Diarra took Scholes apart again..

Eh Marlo?

Will be interesting to see his analysis of this game. I'm going to predict that the name Anderson will be playing a large part

Scholes was the best midfielder on the pitch tonight. Excellent performance.

he'll be too busy bttting antonin'd threads about fletcher

Didn't think I'd ever say it but I was well impressed with Scholes defensive contribution tonight, his overall contribution was fantastic.

What exactly does Diarra store in that forehead of his? Its £#%&!ing huge!

We were excellent tonight.

That's as comfortable as you can expect to be a fratton park.

i think we'd all agree that there is simpy no substitute for running around and kicking things. You can have all the silky, intelligent, ginger legends in your team that you like but you can't put a price on big, dumb, cloggers from 'wheeler deeler arry'

Probably too busy chirpsing champs

if i was to do something like this id be called boring or immature.

scholes played infront of the back four today with another player.
the 'makelele' role (not not makelele plus 1, just him)

considering he had jos and him screening the back four i fail to see a man of the match performance from him.

he didnt lose possesion much, but then again he didnt exactly do much attacking and his sole shot on goal was from a set peice.

so basically our scholesy played as a defensive midfielder,sitting deep with jos and the midfield look inbalanced but did enough to over power diarra and davis.


£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

if i was to do something like this id be called boring or immature.

scholes played infront of the back four today with another player.
the 'makelele' role (not not makelele plus 1, just him)

considering he had jos and him screening the back four i fail to see a man of the match performance from him.

he didnt lose possesion much, but then again he didnt exactly do much attacking and his sole shot on goal was from a set peice.

so basically our scholesy played as a defensive midfielder,sitting deep with jos and the midfield look inbalanced but did enough to over power diarra and davis.


£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

What a load of £#%&!ing shit.

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

if i was to do something like this id be called boring or immature.

Scholes played infront of the back four today with another player.
The 'makelele' role (not not makelele plus 1, just him)

considering he had jos and him screening the back four i fail to see a man of the match performance from him.

He didnt lose possesion much, but then again he didnt exactly do much attacking and his sole shot on goal was from a set peice.

So basically our scholesy played as a defensive midfielder,sitting deep with jos and the midfield look inbalanced but did enough to over power diarra and davis.


£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

[size="6"]%@#$&!s hth

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

if i was to do something like this id be called boring or immature.

scholes played infront of the back four today with another player.
the 'makelele' role (not not makelele plus 1, just him)

considering he had jos and him screening the back four i fail to see a man of the match performance from him.

he didnt lose possesion much, but then again he didnt exactly do much attacking and his sole shot on goal was from a set peice.

so basically our scholesy played as a defensive midfielder,sitting deep with jos and the midfield look inbalanced but did enough to over power diarra and davis.


£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

I am guessing it was to see if it is possible for you and Ether to not agree on something, I think you will both agree to that

Originally Posted by magic_cantona

What a load of £#%&!ing shit.

Originally Posted by gedthemull

[size="6"]%@#$&!s hth

easy for you to hollow headed idiots to say that.

which part of that is %@#$&!s?

did scholes start off any attacks or did we always play the long ball or have evra and brown bombing down the wing?
did scholes not have jos with him, both sitting deep?
did scholes have any impact on the game attackingwise?

please point what wasnt true?

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

if i was to do something like this id be called boring or immature.

scholes played infront of the back four today with another player.
the 'makelele' role (not not makelele plus 1, just him)

considering he had jos and him screening the back four i fail to see a man of the match performance from him.

he didnt lose possesion much, but then again he didnt exactly do much attacking and his sole shot on goal was from a set peice.

so basically our scholesy played as a defensive midfielder,sitting deep with jos and the midfield look inbalanced but did enough to over power diarra and davis.


£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

Can i please come in with my first “This Marlo, mans knows shit” comment.

Hope i did ok.

I feel better for that.

Now go and suck on your big toe you gimp.

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

easy for you to hollow headed idiots to say that.

which part of that is %@#$&!s?

did scholes start off any attacks or did we always play the long ball or have evra and brown bombing down the wing?
did scholes not have jos with him, both sitting deep?
did scholes have any impact on the game attackingwise?

please point what wasnt true?

you are right Scholesy had no part in our attacking play tonight, he played shite

the MOM award was an absolute travestry. I now live and breathe in the

altenative dimension of Starlo Mansfields world, where collecting phone

numbers is the new trainspotting, because I now don't know what to do with

said chimps numbers if they ever spoke to me, unless my big willied mate

Ishmael was there, then I could have a tug whilst he chumps the chirpses.

HTH.:£#%&!er:

Originally Posted by gedthemull

you are right Scholesy had no part in our attacking play tonight, he played shite

did i say he played shit or did i say he got a 6/10???
please answer this question?
are you just being a baby and saying i said he was shit because think he was the best player on the pitch by any stretch of my imagination

the MOM award was an absolute travestry. I now live and breathe in the

altenative dimension of Starlo Mansfields world, where collecting phone

numbers is the new trainspotting because I now don't know what to do with

said chimps numbers if they ever spoke to me, unless my big willied mate

Ishmael was there, then I could have a tug whilst he chumps the chirpses.

HTH.:£#%&!er:

,

why are you saying that?
how old are you again? 13?
why are going on about what i do over the weekend and whats its relation to scholes?
do i have to agree with you on everything?

seriously you should grow up?

go on say something else? another low blow about me chirpsing birds in london? that will show me.

and then tomorrow tell me i make up everything and dont exist.

sad little man.

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

did i say he played shit or did i say he got a 6/10???
please answer this question?
are you just being a baby and saying i said he was shit because think he was the best player on the pitch by any stretch of my imagination

,

why are you saying that?
how old are you again? 13?
why are going on about what i do over the weekend and whats its relation to scholes?
do i have to agree with you on everything?

seriously you should grow up?

go on say something else? another low blow about me chirpsing birds in london? that will show me.

and then tomorrow tell me i make up everything and dont exist.

sad little man.

I need to grow uprofl

Sorry can't answer the question as it doesn't make sense

I wish I was 13 again, and it's a well known fact that I act/am an eejit,

never pretended otherwise. Find it very amusing that you act/pretend to be

a player, and then admit your mate/pal could pull/take your churpse away

from you, the long and short of all this is you are not fit to slag off Mr. P

Scholes or in any of your alter egos, big enough or good enough to kiss my

big fat old arse. motwyw. Love The Mull. x

Originally Posted by marlo stansfield

£#%&!ing hell, what was the point of this thread?

Indeed!

I think your recent assessment of Scholes' performance have been harsh. He's been playing a deeper role for a few season now and has been fantastic in the main. Today was no different. For 70 minutes, he was imperious in possession. He'd keep the ball moving, holding on to it or passing straight away, depending on who was free. I find that much preferable to JOS habit of just smashing it up the pitch. But he did tire towards the end of the game, when he did get caught and give the ball away a few time. But even so, we recovered well. Had we a full compliment of midfielders, he'd probably have come off after 75 mins anyway so that wouldn't have been an issue

I criticised Scholes about a year/18 months ago but at the moment he's imperious.