Paul Scholes & Steven Gerrard? Thierry Henry decides who is better! | MNF
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 сер 2015
- Thierry Henry was asked which player he wished he could have played with during his career. It came down to a choice between Steven Gerrard and Paul Scholes. With Gary Neville and Jamie Carragher sat either side of him, which player would Henry go for? Would you prefer in your team in their prime, Gerrard or Scholes? Comment below.
Subscribe: goo.gl/6nhQVY
Subscribe to the Sky Sports UA-cam channel: goo.gl/FkngB7
Twitter: / skysports
Facebook: / skysports
Website: www.skysports.com - Спорт
Scholes could find my dad With a pass and I haven’t seen him for 17 years
TheWalkingNomad 😂😂
Brother! !!
🤣
😂😂😂
Your dad lives next door
Imagine a team with Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard.... oh wait nevermind
Sound like England's 2004 team lol
Portugal fked them up tho. They also had a super team tho. Figo; Ronaldo; Rui costa; Deco; etc.
+Alexandre Silva
lol no they didn't they barely scraped over the line AT HOME on your beach pitch in a lottery shootout after losing the game for 80minutes and needing a legitimate winning goal for England disallowed by coward UrsMeier...not to mention Portugal had EVERY PLAYER AVAILABLE for that game. England didn't have Ferdinand, Butt, King etc...also Rooney came off injured early in the game (which also hindered England for the penalty shootout).....I would've preferred NickyButt to Gerrard in that Euro's but he was injured, 2 years earlier Gerrard was injured for WC2002 and Butt took his place and did well, nothing too special but did his job which is at least more than Gerrard did in 2004 he was awful.....as he was for most of his England career.
dcvbhtrdf Didnt remember all that. It was 13 years ago after all.
Alexandre Silva England had a better team in both 2004 and 2006 even doe Portugal knocked them out on both occasions. Coming from a swede.
Man United fans: Scholes was best
Liverpool fans: Gerrard was best
Chelsea fans: Lampard was best
Rest of the world: Scholes was best
+OEMUFC Lampard and Gerrard was best
Daniel Fahim Islam Gr8 banter m8
+OEMUFC rest of the world xavi is the best.
imharbinger Out of those three numpty
ariean rachmat I agree
Gerrard wins games Scholes wins leagues
EDIT: When I said this 4 years ago I meant Gerrard can take a game by the scruff of the neck and single handedly win you the game... However Scholes controlled the tempo of all you United games and it isn't a coincidence we won game late coz United wore the opposition and Scholes was key to that so
Again:
Gerrard wins games Scholes wins leagues
think we all need to look at the team gerrard was in and the team scholes was in, Gerrard was more dynamic and had a massive impact on big gig games (finals)..... would anyone like to tell me what big games scholes had a massive influence on where he made a difference ............ just to clarify i think scholes is a great player.
what a div you really are, so because he slipped over this means he does not deliver in big games, do i really have to go through the big games???? REALLY .
if you want to judge gerrard on a slip then thats up to you but i will be more logical and judge him on what he achieved, yeahLiverpool lost the league because he slipped???? lol nothing to do with the palace game no? nothing to do with te fact we lost to southampton at home or drawing at relegated Newcastle ect ect. danny you are a div mate
SCHOLES
LEAGUE - PLAYED 499 GOALS 107
EUROPE - PLAYED 134 GOALS 26
APPEARANCES - PLAYED 718 GOALS 155
GERRARD
LEAGUE - PLAYED 504 GOALS 120
EUROPE - PLAYED 130 GOALS 41
APPEARANCES - PLAYED 710 GOALS 186
Wait it gets better........... Scholes Premier league assists 55 and Gerrard 92.
Luke Chadwick won the league but he was rubbish
Man utd won leagues Scholes was only 1 of the helpers
On individual ability Scholes couldn't stop gerrard because he couldn't tackle
But gerrard could do it all. Pass, Score, tackle, leader etc
Only reason Scholes gets mention in the same breath as Gerrard is because he played with
a lot of great players that help his luxurious career.
QTModz You lost all credibility when you said Scholes was rubbish.
Gary's face is brilliant when Henry is bigging up Scholes
He’s so chuffed 😂😂
I said that as well lol
"tell him that"😆
Zidane said Scholes was the best, Xavi said Scholes was best midfielder in the world, Viera said Scholes was best he played against, Ronaldo said Scholes was best he played with and there's many more. Scholes was the best
Couldn't have said that better myself.
"Is he the best in the world? He might not get the attention of Messi and Ronaldo
but yes, I think he just might be. He has great passing ability, can
tackle and scores goals, but most importantly he gives the players
around him confidence and belief. You can't learn that - players like
him are just born with that presence."
-Zinedine Zidane on Gerrard, 2009
u do realise they are fake quotes right?
+Ethan Grewal Scholes was apart of the class of 92 so it does make sense that they would incude quotes other footballers have said about him.
Zidane actually said Gerrard was the best player on the planet in 2009
Scholes played the long game. You can't measure his impact in terms of assists and goals alone. He knows how to dictate the pace of play and keep possession, undermining the confidence of the other team. And his long balls are immense. The guy could have been a perfectly capable striker if he wanted to, but Fergie put him in midfield, and he adapted and learned how to enable every other player on his team to do their job better.
Like fury pacing 12 rounds lol
@@dosser5626 He's not like a gerrard who would run a match on his own irrespective of what opposition or teammates he had
The same people that slag off scholes for not having as many assists or goals are the same people that idolise zidane. Stats don’t tell the full picture of a players impact
Scholes was a CF. That's how he started out, he loved scoring goals hence the chant "he scores goals galore, he score goals". He slowly transitioned to a Mid and well the rest is history.
@@sidhanthmuralidhar8963Gerrard never ran a match in his life. He was a moment's player.
It's his opinion and he is a legend of the game. I think he knows better than anyone of us in the comment section. Anyway along with him many legends have said that Paul Scholes was he best player they played against. I'm sure alll of you have heard of when Zidane was asked about how it felt to be the best player in the world and he responded by saying I don't know, you should go ask Paul Scholes.
+TNT-Kila Zidane on Steven Gerrard: "Is he the best in the world? He might not get the attention of [Lionel] Messi and Ronaldo but, yes, I think he just might be," Zidane said."
Footballs a matter of opinions, often contradictory, but no one dispute either one of their abilities. Gerrard for me is the best as he played in worse teams, won more games from his major impact and performed more man of the match performances in major finals. However, I'm not ignorant enough to say others may have a different opinion.
+TNT-Kila i think paul scholes is the best midfielder ever. but i also think the same can be said about gerrard and lampard and pirlo...the reason why...is because i dont think anyone can quantify unique presence...and all these players had different abilities and strengths and weaknesses but im sure when you've played with any one of them regardless of how good you are...it felt like a completely foreign experience. When Henry was in his prime...in arsenal and in barca...he played in teams that were centered around a midfield that was strong because they valued ball retention...and he played with some of the best midfielders in the world as far as that particular skill was concerned...so anyone he saw that could do that as good or even better than the midfielders he played with or against...was always going to be held in high regard. and the best at that particular skill was Paul Scholes.
