@Dan Cater Sorry you feel that way, man. Really was trying to be as neutral as possible with the information available. Which is why I went into detail about the evolution of their positions late in their careers. But again, I did mention it would have a bit of subjectivity and that these things can be argued either way. The final answer is definitely not a one fits all.
@@dpcater Agreed. Having Lampard beat Gerrard in the individuals awards too is just bizarre. There is "Premier League Player Of The Season" but the far more prestigious PFA awards are ignored. Gerrard won PFA Young Player of the year in 01-02 and PFA Players Player of the year in 05-06, neither of which Lampard won.
Everyone seem to be basing their opinions on sympathy rather than face value. They were all legends but come on! To be the highest scoring midfielder of all time in the Premier League just blows all the proportion away. Proper legend of the greatest league in the world. Not to forget being in the top scorer of all time amongst all the greatest, legendary strikers.
As an AC Milan supporter I literally hated Gerrard. However I have never seen in my life such a display of leadership. That guy was for really something.
@@ap06.p32 He was literally being the opposite of petty. Admitting he _hated_ (not hate, present tense, as you accused him of) Gerrard but going on to say what a great leader he was. That's magnominity.
Funny that, cause Lampard scored against Barca in 3 consecutive seasons (2004-2007). Chelsea used to get the better of Barca quite often, so as a Barca fan in 05/06, I don’t know how you can say you didn’t fear Lampard 😂
Gerrard was probably the best leader with probably the most responsibilities in his role. Lampard was the biggest goal threat and all round most dangerous going forward. Scholes was easily the best passer with the best football brain as well as being the most successful trophy wise. For me its Scholes but you cant go wrong with any.
"Lampard was the biggest goal threat and all around most dangerous going forward." Stop right there. You have fallen into one of the biggest potholes in the Lampard argument. Frank Lampard was every bit the defender that Gerrard or Scholes ever were. It may not have seemed like it at the time, but go back and watch. Lumpy was a defensive asset. Not a liability.
Lamps was vice captain to Terry even gerrard would have been vice to Terry that is a leader not a man who will slip and lose the prem title for his club which he never won
@@thekevindeucey i know, i watched the vast majority of his career. i never at any point said he couldnt defend or was a liability, i stated he was the best going forward of the three because thats what differentiates him from the other two. there are so many qualities required of center mid and it differs team to team, and they all brought different things to the table. i dont support any of the teams they all played for so i’m neutral here.
While Scholes had the finesse and played the most beautiful football, Gerrard had the biggest impact on a game out of the three. They all had world class ability, but Stevie G played at such an intensity that it dragged quite average players up levels and see off teams like AC Milan and Real Madrid. His leadership qualities elevate him to a different level imo
I would also like to add that I think Gerrard is the more complete player, not only was he a great passer and shooter (With the most spectacular goals of the three) he was also a great defender who was great in tight places and was great under pressure
Gerrard was the most versatile of the three. He was so dominant at the pitch that you've felt like his winning the match on his own. You'd see him making a crucial tackle on one end, then providing a key pass on the other end, then chasing a lost ball at the wing- all across one minute. And he just kept pushing forward until the final whistle. No one could match his energy and his remarkable quality at every single aspect of the game. For me he's the Winner.
@@ebeytitus6015 people conveniently forget that the game against palace after that was also lost and losing the title wasnt gerrard's fault any more than it was Rogers'. If you're going to judge him based on that one moment, then you're just biased mate.
Your analysis fits with what you'd feel watching them: Scholes was the conductor for a series of great teams recognised in him being involved in so many trophies and last for a long time as a beautiful controller of the ball, Lampard was the driving force behind Chelsea's success, hence brilliant stats and personal achievements, and Gerrard was a brilliant leader, taking less than brilliant teams to heights they couldn't imagine by sheer grit.
@ are you for real? You are literally embarrassing yourself and embarrassing the rest of United fans and you are proving my point that you have nothing other than the quotes 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 WOW I’m literally speechless
@@connorbanks5644 just look at his passes, he could pick out anyone from anywhere, I'd like to see one of the others do that day in day out, he's the best passer ever top 2 at least.
@@connorbanks5644 Good spelling on your name there, probably couldn't afford school even though it's free. A name is always spelled with a upper case letter on the first letter of your first and last name. The fact that you didn't even know this shows how little you know about football.
Lampard held the record for most chances created in a PL season. Created the most chances in the 08/09 season in Europe. And is 3rd for chances created behind Xavi and Farbregas for most chances created between 2005 and 2011
This aspect of his game was grossly underrated because he scored tons of goals. Also, his ability to turn up in big games was equal, perhaps surpasses Gerrard.
For me Paul Scholes, all were great players but Scholes was something else. I would give an honourable mention to Michael Carrick though, not as flashy as some but a tremendous player in his own right.
I think it mainly boils down to pace and workrate. His wise movements on the pitch along with a quality first-touch and shot technique, simply a joy to watch.
I think scholes is the best due to his intelligence about football. But that's just my opinion. If you prefer scorer, you will pick Lampard, if you prefer better physical qualities, you will pick Gerrard.
Schools scored a lot of goals. The only weakness in his game was his tackling. Gerard disappeared and a lot of games. He could pull off moments of brilliance but there were many times where he was found lacking
@Azam Chishty Gerrard was the best hands down. Scholes was an afterthought when Gerrard and Lampard were literally dominating the league in the 2000's. There have only been two occasions since I've watched football where there have been big midfield debates and that's Keane vs Vieira in the late 90's to early 2000's and the Lampard Gerrard debate that followed. And Scholes was literally the red headed stepchild in the background on both of those occasions.
@@selfelements8037 where did xavi say I am a dumbed down version of Scholes. Come on bro resist lying to make a point we get it Scholes was good. But xavi equally him and iniesta at one point in the pivot just doing salsa moves. Why can't we have different types of midfielders?
It's a two way street. We never had a manager that got the best out of those players; equally, those players never did enough game by game when they were on the pitch. It says something when your most effective strategy for creating chances was a Gary Neville long throw.
Tournoi de France 1997 disagrees with you....Scholes won something. Gerrard & Lampard didn't. Nor did they ever score a hatrick for England or a brace in a playoff to qualify for a major tournament....or win 2 CL's....or win 11 Prems. Scholes was also a better goalscorer at earlier ages than those 2 until they started being the main freekick & penalty takers in their clubs because they focussed more on goalscoring....and Gerrard also focussed on terrible backpass decisions and singlehandedly knocking England out of Euro2004, Euro2008 qualfying & WC2014 (and missed crucial pen vs Portugal WC2006).
Really informative this with the hard numbers surrounded these 3. I'm personally never a fan of these "who was the best?" debates, because its often impossible to say and they all played different roles, so it's a comparison that will never gain a definitive answer. However, my favourite of the 3 has to be Scholes. I'm a big fan of the deep lying playmaker. Pirlo, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets etc. When a truly world class deep playing playmaker is in the pitch I'm obsessed with where they are and what they're doing in a match. Scholes for me was in that grouping. A true world class talent.
“There was a point when Gerrard was the best midfield player in the world. It is unusual to get complete midfield players who can do everything, but that is what he was.” Learn your history mate🤣
“There is no doubt for me that Paul Scholes is still in a class of his own. He’s almost untouchable in what he does. I never tire of watching him play. You rarely come across the complete footballer, but Scholes is as close to it as you can get. One of my regrets is that the opportunity to play alongside him never presented itself during my career.” - Zinedine Zidane
When asked what her do when Eric retired, Ferguson motioned over to Scholes and said he wasn't worried as Scholesy was going to be better. Most complete midfielder in history. Would have made the Barca side of messi, David and iniests that bit better..he was that good.
@@waynesharp8999 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 I think someone’s been spending too much time at the ‘theatre of dreams’ (cringiest Nickname of a stadium to this day)
@@connorbanks5644 not as bad as 'the etihad' just advertising that they sold their soul for oil money.
3 года назад
@@connorbanks5644 You have given up trying to banter scholes because you know he is better and your trying to insult old Trafford. The theatre of dreams accurately depicts anfield to be honest. It's just loads of Liverpool fans dreaming they were a bigger club that United, and did I say Liverpool fans? Oh wait do they still exist? I guess a few must still be out there
I would rank Scholes the highest but I think this argument is so strange. To me the 3 play completely different to compare. Gerrard was a box to box no nonsense player but with a bit more talent then the usual one, similar to Keane and viera. Lampard was more or less a cam who scored more then the two others. Finally Scholes was more of a control, using his genius to dictate the play, like pirlo and xavi.
