Ibime:


Scoles started as the 2nd midfielder in a 4-4-2 with Roy Keane.

He wasn't no 2nd striker, not where Sheringham, Solskjaer, Dwight Yorke, Andy Cole and Cantona dey. He can only have played a couple of games as a 2nd striker.

He and Barry have played the same position for the bulk of their career.

Paul Scholes actually played quite a number of matches as a striker earlier on. Between 1994 when he broke into the team and around 1997 when Roy Keane injured his cruciate ligament in the first Alf Inge Haaland tackle Paul Scholes was used mainly in attack while first choice midfield was Keane and Butt.
The injury allowed Scholes to gain a starting shirt in midfield with Butt and when Keano got back in 1998 it was Butt and not Scholes who went to the bench.

Nihilist:



Btw using your equation...


Iniesta = (34 goals + 81 assists)/386 league games = 0.30 ga per game
Scholes = (107 goals + 34 assists)/499 league games = 0.28 ga per game


I hope this does not mean what I think it means...

Put your money where your mouth is on the G Barry vs Scholes metric nigga.

This calculation above shows Iniesta an attacking midfielder is barely outproducing a deep lying midfielder which is a shame.

afrodoc2:


Paul Scholes actually played quite a number of matches as a striker earlier on. Between 1994 when he broke into the team and around 1997 when Roy Keane injured his crucial ligament in the first Alf Inge Haaland tackle Paul Scholes was used mainly in attack while first choice midfield was Keane and Butt.
The injury allowed Scholes to gain a starting shirt in midfield with Butt and when Keano got back in 1998 it was Butt and not Scholes who went to the bench.

Jan 1995 to 1997, Andy Cole and Cantona were Utds 2 upfront. No space for Paul Scholes there.

I know what Dadehmola is talking about. His first couple of games he played as a 2nd forward. That was how he was introduced to the Old Trafford crowd.

afrodoc2:


Paul Scholes actually played quite a number of matches as a striker earlier on. Between 1994 when he broke into the team and around 1997 when Roy Keane injured his crucial ligament in the first Alf Inge Haaland tackle Paul Scholes was used mainly in attack while first choice midfield was Keane and Butt.
The injury allowed Scholes to gain a starting shirt in midfield with Butt and when Keano got back in 1998 it was Butt and not Scholes who went to the bench.

...not to mention the 2002/2003 season when he partnered Van Nistelrooy, scoring 20goals or so.

Everybody wey dey watch ball that year sabi say scholes' sojourn as a permanent CMF started around 2004 Thereabout but Ibime dey find straws to grasp at.

See as e wan shift argument - he wants us to compare like for like when it became obvious that a defensive minded player could actually be more "productive" than an AMF (by Ibime's metrics)!

Ibime:


Put your money where your mouth is on the G Barry vs Scholes metric nigga.

This calculation above shows Iniesta an attacking midfielder is barely outproducing a deep lying midfielder which is a shame.

You've been told by various manyoo fans thar Scholes played in a more attacking position than Barry for most of his career. Supporting striker, Attacking Mid and only played deep towards the end of his career.

And he played with some of the best attackers ever to play in the UK...yet he has less assists than a DM playing with Agbonlahor and John Carew.

Scholes is less 'productive' than Iniesta....despite playing the same position for most of his career.

Is Scholes an unproductive nigga....yes or no?

Ibime:


Jan 1995 to 1997, Andy Cole and Cantona were Utds 2 upfront. No space for Paul Scholes there.

I know what Dadehmola is talking about. His first couple of games he played as a 2nd forward. That was how he was introduced to the Old Trafford crowd.

Who is the deeplying midfielder in a duo of Keane and Scholes in an era when 442 diamond was reigning ?

Ibime:


Jan 1995 to 1997, Andy Cole and Cantona were Utds 2 upfront. No space for Paul Scholes there.

I know what Dadehmola is talking about. His first couple of games he played as a 2nd forward. That was how he was introduced to the Old Trafford crowd.

There was no Yorke and Sheringham too as you earlier claimed. In those years Scholes was a sub playing both in attack and midfield( wherever space appeared) and he played many many matches in attack.
For example from Jan 1995 to October 1995 when Cantona was banned for the Kung fu kick incident our attack was Scholes and Andy Cole......and the soon departed Sparky
And our midfield was Keane,Butt.......and the soon departed Guvnor

Dadehmola:


...not to mention the 2002/2003 season when he partnered Van Nistelrooy, scoring 20goals or so.

Everybody wey dey watch ball that year sabi say scholes' sojourn as a permanent CMF started around 2004 Thereabout but Ibime dey find straws to grasp at.