+TNT-Kila Zidane is famous for talking shit. Before he coched Madrid, I think it was in October 2015: "PSG and Real Madrid are above Barcelona and Bayern" WHAT THE FUCK
+visca barca yeah man u know more than zidane..he is a fcking legend dude
-.-legends don't talk shit!!!
Sattwik Laskar
So you are stupid enough to say that PSG and Madrid are above Barca and Bayern ? hahaha stupid kid. Zidane is the only one who thinks that shit.
Look at these peasants arguing who the best midfielder is in England. The best English midfielder is Tom Cleverly.
Tidy.
Scudder Reviews He missed a 97th min penny all he needed to do was hit it on target😂😂😂😂
Jamal Hussain pens aren’t that easy, goal gets smaller soon as you place that ball down plus 30k people screaming and shouting and immense pressure
My mum is better than cleverley
Mild gargle
Paired with Brazilian legend Anderson
There's no point listening to Utd or Liverpool fans on which one was best. We all know which player each set of supporters will choose. You need to look at what the legends of the game say because they themselves are the yardstick of what makes a great player. Zidane, Xavi, Petit, Vieira, Henry, Guardiola, Lippi, Keegan, Shearer and more have all gone on record saying they felt Scholes was the best. Christ, even Messi said that whilst training and developing in the Barcelona youth academy, the Barcelona coaching staff used to use Scholes as the example of how to play & create in midfield. Look it up.
Liverpool fans don't want to believe it
You must be a UTD fan.
Buttner 1 Gerrard 0
Haze DCUO
Ooooh, one person's opinion...score!!
Haze DCUO
Yeah,keep going.
Journalist: "So Zidane, how does it feel to be the best midfielder in the world?"
Zidane: "You should ask Paul Scholes"
He was being Sarcastic
Wayne Adrienne Zidane is known to be a huge admirer of Paul Scholes, so i doubt it!
AWEZOME1337 then paul scholes would phone up ronaldinho
Steven Gerrard on his day definitely 1 of the best midfielders in world football but for me Paul scholes was the master , the way he dictates the play , he choses to up the pace of the game or to slow it down , the way he pings passes and not to mention he goals he scored from long range shots or darting runs into the box , of course Gerard did that but for me scholes did it on a more consistent basis
+kev dufc i agree i think going forward and perhaps defending gerrard is more complete. But if youre talking about a team player someone youd wanna play with itd have to scholes first .
+Daniel Lee you quite clearly have some difficulty using the english language. that or you think you know better than every world class player that ever played against paul scholes. apart from that your awesome
+kev dufc Reasons why Gerrard is obviously better than Scholes:
1) Gerrard has more goals and assists in less appearances than Scholes.
2) Gerrard is more versatile and complete than Scholes, Gerrard could play in CDM, CM, CAM, LM and CF.
3) Gerrard has way more individual awards playing in a much weaker team. Only player to have 6 player of the month awards in BPL, only footballer to score in UCL, Europa League, FA Cup, Carling Cup final.
4) Gerrard was captain of Liverpool (obviously) and England and first choice midfield player for England, pushing Scholes out of the side and making him retire in 2004.
5) like Scholes Gerrard has also been praised by experts in the game, especially Zidane and Mourinho who tried to sign him 3 times for Chelsea, Inter Milan and Real Madrid.
www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/9841766/jose-mourinho-will-miss-dear-enemy-steven-gerrard
End Off.
+Infinite One One of the reasons England flopped so much in the 00's is because Sven chose Lampard/Gerrard over Scholes, which was a complete joke. Most England fans would agree that Sven royally screwed up in this department...It should be a comparison between Lampard and Gerrard, not Gerrard and Scholes. Scholes was the most technically gifted midfielder of his generation. I'm not dissing Gerrard, but his midfield class really, really cannot be compared to Scholes. Sorry.
Ruairi Evans that has more to do with the fact frank and gerrard couldnt properly co habituate than it has to do with scholes quality.
We never realised how good Scholes was until he was not playing, because he went about his job in such a quiet unassuming way, he was not notice.
As someone who watched every united game I realised how good he was it was impossible not too you couldn't keep your eyes off the guy he dictated everything united did his passing was out of this world
In truth we had lots of quality players and he was just one of them.
Cantona, Beckham, Yorke and Cole, Keane: and he'll tell you how good Irwin was. Van Nistelrooy, Rooney, Ronaldo, Kanchelskis, Giggs, Sharpe, Ince...
Scholes is appreciated and rightly so, but fans go over the top.
He never won the Matt Busby award once for player of the season.
Most importantly, Scholes made every player around him better. He changed the pace of the game. We've seen these three players playing individual games in PL week in week out, Scholes seemed to have a better edge very consistently than the other two, either winning comfortably yet convincingly or rather won tactically. Every time he was on the ball, everyone could see that his creativity epitomized the whole team play, the idea of attacking that he bred into the players around him and he easily dictated the game his own way, pinged the ball SHARPLY to the flanks (you could compare his long-range passing ball was a fraction faster than the other two), always moving forward, his techniques are top notch, a box-to-box player. Leave alone winning individual trophies, he could score whenever he wants to. Even Messi said "he's our teacher at La Masia" where Guardiola must have praised him lots in the dressing room or even coaches before him. Footballing greats in the world said things about Scholes more than Stevie and Frankie although we all have known their excellent qualities, but Scholes is/was far the best. Even the late George Best couldn't hide his frustration when Scholesy suddenly retired from the national team as if he could see things could've done better should England put more advanced roles to the Ginger boy and he said, "England have lost their best player."
It's 2018, anyone?
Scholes is a very unique player. He never seems to lose control and never wants to be a standout player. He simply likes to play the game. Playing the game is itself a reward.
Sir Alex Ferguson is the greatest British manager of all time and Scholes was his secret ingredient for success.
NITHISH SOMAN very well put
NITHISH SOMAN it's also interesting to note that as soon as scholes stepped down, United went downhill. That shows the brilliance of scholes.
NITHISH SOMAN he lost control many times
Please explain why Ferguson dropped Scholes for big games?
Anthony Mcintyre Fergie was so good at the art of managing his players especially Scholes. He knew how special Scholes is. Big games tend to be physical so its a strategic to choose someone with physical capabilities. Fergie would introduce him late to take control of the game. He is an active contributor to many of Fergie's late victories. There is one more reason, Scholes is simply a wild one. Unpredictable at times and its risky to use him. His brilliance often outweigh the risks. He is such a special player likes of which the EPL has never seen before and will ever see again. Coming from a fan who started watching the game to see him and retired along with him. Eagerly waiting for the emergence of someone half his caliber.
Yeah Scholesy was just...phoenomenal.
I liked Stevie G the most
BUT WHEN XAVI, ZIDANE, HENRY, etc SAY ITS PAUL SCHOLES YOU HAVE TO ADMIT IT FULL-STOP.
