And if Hargreaves doesn't join United ?

Originally Posted by The Watcher

Every system has weaknesses that can be exploited. Having Scholes in the middle means we are more likely to expose the flaws of the opposition, which in turn ensures our own tactical deficiencies aren't highlighted. Given the players at our disposal, I always feel that the opposition have more to fear from us, then we do of them.

Anyways, as I said before, United should always play attacking football, with skilful players. Much rather watch a class act like Scholes, then some water carrier like sisoko or makalele. If it means we don't win many European Cups, so be it. League championships won the United way are enough for me!

Yeah. I've talked meself into seeking out a libero though now so that United can play with a back 3! Hmm, where to look...............

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Yeah. I've talked meself into seeking out a libero though now so that United can play with a back 3! Hmm, where to look...............

Well, I'm sure Rio has the ability to play that role. Vidic and Henzie as man markers just infront of him. However, I'm more then happy with our back four and attack minded full backs

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

No I wasn't. Saw some clips of him for Everton the other week though and he seemed pretty good. Should we be after him then, you reckon?

I believe he's born to play for United Throb.

Not sure of the intricate details of his ownership, but no doubt it's dodgy as £#%&!. I know United rate him but I don't think they'll conduct any transfer negotiations.


A pipe dream beginning to border on an obsession I think. You'll soon get sick of my Fernandes campaign.

Originally Posted by The Watcher

Every system has weaknesses that can be exploited. Having Scholes in the middle means we are more likely to expose the flaws of the opposition, which in turn ensures our own tactical deficiencies aren't highlighted. Given the players at our disposal, I always feel that the opposition have more to fear from us, then we do of them.

Anyways, as I said before, United should always play attacking football, with skilful players. Much rather watch a class act like Scholes, then some water carrier like sisoko or makalele. If it means we don't win many European Cups, so be it. League championships won the United way are enough for me!

Absolutely, but what do Scholes' weaknesses mean to the rest of the team, for all he gives us in possession?

The best football we've played in quite a while has come after Scholes' suspension.

By playing Carrick and O'Shea, we get more out of Rooney (in particular) and Ronaldo. I also think we get more out of Carrick.

At this moment in time, I'd feel more comfortable starting a game away at the Bridge without Scholes in the side.

Originally Posted by celtbion

Nah, Liverpool winning it has shown up what we got wrong. We're a side built for winning league titles and pretty football, not winning cup ties.

Scholes presence was a big part of that, brilliant going forward but if things weren't quite right and we had to dig in, we came unstuck too often.

I mean, one of our midfield mainstays can't tackle. He's not poor at it, he just can't. You wouldn't get away with that in Cork AUL 3B soccer.

scholes is, quite simply, a world class player. when did zidane ever £#%&!ing tackle?

Originally Posted by Gog Coch

We dont need two ball winners on the firld at the same time. The problem with scholes/giggs/etc tryng to win the ball they are usually chasing somebody towards our goal and commit the most stupid fouls , scholes even from side and front..
Larssen was the exception .

because larsson never even tried to tackle? giggs is a good tackler, incidentally. you just don't like him because he's welsh.

Originally Posted by celtbion

Carrick is being asked to play as a covering DM right now, I don't think we're seeing the best of him consequently.

carrick is playing his role well. sure, we've seen more of his dynamic forward running in the absence of scholes... largely because o'shea's attacking threat is non-existent, but scholes has both the character and the talent to destroy teams.

Originally Posted by The Watcher

Every system has weaknesses that can be exploited. Having Scholes in the middle means we are more likely to expose the flaws of the opposition, which in turn ensures our own tactical deficiencies aren't highlighted. Given the players at our disposal, I always feel that the opposition have more to fear from us, then we do of them.

Anyways, as I said before, United should always play attacking football, with skilful players. Much rather watch a class act like Scholes, then some water carrier like sisoko or makalele. If it means we don't win many European Cups, so be it. League championships won the United way are enough for me!

it was a concern that teams would run over us in midfield. and they haven't. not liverpool. and not chelsea. don't bother mentioning arsenal. I'd rather play scholes and get vidic and ferdinand to do their jobs.

Originally Posted by celtbion

Absolutely, but what do Scholes' weaknesses mean to the rest of the team, for all he gives us in possession?

The best football we've played in quite a while has come after Scholes' suspension.

By playing Carrick and O'Shea, we get more out of Rooney (in particular) and Ronaldo. I also think we get more out of Carrick.

At this moment in time, I'd feel more comfortable starting a game away at the Bridge without Scholes in the side.

that is just %@#$&!s. we have been shit in the main recently. now I know it was a charity match, but giggs and scholes showed why they both must be in the team. if you'd really rather have o'shea and carrick than carrick and scholes, you must be insane.

Originally Posted by jem's kind streak

if you'd really rather have o'shea and carrick than carrick and scholes, you must be insane.

Any game where we have to spend some reasonably period defending, I'm happier with the Carrick and O'Shea combination.

We've looked brittle as anything under any sort of sustained pressure by the better sides.

However, as happens, most of the teams we play, we don't spend much time defending so, in practice, I'd have Scholes in the team 80-90% of the time anyway.

This season.

Next time, if we've Hargreaves signed up, I'd rather see him and Carrick in tandem. Neither in Scholes' class technically but I think we'd have a better balance to the team with that pair.