Higher State Of Consciousness

Exit Ryan Giggs. Enter Paul Scholes. With Giggs getting all the plaudits recently, but rested for the game against Fulham, it was the turn of Paul Scholes to step up and deliver a masterclass, and not just in volleying as The Telegraph quite rightly say, but in passing as well. Using the Guardian's new "Chalkboard technology" and my rudimentary maths I have worked out that Scholes had a pass completion rate of 97%. Which is doubly remarkable considering the audacious nature of some of those passes. David Mcdonnell in The Mirror sums it up nicely:

Like Giggs, Scholes is not able to command a regular first-team place these days. But his guile and experience - not to mention his shooting, vision and ability to execute a killer pass - remain potent as ever.

He masterminded United's triumph from his new deeperlying role in midfield, spraying long passes with frightening accuracy and causing panic among the opposition whenever he was on the ball.

The Telegraph report chips in with some praise from Sir Alex:

The focus in recent weeks has been on another thirtysomething, Ryan Giggs, but last night it was Scholes’ turn to remind everyone of his enduring class. Imperious in possession, he never wasted a pass. Time after time, he swept the ball wide to Cristiano Ronaldo or Ji-Sung Park. Again and again, he clipped little balls through the middle to Berbatov or Carlos Tevez.

“Scholes was fantastic and some of his switches of play were absolutely devastating,’’ smiled Ferguson. “He and Giggs are a great example to young players in the way that they live their lives, but they have kept their ambition which is important. We are so delighted and proud to have them here.’’

The Guardian's Andy Hunter also singles out Scholes for praise:

Paul Scholes led an imperious display from the beginning, establishing United's superiority even before a 12th-minute goal that rolled back the years while illustrating his influence on the present. Always the man available to take pressure and possession off his defenders, and frequently dropping 50-yard passes on to the toes of Cristiano Ronaldo, the 34-year-old put United in the ascendancy with his first league goal of the season. It was a strike that evoked memories of Valley Parade in March 2002, though Mark Schwarzer will hope it does not linger in the collective conscious that long.

While The Independent's report by Sam Wallace is a little more subdued, probably because, as he says it was "a performance that was difficult to fault", and therefore he's left with nothing negative to say.
The Mail's Matt Lawton praises our squad, not so much it's depth as for the way it assimilates into a team:

The champions of England, Europe and the world are looking unstoppable, and not just because they have extended their record to 14 consecutive clean sheets in the League.

...

It is the fact that Ferguson can make seven changes to his side and still make mincemeat of the opposition.

Last night the transition was as seamless as the football was fluent. Wonderful stuff.

Playing on Arsene Wenger's "Untouchables" thing The Sun claim that, "it would probably take Eliot Ness and his Chicago gang-busters to stop them as they head inexorably towards an 11th Premier League title."
Rooney's return is talked of by Oliver Kay in The Times, with comments by Sir Alex:

“It was his first touch, coming in late at the far post. I’ve seen him do that many times before,” Ferguson said. “He’s back now and hopefully he stays back. He’s 100 per cent fit, but at this stage of the season you don’t want to take chances with your players because, if you do, you can exacerbate things and they can be out for weeks, which you don’t want.”

Also in the article is the quotes by Sir Alex on Chelsea's title chances:

“I think they have played into our hands and that the title race now is going to be between ourselves and Liverpool,” Ferguson wrote. “I was shocked that Chelsea should part so soon with a manager of such great experience and proven success as Phil Scolari. Their haste is a reflection of the sad way the game is going, with everyone from owners, the board members, the supporters and the media demanding instant success and showing absolutely no patience in the pursuit of their ambition."

The Times also report someone else claiming Chelsea are out of the title race:

Jamie Carragher has dismissed Chelsea’s chances of winning the Barclays Premier League

I think Carragher should be more worried about Chelsea putting a run together and getting second than about Chelsea overhauling us to win the league...
There's some talk from Tevez on his future, from The Independent:

Tevez said.”It would be very difficult to have to leave one of the biggest clubs in the world. I spoke with the [chief executive] of the club [David Gill], but nothing is signed yet. We are now waiting until June and we will see what happens.”

Why this should "encourage Manchester City", as The Independent assert, I'm not exactly sure.
After yesterday's bizarre article ("Why David Moyes is the only man who can stop a domestic clean sweep for Manchester United"), The Mirror follow it up today with something even more nonsensical, by Alan Nixon, entitled, "The Premier League has become too easy for Manchester United". It would be fair enough if there was some coherent argument in it, but unfortunately there's no argument at all:

It's all very well breaking records for shut-outs and being on course for the biggest number of 1-0 wins ever.

None of those domestic landmarks are going to mean a jot in a week when Manchester United face their biggest test of the campaign so far - Jose Mourinho's Inter Milan at the San Siro.

The hard fact is that the Premier League has become too easy for United - and is not the ideal preparation for the kind of high-speed and intensity that awaits in the Champions League.

So it's such a hard fact that it needs precisely no evidence to support it? It wasn't that many weeks ago that everyone was saying how close the title race was, how the Premiership was the hardest it's ever been this year and citing the number of clubs involved in the relegation fight as evidence. But now it's a "hard fact" that the Premier League is too easy, meaningless when it comes to The Champions League. Unfortunately, even here his argument is absolutely ridiculous:

However, the suspicion is that Inter are in better form than United as they have an even bigger lead in Serie A than United in the Premier.

First; they are in better form than us? I'm not even going to bother looking at their form, but we've won 9 league games on the trot and, oh, had 14 clean sheets in a row. And their form is better than ours?!? OK. I can't resist, I've checked their form here and it goes like this WWDLWWDWW. Which is nine games. Our points tally from our last nine games - 27. Inter's tally - 20. Who's the form team?
Second; how does them having a bigger lead than us in their league prove, as he clearly asserts, that their form is better than ours? It clearly doesn't. That such a nonsensical sentence can get
into a national paper is surely cause for concern.
Thirdly; if he's saying our league is no guide to anything why even bring league form into it? Wouldn't a comparison between the relative strengths of the 2 leagues be in order? Indeed, given Inter's lead at the top of their league why isn't he writing an article about how easy the Italian League is and how it's no preparation for meeting us in The Champions League?
And as for the closing 2 paragraphs I'm really not sure what they're meant to mean:

Fergie has had the luxury of chopping and changing in an effortless run of wins, saving his players for the competition he rates the most important.

But has Ferguson played his strongest team this season? And does he know what that line-up is? The frightening fact is United have had it so easy this season they have never put their best 11 on the field at any stage because they needed to.

Does it make sense? He seems to say both that Sir Alex doesn't know his best eleven, while at the same time saying that he's not playing his best eleven because he doesn't need to, implying he does know his best eleven. Plus, in the context of the entire article (implying we're not good enough to beat Inter), to suggest that it's "frightening" that we haven't played this mythical best eleven this season seems absurd. He pretty much claims we're not very good and ends up saying we're frightening. Was this article written and edited in the pub late at night after a heavy session?