Despite being labelled as the quiet one during his illustrious playing days, Paul Scholes certainly isn’t shy when it comes to ruffling some feathers now he’s hung up his boots.
The midfield legend discussed all things United during this week’s instalment of The Overlap Fan Debate, unsurprisingly voicing his concerns over numerous aspects of how the club’s season has started.
He can expect to find himself in hot water with Erik ten Hag, too, as he has directly disputed the manager’s recent comments regarding Marcus Rashford being dropped from the XI at Selhurst Park.
It was a decision that raised the eyebrows of supporters and pundits on the day, primarily because the forward had just been amongst the goals again – scoring three times in two matches – after a turbulent period in his career, during which he struggled significantly to make his mark on games.
With Rashford, it’s always been evident, as is the case with most players, that he has to be brimming with confidence if you want to get the best out of him. Such self-belief only comes from a positive run of form, so halting that could well have implications on how he fares upon his return to the line-up.
Yet, the manager is well within his rights to rotate his squad as he sees fit. Alejandro Garnacho and Amad Diallo, both of whom started the clash, have been in scintillating form since the term began and would’ve been well within their rights to feel aggrieved had they not been given the nod.
Scholes disputes Ten Hag’s claims
Ten Hag had clarified his logic before kick-off, citing rotational reasons, but Scholes isn’t having any of it.
“Leaving Rashford out on Saturday… he’s been up to something hasn’t he?” the treble-winner questioned.
“Come on. He’s not scored for such a long time – all of a sudden, he comes and scores three goals in two games, and now he’s not playing? He’s said it was rotation, but come on, do me a favour, no chance.”
You’re just guessing, Mr. Scholes. Disciplinary issue and I doubt EtH would even have had Rashford on the bench – it’s not much of a punishment, is it? I’ll go with rotation; I happen to think it wasn’t a good decision, but it’s the Manager’s to make and I see no need to look any deeper.
David Miller – Think before you talk- NO coach would bench a player who is on fire at the moment just for rotation. Get into the FACT – ETH is an average coach at best.
Not sure what your point is, MU, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You call Ten Hag average at best, but also claim no coach would bench an on-fire player for the sake of rotation, but that’s precisely what EtH did. So, do you know something we don’t, or are you joining Paul Scholes in the guessing game? Again I make the point that, if it was a disciplinary matter (pure speculation), bringing a player on as a Sub instead of starting them isn’t the most savage punishment. As Rashford unfortunately has a little form in the ill-discipline stakes, I would think it more likely a reoccurrence would have seen him dropped completely.
Finally: just because I have an opinion that differs from yours, it doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with my thinking.