Just because someone is a good player doesn't mean they have good judgement about a player. There have been many great players who have been awful managers, for example, Thierry Henry, Alan Shearer and Gary Neville. The best people to judge would be managers.
"is he the best player in the world? Yes, I think he just might be" Zidane, about gerrard. Not scholes.
@@TobyRoberts so steven G is the best in the world at that time while ronaldo and messi are playing........ and for scholessy....ZIZOU said he is the best CM in the world around last 15/20 years....
@@wlldallano6419 "for me he is England's greatest ever player"
Messi, about Gerrard.
Scholes could never.
@@TobyRoberts and what about xavi about scholessy
Have to agree with Henry here Scholes really was a amazing midfielder and one of the key reasons to united's success over the years !! Scoring goals isnt everything hence Scholes Pirlo Xavi these are in a unique tier of midfielders which simply are the best and cant be compared to others
+The madridsta Thank you. Gerrard is just not in that class.
+The madridsta Here's some reading for you mate: statsbomb.com/2014/01/what-does-a-great-defensive-midfielder-look-like/
Statistically, Gerrard and Pirlo are clones in the holding role. Please don't bring up Scholes; he couldn't defend or create goals in the holding role. He just passed the ball along.
Ich Mein Just passed the ball along ?? -_- that ends the conversation IMO !! i would have loved to have a player that was practically forced out of retirement by his club compared to player who was forced out of his club
Scholes wasn't forced out of retirement. He barely played. All his minutes combined were 8-9 games.
Gerrard in his last season was Liverpool's top scorer. Please don't even try to compare the influence of the two. United themselves tried to sign Gerrard several times. Scholes for the last handful of years was just a rotated squad player. In his penultimate year Gerrard was PFA player of the year candidate and got into the PFA team of the year again (a record 8 times).
Ich Mein United tried to sign Gerrard ? wtf XD !!!
00:29 Gary looks so pleased and proud of Paul Scholes and Henry's acknowledgement of him.
We who have played and watched feel Scholes was the better player but to hear it from a man who played against both regularly, seals the deal!!!
He's right, there was a time when we literally did have the best midfield in the world.
Hargreaves
D Becks Scholes Lampard Gerrard
Shame we just never had the manager to back it work though.
It's a shame that no matter how you organize the players you mentioned, somebody has to play out of position (left mid).
+Rafi Stone Yeah people always underestimate Hargreaves, that guy was a beast. And Carrick is good too.
+Rafi Stone And Joe Cole.
+Rafi Stone Dont forget Joe Cole. He was brilliant
+Rafi Stone Absolutely. What the team needed was a defensive midfielder like Hargreaves or Carrick playing alongside them. The management was the real problem, not the players.
Speak the truth. Thierry Henry was one of the best strikers in England.
Paul Scholes was a Joy to watch. Everytime i watched him playing for us, you could see him controlling the whole team as if he was manager on the pitch.
Scholes was class, but Gerrard was better. Gerrard had more goals, more assists, much better tackler, dribble, better shooting from distance. I can't really think of one thing Scholes was better at, apart from playing for a better team
@@RamesesBolton Don't be ignorant. Imagine Scholes playing for united at 38, When he retired man utd never won the league but once he came out of retirement then Man utd won again. That should tell you something !! The game is about winning titles, and that's what Scholes did. Most decorated English player of all time!!
@@RamesesBoltonscholes clear in passing
@jrhomer100
More bad backpasses
More England fails
More PL fails
More CL fails
Etc...
@@RamesesBolton wonder whose opinion matters more, you (some random bloke on youtube) or thierry henry who has won everything there is to win in football 🤔😂😂😂
Scholes could strangle a team until they died on their feet and that's where the famous Fergie time goals came from .
at the age of 34 scholes scored a screamer against barca then later wins the UCL , Gerrard at the age 34 gets sent off after 30 seconds at JUANfield then later guided his team to 6th place with 6-1 lost against Stoke. flew to USA.. anymore comparison?
😂😂😂
what a biased manc, that's just disrespectful
@GTS and won so much more then him
Yes he scored a goal in a game in which the Barcelona team were absolutely dominating in midfield. You should look at the stats for them games in another year they might have been beat 5-1.
The difference between having a world class team around you and a pile of shite around you
Henry knows, it's Scholes!
I don't think you either have to be a Liverpool fan or watch all of Liverpools games to understand how often it's basically been Gerrard against the world,I find it really sad that just because he stayed loyal to his club and didn't run towards the real Madrid and inters and Chelseas which were crazy for him he doesn't have quite the trophy cabinet scholes or Lampard had,he's been in the team of the year more times than any other player in history which shows his consistency and he's also the only player in history to have scored in every single final underlining just how special he was,scholes could never carry a team by himself the way Stevie did, nonetheless he was a great playmaker and deserves respect for that
Scholes always talks highly of Gerrard and has stated he couldn't have filled his position at Liverpool. But over the course of a season Scholes dominated nearly every midfield never losing the ball and always making the right pass. Different players really and both were special, hard to say one is better than the other.
arsenal fan
Gerrard all round just pips it
but Scholes was quality no doubt
Scholes was really awesome. He was already good in the first season he debuted. There was never a season where he was bad. In fact, manutd's current downfall can be partly attributed to Scholes's departure. He left in 2013, after which manutd stop winning league title in a while.
+Hyrugaful
Not just stopped winning the league, finished 7th, 4th and 5th since Scholes last played and he never finished outside the top3 in his whole career.
So it wasn't Fergie, it was Scholes all along. No wonder Fergie never had a go at him. Lol jk
Man U had no business winning that last prem they won. Van Persie carried that season and what a state Fergie left United in. My god, Moyes never stood a chance. Scholes was never even the best mid at United, let alone England where he was never chosen for his country or won a player of the year, or the world where he's never been nominated for a Ballon D'or. Overrated basic mid with little ability outside fluffing his passing accuracy.
@@Conaty lol nonsense
@Conaty
No business winning it??🤦♂️they won it at an absolute canter. They eased off towards the end and still won by 11 pts it was obvious they were going to win it from new year onwards and it was virtually their 7th PL title in a row or 7th time in a row where they were the best team but I bet the 2 out of 7 they didn't get credited for from 2006/07 to 2012/13 which were "won" by nothing margins you'll say were deserved "convincing" wins lol
The moment gary said "tell him that as well" i laughed so hard 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Henry schools is the best middle England ever had.
Lingard: hold my beer
"The only great English midfielder in my career was Paul Scholes. He had elegance in him. Others were pretenders." - Pirlo
But wait didn't Pirlo boss Scholes with AC Milan twice in CL, but Gerrard absolutely wrecked AC Milan in the final the same year?
How many times was Scholes Man UTD or premier league team of the year or feature in FIFA world 11?
@@philipduffy6581 Scholes bossed Pirlo in the first leg in 2007 and bossed him in both legs in 2011, and Gerrard got bossed in 2007 by Pirlo. Typical Gobshite.
YT Goh isn’t that the guy who lost the UCL while being 3-0 up and missed his pen
It's a fake quote like most are....
This has gotten out of hand. Comparing pirlo with Scholes.... C'mon.
