After the release of Sir Alex Ferguson's autobiography, many player, plaudits and the general football community have spoken out about some of the claims Sir Alex has made.
One of the boldest statements made by Ferguson is that Steven Gerrard is not a “top, top player”.
As with any controversy in European football, Joey Barton got involved. The former QPR midfielder took to his Twitter account, claiming that Sir Alex is “obviously as good at judging players as he is at putting cones out. Steven Gerrard not a top, top player?"
Barton went on to claim that “On a serious note. Gerrard for me, was better than Roy Keane. At one stage he was up there with the best midfielders in the World."
A fair comparison in my opinion - but an opinion is all that can truly separate these two iconic midfielders of British football. On their day both Gerrard and Keane could be the best midfielder in the world. The real difficulty of comparing these two players comes, is that they played for two very different clubs. Gerrard, who has never won the Premier League, must look on enviously at Keane’s astonishing seven Premier League titles. Keane has also won double the amount of FA Cups (four compared to Gerrard’s two) while both players can claim one Champions League winners metal.
One cannot compare the players judging on honours alone. The fact that Gerrard has on so many occasions carried Liverpool Football Club by himself is a remarkable feat for one man. Gerrard almost singlehandedly won the Champions League title in 2005, not to mention his classic brace and his Man of the Match performance against West Ham in the FA cup final in 2006.
Two very similar players, but with very different reasons to earn any football fan’s respect. I can’t see how the current England captain is not a “Top, top” player and in fact, I tend to agree with Joey Barton. What is your opinion? Is this a fair comparison? And who will go down in the history books as the better player?