Fabian Delph - Signed for Manchester City

[pauliewalnuts]

The main difference between Scholes and Cattermole is that Scholes is an extremely gifted player, whereas Cattermole is someone who runs around football pitches kicking people, that's far and away the main reason they're rated differently.

Cattermole would have gone the same way coming through Man United's youth policy in the early 90s as Robbie Savage did - out the door.

[Clampy]

Cattermole had an half decent game last night, but he's still rubbish.

[villa kicks]

Delph best midfielder and best player this season.

More yellow cards the goals is his biggest issue . Far too many in fact. Plus his one goal was when he had space and time to pick his spot and didnt have to rush it. Had been previously unlucky with the post in other match.

What you can guarntee with Delph as well as his tackles(fouls) is his dribbles at least once a match. I would like him to do this at the right time and make better decisions both when to pass dribble and shoot.
His long passing has improved but his crosses are woeful and similarly in any assist in creating goals scoring chances.

I think he will develop into star and key man if he can get this right

[charlie659]

Off to Spurs for £15m within two years, they like midfielders.

[SamTheMouse]

i dont entirely agree.  If Clattermole had been in the class of 92, surrounded by a team that referees loved, he would have been remembered differently.  And if Scholes had come through in Plunderlands class of 2008, ditto.  Im not saying they are the same player, just ratd differently due to circumstances.  Look at John O Shit and Wes-give-the-ball-away-Brown.  Lucky players to have come through surrounded by excellence.  Now....not so great

The man has a point. Nicky Butt, anyone?

[Monty]

Nicky Butt, sure, but comparisons between Scholes and Cattermole are ridiculous. Scholes couldn't tackle, but his passing game was one of the best in Europe - Cattermole can't tackle, but his game is meant to be based around tackling, which leaves him with no game.

[SoccerHQ]

Think his contract has 18 months left. Would imagine they'll be an offer in the summer. Now question here is on what terms? I think he's quite well paid already in the squad, is probably in the top 5 wage earners.

He's been excellent for the last year but hardly an irreplaceable central midfielder.

[peter w]

Even though he got massive respect from pretty much everyone, I still don't think he got as much as he should have, he still managed to be underrated.

He seems to be more respected now in retrospect than he was during his career. For instance he was wasted as an England player by being stuck out on the left for most of the time in favour of a 4-4-2 system with Gerrard and Lampard in the centre. Really we should have either played 3 in the centre or picked and chose for the occasion or opponent whilst making sure Scholes wasn't wasted. Or that he felt valued so that he didn't retire early.

And there in a nutshell is why England are lightyears behind at international level.

Even now we're for the most part stuck dogmatically with 442, for as far as I can see no better reason than it worked for Ramsey 48 years ago.

At the time we were pissing about with Scholes on the left of a 442, he was playing just of either a front one or front two for his club and looking like one of the best link-men / midfielders in Europe and being a constant goal threat himself.

Re his retirement from international football, I think it was intimated that Fergie had told him that if he wanted a new big fat contract he'd needed to stop playing for England. After years of banging his head up against a wall, could you really blame him if that was the case?

For years, if we could have looked beyond 442, and possibly even today, you could if you really wanted to, find a formation that could accommodate Lampard and Gerard without completely buggering the rest of the team up.  If you were to use both 4-2-3-1 would probably work best, with Gerard one of the two to limit the amount of running he'd have to do.

As for Delph, he could make either a central or wide left position in 4-3-3- or 4-2-3-1 his own.  Great that we're finally getting to see what all the fuss was about 5 years ago.
Hard to believe that he's only just turned 24.  Hopefully we'll see him at his best over the next 6-7 years when he's at his peak.

Well, up to a point.

4-4-2 suited the players available at the time. It's easy to forget that Lampard and Gerrard were two of the best midfielders around at the time. To accommodate all 3 we would have risked exposing one flank because Beckham was a shoo-in on the right. Whatever we might think now he was justified in being in the team. Scholes was a good player but his tackling wasn't up to it and Gerrard and Lampard did show more. With all 4 in then you'd need a 5th player on the left for balance. Again, at the time Owen fed a lot off Heskey so they were the reason for playing two up front. Unless it went 3-5-2 then 4-4-2 was the only possible formation with the players available. 3-5-2 was worked out after it became vogue at Italia 90 and few years after that. 4-4-2 with one of the 3 being asked to fill in on the lank was the only reasonable formation for me.

[Monty]

It's well argued, Peter, but there are a few points against:

1) Scholes was much, much better than Lampard, Gerrard and Beckham, and Beckham was only a shoo-in on the right of midfield because, unlike everyone else in the world, we continued to allow the 'right-midfield' position to exist even after it had been made completely obsolete. Scholes was the only one whose ego wasn't so colossal as to complain when put at 'left-midfield', so he was stuck there.

2) Strict, rigid, stay-in-your-square 4-4-2 was, and is, dead. It wasn't at Italia '90 that 3-5-2 came into vogue, it was then that England caught up with everyone else, because 4-4-2 had been killed in Mexico '86. 3-5-2 against 4-4-2 set up two man-markers on the strikers with a sweeper spare, then overran the centre of midfield with a 3-against-2 situation. 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 then killed 3-5-2 and thank God it did, because 3-5-2 got very very boring inn the 90s, but on the international stage nobody played 4-4-2 with any success, or at least nobody did so as an attacking system, but occasionally as a dig-in-and-counter system.

[john2710]

I think Delph would be better with a proper defensive midfielder alongside him. You have to remember that he has little more than a seasons experience at Premiership level.

[eamonn]

But 3-5-2 for the Villa, '95-'98 saw us play our best football between '93 and now.

[AV82EC]

But 3-5-2 for the Villa, '95-'98 saw us play our best football between '93 and now.

By 97/98 we were getting found out though and we didn't adapt and move on.

[Clark W Griswold]

Much, much better?
Premier League players are much, much better than League 2 players. You're comparing a load of England Internationals who are all pretty similar standard. IMO they are all close in ability but i would rank them in the following order;
1 Beckham
2 Gerrard
3 Scholes
4 Lampard

[SheffieldVillain]

Much, much better?
Premier League players are much, much better than League 2 players. You're comparing a load of England Internationals who are all pretty similar standard. IMO they are all close in ability but i would rank them in the following order;
1 Beckham
2 Gerrard
3 Scholes
4 Lampard

I think it depends on if you're ranking them on achievement or pure natural ability. For me Beckham and Lampard are examples of players who made the best of what they were given but Scholes was far more talented to start with.  Didn't Zidane once call him the best midfielder he'd played with or against? A pretty big compliment coming from someone like him.

[peter w]

But Scholes contributed neither enough goals or assists to be in the team ahead of Lampard or Beckham. He didn't tackle and cover as much ground as Gerrard. There are arguments that our midfield didn't contribute as much as they could have but Scholes isn't above that criticism. Also, it's worth remembering that Gerrard was played on the left a lot and Scholes wasn't the only player stuck out there for the sake of balance.