See as e wan shift argument - he wants us to compare like for like when it became obvious that a defensive minded player could actually be more "productive" that an AMF (by Ibime's metrics)!

2003 was the only season Scholes played in a 3 man midfield with Veron and Keane.

He did not partner anyone upfront. Infact Veron was supposed to be the AM of the three, yet Scholes popped 20 goals.

Compare what a productive nigga did in his only season in a 3 man midfield vs what an unproductive nigga (Iniesta) produces every season.

Nihilist:



Who is the deeplying midfielder in a duo of Keane and Scholes in an era when 442 diamond was reigning ?

In a 4-4-2 era, you have 2 strikers and the CM can be expected to score 8-10 goals in an good season. Direct comparison with a 4-3-3 would place that player more toward the CM while the second forward would be closer to today's AM. Not direct but comparable.

Ibime:


In a 4-4-2 era, you have 2 strikers and the CM can be expected to score 8-10 goals in an good season. Direct comparison with a 4-3-3 would place that player more toward the CM while the second forward would be closer to today's AM. Not direct but comparable.

Its a simple question.
Who was the deeplying midfielder and who was the attacking mid in Scholes and Keane?

Nihilist:


You've been told by various manyoo fans thar Scholes played in a more attacking position than Barry for most of his career. Supporting striker, Attacking Mid and only played deep towards the end of his career.

And he played with some of the best attackers ever to play in the UK...yet he has less assists than a DM playing with Agbonlahor and John Carew.

Scholes is less 'productive' than Iniesta....despite playing the same position for most of his career.

Is Scholes an unproductive nigga....yes or no?

You were not alive during that era. Leave experienced niggas to discuss.

1994 to 2004 (before 4-3-3), Paul Scholes did not play more than a handful of games as a 2nd striker. He was the 2nd midfielder in a 4-4-2 for the majority of that period.

2004 to 2013, he was a permanent deep lying midfielder.

Ibime:


2003 was the only season Scholes played in a 3 man midfield with Veron and Keane.

He did not partner anyone upfront. Infact Veron was supposed to be the AM of the three, yet Scholes popped 20 goals.

Scholes partnered Ruud in attack that season. We only reverted to a 4-3-3 in the UCL (especially away from home).

Scholes:

The season I enjoyed most in my career was the one (2002-03) when I played a lot of games up front with Ruud (van Nistelrooy). That’s the one and only time I’ve managed 20 goals in a season.'

Ibime:

Compare what a productive nigga did in his only season in a 3 man midfield vs what an unproductive nigga (Iniesta) produces every season.

Lol.

No dey shift goalposts like Dayo abeg...

Let's focus on a particular conclusion that could be drawn from your analogies...

Judging by your definition of productivity, Can we confidently say that Gareth Barry was more productive than scholes (despite the later playing in a much more advanced role for a considerable period of his career...and ofcourse, for a better team)??

Ibime:


In a 4-4-2 era, you have 2 strikers and the CM can be expected to score 8-10 goals in an good season. Direct comparison with a 4-3-3 would place that player more toward the CM while the second forward would be closer to today's AM. Not direct but comparable.

Give us 5 AM in a 4-3-3 with good goals return?

I am sure I have seen a post where you called Iniesta a CM

raumdeuter:


Give us 5 AM in a 4-3-3 with good goals return?

I am sure I have seen a post where you called Iniesta a CM

The main teams that play 4-3-3 are Barca, PSG, Liverpool, Chelsea and Napoli to a lesser extent - goalscorers include Gerrard, Lampard, Matuidi and Hamsik. In previous years, we had Man City with Yaya Toure scoring 15 goals a season.

Then we can take it to 4-2-3-1 which is a slight variant and then you have Ozil, De Bruyne, Muller etc etc etc.

Does Iniesta not two have arms and two legs like the players mentioned above?

Lol Iniesta has suffered in your hands. From "best midfielder in the game" to "unproductive nigga" now he is a cripple?

Dadehmola:

Scholes partnered Ruud in attack that season. We only reverted to a 4-3-3 in the UCL (especially away from home)

Solskjaer started 29 league games that season, Van Nistelrooy started 33 games.

Assuming 38 league games a season, please tell me how many matches Scholes could have played as a support striker.

It's simple Mathematics. Just because Scholes said he was pushed upfront a few times, don't twist facts nigga. By my calculation, that means he started upfront 9 times (in Solskjaers absence) if he wasn't injured himself.

Dadehmola:

Judging by your definition of productivity, Can we confidently say that Gareth Barry was more productive than scholes (despite the later playing in a much more advanced role for a considerable period of his career...and ofcourse, for better team)??

Scholes has 155 goals in his career. What productivity?