Shocking thing is that Lampard played DM for a lot of his career. Allowed him to be more efficient on defence considering his lack of noticeable pace. Also allowed him to take snipes from outside of the box which he was clearly top tier at, if not the best at it.
@@lolno6975 i was adding to your point that he was playing DM a lot... ofc hes naturally good at hitting the ball thats implied. But to score so many goals from a deeper positions it requires insane footballing IQ and most ppl tend to ignore that for lampard.
Gerrard: The better all-around midfielder and leader Scholes: The most talented and smartest midfielder Lamps: The better scorer and playing off the ball
I remember back in 2005 I was already searching for videos Lampard vs Gerrard on RUclips when I was a young teen. Those two were just insane. You included the goal that Gerrard scored against Middlesbrough. Somebody made a video clip of those two when they were still playing & their goals. Even when they were playing they were still being compared.
pity the 4-2-3-1 wasn't popular when they were in the england squad, imagine a midfield pivot of scholes and gerrard, with lampard playing the no. 10, or a 4-3-3 with scholes in the deep lying role pulling the strings for gerrard and lampard to go forward
@@WERTYUIO821 to be fair rooney showed he was able to play out wide in the rooney-tevez-ronaldinho dynamic so it’s feasible to say he’d go out wide before owen began to falter. so now the midfield/attack in 2006 (when all players mentioned were playing well): cdm: scholes cdm/cm: gerrard cm/cam: lampard rw: beckham lw: rooney st: owen scary.
@@adamidris8027 I assume you mean Ronaldo-Rooney-Tevez? It was stil "supposedly" 4-4-2 with Ronaldo going forward from left midfielder to something like a stiker and Rooney in the middle moving between striker and attacking midfielder rather than wide. Rooney on the left would just be dreadful. In extremely rare occasions he moved on the right but even then he got confused/that was the system and worked as an attacking midfielder rather a winger. Scholes would potentially also have a disadvantage as he always had another midfielder that was more defensive/stronger than him next to him. Scholes was 100% effective in 442oons. In other formations his role was off. A very scary team indeed on paper but on action, a team like Italy with Pirlo, Gattuso and De Rossi would destroy that midfield.
@@WERTYUIO821 yh it autocorrected to r10 my bad. tbf rooney ronaldo tevez was the first team i ever saw so my perception of the players r probably v biased. i doubt that england teams balanced enough anyways: needs a carrick or something
Everyone says Gerard had a bigger impact but every professional player conversation about Paul scholes comes down to how he had a massive impact on the game and the way to stop united was to disrupt Paul scholes.
Very hard to decide between Gerrard and Lampard. Gerrard was a one man army, physically incredible, he'd win the ball, dribble past people, score amazing goals, great range of passing.. Lampard was more subtle, not so strong defensively and physically but he was so intelligent and efficient on the pitch in everything he did. Impossible to decide for me. Scholes was obviously incredibly intelligent, and I really liked him as a player, but never was close to the influence and impact prime Gerrad and Lampard had on the pitch.
@@musclecat7910 you clearly have a better understanding of football than most people because I’ve seen so many people say carrick is average at best they think players like ward prowse etc are better and they use the limited England caps to try back their point up
I'm not surprised at this point how much people underrate Lampard when there's a conversation comes up about these three. I believe it's because he played for a club that's disliked by many. For all the people who only thinks that Lampard was just a goal scorer think one dimensionally and barely saw a match of Lampard. You don't get to be 2nd in ballon d'or for no reason and at a time when Ronaldinho was at his prime. My conclusion would be that people should leave Lampard out of the conversation not because he wasn't good enough but because he's criminally underrated by football fans. Lampard doesn't deserve that much disrespect
@@yinyang8259 so he did what his team wanted of him, evident by him winning more premier leagues than the other 2 combined. his role was to ping balls anywhere and he did it bette than anyone. lol
@@willrichardson8140 using amount of prem titles is actually stupid since football is an 11 man sport lol. They all did their job but the point was "dictating the tempo" is just 1 category
Being a late football fan, I must admit I have not seen so much of Scholes. But between Lampard and Gerrard, no debate whatsoever when I was young. One played with a superstacked team (Drogba, Essien, Terry, Cech and so on) and the other one was surrounded by good footballers like Hyypia, Garcia, Riise, Kewell, Dudek and so on. Carragher is probably the only other superstar. I mean, when F. Torres came it made such a huge difference. I do not think Scholes or Lampard would have performed as much with the same roster simply because talent is not enough to lift a team up like Gerrard did. Yet, he still managed to finish 2nd spot in the PL and pretty much always had good run in the CL.
Gerrard played combo with prime owen,prime torres,prime suarez,mascherano,xabi alonso,pepe reina, i can make a whole list and even though they played on the exact England team Lampard still scored more, and his career started from a team like West ham which is way lower than always on top 4 Liverpool, don't be a tard bruh, everyone played outstanding with their roles given
Michael Owen won the Ballon D’Or at Liverpool, Suarez, Torres, Fowler, Alonso, Mascherano… but yeah ok mate 👌🏽 Lampard was the best player at Chelsea for over a decade, didn’t matter who came in, he was always the main man
@@Luke_S124 The Istanbul miracle was surely not with Gerrard being surrounded by top guns......And you clearly do not know much about football if you think Chelsea was not a stacked team in those years...
@@platonfoucault1087 I never said Lampard didn’t play in a top team. I just said regardless of all the top players Chelsea signed, Lampard was always the best/most consistent player we had for over a decade. And the teams that Gerrard played in were nowhere near as bad as people make out. He played with some world class players throughout his career.
Makes very little sense, but who know what Sven-Goran Eriksson was thinking back then, haha. I guess Lampard and Gerrard were the more dynamic of the three, which swayed the decision. Still really odd in hindsight.
Because English people don't know shit about football. Their football cultural at the time, hell, if they had Modrić at the time, they would also push him out wide. They has to suffer decades of failure until know when they slowly started changing their football philosophy.
Honestly, Beckham was the "issue". He was the poster boy of that England squad and not playing him on the RW was just out of the question, even tho playing 3 in the middle would've been ideal. Put it down to 4-4-2 conservatism I guess.
@@minnumseerrund I really don't think Beckham was an issue, because while he isn't a traditional winger like a Ryan Giggs, Spain played the 2010 world cup with Iniesta as a Left-Winger. It easily could've worked as long as the left-side player had the pace to make up for Beckham's lack of pace, because Beckham gives you so many other qualities that are phenomenal.
I am a Liverpool fan and it is Scholes . England should of built team around him. He kept possession that is why he is only player that could fit in a Barcelona team from England
Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard. In that order. Scholes wasn't as flashy/loud as the other 2. Only real football fans know he's better than the other 2 (both were world class as well)
Fair enough. Agreed, Scholes doesn't have the numbers that the other two have, which is probably the main reason people disregard his abilities nowadays
@@FootballIconic no .......how many individual awards did he have? He was always surrounded by insane talent all the time....Gerrard had less better players...he is the best
I'm not going to lie, I've been having this debate with my friends and I've told them I believe paul scholes was the greatest between these 3 players and they don't want to believe. I respect both lampard and gerard highly and my top 3 is scholes, gerard and lampard. I think lampard has the statistics and gerard because he carried Liverpool for so long AND the fact he didn't have such good players make him standout but Paul scholes was a different beast. I think were Paul scholes doesn't get the credit he deserves is because we tend to want to look as statistics as a measure of success and he doesn't have the stats to compete with lampard and gerard but how I look at it is that scholes has played with some exceptionally talented forwards that were able to get goals and assists on their own as a front three and both lampard and gerard played higher than scholes for much longer. I also don't think scholes would be considered a leader but he was surrounded by bigger personalities at United. The man played alongside cantona, keane, ferdinand, vidic etc. Like I don't expect him to stand out amongst those players. Where he showed his leadership is how he dictated the tempo of the game, which he always did. Man United with and without Scholes was chalk and cheese. And I'll put it this way. If you want to show a kid how to play CM, show him a video of paul scholes. The vision, ability to pass with correct weight of pass and the ability to pick the right pass was surreal and he was always on the move and always looking for players. Scholes saw the game 3 plays ahead of everyone else. I think if scholes was anything other than english , he'd be lauded as a world great. And I liken it to iniesta and xavi. Paul scholes was a xavi or iniesta for man united it's just there they had messi and man United had players like yorke, van nistleroy, ronaldo, rooney etc that would naturally be the apple i Of everyone's eyes because they put up numbers and to me it's only numbers that mattered in england. It's why when these three should've played as a 3 in midfield for england or a 4 with scholes as a deep playmaker, lampard as AM and gerard as box to box and a destroying DM if you go with a 4 in MF, that team could've dominated europe. But scholes was a casualty because he wasn't appreciated in England and it's the only country he wasnt.