How can you tell Gerrard is better when he was already shit in his 33 age when Scholes was still fantastic at 39 !!! He was fantastic for more than two decades !
+InternalPrimate06 With a team around him. Scholes could never have acheived what Gerrard acheived in a Liverpool side.
+InternalPrimate06 Er what? Gerrard was nominated for the PFA player of the season and got into the PFA Team of the season when he was 35 (the 13-14 season). Scholes was a rotated squad player for most of his last years.
Ich Mein
Gerrard now is 35 and two years they had Suarez, so that was their good season so he was nominated, but yeah...he slipped ;D and that's why they lost that title.
lol you dont lose a title in one game. Also Suarez was a factor in a series of many that culminated in that season's success. The form of Gerrard was another. you clearly know nothing about football and you just say stupid shit to try to insult people like a child. fucking idiot lol
Tha Pecking Order
I know that they didn't loose it in one game and yeah I was trolling on Gerrard, but still Scholes was greater player.
How the fuck can you even argue that Gerrard was even on the same level as Scholes let alone better? The fuck? That's like saying Hazard is almost as good or even better than Ronaldo. lol.
+Rafa 7GT Mourinho said that ;)
+Rafa 7GT string up a few fckd up words n make it appear as if u made ur point u miserable fck!!:P
:dont take anytin personal ciao!
+Rafa 7GT Reasons why Gerrard is obviously better than Scholes:
1) Gerrard has more goals and assists in less appearances than Scholes.
2) Gerrard is more versatile and complete than Scholes, Gerrard could play in CDM, CM, CAM, LM and CF.
3) Gerrard has way more individual awards playing in a much weaker team. Only player to have 6 player of the month awards in BPL, only footballer to score in UCL, Europa League, FA Cup, Carling Cup final.
4) Gerrard was captain of Liverpool (obviously) and England and first choice midfield player for England, pushing Scholes out of the side and making him retire in 2004.
5) like Scholes Gerrard has also been praised by experts in the game, especially Zidane and Mourinho who tried to sign him 3 times for Chelsea, Inter Milan and Real Madrid.
www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/9841766/jose-mourinho-will-miss-dear-enemy-steven-gerrard
End Off.
+Infinite One you're a Liverpool fan. End of.
+Syafiq Pha great counter point there mate you certainly made him look stupid, you idiot he gave stats back up your bullshit with stats too, people seem to forget how bad scholes was at times remember his tackling
Both great players but Scholes was a genius. When he first retired he was majorly missed and his reintroduction back into the team changed United's season. Scholes edges it just
Even The all time great midfielders Zidan, Xavi & Pirlo said Scholes one of the best MD of his generation
Scholes, Gerrard,Lampard and Beckham! How did we not win a World Cup or a Euros with that midfield!
Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho
@@DrLoomis666 Euros 2004 though Greece won 😭😱
Scholes > Lampard > Gerrard
I rate Gerrard highly,he was a brilliant player,hard working box to box player who could perform consistently at the highest level and deliver on the big occasion.My only criticism was that when he came up against the top,top midfielders he never seemed to get the better of them. When you speak about Scholes,in my opinion you're speaking about the best midfielder of his generation,he is the only English player who could genuinely control a game of football and that is the benchmark for a truly great midfielder. He was the most complete player of his generation and the best player of his generation. I think a real indication of how good a player you are is to look at what the unbiased opinion of your fellow players say about you,especially those who played in the same position as you, and it has been well documented that some of the greatest midfielders of the modern era single Scholes out for special attention,not just saying that he was one of the best,but that he was the best!
Paul Coyle So agree on this. Scholes is among the best. He is the one that performs so well against the greats. Even Zidane said Scholes is his hardest opponent. And Zidane is a born legend of France and a fantastic midfield maestro. Scholes can still play late into his thirties and still produce superb passing, off the ball positioning, through passes, awareness, vision...etc. Further more, Scholes have a knee condition. And still performs at the highest level. He dictates the game and he, along with Pirlo, Zidane, Xavi are one of the best midfielders in their generation.
Gerard is not even close. If you want to be the great, you win. Being a running machine for Liverpool and scoring long shots and penalties but can't even win the league, not even once. It just tells the difference between Scholes and Gerrard. Gerrard wins games but Scholes wins leagues. Like Mourinho said that anyone can win a big game. But they have to keep winning and winning, which is what Scholes did. Gerrard? Hell no.
Am I the only one that remembers when he totally dominated Xavi and Ronaldinho and kept them out of the game when Liverpool beat Barcelona 2-1?
THANK YOU!!
@@mackovo6 I agree with you but don't think if Gerrard had a better team he would have won the league atleast once?
@@romanbatista3286 This is when the old-fashioned better team, worse team excuse will come in. The same that I can say Messi is only best in the world because he had a great team. It's just the lame excuse for Gerrard or for any other player. Liverpool did have good players too like Suarez, Torres, Alonso, Owen in his prime etc. If he can't make the team better to the point of winning leagues, then forget about it. United was winning it all because Scholes just made the team better. Gerrard didn't seem to deliver on those easy games that they should have won. There is a reason why he won ZERO Epl titles because it's not about doing flying tackles, it's about how you deliver consistently and not screw it up, like how he did several times. Scholes won title even after Ronaldo left btw, and won with different generations which is why he is way better. Gerrard was offered the chance to do it, but failed. Maybe if he have 2 extra players in his team then he may win 1 title...
The king says Scholes. Then so be it!
Eric Cantona said that Scholes was the best?
People peddling the myth that Gerrard played in shit teams, well how come they got to Uefa cup finals, fa cup finals, league cup finals and champions league finals? They spent more than United for a long period of time.
Also Fowler, Berger, Litmanen, Reina, Zendan, Kewell, Keane, Morientes, Redknapp,Hamann, Hypia, Carragher, Sturridge, Riise, Coutinho, Alonso, Mascherano, Garcia, Owen, Torres ,Suarez.
Liverpool fans used to always say these were the best players in the world, now suddenly they're all shit and Gerrard carried the team for his career?
those players you mentioned are nowhere near Manchester united players that played in the same time
a lot of those were before gerrard
yeah but he never had a great TEAM! There where always a bunch of weak fucking links! But i do think that Scholes is ahead of Gerrard!
omario8822 they would have lost all of that if Gerrard didn't play lol+the best of each team didnt all play at the same time lol Bad analogy there you fucking moron
The argument was that Liverpool played shit teams and "carried" them when its quite clear thats nonsense, Liverpool also spent more than united between 2000-2010.
Also your argument that they would've lost if Gerrard didn't play is hiarious, they were 3-0 in CL final because kaka and seedorf were running rings round him. It was Hamann that more or less took control and got them back in. Same with Fa cup final against west ham, fantastic goals but shocking performance against reo-coker and ethrington put them in that position in the first place.
Its why Benitez took him off in derbies, never played with his head Scholes and Lampard comfortably better imo even though Lampard had less natural ability.
