Scholes and Butt Face Backlash Over Martinez Criticism as United Faithful Rally Behind Defender

The fallout from Paul Scholes and Nicky Butt's podcast remarks about Lisandro Martinez has intensified, with Manchester United's fanbase delivering a clear verdict: the Class of '92 have crossed a line.

After watching their latest episode, which included an apology to the Argentine defender, one thing became abundantly clear—it was the sort of reluctant, heavily-caveated mea culpa that middle-aged men specialise in. Butt suggested the criticism modern players receive pales in comparison to what his generation endured, conveniently overlooking the rather significant arrival of social media and an internet culture obsessed with manufactured outrage for engagement.

Scholes, who drew particular attention for his comments, claimed he was merely having a laugh. Yet he acknowledged that had the boot been on the other foot, he'd have been upset himself. More tellingly, he conceded his actual opinion of Martinez hasn't shifted—United still can't win the league with him at centre-back.

This is where the argument crumbles. Thirteen years without a title. An average deficit of 24 points to the leaders across those years. A squad nowhere near the physical or mental condition required to mount a genuine challenge. A European final lost to Spurs—and not even prime Spurs, but arguably their worst iteration in years. The notion that Martinez is the problem strains credibility.

The broader issue, according to supporters, is that Scholes, Butt, Roy Keane and their ilk remain trapped in a comparison trap. They measure the current United against the one they knew, the one that's been gone for over a decade. That's not helpful commentary; it's nostalgia dressed up as analysis.

One fan from Cape Town articulated the frustration perfectly: these are multi-millionaires already, yet they chase clicks by criticising their own club's players rather than offering constructive support. The suggestion that jealousy plays a role—that they're frustrated the club didn't create roles for them—has gained traction among the faithful.

The Martinez row also exposed what many see as an uncomfortable pattern. The initial podcast segment was crude; the follow-up response showed their true colours, one supporter contended. The characterisation of Class of '92 members ranged from unflattering to scathing, with Phil Neville emerging as the sole figure drawing no significant criticism.

There's a legitimate question about what these former players are trying to achieve. Great footballers, certainly. But their willingness to weaponise their platforms against current squad members—particularly when they're already financially secure—strikes many as unprofessional and disloyal.

For a club steeped in tradition, the irony is sharp: those who should be custodians of United's legacy are actively tarnishing it through constant negativity and manufactured controversy. The supporters have noticed. And they're not impressed.