Yes and people forget Scholes won something with England (Tournoi de France 1997) Gerrard & Lampard won absolutely nothing. Nor did they ever score a hatrick for England or a crucial brace in a playoff to qualify for a major tournament....or win 2 CL's....or win 11 Prems (Gerrard zero). Scholes was also a better goalscorer at earlier ages than those 2 until they started being the main freekick & penalty takers in their clubs because they focussed more on goalscoring, Scholes you never thought throughout his career he wasn't scoring enough goals and he scored 14 in all competitions in his first title winning season age 20/21 without being on any freekicks or pens....Gerrard & Lampard never got those numbers until they were on freekicks&pens (And Scholes scored 20 in a season 2002/03 without any via free-kicks or pens I'm sure neither Gerrard or Lampard managed that) and without Abramovic Lampard would be what he was before then....nothing, never won a trophy until nearly 27 years old & didn't score much....and Gerrard's argument is easily lost on his terrible backpass reputation alone (5 times he did that!!!) and he singlehandedly knocked England out of Euro2004, Euro2008 qualfying & WC2014 (and missed crucial pen vs Portugal WC2006).
@@RazzBurs hes literally right tho lol. Statistically Lamps and Gerrard benefit far more in stats like that. Scholes started playing Regista (playmaking CDM) so naturally he will do less in the attacking half than those 2
@@youngcitybanditScholes started as a striker and number ten up to 2003 really he was box to box and that's when his stats were better then both of there's but then he moved back and became even better imo opinion as he controlled the game but stats not so good but I never look at stats to judge a player or Zidane, Maradonna,Best etc wouldn't be as good as Harry Kane if you judge a player by that
The thing about Scholes is, if there is a prolific team with great attack and defense, what one needs in midfield is control and vision, one can find better engines than Gerard in midfield, although it's a valuable trait; better scorers than Lampard, although one doesn't need to compensate with goals from midfield when you have quality attackers, but it would be impossible to replace Scholes, they just didn't have a player who could do what Scholes did. pure genius. There were very few players in the world who could replace him and be justified.
Gerrard imo was outstanding in all midfield roles topped the prem assist charts playing as a dm Had zero limitations as a midfielder and at times carried Liverpool almost single-handedly
This channel is going to blow up soon I’m sure of it. Your content is fantastic; everything from the presentation to your analysis is great. Keep it up, man.
“In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes. I have spoken with Xabi Alonso about this many times. Scholes is a spectacular player who has everything. He can play the final pass, he can score, he is strong, he never gets knocked off the ball and he doesn’t give possession away. If he had been Spanish then maybe he would have been valued more.” -Xavi Hernandez
Scholes was the most naturally and technically gifted. The best playmaker amd passer. Lampard was the best ppg player. Gerrard the best allrounder and leader
Zidane: “In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes”... I don’t even like Manchester United and I know this is not even a conversation
Also Zidane on Gerrard as the best player in the world "He might not get the attention of Messi and Ronaldo but, yes, I think he just might be". The quotes don't really mean much
3 года назад+1
@@nilavabhadra5561 Yeah but Iniesta, Xavi, Figo etc. have said these things about scholes, whereas only Zidane has said it about Gerrard
@ nope, check it out, you have similar quotes on Gerrard as well. Same with Lampard. Most professional footballers have thousands of quotes praising their opponent players. They give interview after almost every match they play. You can't really base much on that
I think Scholes could play in the midfield with either of them and make it a successful partnership however i don't think you could play Gerrard and Lampard together alone in the middle of the park. Scholes and Gerrard would be unreal imo similar to the Scholes and Keane set up we had many years ago at United.
So as an Englishman and being brought up during this period I have some points to drop. 1, Paul Scholes is by far the best player England has produced in a long time, he would fit into any European team of the period. This is a massive boon to any player in the world, any team would be built around him just like modric 2, Steven Gerrard is a phenomenal leader and a literal driving gear, he has a lot of weaknesses but is an attacking focused player 3, Frank Lampard is a jack of all trades, he isn't amazing at anything in particular but will always do his job So after that rough breakdown, Paul Scholes is by far the best player England has ever produced, he isn't the most gifted but his mind is rock solid Gerrard is by far our most dangerous aggressive midfielder in a while, he is a kill drive man and a game winner Lampard to me has always been above standard man, I can't really slate Lampard but never been a big admirer In the end we wasted our greatest play maker, many countries realise the greatest attributes to football and Paul Scholes has always been that man and we wasted him Ps. Notts forest fan
Gerrard best box to box defends well, excellent passing ranges only thing missing from him was to control the tempo of game at will. It was a great loss for England to not have a coach to gel that golden generation to me it seem a very difficult task hence no good world cup result to show, Gerrard most complete midfielder.
1. Paul Scholes + Keane midfielders of the decade 1990-2000 according to both the pundits and fans. 2. Paul Scholes and Keane midfielders of the decade 2000-2010 according to the pundits. 3. Paul Scholes and viera midfielders of the decade 2000-2010 according to the fans. 4. Paul Scholes midfielder of the first two decades 1990-2010, according to both pundits and the fans. Thank you
Why should there be a debate even Paul scholes for sure ... the only one to not get hair dryer treatment ... May be the debate is about the best mid fielder I would argue him as the best English player ever
Scholes is the glue that England national team never had after he retired. So its not surprising that the national team was never successful. Imagine building a house of wood without using any nails.
Charging up and down like an all rounder Gerrard. Finding a way to get in a position and score goals Lampard. Conducting a team with skill and intelligence and making players around him look better Scholes. It just depends what you prefer and what you think is more effective.
TBH Scholes and Carrick I feel belonged to a different country/style of play they would have suited the Italian or Spanish games much better but despite that Scholes being on the same level as these two without being as great a physical athelete is a sign of his greatness, at end of the day he wouldn't have got the Ballon D'Or votes cause the passing and technical aspect didn't quite get the recognition in individual awards until Pirlo and Italy won the World Cup and then the generational Barcelona team came along who emphasised solely on passing, Scholes would have fit that mould but United's game play while if sat down and thoroughly analysed we can see how important Scholes and Carrick were that wasn't the focal point visible to the world it was Rooney, Giggs, Beckham, Ronaldo, van Nistelrooy, Nani, Berbatov, Tevez, van Persie. The Wingers and Strikers tearing up the defences and crossing, Neither Scholes or Carrick were outspoken or tried to be as involved in the off-field stuff as the Lampard and Gerrard hence leading them further away from catching the public eye. That's my two cents on why Scholes never got a BallonD'Or vote and why Carrick is probably the most underrated midfielder of PL era.
Really depends for what type of play style your looking for, if you want deep lying playmakers then scholes wins. If your looking for goal involvements then Lampard is the clear winner if your looking for leadership then Gerrard wins
Paul Scopes, hands down unbelievable quality and footy intelligence, and importantly the crucial member of one of the all time best teams over two decades in the world's top league. (ps I am not a ManU/Lpool/Chelski fan)
Chelsea wasn't far from that team, and Lampard was actually the main guy on that team. Scholes was behind Ronaldo, Tevez, Vidic, Ferdinand, Edwin Van der Sar, and Rooney. Gerrard never had a team that good, but he didn't have teammates that were as good
I looked in the comments thinking everyone would but gerrard but I’m happy to see everyone putting scholes I’ve been told that scholes was the worst out of them all just hope everyone in the comments aren’t biased United fans scholes=🐐
1. Paul Scholes. 2. Frank Lampard. 3. Steven Gerrard. Scholes was undoubtedly the best passer of the ball, and probably the best reader of the game. He was also a prolific scorer from central midfield, with only one weakness: his tackling was erratic, and often earned him yellow cards. Lampard was the perfect role model for any young player: he fulfilled and even exceeded his potential through hard work and total commitment. As a central midfielder, he scored more goals than most strikers, and all sorts of goals too. Probably the least naturally talented of the three, Lampard's achievements for club and country were phenomenal. Gerrard was also phenomenal, with his workrate, his commitment, and his leadership: his qualities as a leader, on top of his playing ability, made him indispensible to both club and country. All three players would/should have complimented each other in a 3 man midfield, with Cole and Beckham as wing backs, but unfortunately England persisted with a 4-4-2 formation, which left Lampard and Gerrard alone in the middle of the park, and Scholes on the left wing!
what an analysis! shame that Gerrard came third tho, but still, for me a hardhead overseas liverpool fan, im always biased to Gerrard at the end. He's a one in a million chances for a liverpool player, and his reign post-Houlier and pre-Klopp era is simply one of the most wonderful and structured occurence in LFC's history.