Scholesy was the best midfielder the country has ever seen and ever will see
Clueless
Dele alli says hi
Well he’s certainly not lying
Myself and a guy at work regularly have this argument. Its so nice to have henry's backing. I cant wait to go to work tomorrow
People who make the comment about Scholes being in the better team and Scholes wouldn't have done for Liverpool what Gerrard has... You're absolutely overlooking the key difference, which is... Scholes did for UNITED what Gerrard did for Liverpool!! Scholes was THE standout player who made it all tick for those dominant Manchester United teams! So you say Scholes looked better because he had world class players around him? All of them world class United players you're referring to... Scholes was better than them all!
Scholes wasn't a stand out player
scholes made those players look better that too that's the real difference. Gerrard was an all action player but only played well himself.... lack tactical discipline, would run all over the field trying to do everything... he didn't make the team play better the way that maestro's like scholes and xavi did. they wouldn't have as many stand out blood and thunder moments like Gerrard but they would make every player around them better they would make the team tick for a season not just have a good individual performance in a cup game.
@@vkdeen7570 that's very correct sir
A liverpool team of Alanso and mascherano far better than keane butt or fletcher. Wat are u on about
Paboy Korta I cant tell if you’re joking! But if not then you must be insane if you think Alonso and Mascherano are anywhere near as good as Keane! Also convenient to leave out the other players Scholes played with like Ronaldo, Rooney, Cantona, Giggs, Van Nistelrooy, Van Persie, Stam, Ferdinand, Vidic, Irwin, Evra, Schmeichel, Van Der Sar.. those United teams were far superior to those Liverpool teams, hence why United dominated for 20 years+
Ffs stop saying Gerrard had bad players. You're telling me that players like Suarez, Torres, xabi Alonso, Sturridge coutinho, kuyt, carragher, hyypia, cisse, kewell, baros, morientes, riise, kewell, Luis Garcia, Mascherano, Pepe reins, etc weren't good enough to win a single premier league title with Gerrard? He won the champions league so no excuse tbh scholes was just the better player. Accept it
They weren't as good as what Scholes had. Lets be honest. I'm not saying player a was better than player b, i'm just making the point.
+Alex George Meaning Liverpool is shit.
You name all these players as if liverpool had them all in the squad at the same time lol
Alex George what Anderson and fucking cleverly.
harry burge I know some were different seasons but the season he had both Suarez & sturridge should've been his season.. or the one he has Torres. Scholes won the league with Anderson, cleverly, antonio Valencia, Nani, & Carrick. All average so really no excuse lol
Scholes is way way ahead of all of them lads he was a some player !
Look at Gary with love in his eyes 😂
Paul Scholes is one of the greatest midfielders of all time, such a unique talent.
The one player I'd have wanted at United is Henry.
It would have been unfair to have him at United.
100% agree my favourite prem player outside of a united team and imagine him with the likes of van nistelrooy to begin with then with Rooney behind him and Ronaldo on the right would be the most deadly front three the planet has ever seen
I don't know how anyone can say Gerrard was better than Scholes.
Gerrard was better than scholes. See. It was easy.
Lol Kagawa 1 Gerrard 0. Buttner 1 Gerrard 0
Traore 1 Cantona 0
+yoonkean: Wes Brown 2 Gerrard 1
+yoonkean: Cantona 5 Gerrard 0
It's pretty obvious why we always got beat Carra! Any team in the world would have built the team primarily around Scholes and then Gerrard. England blindly stuck to 4-4-2. Then they thought, "How do we get our best midfielders - Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard and Beckham - in to a midfield four of a 4-4-2?". Answer - just stuff them all in. Gerrard and Lampard played together in central midfield two with no defensive midfielder, so neither would have known each others roles fully. Neither had the freedom to fully express themselves in attack as one would need to cover the back four. For their teams, Gerrard played with Hamann and then Mascherano, Lampard played with Makelele and Scholes played with Keane and then Carrick. It's baffling why England didn't do the same, playing either Hargreaves or Carrick in defensive midfield. And then there was Scholes, who was played in left midfield. The greatest English footballer, some say the greatest central midfielder, for the past 20 years. Is it any wonder why these three never fulfilled their expectations for England (Scholes more than the others)? It's interesting to note that the players who played well for England - any of the defenders, Beckham, and arguably the strikers - played in their favoured position. If I was England's manager at the 2006 World Cup I would have used the 4-4-1-1 formation (not 4-3-3 since it was not used in English football much, so the players wouldn't know it well) and lined them up like this:
Seaman
Neville Terry Ferdinand A. Cole
Beckham Hargreaves / Scholes Left midfield
Carrick (perhaps Joe Cole?)
Gerrard
Rooney / Owen
Every player is in their position. Scholes pulls the strings alongside a defensive midfielder which screens the back four. Gerrard is given a free, marauding role behind the striker as this is where I think he was always best. Left midfield is a position that I am not sure about, but with that midfield supplying a striker like Rooney or Owen that team would be incredible. Not to mention there is squad depth and competition for almost all places, with the likes of Lampard not featuring. Oh yes, this England team could have conquered many. Shame.
+Roshan Payapulli Thats a great team. God we have wasted a lot of talent over the years. As you say really not that hard to figure out but our managers made a big mess of it. Paul Scholes on the Left!! Ridiculous.
I agree Timothy. Of course there is the problem that both Rooney and Owen liked playing off a bigger striker like Heskey. Still, I think this would have worked. Joe Cole is the obvious choice in left midfield.
Roshan Payapulli Only weakness I see is a lack of speed and dribbling ability on the flanks. A problem we had throughout that generation. Drop Giggs into that team and it would be formidable.
+Timothy Frost I agree in a way, but Joe Cole was pretty pacy and skilful too. I do agree that if you drop Giggs in there that team would be unstoppable. It's a shame he chose Wales but that team with Joe Cole in instead would be formidable too.
+Roshan Payapulli Totally agree. In hindsight, as good as Lampard was back then, i would have played Scholes and Gerrard in the middle and brought Lamps off the bench with 20-25 to go. When we played scholes on the left the team had superstars everywhere but zero chemistry.....big chance gone.....thanks Sven.
The best striker the leagues ever seen telling you whos better. Scholes
Yeah but that’s because when he was playing our main rivals were utd they had a great team,Gerrard is younger an Liverpool were average so Arsenal didnt have thise kinda problems with them
Scholes 1000% easy choice
IS IT?????
Gerrard carrried a mediocre team for over a decade and won trophies sometimes on his own back, Gerrard had everything you could want in a midfielder unfortunately scholes played for the best team around unlike Gerrard.
I agree with you Gerard did carry his team quite a lot over the years , grabbing games and pulling the team forward . I think technically the most gifted team was the arsenal side , frightening line up and very physically strong.. However they never really managed to dictate against united because scholes always took that away from them. I think it will always be hard to compare these two as they did their best to shine in both situations. Scholes would never stand out as much at united as Gerard did at Liverpool because the whole team had belief at united and the Liverpool sides always looked to SG. A tough comparison to make.
Essentially two brilliant players and the premier league is worse off without them.