Nihilist is a child in football. He only started knowing himself in 2003. Don't get sucked into his foolish analogies based on incomplete information. He would be debating something not knowing I'm holding 3 times as much information as he does.

I could have told him that Gareth Barry's first season in 1998, he played left-back and centre-back the whole season, but I didn't, because he would use that to his advantage.

I could have told him that he spent the next 5 years after that playing as a left-winger, but I didn't. I could have told him he was Villa's set piece taker which is where most of his assists came from, but I didn't.

All I want is my £100 - I want Nihilist to put his money where his mouth is and let's calculate whether Paul Scholes productivity is not 50% higher than Gareth Barry's.

Ibime:


Scholes has 155 goals in his career. What productivity?

Nihilist is a child in football. He only started knowing himself in 2003. Don't get sucked into his foolish analogies based on incomplete information. He would be debating something not knowing I'm holding 3 times as much information as he does.

I could have told him that Gareth Barry's first season in 1998, he played left-back and centre-back the whole season, but I didn't, because he would use that to his advantage.

I could have told him that he spent the next 5 years after that playing as a left-winger, but I didn't. I could have told him he was Villa's set piece taker which is where most of his assists came from, but I didn't.

All I want is my £100 - I want Nihilist to put his money where his mouth is and let's calculate whether Paul Scholes productivity is not 50% higher than Gareth Barry's.

Ibime today is Thursday abeg.

The simple point is that Barry has more assists than Scholes despite playing in the Pivot(And Left and Centre Back ) for a really shitty team and with really shitty team mates. Is Scholes an unproductive nigga...yes or no?

Also using the equation that you recommended here:

Ibime:


Productivity is goals + assists nigga.

If you are having trouble with Maths, kindly supply us those Barry stats you claim you saw.

We will do the metric

Scholes - (goals + assists)/ games

vs

Barry - (goals + assists)/ games

Iniesta is more productive than Paul Scholes. Is Scholes an Unproductive Nigga? Yes or No


The rest of your 'childish' yarns dont't even follow. I entered Uni in 2004 and and attended my first EPL game in1999 - How I only 'understood myself in 2003' is as irrelevant as it is illogical.


Anyway, Just answer the question.

By Ibime's logic. Cr7 is the greatest Madrid player

Meanwhile. . .

The Blues' incoming manager was expected to deploy the 3-5-2 his Italy team play but it is now understood he feels a gung-ho 4-2-4 suits English football better

Antonio Conte has a tactical masterplan to rebuild the Chelsea squad for next season.

Italy boss Conte, renowned for being one of the best tacticians in Europe, wants to switch the Blues to a 4-2-4 formation when he gets to work in west London after this summer's Euros, and is drawing up a list of transfer targets to suit his ideas.

It means Chelsea fans could be set for an exciting, attacking brand of football next season as he tries to take the Premier League by storm.

Conte has used a 3-5-2 system with the Azzurri, and it was thought that the outgoing champions might adopt that formation — which would have meant a major defensive reshuffle.

But Mirror Sport understands the former Juventus boss has told scouts and agents he wants to play a different way which would be suited to English football.

The 46-year-old believes the open, attacking style of the game in England is tailor-made for his tactical masterplan - especially having seen Leicester do so well in a 4-4-2 under his fellow Italian Claudio Ranieri.

Conte, known for a strict defensive style, used 4-2-4 at another Italian club, Bari, earlier in his managerial career.

Chelsea have set their sights on Atletico Madrid's France international forward Antoine Griezmann as their big summer target and that would make a major statement.

Conte is also hopeful current star attackers Eden Hazard and Diego Costa will stay at Stamford Bridge as he is determined to strengthen rather than lose his biggest players.

Going all-out attack would suggest he will go for a new forward to complement Costa, and a huge money bid for Griezmann would also fit into a bold set-up.

Paris Saint-Germain playmaker Javier Pastore is another potential target, while Roma’s Radja Nainggolan tops the midfield hit-list.

Juventus and Italy central defender Leonardo Bonucci is another on the radar, while PSG striker Zlatan Ibrahimovic fancies a move to London.

Nihilist:


Yes lets do the Maths.

Agbonlahor 73 league goals in 10 seasons (7.3 goals per season or 0.2 goals per game)

Emile Hesky 9 league goals in 4 seasons (0.4 goals per season or 0.09 goals per game)

These are examples of the Wastemen than Barry was assisting. Try and factor these profligate wastemen into your calculations abeg.

And then compare to Scholes playing with Rooney(177 league goals), RVN(95 league goals)

And tell me why Scholes has only 34 premier league assists


Btw using your equation...