Gerrard third? Dogshit because Lampard played for oily Chelshea and Scholes a dominant Man U team No way would they have been able to do what Gerrard did in an average Liverpool
Zinedine Zidane was once asked in an interview, “What does it feel like to be the best player in the world?” The Frenchman replied, “I don’t know, ask Paul Scholes”
Simply gerrard! Period! Considering the team he played in..no debate here..scholes and lampard had world class players but gerrard carried lfc single handedly..what a true icon! 💯 goated!
Nice video. Didn't know Scholesy began as a striker. It's always fun debate between these three midfielders, and my pick has to be Scholesy as always. Not because I'm a Red Devil fan, but because he truly is the best of all three. Of course he wasn't gifted with the physicality of his competitors, but the intelligence, shot technique, pace and workrate made him a joy to watch. Good old 90's.
Paul scholes. Einstein of football..... Passes, shooting, intelligence. Paul scholes in the beginning was a threat in the front of the goal as well. Imagine even Xavi Hernandez, Patrick Viera, Zidane talks so highly of you....
The other 2 were the main stars in there teams for most of the time so they seemed better IMO, Scholes was a top player in an amazing team with other top players so he didnt stand out as much
@ uefa says otherwise, united had the best forward while chelsea got midfielder,defender and keeper. Chelsea definitely had the better team
3 года назад
@@blank1933 Well literally every football fan in existence knows 08 United was definitely in the top 4 best sides ever. So Chelsea can't have had a better team, not to mention United won the league that season, and best Chelsea in the UCL final.
In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes," said Xavi. "He can play the final pass, he can score, he is strong, he never gets knocked off the ball and he doesn't give possession away. If he had been Spanish then maybe he would have been valued more
Three of the greatest midfielders of Premier league history without a doubt. I might be bit biased, because I have supported Manchester United ever since I started watching football, but to see Scholes doing what he could do was just phenomenal. Lampard was a scoring machine. Gerard could do it all and carried Liverpool alone basically. But Scholes controlled the game. He was pivotal in every part of United's game. He was the focal point around which United defended great and attacked great. He basically dictated the game. So, even if I might be biased, if we go on the words of some of the greatest midfielders of that era, most of whom said the same name, Scholes should be the winner of this debate, without taking anything away from the other two.
Gerrard was way more well rounded. Lampard was a better goal scorer, Scholes was a better passer, Gerrard was great at everything. Just sucks we had poor teams to surround Stevie with
Lampard was a amazing player and is probably the best goalscoring midfielder of all time but Schools had something that made him the better midfielder and Gerrard was good one of the best but schools was the footballer and lampard was the man to mark
I'm a Liverpool fan and I genuinely wouldn't put my scouse lens on but l think as a complete footballer Gerrard was the very best of the 3. He was box to box and a good leader. Could play in any position the other two couldn't perform creditably. That to me made him the best. Lampard was a the best goal poacher, a sniffer and if the others chose to do same the would have scored similarly. Scholes was a greater controller of the midfield. A real exponent. I always admired him and had wished he played for Liverpool but back to the debate i think Gerrard was the best with of them being too too class. Remember Lampard and Scholes played in super teams but Gerrard made Liverpool a super team to compete or challenge the teams squarely
The thing gets even crazy when you realise that scholes was really troubled by his eye sight for almost a decade in his late career... Yet manages to outclass everyone 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥just brilliant..
Correction for 9:02: I was referring to the 2005 Champions League Final. Not the 2007 one. Apologies for the error!
@@dpcater feel free to make your own vid on it then. There will always be subjective opinions, so deal with it.
@Dan Cater Sorry you feel that way, man. Really was trying to be as neutral as possible with the information available. Which is why I went into detail about the evolution of their positions late in their careers.
But again, I did mention it would have a bit of subjectivity and that these things can be argued either way. The final answer is definitely not a one fits all.
@@dpcater Agreed. Having Lampard beat Gerrard in the individuals awards too is just bizarre. There is "Premier League Player Of The Season" but the far more prestigious PFA awards are ignored. Gerrard won PFA Young Player of the year in 01-02 and PFA Players Player of the year in 05-06, neither of which Lampard won.
@@iklock having second to godly ronaldinho in balondor was enuf
Everyone seem to be basing their opinions on sympathy rather than face value. They were all legends but come on! To be the highest scoring midfielder of all time in the Premier League just blows all the proportion away. Proper legend of the greatest league in the world. Not to forget being in the top scorer of all time amongst all the greatest, legendary strikers.
Remember us when you get HUGE.
Yes bro
Yes !!
Pls do
Hahaha, cheers man!
@@FootballIconic pls do one on dennis irwin for roy keans sake
As an AC Milan supporter I literally hated Gerrard. However I have never seen in my life such a display of leadership. That guy was for really something.
how petty, you honestly hate him cus of one match, on that bases i should hate demba ba
@@ap06.p32 you should
@@ap06.p32 He was literally being the opposite of petty. Admitting he _hated_ (not hate, present tense, as you accused him of) Gerrard but going on to say what a great leader he was. That's magnominity.
@@ap06.p32 moron. He’s literally paying Gerrard a massive compliment
@@ap06.p32 I hate TAA.
“I want to pass like him. Who taught him how to do that?” - Ronaldinho on Scholes
"I want to tackle like him." Manatson know nuts Salewa
The greatest of the 3.
But he still choose Lamps in his all time eleven
“The greatest midfielder I ever witnessed. “
Scholes on Frank Lampard
@@nehphangmawlong4112 whereas Iniesta, Xavi, Zidane, Pirlo, and Henry all chose scholes over the two
By 2005/2006 as a Barcelona fan I wouldn't fear lampard or scholes the way I would fear Gerard.Gerard was the deadliest of the three.
Funny that, cause Lampard scored against Barca in 3 consecutive seasons (2004-2007). Chelsea used to get the better of Barca quite often, so as a Barca fan in 05/06, I don’t know how you can say you didn’t fear Lampard 😂
Gerrard was probably the best leader with probably the most responsibilities in his role. Lampard was the biggest goal threat and all round most dangerous going forward. Scholes was easily the best passer with the best football brain as well as being the most successful trophy wise. For me its Scholes but you cant go wrong with any.
"Lampard was the biggest goal threat and all around most dangerous going forward."
Stop right there. You have fallen into one of the biggest potholes in the Lampard argument.
Frank Lampard was every bit the defender that Gerrard or Scholes ever were. It may not have seemed like it at the time, but go back and watch. Lumpy was a defensive asset. Not a liability.
Lamps is also 4th in assists in prem history lol and the only midfielder in the top 10 scoring charts
@@thekevindeucey he played cdm when we won the ucl and uel
Lamps was vice captain to Terry even gerrard would have been vice to Terry that is a leader not a man who will slip and lose the prem title for his club which he never won
@@thekevindeucey i know, i watched the vast majority of his career. i never at any point said he couldnt defend or was a liability, i stated he was the best going forward of the three because thats what differentiates him from the other two. there are so many qualities required of center mid and it differs team to team, and they all brought different things to the table. i dont support any of the teams they all played for so i’m neutral here.
While Scholes had the finesse and played the most beautiful football, Gerrard had the biggest impact on a game out of the three. They all had world class ability, but Stevie G played at such an intensity that it dragged quite average players up levels and see off teams like AC Milan and Real Madrid. His leadership qualities elevate him to a different level imo
I would also like to add that I think Gerrard is the more complete player, not only was he a great passer and shooter (With the most spectacular goals of the three) he was also a great defender who was great in tight places and was great under pressure
I could not put it any better my friend
He also slipped a lot
@@yusifalabed7363 he was not a great passer, he was ok, you're using the word "great" too loosely here
@@alibarznji2000 go and watch his assist to Sturridge against Fulham mug. He's the best passer the game's seen. Clueless.
Gerrard was the most versatile of the three. He was so dominant at the pitch that you've felt like his winning the match on his own. You'd see him making a crucial tackle on one end, then providing a key pass on the other end, then chasing a lost ball at the wing- all across one minute. And he just kept pushing forward until the final whistle. No one could match his energy and his remarkable quality at every single aspect of the game. For me he's the Winner.
Slipped up against Chelsea.....in a very very important match
I don't wanna go against your opinion tho mate
@@ebeytitus6015 people conveniently forget that the game against palace after that was also lost and losing the title wasnt gerrard's fault any more than it was Rogers'. If you're going to judge him based on that one moment, then you're just biased mate.