Let's put it this way - Scholes would have had about as much hope of carrying weak Liverpool sides to a CL Final as I would of writing a Symphony.....
terry spencer haha when did Liverpool win anything with a mediocre team .
Bro u high
look how mad carra is in the face tbh henry speaks the truth
You know what? I don't care who is considered the best. Some will say Gerrard, others Scholes. All I know as a Liverpool fan is watching Gerrard all those years' I witnessed something very special. The amount of times he made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. The amount of last gasp winners, amazing goals, special moments. Legend.
0:13 - Neville’s laugh as Jamie tries to grasp a thread of hope from Henry hahaha... why can’t people just accept that Paul Scholes was the best player of his generation in England, and certainly right up there as one of the greatest midfielders in the world... never saw Gerrard control a football match in my life, he was pure impact and very good at it, that’s for sure... but ask him to dictate the tempo of a game and I think he’s lost a little! Paul Scholes has always had the highest accolade you can ask for... the praise of his fellow pros... every player of that generation around Europe waxed lyrical about him... tapes were shown at La Masia to the likes of Xavi, Iniesta and Messi when talking about how to play one and two touch stuff...
Anyone that thinks Gerrard is better than Scholes should just stop watching football. It's not even debatable.
james davis Doesn't mean he was a better player. You only have to watch both of them play to know who was better. Scholes was far superior technically. He plays the game at his own pace and controls the tempo of matches by himself. You can dictate a game without getting a goal or an assist, Xavi does the same thing, is Gerrard better than him? Hell no.
Scholes has more longevity on top of that. He came out of retirement at 37 and was still a world class player. Gerrard just turned 35 and he has already fallen off a while ago.
+MrVIP1993 Gerrard kills Scholes. Henry needs to kill himself.
+MrVIP1993 nobody asked about longevity. Gerrard in his prime was better than Scholes in his prime
+MrVIP1993 It is debateable thats why so many pros disagree over who is better, pros including current footballers, former footballers, and managers. I think its impossible to compare them as players because they are so different. But if i had to choose one or the other it would be Gerrard. Simply because he can do everything Scholes can do, and he also can do it without a quality team around him; including scoring incredible goals that NO other footballer could score in a teams absolute moment of need. Paul Scholes doesnt have an FA cup final named after him.
no way You must be joking.
It's nice to hear this from someone I admire who played against them.
love this interview
Scholes was an artist, playing for a top team, dictating the play of an extremely successful side. Gerrard was a talented determined lad who spent his career dragging an average Liverpool squad to moderate success at best. It's not fair to compare imo. Scholes' situation made it perfect for him to be the best. And he was.
The problem with Gerrard was that when he got he ball he could dribble with it, he scored some amazing goals with it, he could takle very effectively, and he could also pass the ball very well. But he could never keep the ball properly when he did he was shaking.
If Scholes was so good then why did England manager after England manager disregard him over Lampard and Gerrard. Not just one, but over and over again. And why has he won hardly any individual accolades (player of the month, year. Team of the year, ballon d'or top 3, etc)? Why when he was playing did hardly anyone consider him one of the world's best?
Because Sven was daft. What did England win with that midfield? NOTHING. Meanwhile, Scholes kept a weak midfield alive to win honor after honor as Gerrard and Lampard couldn't play with each other and messed up tournament after tournament. Those individual accolades are popularity contests and its proven. Gerrard was class, no doubt, but Man Utd would have won less trophies if you replace him with Scholes and Liverpool would have won a league title (or more) with Scholes's consistency in that scouse midfield.
Tottenham fan here. I think people forget how good Gerrard was, a view also coloured by a perception that he was selfish ('Stevie me' reputation i.e. liked to be seen as a saviour of mediocre Liverpool teams) and gloating about his famous slip. In the process I'm not sure many remember how all-round and complete a player he was; he was a no.8 and a no.10, a deep playmaker or a dangerous striker. The range of his technique was also I think amongst the very top. I think this debate of 'Scholes or Gerrard' can be quite redundant, as who you'd have in the team depends on other dynamics and factors in that team. Gerrard combined the skills of forward players along with his midfield skillset, which is why I think he was a more complete player than Scholes/Lampard. Even though he generally played in a midfield two he was a seriously dangerous goal threat, he could go past players easily in a way Scholes/Lampard couldn't and combined really well with forwards in tight areas. He also was more effective in breaking down defences in tight areas. He was the kind of player who had the skill/panache whereby he could be a threat to any team on the world stage (he wouldn't be out of place in a Brazil team) and he often displayed that ability in substandard Liverpool teams.
Scholes was a different breed, he was a conductor and was probably one of the best three in the world in the last generation (along with Xavi and Pirlo) in controlling the pace and tempo of a game. But people forget that if United didn't dominate a game he could be a liability and his benefits were less - his strength was in helping others to make things happen, and he wasn't that solid defensively. Gerrard meanwhile (who was better than Scholes defensively, albeit still a liability) could be relied upon to do something out of nothing, even if Liverpool weren't dominating - he consistently made things happen himself. But for sure, if you *had* to play a midfield two in a team where you had enough firepower further forward, Scholes's ability to control the tempo as opposed to Gerrard's more aggressive style was the shrewder bet. Scholes was undoubtedly more disciplined in terms of positioning (ironically even though he was a worse tackler than Gerrard) and was less of a liability in a midfield two.
Nonetheless, while I rate Scholes slightly higher as a conductor, Gerrard was also amongst the best I've seen who knew how to control games from deep, even if he was more adrenaline-based/high tempo. This was by contrast to Lampard, who was much more limited when asked to play deep in a midfield two. Besides that feature, i.e. the slightly better ability to control a game's tempo, I don't think there was much in Scholes' skillset, i.e. vision, passing ability, etc. that was missing from Gerrard's. By contrast, Gerrard was able to do things that Scholes couldn't do/didn't do as much; he took on players, required less time on the ball, directly broke down defences more (whether by driving forward himself, good through passes, etc.).
Ultimately it comes down to the roles you categorise them in. In terms of attacking/driving central midfielders, Gerrard was probably the best in the world at his peak - could only think of likes of Yaya Toure who compared (Lampard would come next as he didn't play as well as part of a two-man midfield, along with Roy Keane, Vieira). In terms of deeper playmakers/conductors, Scholes was in the top three (along with Xavi and Pirlo; Xavi being first IMO because of his dynamism and greater ability to keep the ball under pressure), but Gerrard would still be in my top five (Lampard wouldn't). In terms of advanced playmakers (Zidane/Ronaldinho/Messi/Iniesta/Silva-type), Gerrard would be in my top ten (as would Lampard) - though his lower ranking here for me isn't because of being less technically gifted (of course Messi aside, he's not human), but because he didn't play as an advanced midfielder as much as his competition.
Ultimately who you would want in your team really depends on who else you had in it. No way would Scholes have been more effective in a mediocre Liverpool team than Gerrard - not because "others at Man Utd made Scholes look good", but because Scholes made others better and at Liverpool those others weren't at the same quality. Meanwhile Gerrard would pull up teams himself by the bootstraps. That's where I rate Gerrard higher; Scholes was a player at his most effective in good collective teams, while lesser teams who rely more on individual brilliance could use a player like Gerrard more.
