, even thought it was Gerrard when moved back who was recognised by his peers by being voted into team of the season and nominated for player of the season.
Scholes' change of position was in reverse to Lampard's and Gerrard's whereby he scored goals in the attacking position and then was moved back and worked in a double pivot with Keane was as we all know was a very successful partnership but for me Keane was the main part of that, one of my favourite players of the PL era, despite being a United player. He was everywhere, back in his box defender, next minute bombing into the opposition box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool conceded a horrendous amount of goals with Gerrard as a deep player that season. He then embarrassed himself at the World Cup playing there, and had no control of the games at all.
He scored a few goals (5 from open play, 4 penalties) and as per usual goals are what catches the eye. He essentially got in the team of the season because of Sterling, Sturridge and Suarez, as his team contribution was not great. Relying on outscoring teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes because we were all out attack, having a worse squad then at least four teams. When that's the case you have to play to your strengths. It nearly worked too.
Gerrard was outstanding controlling our play, not so good at the defensive side as his legs had gone at 34 and players could easily out run him but certainly worthy of team of the season and getting nominated for player of the year.
The whole England team embarrassed themselves at the World Cup. Gerrard was 34 and frankly it was more an indication of the quality of players at its disposal that an aging and tired Gerrard got in. He wasn't getting younger and not the player he was when he was voted England's best player or voted into team of the tournament like his previous tournaments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonhe got in the team of the year despite only doing half his job well, and the other half terribly?
Meanwhile Scholes came out of retirement to play there and United also narrowly missed out, with United having a better GD and more points than Liverpool did, conceding a third less and doing his his entire job well and it went under the radar.
And this somehow is a point made to disprove how underrated Gerrard was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His job was as a deep laying playmaker which he did excellently, recognised by his peers. It's not like Scholes was good defensively, in fact quite the opposite, even in his prime, so much so that it was often a joke abiut how he couldn't tackle.
You're making the mistake of comparing a teams stats with another teams to prove a point about two individual players. You're bordering on the United fans stupidity in this thread here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using two teams stats to show how one player got recognised, despite not doing his entire job well, because the team scored a lot of goals.
Gerrard was the shield that season. You conceded 51 goals, which means he 100% was not doing his job well, which as the deepest midfield player not just pinging balls about.
He made a huge mistake to lose the title.
He then performed terribly at the WC and made a defensive mistake v Uruguay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerrard wasn't the shield. We didn't have one hence consisting so many goals. However with this tactic we scored so many and nearly outscored our way to the title without having anywhere near the best squad of players.
Yes he made a mistake, however we would never have been in the position of that mistake costing us anything if he hadn't played so excellently that season.
You're again confusing a teams stats with an individual players. You're a bit dim to be honest as I've said this a few times now and it's still not sinking in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was your facking shield. That he was no good at doing the job cannot be ignored.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No he wasn't. We didn't play with a defensive midfielder. When Rodgers felt we needed one we played Lucas. We played Gerrard as a deep laying playmaker which he excelled in that season, hence getting nominated for player of the season and getting into team of the season.
posted on 8/7/17
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR will no doubt bang on about Alonso.
Forgetting how underrated he too was until he left and was appreciated
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbf alonso was so underrated by his own manager that he tried to sell him to fund a move for gareth barry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another re-write of history. Alonso wanted to leave that season as Benitez had annoyed him by wanting him to play a match rather than be there for the birth of his son. We therefore placed a £16m price tag on him and he was set to join Juventus but they were only prepared to pay £12m for him.
You're not very good at this. You can't just make things up to suit you.
posted on 8/7/17
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another re-write of history. Alonso wanted to leave that season as Benitez had annoyed him by wanting him to play a match rather than be there for the birth of his son. We therefore placed a £16m price tag on him and he was set to join Juventus but they were only prepared to pay £12m for him.
You're not very good at this. You can't just make things up to suit you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so you were prepared to sell him for £16m? and at one point seemed to have agreed to buy barry for £19m:
and then alonso, when leaving anfield, blamed it on benitez's pursuit of barry:
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/5851576/alonso-barry-talk-forced-me-out
but yeah, i'm just making stuff up.
posted on 8/7/17
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another re-write of history. Alonso wanted to leave that season as Benitez had annoyed him by wanting him to play a match rather than be there for the birth of his son. We therefore placed a £16m price tag on him and he was set to join Juventus but they were only prepared to pay £12m for him.
You're not very good at this. You can't just make things up to suit you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so you were prepared to sell him for £16m? and at one point seemed to have agreed to buy barry for £19m:
and then alonso, when leaving anfield, blamed it on benitez's pursuit of barry:
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/5851576/alonso-barry-talk-forced-me-out
but yeah, i'm just making stuff up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Benitez himself knew what he wanted to do. He had stated he wanted Barry to play alongside Alonso on the left, however Alonso wanted to leave. He'd just had an average season so Juventus didn't value him as high as we did and didn't meet his valuation, luckily for us as he stayed, Barry chose City and Alonso went on to have a great season before getting his wish to leave and we netted double the value we placed on him the previous season.
posted on 8/7/17
The simple fact is that it's not as simple as Benitez preferring Barry to Alonso but relations between the two breaking down after Alonso refused to play a CL semi final to be at the birth of his child. The relationship was strained and options were looked at, which is what happens throughout the football world. Fergie had it with Stam, with Beckham, RvN amongst others. It's not uncommon that two people fall out after a disagreement and in the end a player is sold. However the potential signing of Barry was nothing to do with that. Alonso possibly felt it was as evidenced by his comments in the article you posted as he was feeling unwanted after the breakdown in the relationship between himself and the manager. However the manager stated he wanted Barry to play on the left, which was our problem position under Benitez.
posted on 8/7/17
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
The simple fact is that it's not as simple as Benitez preferring Barry to Alonso but relations between the two breaking down
----------------------------------------------------------------------
fair enough TOOR.
would though prefer not to be accused of making stuff up just because i relied on general press chatter rather than the real intricacies of it....though always glad to see someone offer a proper explanation for my ignorance, rather than just a "you're wrong".
posted on 8/7/17
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
The simple fact is that it's not as simple as Benitez preferring Barry to Alonso but relations between the two breaking down
----------------------------------------------------------------------
fair enough TOOR.
would though prefer not to be accused of making stuff up just because i relied on general press chatter rather than the real intricacies of it....though always glad to see someone offer a proper explanation for my ignorance, rather than just a "you're wrong".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you know the press make stuff up with sensationalist views in order to sell. Scholes retiring due to playing on the left is a good example when he himself said it was nothing to do with that and he actually enjoyed playing on the left.