Your analysis fits with what you'd feel watching them: Scholes was the conductor for a series of great teams recognised in him being involved in so many trophies and last for a long time as a beautiful controller of the ball, Lampard was the driving force behind Chelsea's success, hence brilliant stats and personal achievements, and Gerrard was a brilliant leader, taking less than brilliant teams to heights they couldn't imagine by sheer grit.
What heights? A European cup? Other than that, what heights? Surely Liverpool expect to win the odd league and fa cup?
Three European cup finals, three FA cups, two league cups,
Several times runner-up in the league. He almost single-handedly did it
“I’m star-struck when I see Paul Scholes because you never see him. On the pitch you can’t catch him. Off the pitch he disappears.” - Luis Figo
Wow a quote said by another player .....😴
@ are you for real? You are literally embarrassing yourself and embarrassing the rest of United fans and you are proving my point that you have nothing other than the quotes 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 WOW I’m literally speechless
@@connorbanks5644 11prems...okay bye!
@@connorbanks5644 just look at his passes, he could pick out anyone from anywhere, I'd like to see one of the others do that day in day out, he's the best passer ever top 2 at least.
@@connorbanks5644 Good spelling on your name there, probably couldn't afford school even though it's free. A name is always spelled with a upper case letter on the first letter of your first and last name. The fact that you didn't even know this shows how little you know about football.
Lampard held the record for most chances created in a PL season.
Created the most chances in the 08/09 season in Europe. And is 3rd for chances created behind Xavi and Farbregas for most chances created between 2005 and 2011
Hes easily the one with highest football iq. Watching him he always does the right thing and is in the right place
@@youngcitybandit How did he do that consistently is a question I'd love to put to him if I ever met him. What a genius
This aspect of his game was grossly underrated because he scored tons of goals. Also, his ability to turn up in big games was equal, perhaps surpasses Gerrard.
Spot on…I have never seen Lampard made poor decisions.
He is always aware of every moment.
@@amosademola2362yeah even though his managerial skills was below avg his vision and the team he built able to win UCL for chelsea for the 2nd time
For me Paul Scholes, all were great players but Scholes was something else. I would give an honourable mention to Michael Carrick though, not as flashy as some but a tremendous player in his own right.
100% agreed on Carrick.
I think it mainly boils down to pace and workrate. His wise movements on the pitch along with a quality first-touch and shot technique, simply a joy to watch.
Alert...man utd fan spotted
@@toshiyapangaier7059 anyone can scholes is the best you tard
@@DonKilkenny where?
I think scholes is the best due to his intelligence about football.
But that's just my opinion.
If you prefer scorer, you will pick Lampard, if you prefer better physical qualities, you will pick Gerrard.
I agree, scholes also had some cracking goals though
@@cameronworthington3909
Yeah only about 140 of them!!!
Schools scored a lot of goals. The only weakness in his game was his tackling. Gerard disappeared and a lot of games. He could pull off moments of brilliance but there were many times where he was found lacking
@@7472wayne
Like Nobby Styles long before him, I think Fergie has said a lot of those “mis-timed” tackles were deliberate from Scholesey.
@Azam Chishty Gerrard was the best hands down. Scholes was an afterthought when Gerrard and Lampard were literally dominating the league in the 2000's. There have only been two occasions since I've watched football where there have been big midfield debates and that's Keane vs Vieira in the late 90's to early 2000's and the Lampard Gerrard debate that followed. And Scholes was literally the red headed stepchild in the background on both of those occasions.
Xavi Hernandez : Paul Scholes is the most complete midfielder I have ever seen.
I think that should sum it up.
Scholesy was the perfect Barcelona player they never had. Xavi was a dumbed down version of Scholes, lacking the sheer physical power.
@@selfelements8037 stop it
@@khalawahstu4115 It's true!
@@khalawahstu4115 Even Xavi admitted himself.
@@selfelements8037 where did xavi say I am a dumbed down version of Scholes. Come on bro resist lying to make a point we get it Scholes was good. But xavi equally him and iniesta at one point in the pivot just doing salsa moves. Why can't we have different types of midfielders?
Scholes came out of retirement to win a premier league at the age of 38, the man was inevitable. For me the best out of the three.
@Deniz Sen watched the video? 92% pass accuracy lol
Bro keep this content up! You will definitely blow. Love your videos
Haha thanks so much! Really appreciate it, friend!
With that midfield, England should have won something. Never had the right manager I guess.
It's a two way street. We never had a manager that got the best out of those players; equally, those players never did enough game by game when they were on the pitch. It says something when your most effective strategy for creating chances was a Gary Neville long throw.
No balance
Tournoi de France 1997 disagrees with you....Scholes won something. Gerrard & Lampard didn't.
Nor did they ever score a hatrick for England or a brace in a playoff to qualify for a major tournament....or win 2 CL's....or win 11 Prems.
Scholes was also a better goalscorer at earlier ages than those 2 until they started being the main freekick & penalty takers in their clubs because they focussed more on goalscoring....and Gerrard also focussed on terrible backpass decisions and singlehandedly knocking England out of Euro2004, Euro2008 qualfying & WC2014 (and missed crucial pen vs Portugal WC2006).
@@cddb5408Tournoi du France was a showcase of how England would have fared if they built the game around Scholes.
Gerrard won a world cup brace
Frank Lampard as a Bayern Munich fan.
Really informative this with the hard numbers surrounded these 3. I'm personally never a fan of these "who was the best?" debates, because its often impossible to say and they all played different roles, so it's a comparison that will never gain a definitive answer.
However, my favourite of the 3 has to be Scholes. I'm a big fan of the deep lying playmaker. Pirlo, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets etc. When a truly world class deep playing playmaker is in the pitch I'm obsessed with where they are and what they're doing in a match. Scholes for me was in that grouping. A true world class talent.
Reporter : “how does it feel to be the best player in the world?”
Zidane : “Ask Paul scholes”
No 😂 he said Gerrard also Rooney Rio and Ronaldo said gerrard
“There was a point when Gerrard was the best midfield player in the world. It is unusual to get complete midfield players who can do everything, but that is what he was.”
Learn your history mate🤣
Zidane always like Gerrard.... FUCKING LIAR COMMENT! 😊😊
“There is no doubt for me that Paul Scholes is still in a class of his own. He’s almost untouchable in what he does. I never tire of watching him play. You rarely come across the complete footballer, but Scholes is as close to it as you can get. One of my regrets is that the opportunity to play alongside him never presented itself during my career.” - Zinedine Zidane
Wow a quote said by another player 😴
When asked what her do when Eric retired, Ferguson motioned over to Scholes and said he wasn't worried as Scholesy was going to be better. Most complete midfielder in history. Would have made the Barca side of messi, David and iniests that bit better..he was that good.
@@waynesharp8999 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 I think someone’s been spending too much time at the ‘theatre of dreams’ (cringiest Nickname of a stadium to this day)
@@connorbanks5644 not as bad as 'the etihad' just advertising that they sold their soul for oil money.
@@connorbanks5644 You have given up trying to banter scholes because you know he is better and your trying to insult old Trafford.
The theatre of dreams accurately depicts anfield to be honest. It's just loads of Liverpool fans dreaming they were a bigger club that United, and did I say Liverpool fans? Oh wait do they still exist? I guess a few must still be out there
I would rank Scholes the highest but I think this argument is so strange.
To me the 3 play completely different to compare. Gerrard was a box to box no nonsense player but with a bit more talent then the usual one, similar to Keane and viera. Lampard was more or less a cam who scored more then the two others. Finally Scholes was more of a control, using his genius to dictate the play, like pirlo and xavi.
Shocking thing is that Lampard played DM for a lot of his career. Allowed him to be more efficient on defence considering his lack of noticeable pace. Also allowed him to take snipes from outside of the box which he was clearly top tier at, if not the best at it.
@@lolno6975 he legit scored based on football iq and knowing where to go.
@@youngcitybandit and also just being a lethal striker of the ball? Didn't think of that?
@@lolno6975 i was adding to your point that he was playing DM a lot...
ofc hes naturally good at hitting the ball thats implied. But to score so many goals from a deeper positions it requires insane footballing IQ and most ppl tend to ignore that for lampard.
Gerrard beat Barca and Real in his prime
Gerrard: The better all-around midfielder and leader
Scholes: The most talented and smartest midfielder
Lamps: The better scorer and playing off the ball
I remember back in 2005 I was already searching for videos Lampard vs Gerrard on RUclips when I was a young teen. Those two were just insane. You included the goal that Gerrard scored against Middlesbrough. Somebody made a video clip of those two when they were still playing & their goals. Even when they were playing they were still being compared.