In the end, more teams could use Gerrard's greater individual abilities, while his 'conductor' abilities (most useful in teams that dominate possession) were not that far behind Scholes.
I'm a Liverpool fan and idolized Gerrard. But Scholes is the best English player in my lifetime. He could control the tempo of football games in the same way only elite players like Xavi and Pirlo could and can, and that's one of the very few things Gerrard has never really been able to do in his career. Gerrard was the more dynamic player and certainly had some better attributes such as pace and tackling, but overall you have to say Scholes just because he was able to do what every other English player can't.
Most of schocles passes are from the deep and unbelievably perfectly calculated..... no mistakes or misplacements
Sensational "silent genius at work". Myself just fortunate to see him on TV.... but what a midfield master.👏👏👏👏
Scholes couldn't of carried Liverpool like Gerrard did. Scholes was surrounded by many world class players every season when Gerrard wasn't. Gerrard had everything, pace, power, pass short and long, tackling, crossing, assists, goals. You could play Gerrard at right back and he could do the job, as an all round player he was the best midfielder in the premiership ever. Selected most times for team of the season. Zidane wasn't wrong when he said Gerrard was the best midfielder at his peak.
Has to be Scholes, especially with everything he won!
Steven Gerrard played football for two average teams……Liverpool (and I’m a Liverpool fan) and England. Gerrard without fail was 99% of the time the best player on the pitch. Scholes was surrounded at United by a team that dominated English football. Gerrard had to use his genius to win games for Liverpool. Gerrard won Liverpool the European Cup in 2005. He got us there and he started the come back. Scholes was great, however, he never grabbed a game by the scruff of the neck and literally dragged it forward and won it like Gerrard. Gerrard did it time and time again.
So you are saying a piece of glass in bowl of dirt will look like a diamond?
the best player at liverpoool is xabi alonso not gerrard, you put Xabi and Scholes in cm liverpoool will win a lot trophy
You lot don't half exaggerate!! The motm award usually goes to a player on the winning side & Liverpool lost a lot of games with Gerrard.
Just because Gerrard was more important to his respecrive team doesn't mean he was better. And it's not even true, Scholes came up clutch time and time again (Barcelona, winner last minute against City, couple goals against Liverpool, off the top of my head).
United player was good bcuz of presence of Scholes... as Henry said, he make United tick. They're work as solid, organized team.
Look around and you will see that in 90% of cases, your favourite player's favourite player would be Paul Scholes..
All top midfielders for example Zidane, Xavi, Iniesta, Pirlo, Kroos they always said Scholes was the best they ever saw. Scholes was a phenomenon. Dominating the midfield of the biggest team in the biggest league for 2 decades ain't easy. It's very hard.
Rooney and Neville said recently Gerrard could do much more for Man U, but Scholes wouldn’t be able to do anywhere near as much for Liverpool.
Even Scholes said this himself
Paul scholes had a brilliant mind for football when he was playing, rightly admired by the other best players in the world, likes of Zidane etc
I love how smug Neville is and how carra looks like he's about to have a hissy fit
Jamie, " why do we keep getting beat then?" Answer probably due to having a crap defence. If only Henry replied with this response.
A backline of Cole-Terry-Rio-Gary is crap?
@@jagmaharesi2486 God knows what i was referring to here, i might have been thinking of liverpools defence and not englands.. but to answer your question that is a great defence .
There was always the problem of whether to play Lampard or Gerrard, the was playing Beckham on the right, Joe Cole on the left, either Lampard or Gerrad and of course Scholes. Gerrard had a tendency to pass to the other team
Henry isn't the only one, when asked in an interview "who was the best midfielder you ever played against ? Zinedine Zedan repled "Paul Scoles, without doubt" Acclaim from these two - it dont get better than that.
Scholes himself said "left-hand side of midfield [sic] was never the problem.
My form in the last 20 or 30 caps wasn't quite good enough and Steven and Frank were two top-class players who he went with centrally."
30 caps is half his England career.
Scholes is one of the best ever medfielder.
Scholes Is A Like An Artist... Could Find the impossible pass Every time.. There is no comparison here
Rooney and Neville said recently Gerrard could do much more for Man U, but Scholes wouldn’t be able to do anywhere near as much for Liverpool.
Scholes is the best midfielder to ever live.
I love Lampard and Gerrard but Scholes is just above them.
Liverpool fans are pissed lol
They're always pissed (in both senses)
+OEMUFC
You mean 3 senses (1) Because Henry said Scholes is better than Gerrard (2) because they're drunk (3) because they've been shit for ages and have never won the PremierLeague.
dcvbhtrdf bruh
I'm not going to be drawn into this Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard debate, but what I will say is that Gerrard & Scholes was a really quality partnership in the England midfield. They played to each other's game & had effective communication, understanding & positioning. Had Gerrard been fit for the 2002 World Cup to play alongside Scholes, I think England would have won it.
I got pissed off when Sven fiddled about & drafted in Lampard. Gerrard & Lampard's partnership was a recipe for disaster. So what if Lampard was playing well? Why ruin what is already a world class central midfield? Why did other managers continue to try Gerrard-Lampard after Sven's tenure? It pissed me off big time as they both looked bloody useless. No wonder England failed to deliver!
+Gunner Boy If he (Gerrard) was fit I would have preferred to see him in behind Owen because he would have been a shite side better than that donkey Heskey. Butt actually did a fantastic job alongside Scholes in that tournament,
I agree, better to play Gerrard and bring in Lampard as a sub if they needed scoring
I am a UTD fan so always biased but it has to be recognised that Stevie and Paul were completely different players who just happened to play in the same position as the other. One a crafty close space player the other more dynamic and driving. Obviously Scholsey was the technically more skilled footballer but Stevie was a beast. The mistake that England managers made was trying to put Stevie and Lamps in the same team, it should have been 2 of Scholes and Gerrard or Lamps in the middle but Scholesy often found himself on the right when he was an out and out centre mid or even number 10, he often looked lost out on the wing.
Xavi: Paul Scholes is a role model for me I really mean this he's the best central midfielder I've seen in the last 15-20 years. I've spoken to xabi alonso about him he's spectacular the last pass goals he's strong he doesn't loose the ball, vision players love him.
I love Gerrard best player we had season after season but Scholes was the best. Lampard third.
Scholes has 11 PremierLeague winners medals to Gerrard's NONE
Scholes has 2 ChampionsLeague winners medals to Gerrard's 1
Scholes has 3 FAcup winners medals to Gerrard's 2
But Gerrard did make more shit backpasses that led to the opposition scoring lol
+dcvbhtrdf dont tell me gerrard wouldnt have been in united's first team if he played for them
+Kit Somerset
Yeah like Veron was very breifly before being booted out because he wasn't as good as people thought. Gerrard couldn't handle playing for a big club.
and are you not going to comment on his very many backpass fuck-ups for club and country?
you mean his ONE backpass that everyone makes fun of him for now? (united fan)
+Kit Somerset
lol "ONE backpass"?? really?