Iniesta = (34 goals + 81 assists)/386 league games = 0.30 ga per game
Scholes = (107 goals + 34 assists)/499 league games = 0.28 ga per game


I hope this does not mean what I think it means...

Walai, you no be better person at all.

Nihilist:


Ibime today is Thursday abeg.

The simple point is that Barry has more assists than Scholes despite playing in the Pivot(And Left and Centre Back ) for a really shitty team and with really shitty team mates. Is Scholes an unproductive nigga...yes or no?

Also using the equation that you recommended here:


Iniesta is more productive than Paul Scholes. Is Scholes an Unproductive Nigga? Yes or No


The rest of your 'childish' yarns dont't even follow. I entered Uni in 2004 and and attended my first EPL game in1999 - How I only 'understood myself in 2003' is as irrelevant as it is illogical.


Anyway, Just answer the question.

Nigga you were supporting Leicester in 2003. How could you know yourself?

£100 says Scholes is 50% more productive than Barry - place the bet. I no get time for all this long yarns. I want my money.

ollah1:
By Ibime's logic. Cr7 is the greatest Madrid player

Ronaldo arrived Madrid in 2009 and became that club's record scorer just 6 years later.

Would you like me to put Raul ahead of him who took 14 years to do the same, or Di Stefano who took 11?

Ibime:


Ronaldo arrived Madrid in 2009 and became that club's record scorer just 6 years later.

Would you like me to put Raul ahead of him who took 14 years to do the same, or Di Stefano who took 11?

Nobody is taking about the duration he spent there. The discussion is in line with your logic (goals and assists).. it means he is Madrid greatest player.

Ibime:


Nigga you were supporting Leicester in 2003. How could you know yourself?

What does this nonsense even mean.

This is me in 2014

Nihilist:


I'm trebling up on Hazard, Costa, and Fab.

Leicester my 1st love, but dem must chop am

Nihilist:
PvA debut assist btw

And Leicester have fvcking scored!!!!!! 2-2

August last year

Nihilist:
I can only smile at Leicester's blistering start.

Up the Foxes

Let's just hope that Chelsea also do something lovely today

I still clearly dont know myself

Bros....Why does Barry have more assists than Scholes despite playing at Centreback? Is Scholes an Unproductive Nigga...Yes or No?

ollah1:


Nobody is taking about the duration he spent there. The discussion is in line with your logic (goals and assists).. it means he is Madrid greatest player.

Before nko?

Ibime:


Before nko?

This member said cr7 is the greatest player to ever wear the white jersey. He said he is the best player that ever played for real Madrid

Do you agree with him?

Cc usbcable
Krasid

I think I've made my point here

ollah1:


This member said cr7 is the greatest player to ever wear the white jersey. He said he is the best player that ever played for real Madrid

Do you agree with him?

Cc usbcable
Krasid

No, not yet.

Ibime:


The main teams that play 4-3-3 are Barca, PSG, Liverpool, Chelsea and Napoli to a lesser extent - goalscorers include Gerrard, Lampard, Matuidi and Hamsik. In previous years, we had Man City with Yaya Toure scoring 15 goals a season.

Then we can take it to 4-2-3-1 which is a slight variant and then you have Ozil, De Bruyne, Muller etc etc etc.

Does Iniesta not two have arms and two legs like the players mentioned above?

When did Liverpool play 4-3-3 with gerrard there, who were the front 3 for liverpool then and what was their goal return

When did Man city play 4-3-3? Who were the 3 strikers for Man City that time?

Can everyone stand down for 30mins Ibime oya lets do some numbers

In that list you gave Matuidi, Hamsik and Iniesta are the genuine 4-3-3 CM I can vouch for

I would need further evidence to show Gerrard and Yaya Toure played in a 4-3-3

So stats for Matuidi Hamsik and Iniesta coming

raumdeuter:
Can everyone stand down for 30mins Ibime oya lets do some numbers

In that list you gave Matuidi, Hamsik and Iniesta are the genuine 4-3-3 CM I can vouch for

I would need further evidence to show Gerrard and Yaya Toure played in a 4-3-3

So stats for Matuidi Hamsik and Iniesta coming

What is the difference between Matuidi, Hamsik, Gerrard, Lampard and Toure?

Care to explain?

For Matuidi, give us his yearly average since he joined PSG, same for Hamsik - let's compare with Iniesta.

Ibime:


What is the difference between Matuidi, Hamsik, Gerrard, Lampard and Toure?

Care to explain?

For Matuidi, give us his yearly average since he joined PSG, same for Hamsik - let's compare with Iniesta.

Hamsik Gerrard lampard are the dead ball takers for their clubs including FK and penalties

Of all 5 only Iniesta and Matuidi dont take PK for their clubs