Ive just realised Scholes and Gerrard really did violate 'boro 🤣🤣
Michael Carrick? Give over.
That Bolton keeper got done by Lampard so many times from the spot you would think he'd know frank was going to his right eventually...
😂😂
Lampard , Scholes , Gerrard , Makelele , Ballack , Gattuso , Xavi, Iniesta , Vieira, Yaya Toure, Essien , etc…. The 2000s was such a great era
pity the 4-2-3-1 wasn't popular when they were in the england squad, imagine a midfield pivot of scholes and gerrard, with lampard playing the no. 10, or a 4-3-3 with scholes in the deep lying role pulling the strings for gerrard and lampard to go forward
👀
Who would stay on the bench in that system? United's wonderkid Rooney or Ballandor winner Owen?
@@WERTYUIO821 to be fair rooney showed he was able to play out wide in the rooney-tevez-ronaldinho dynamic so it’s feasible to say he’d go out wide before owen began to falter. so now the midfield/attack in 2006 (when all players mentioned were playing well):
cdm: scholes
cdm/cm: gerrard
cm/cam: lampard
rw: beckham
lw: rooney
st: owen
scary.
@@adamidris8027
I assume you mean Ronaldo-Rooney-Tevez?
It was stil "supposedly" 4-4-2 with Ronaldo going forward from left midfielder to something like a stiker and Rooney in the middle moving between striker and attacking midfielder rather than wide.
Rooney on the left would just be dreadful. In extremely rare occasions he moved on the right but even then he got confused/that was the system and worked as an attacking midfielder rather a winger.
Scholes would potentially also have a disadvantage as he always had another midfielder that was more defensive/stronger than him next to him. Scholes was 100% effective in 442oons. In other formations his role was off.
A very scary team indeed on paper but on action, a team like Italy with Pirlo, Gattuso and De Rossi would destroy that midfield.
@@WERTYUIO821 yh it autocorrected to r10 my bad. tbf rooney ronaldo tevez was the first team i ever saw so my perception of the players r probably v biased. i doubt that england teams balanced enough anyways: needs a carrick or something
Everyone says Gerard had a bigger impact but every professional player conversation about Paul scholes comes down to how he had a massive impact on the game and the way to stop united was to disrupt Paul scholes.
Very hard to decide between Gerrard and Lampard. Gerrard was a one man army, physically incredible, he'd win the ball, dribble past people, score amazing goals, great range of passing.. Lampard was more subtle, not so strong defensively and physically but he was so intelligent and efficient on the pitch in everything he did. Impossible to decide for me.
Scholes was obviously incredibly intelligent, and I really liked him as a player, but never was close to the influence and impact prime Gerrad and Lampard had on the pitch.
Scholsey... Do one on Carrick when you get time! He was super underrated!!!
Really would love to see this
Football fans from around that time would not underrate him at all. Pool fans here
@@musclecat7910 you’d be suprised how many people say he was shit even people that were watching football in his era
@@libademarquoyah6859 really? I too talk shit about him, but that's really all just a banter. Every pool fans i know put him in a high regard
@@musclecat7910 you clearly have a better understanding of football than most people because I’ve seen so many people say carrick is average at best they think players like ward prowse etc are better and they use the limited England caps to try back their point up
Your videos are great, this channel will definitely grow fast
Fingers crossed! Cheers, man.
Possibly the best quality football videos iv watched. I expected to see at least 500k subscribers. Your going places on RUclips. Well done
Thanks! Really appreciate that
Scholes, not even a contest. Gerrard and Lampard were incredible players, but Scholes was at another level.
I'm not surprised at this point how much people underrate Lampard when there's a conversation comes up about these three. I believe it's because he played for a club that's disliked by many. For all the people who only thinks that Lampard was just a goal scorer think one dimensionally and barely saw a match of Lampard. You don't get to be 2nd in ballon d'or for no reason and at a time when Ronaldinho was at his prime. My conclusion would be that people should leave Lampard out of the conversation not because he wasn't good enough but because he's criminally underrated by football fans. Lampard doesn't deserve that much disrespect
Scholes
The other 2 were good, they were a 9 or 10, Scholesy turned it up to 11
Agree, he dicted the tempo like no one else
Lol no. Dictating the tempo of a game isn't the only thing a midfielder is expected to do. It all depends on what suits your team's style of play.
@@yinyang8259 so he did what his team wanted of him, evident by him winning more premier leagues than the other 2 combined. his role was to ping balls anywhere and he did it bette than anyone. lol
@@willrichardson8140 using amount of prem titles is actually stupid since football is an 11 man sport lol.
They all did their job but the point was "dictating the tempo" is just 1 category
Being a late football fan, I must admit I have not seen so much of Scholes. But between Lampard and Gerrard, no debate whatsoever when I was young. One played with a superstacked team (Drogba, Essien, Terry, Cech and so on) and the other one was surrounded by good footballers like Hyypia, Garcia, Riise, Kewell, Dudek and so on. Carragher is probably the only other superstar. I mean, when F. Torres came it made such a huge difference. I do not think Scholes or Lampard would have performed as much with the same roster simply because talent is not enough to lift a team up like Gerrard did. Yet, he still managed to finish 2nd spot in the PL and pretty much always had good run in the CL.
In a group of blinds , the cataract eye wins
Gerrard played combo with prime owen,prime torres,prime suarez,mascherano,xabi alonso,pepe reina, i can make a whole list and even though they played on the exact England team Lampard still scored more, and his career started from a team like West ham which is way lower than always on top 4 Liverpool, don't be a tard bruh, everyone played outstanding with their roles given
Michael Owen won the Ballon D’Or at Liverpool, Suarez, Torres, Fowler, Alonso, Mascherano… but yeah ok mate 👌🏽 Lampard was the best player at Chelsea for over a decade, didn’t matter who came in, he was always the main man
@@Luke_S124 The Istanbul miracle was surely not with Gerrard being surrounded by top guns......And you clearly do not know much about football if you think Chelsea was not a stacked team in those years...
@@platonfoucault1087 I never said Lampard didn’t play in a top team. I just said regardless of all the top players Chelsea signed, Lampard was always the best/most consistent player we had for over a decade. And the teams that Gerrard played in were nowhere near as bad as people make out. He played with some world class players throughout his career.
If I had to pick only one, I think it's Scholes.
Gerard and Lampard were good, but Scholes is on another level
Yes... on a lower level
Yes Superior. Super worse than both but better than your grand pops
Scholes played in a midfield 2 that dominated 90% of the games, don’t know how he was put on the lw for England
Makes very little sense, but who know what Sven-Goran Eriksson was thinking back then, haha. I guess Lampard and Gerrard were the more dynamic of the three, which swayed the decision. Still really odd in hindsight.
Because at the time Gerrard and Lampard were on a completely different level to Scholes in the PL
Because English people don't know shit about football. Their football cultural at the time, hell, if they had Modrić at the time, they would also push him out wide. They has to suffer decades of failure until know when they slowly started changing their football philosophy.
Honestly, Beckham was the "issue". He was the poster boy of that England squad and not playing him on the RW was just out of the question, even tho playing 3 in the middle would've been ideal. Put it down to 4-4-2 conservatism I guess.
@@minnumseerrund I really don't think Beckham was an issue, because while he isn't a traditional winger like a Ryan Giggs, Spain played the 2010 world cup with Iniesta as a Left-Winger. It easily could've worked as long as the left-side player had the pace to make up for Beckham's lack of pace, because Beckham gives you so many other qualities that are phenomenal.
I am a Liverpool fan and it is Scholes .
England should of built team around him. He kept possession that is why he is only player that could fit in a Barcelona team from England
I am a man utd fan and it is lingard who is the best
Love the content bro! So insightful and enjoyable 💯
Thanks man! Glad you enjoyed!
loving this channel already, top work bro 🤍
Thanks!!
Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard. In that order.
Scholes wasn't as flashy/loud as the other 2. Only real football fans know he's better than the other 2 (both were world class as well)
Fair enough. Agreed, Scholes doesn't have the numbers that the other two have, which is probably the main reason people disregard his abilities nowadays
@@FootballIconic he has more open play goals than Gerrard in less number of matches. And he played deeper than him for most of his career.
It's mad how the stats go in completely the opposite order!
Real fans know its a game of opinion
@@FootballIconic no .......how many individual awards did he have?