(1) Euro2004 vs France for some reason he wanted to pass back despite having only just conceded an equaliser in the 90th minute in a game that England deserved to have won but he decided "we might as well concede another and lose so there's definitely no chance of us topping the group and we'll get a harder quarter-final match and then be eliminated from the competition, yeah lets give it to the PremierLeague top goalscorer in acres of space near our goal".
(2) Arsenal vs Liverpool 2005/06 PremierLeague he does the exact same mistake and both times he gave it to Henry for his team to be punished.
(3) Liverpool vs Chelsea 2009/10 PremierLeague gave another 1on1 chance&goal to another leading goalscorer (Drogba).
(4) Liverpool vs Chelsea 2013/14 PremierLeague (although technically wasn't a backpass it was still another fuck up from him which led to a slip in an area of the pitch he was always going to be punished for, then his team lost the league, players like Scholes held their nerve in moments like this hence why they've won the title so many times).
(5) vs Uruguay knocking England out of the worldcup passing back to his mate Suarez (again the PremierLeague's top goalscorer at the time) via a completely mistimed header setting up Suarez in the same manner as all the rest.
jesus mate I'm not a bloody wikipedia. I'm 14 ffs. I have watched every single man utd game for the last 5 years so go ahead and ask me anything you want about united. Also with your 4th point, you say that gerrards "slip" cost liverpool the league tittle, when in reality it was the game against crystal palace where liverpool were 3-0 up after 70 or so minutes and subsequently conceded 3 goals to allow man city to win the title with a win over I think west ham. (correct me if I'm wrong) I agree that players like scholes would have held their nerve in situations like that, but all I'm saying is that he would have made it into the united team alongside scholes.
Early 2000's Midfielders were great. I enjoyed it.
In SAF's first book, he says that in some tougher away games he used to play Nicky Butt instead of Scholes alongside Keane. Not even the nuttiest Manc would try and claim anyone would ever do that with Gerrard.
You don't compare Gerrard and Scholes. . . You compare Gerrard with the likes of Lampard, Viera and Keane. . . Where as you compare Scholes with Zidane, Xavi, Iniesta and Pirlo. Scholes is on a different level to Gerrard
Gerrard scored more goals, had more assists in less games. He has more accolades on an individual level and Scholes never ranked above 17th in the Ballon D'Or whereas Gerrard broke the top 10 7 times. Gerrard had better control of the ball and was superior defensively. The only thing Scholes was better than Gerrard at was passing with a career average of 91% accuracy, as opposed to Gerrards career average 88% accuracy.
There was barely a difference in their passing abilities and Gerrard rinses Scholes in all other aspects of individual play. Zidane and Maldini both said Gerrard was the best player in the world and Maldini called him his toughest opponent. Bare in mind Maldini played against every player to win a Ballon D'Or from the start of his career to the finish of his career.
You compare Zidane to Xavi and Iniesta. Pirlo was worse than all three of the Englishmen.
@Logia Theories Ok, everything you wrote just proved how little you know of the game
What part?
Factually speaking Gerrard scored more, had more accolades and always ranked higher than scholes in ballon d'or and world XI's (Scholes never got into one). If you ever watched Gerrard, you would know that he shits on Scholes in all aspects of the game except passing, where Scholes wins out by a small margin.
I am also correct in stating what Maldini and Zidane said about Gerrard. I haven't said anything incorrect, and the only debatable part of what I said is my final statement about Pirlo.
Karnel Davis Scholes started as a CF old skool 10 in a 4-4-2 he was just that good at dictating and understanding the game he dropped into cm .....kicking Nicky butt out of the team . Scholes was top scorer in the 95/96 double double season . was a striker initially he just moved back as he got better
Karnel Davis yeah butt broke through the season before in 94/95 and was widely tipped to replace ince
If Liverpool had Scholes they would have won the league at least twice, they had Gerard and they are still waiting for their first premier league title
lul
The manager wins the league not a single player
If Liverpool had sir Alex I am def sure Gerrard would have at least one title
😂yes
He scores goals galore! HE SCORES GOALS!
Honestly anyone who says Scholes is better than Gerrard hasn’t properly watched either of them play. Don’t bring up trophies, that’s a team effort. I’m talking individually, Gerrard was the better player
Any doubt? Him and Keane were the best midfield partnership for years. Scholes was simply magnificent
Why is this in my recommended when it’s was four years ago?
Get yourself a Mrs who looks at you the way Gary was looking at Henry when he was talking about Scholes 😂.
As a UTD fan all 3 were great players but all so different. I will always be biased with Scholes as my favourite and love the fact that footballers see him as the best, but fact is they could all do things the others couldn't. Scholes could play in 'small spaces' way better than the others in that Barca style and had such a beautiful first touch and could get the ball out of his feet quickly with that brain that knew what he wanted to do before he even received the ball, and we all know about his long and short passing. Stevie G was more dynamic and could produce them man of the match individual moments, was faster, stronger and more powerful, again great long passer but could never play in tight spaces 'inbetween' like Scholes Lamps had a crazy ability to sniff out goals and is the best at 'arriving late' like a striker of any English midfielder I have ever seen. The huge mistake is that England should have sacrificed Gerrard or Lamps (not because they were not great) because Scholes would have complimented them perfectly, I would have gone with Scholes in the anchor role behind Stevie who just wanted to bomb on and attack the opposition with no real desire to stay deep, Scholes was more disciplined with his positioning.
The amount of assists Gerrard gave to Henry even though they never played in the same team was phenomenal.
Lol...
😂😂😂
This whole "Scholes played on a better team" is a load of nonsense.
Xavi Hernandez played on a better team than Steven Gerrard. Does that mean that Gerrard is a better midfielder than Xavi because he played on an inferior team? Does that mean Gerrard's a better midfielder than Andres Iniesta?
Please.
Gerrard IS better than Xavi
Gerrard is better than Xavi lol
Xavi partenered Iniesta, that helped him a lot.
Put Xavi in that Liverpool team and see whether if he can perform half what Stevie G did.
Steven Gerrard was
1) a more versatile player (defensive, left/right side & attacking midfield, second striker)
2) won big games off his own back
3) captained team & country
4) Let it slip
Am I the only one that remembers that Gerrard had the same praise from the same players and coaches that Paul Scholes had? People say Gerrard was a level below Scholes but please remind me who dominated a midfield with Ronaldinho-Xavi and Deco during a 2-1 win away from home? Yeah, Scholes certainly didn't. Gerrard was better at every part of the game except passing, and even then his career pass accuracy percentage is only 3% lower than Scholes (it's still higher than Pirlo's)
diego maradonna said in 2005 steven gerrard is the best in the world right now
Pat Naidoo evidence pls
he said pastore was the best in the world at one point aswell
Pat Naidoo Maradona was a fucking cheat.
Haze DCUO Pele is always changing his mind every 2 mins on who's the greatest. First he said himself then messi then ronaldo footballers exaggerate things in the moment
Scholes without doubt