He was always surrounded by insane talent all the time....Gerrard had less better players...he is the best
1. Scholes 2. Gerrard 3. Lampard Out of those 3, the Ginger was the most complete player. End of story
Lampard the most underrated player...people keep on saying good stuff about scholes and gerrard coz they didn't watch lamps play
I'm not going to lie, I've been having this debate with my friends and I've told them I believe paul scholes was the greatest between these 3 players and they don't want to believe.
I respect both lampard and gerard highly and my top 3 is scholes, gerard and lampard. I think lampard has the statistics and gerard because he carried Liverpool for so long AND the fact he didn't have such good players make him standout but Paul scholes was a different beast.
I think were Paul scholes doesn't get the credit he deserves is because we tend to want to look as statistics as a measure of success and he doesn't have the stats to compete with lampard and gerard but how I look at it is that scholes has played with some exceptionally talented forwards that were able to get goals and assists on their own as a front three and both lampard and gerard played higher than scholes for much longer. I also don't think scholes would be considered a leader but he was surrounded by bigger personalities at United. The man played alongside cantona, keane, ferdinand, vidic etc. Like I don't expect him to stand out amongst those players. Where he showed his leadership is how he dictated the tempo of the game, which he always did. Man United with and without Scholes was chalk and cheese.
And I'll put it this way. If you want to show a kid how to play CM, show him a video of paul scholes. The vision, ability to pass with correct weight of pass and the ability to pick the right pass was surreal and he was always on the move and always looking for players. Scholes saw the game 3 plays ahead of everyone else.
I think if scholes was anything other than english , he'd be lauded as a world great. And I liken it to iniesta and xavi. Paul scholes was a xavi or iniesta for man united it's just there they had messi and man United had players like yorke, van nistleroy, ronaldo, rooney etc that would naturally be the apple i
Of everyone's eyes because they put up numbers and to me it's only numbers that mattered in england.
It's why when these three should've played as a 3 in midfield for england or a 4 with scholes as a deep playmaker, lampard as AM and gerard as box to box and a destroying DM if you go with a 4 in MF, that team could've dominated europe. But scholes was a casualty because he wasn't appreciated in England and it's the only country he wasnt.
Yes and people forget Scholes won something with England (Tournoi de France 1997) Gerrard & Lampard won absolutely nothing.
Nor did they ever score a hatrick for England or a crucial brace in a playoff to qualify for a major tournament....or win 2 CL's....or win 11 Prems (Gerrard zero).
Scholes was also a better goalscorer at earlier ages than those 2 until they started being the main freekick & penalty takers in their clubs because they focussed more on goalscoring, Scholes you never thought throughout his career he wasn't scoring enough goals and he scored 14 in all competitions in his first title winning season age 20/21 without being on any freekicks or pens....Gerrard & Lampard never got those numbers until they were on freekicks&pens (And Scholes scored 20 in a season 2002/03 without any via free-kicks or pens I'm sure neither Gerrard or Lampard managed that) and without Abramovic Lampard would be what he was before then....nothing, never won a trophy until nearly 27 years old & didn't score much....and Gerrard's argument is easily lost on his terrible backpass reputation alone (5 times he did that!!!) and he singlehandedly knocked England out of Euro2004, Euro2008 qualfying & WC2014 (and missed crucial pen vs Portugal WC2006).
@@cddb5408 Totally unbiased view you have there m8. Congrats on such a wonderful perspective, must be great.
Its a shame pre assists werent recorded, scholes would probably have got 20 a season
It's a shame because lamps and stevie would have gotten 40 per season
@@chngcy80 salty Liverpool fan😂
@@RazzBurs hes literally right tho lol. Statistically Lamps and Gerrard benefit far more in stats like that.
Scholes started playing Regista (playmaking CDM) so naturally he will do less in the attacking half than those 2
Exactly Scholes was in more contributions then any of them without a doubt considering his team scored much more goals and I mean much more
@@youngcitybanditScholes started as a striker and number ten up to 2003 really he was box to box and that's when his stats were better then both of there's but then he moved back and became even better imo opinion as he controlled the game but stats not so good but I never look at stats to judge a player or Zidane, Maradonna,Best etc wouldn't be as good as Harry Kane if you judge a player by that
The thing about Scholes is, if there is a prolific team with great attack and defense, what one needs in midfield is control and vision, one can find better engines than Gerard in midfield, although it's a valuable trait; better scorers than Lampard, although one doesn't need to compensate with goals from midfield when you have quality attackers, but it would be impossible to replace Scholes, they just didn't have a player who could do what Scholes did. pure genius. There were very few players in the world who could replace him and be justified.
Gerrard imo was outstanding in all midfield roles topped the prem assist charts playing as a dm
Had zero limitations as a midfielder and at times carried Liverpool almost single-handedly
I just found this channel and Thanks God
Great content! Already watched all the videos
Thanks so much man! More to come soon!
This channel is going to blow up soon I’m sure of it. Your content is fantastic; everything from the presentation to your analysis is great. Keep it up, man.
“In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes. I have spoken with Xabi Alonso about this many times. Scholes is a spectacular player who has everything. He can play the final pass, he can score, he is strong, he never gets knocked off the ball and he doesn’t give possession away. If he had been Spanish then maybe he would have been valued more.” -Xavi Hernandez
Pundit: “How does it feel to be the worlds best player”
Zidane: “I don’t know, ask Paul Scholes”
On today's episode of things that were never said.. xD
None of these are close to the true English GOAT Jesse Lingard.
In the title I said "Players" not "Gods".
Lingardinho! 😂😂😂
@@FootballIconic tbf if Lingard keeps this form up he may well escape meme status
Scholes was the most naturally and technically gifted. The best playmaker amd passer.
Lampard was the best ppg player.
Gerrard the best allrounder and leader
The amount of recognition scholes doesn’t get is disrespectful.
It’s interesting to note that lampard made 305 appearances in a row inbetween 2001-2005
Zidane: “In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes”... I don’t even like Manchester United and I know this is not even a conversation
Wow a quote said by another player 😲
@@connorbanks5644 Ranks higher than a youtube comment from a nobody.
Also Zidane on Gerrard as the best player in the world "He might not get the attention of Messi and Ronaldo but, yes, I think he just might be". The quotes don't really mean much
@@nilavabhadra5561 Yeah but Iniesta, Xavi, Figo etc. have said these things about scholes, whereas only Zidane has said it about Gerrard
@ nope, check it out, you have similar quotes on Gerrard as well. Same with Lampard. Most professional footballers have thousands of quotes praising their opponent players. They give interview after almost every match they play. You can't really base much on that
Scholes had the best vision and passing. Lampard was the best goal scorer. Gerrard was a pure box to box midfielder.
Scholes had the best vision& passing and yet Lampard has way more assists than him. Make it make sense
@@no1nova226 Diego Costa & David Sliva had the same amount of assists in 16/17. Who has the best vision?
absolutely loved the video !!
I think Scholes could play in the midfield with either of them and make it a successful partnership however i don't think you could play Gerrard and Lampard together alone in the middle of the park. Scholes and Gerrard would be unreal imo similar to the Scholes and Keane set up we had many years ago at United.
So as an Englishman and being brought up during this period I have some points to drop.
1, Paul Scholes is by far the best player England has produced in a long time, he would fit into any European team of the period. This is a massive boon to any player in the world, any team would be built around him just like modric
2, Steven Gerrard is a phenomenal leader and a literal driving gear, he has a lot of weaknesses but is an attacking focused player
3, Frank Lampard is a jack of all trades, he isn't amazing at anything in particular but will always do his job
So after that rough breakdown, Paul Scholes is by far the best player England has ever produced, he isn't the most gifted but his mind is rock solid
Gerrard is by far our most dangerous aggressive midfielder in a while, he is a kill drive man and a game winner
Lampard to me has always been above standard man, I can't really slate Lampard but never been a big admirer
In the end we wasted our greatest play maker, many countries realise the greatest attributes to football and Paul Scholes has always been that man and we wasted him
Ps. Notts forest fan
Only one of these players came out of retirement, help their team win the league, then retire again. Scholesy was pure class.
Nice Work Dude
Thanks!
Personal opinion.
1. Scholes.
2. Gerrard.
3. Lampard.
If it is personal, why make it public here? Lol
One of the best football RUclipsrs you and the sds podcast are world class
Gerrard best box to box defends well, excellent passing ranges only thing missing from him was to control the tempo of game at will. It was a great loss for England to not have a coach to gel that golden generation to me it seem a very difficult task hence no good world cup result to show, Gerrard most complete midfielder.
Scholes is pure class but I love Gerrard form his energy, leadership and all action. Could do almost everything on the pitch
Great vid dude
Cheers!
You have great videos man keep it up
1. Paul Scholes + Keane midfielders of the decade 1990-2000 according to both the pundits and fans.
2. Paul Scholes and Keane midfielders of the decade 2000-2010 according to the pundits.
3. Paul Scholes and viera midfielders of the decade 2000-2010 according to the fans.
4. Paul Scholes midfielder of the first two decades 1990-2010, according to both pundits and the fans.
Thank you
Why should there be a debate even Paul scholes for sure ... the only one to not get hair dryer treatment ... May be the debate is about the best mid fielder I would argue him as the best English player ever
This channel is going places
Cheers man. Appreciate it!
Scholes is the glue that England national team never had after he retired. So its not surprising that the national team was never successful. Imagine building a house of wood without using any nails.
Scholes is in a league of his own compared to the other 2...The league of the greatest midfielders ever.
Agreed...League of his own in tackling
Charging up and down like an all rounder Gerrard. Finding a way to get in a position and score goals Lampard. Conducting a team with skill and intelligence and making players around him look better Scholes. It just depends what you prefer and what you think is more effective.
Great content really enjoying mate:)
Cheers!
TBH Scholes and Carrick I feel belonged to a different country/style of play they would have suited the Italian or Spanish games much better but despite that Scholes being on the same level as these two without being as great a physical athelete is a sign of his greatness, at end of the day he wouldn't have got the Ballon D'Or votes cause the passing and technical aspect didn't quite get the recognition in individual awards until Pirlo and Italy won the World Cup and then the generational Barcelona team came along who emphasised solely on passing, Scholes would have fit that mould but United's game play while if sat down and thoroughly analysed we can see how important Scholes and Carrick were that wasn't the focal point visible to the world it was Rooney, Giggs, Beckham, Ronaldo, van Nistelrooy, Nani, Berbatov, Tevez, van Persie. The Wingers and Strikers tearing up the defences and crossing, Neither Scholes or Carrick were outspoken or tried to be as involved in the off-field stuff as the Lampard and Gerrard hence leading them further away from catching the public eye. That's my two cents on why Scholes never got a BallonD'Or vote and why Carrick is probably the most underrated midfielder of PL era.
Really depends for what type of play style your looking for, if you want deep lying playmakers then scholes wins. If your looking for goal involvements then Lampard is the clear winner if your looking for leadership then Gerrard wins
Paul Scopes, hands down unbelievable quality and footy intelligence, and importantly the crucial member of one of the all time best teams over two decades in the world's top league. (ps I am not a ManU/Lpool/Chelski fan)
Chelsea wasn't far from that team, and Lampard was actually the main guy on that team. Scholes was behind Ronaldo, Tevez, Vidic, Ferdinand, Edwin Van der Sar, and Rooney. Gerrard never had a team that good, but he didn't have teammates that were as good
I looked in the comments thinking everyone would but gerrard but I’m happy to see everyone putting scholes I’ve been told that scholes was the worst out of them all just hope everyone in the comments aren’t biased United fans scholes=🐐
Great comparison, 3 great players. And Scholes was just fit every year when the team needs him.
Haven't watched but if the answer isn't scholesey you're ill
Lol😂
You have corona virus
1. Paul Scholes. 2. Frank Lampard. 3. Steven Gerrard. Scholes was undoubtedly the best passer of the ball, and probably the best reader of the game. He was also a prolific scorer from central midfield, with only one weakness: his tackling was erratic, and often earned him yellow cards. Lampard was the perfect role model for any young player: he fulfilled and even exceeded his potential through hard work and total commitment. As a central midfielder, he scored more goals than most strikers, and all sorts of goals too. Probably the least naturally talented of the three, Lampard's achievements for club and country were phenomenal. Gerrard was also phenomenal, with his workrate, his commitment, and his leadership: his qualities as a leader, on top of his playing ability, made him indispensible to both club and country. All three players would/should have complimented each other in a 3 man midfield, with Cole and Beckham as wing backs, but unfortunately England persisted with a 4-4-2 formation, which left Lampard and Gerrard alone in the middle of the park, and Scholes on the left wing!
what an analysis! shame that Gerrard came third tho, but still, for me a hardhead overseas liverpool fan, im always biased to Gerrard at the end. He's a one in a million chances for a liverpool player, and his reign post-Houlier and pre-Klopp era is simply one of the most wonderful and structured occurence in LFC's history.
Gerrard third?
Dogshit because Lampard played for oily Chelshea and Scholes a dominant Man U team
No way would they have been able to do what Gerrard did in an average Liverpool
Great vid!
Thanks!
SCHOLES.
End of Discussion.
Your mum!!!!!
Open discussion
Your channel is amazing
Never quit pls
Your vids are quality, it will take time for immense growth but yr channel is amazing.
Zinedine Zidane was once asked in an interview, “What does it feel like to be the best player in the world?” The Frenchman replied, “I don’t know, ask Paul Scholes”
But He Also said in 05 Gerrard IS the Best Midfielder in the World!!
No he didn't
Simply gerrard!
Period!
Considering the team he played in..no debate here..scholes and lampard had world class players but gerrard carried lfc single handedly..what a true icon!
💯 goated!
Nice video. Didn't know Scholesy began as a striker. It's always fun debate between these three midfielders, and my pick has to be Scholesy as always. Not because I'm a Red Devil fan, but because he truly is the best of all three. Of course he wasn't gifted with the physicality of his competitors, but the intelligence, shot technique, pace and workrate made him a joy to watch. Good old 90's.
Cheers! Yeah seems a popular opinion. The guy was too versatile.
Paul scholes. Einstein of football.....
Passes, shooting, intelligence. Paul scholes in the beginning was a threat in the front of the goal as well.
Imagine even Xavi Hernandez, Patrick Viera, Zidane talks so highly of you....
The other 2 were the main stars in there teams for most of the time so they seemed better IMO, Scholes was a top player in an amazing team with other top players so he didnt stand out as much
Yeah Lampard obviously played with scrubs...
@@choke9270 obviously lampard had a wonder team but none of them were close the treble winning side or the 2007/08 United squad
@@nimesh3990 disagree, united only had a better front 3 than Chelsea did
@ uefa says otherwise, united had the best forward while chelsea got midfielder,defender and keeper. Chelsea definitely had the better team
@@blank1933 Well literally every football fan in existence knows 08 United was definitely in the top 4 best sides ever. So Chelsea can't have had a better team, not to mention United won the league that season, and best Chelsea in the UCL final.
In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen - the most complete - is Scholes," said Xavi. "He can play the final pass, he can score, he is strong, he never gets knocked off the ball and he doesn't give possession away. If he had been Spanish then maybe he would have been valued more
Three of the greatest midfielders of Premier league history without a doubt.
I might be bit biased, because I have supported Manchester United ever since I started watching football, but to see Scholes doing what he could do was just phenomenal.
Lampard was a scoring machine. Gerard could do it all and carried Liverpool alone basically.
But Scholes controlled the game. He was pivotal in every part of United's game. He was the focal point around which United defended great and attacked great. He basically dictated the game.
So, even if I might be biased, if we go on the words of some of the greatest midfielders of that era, most of whom said the same name, Scholes should be the winner of this debate, without taking anything away from the other two.
Paul Scholes was an all-arounda to me. No body dictated plays like him.
If only he was flashy...
Gerrard was way more well rounded. Lampard was a better goal scorer, Scholes was a better passer, Gerrard was great at everything. Just sucks we had poor teams to surround Stevie with
Best English midfielder ever is Sir Bobby Charlton...
Should be up there for best player ever
Bobby Charlton would have said it was Duncan Edwards.
@@hughtube5154 true... I think he did say that he was best player he ever played with.
But Sir Bobby is too humble, he is a true role model
Unequivocally Paul scholes is the goat
Lampard was a amazing player and is probably the best goalscoring midfielder of all time but Schools had something that made him the better midfielder and Gerrard was good one of the best but schools was the footballer and lampard was the man to mark
I'm a Liverpool fan and I genuinely wouldn't put my scouse lens on but l think as a complete footballer Gerrard was the very best of the 3. He was box to box and a good leader. Could play in any position the other two couldn't perform creditably. That to me made him the best. Lampard was a the best goal poacher, a sniffer and if the others chose to do same the would have scored similarly. Scholes was a greater controller of the midfield. A real exponent. I always admired him and had wished he played for Liverpool but back to the debate i think Gerrard was the best with of them being too too class. Remember Lampard and Scholes played in super teams but Gerrard made Liverpool a super team to compete or challenge the teams squarely
The thing gets even crazy when you realise that scholes was really troubled by his eye sight for almost a decade in his late career... Yet manages to outclass everyone 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥just brilliant..