Giggs was great and it depends how you judge longevity, achievement and other things but he was never close to winning 3 PFA player of the years, in fact the one he got was very fortunate and probably should have went to Vidic. Not that controversial to say Salah now has had a higher best level than Giggs. But Salah is more like a striker if comparing to the 442 days and probably better compared to the likes of Henry, Ronaldo, Rooney etc than Giggs who was focused on creating.
Mo Salah | PFA Player's Player of the Year
- Thread starter Robbie Boy
- Start date
Absolutely.
Best played a role more similar to Salah, labelled a forward and spending far more time in the final 3rd than Giggs. Giggs did far more defensive work in a much more 2-way role against far, far more superior opponents than Barnes ever faced in his career. A huge portion of Giggs’ legacy comes from his epic tussles with Zanetti, for example. Giggs was injured frequently during domestic campaigns, so runs of performance therein are not going to be as forthcoming.
There is no ‘Barnes and Best’. Those are players operating in different stratospheres, which is why Best is a mainstay in all-time lists there or thereabouts 7ish-20ish and Barnes is nowhere to be seen.
Giggs showed his very, very best on a superior platform than domestic football, often being United best or par best player in the biggest CL ties. One stellar showing against a peak Zanetti (let alone plenty) is worth an untold amount more than showboating against inferior opposition in inferior teams. Barnes has no such opponent to vouch for him.
You’re really on a hiding to nothing here, and I actually rate Barnes highly. Giggs biggest domestic opponent was his hamstrings - he didn’t get to have unhindered runs of form at domestic level where the others did.
Best wasn't a classic winger, he was a roaming forward who would drift along the whole frontline.
It absolutely is a question. If you take the totality of both of their careers into account, the fact that they had different roles in their teams and the fact that they played in different eras. Salah running around like a headless chicken at Basel and flopping at Chelsea is part of the equation. Obviously, he got better.
And him winning player of the year more often doesn't mean anything to me. I'm sure Gerrard won player of the year more than Scholes and I think Scholes was a better player than Gerrard.
I think suggesting Giggs was better is a bit silly. Salah is a level above.
Giggs is up there as well. His consistency was unmatched. In the 90s and early 2000s he was the best winger in the League. Giggs also played as a traditional winger which is very different compared to the modern wide forwards like Salah.
Giggs' main job was to take on defenders 1v1, to have great crosses and to have as many asssists as possible. In Giggs' time wingers didn't really score a lot of goals and that's why he may have inferior stats to someone like Salah. That also applies to the early years of Ronaldo's career as well.
Even in 2008 it was strange to see a winger to top the goalscoring charts and I remember seeing the BBC footage of pundits being in shock that Ronaldo scored so many goals..
I think he was only the best winger during the second half of the 90’s. After that (probably around the treble-season, I’d say) Beckham overtook him and after Becks left it was more about Robben (not for long) and Cristiano.
Salah and Henry both has 8 seasons for Liverpool/Arsenal. Both made 6 team of the season, Salah won 3 player of the year, Henry won 2, both have 4 golden boots, Salah lead in assists 2 times, Henry 1 time (funny enough all 3 times they lead in goals and assists in the same season).
Feel like they are in the same tier as PL players at this point and I think they are the 2 players that are fighting for the spot as the best player in PL history.
Feel like they are in the same tier as PL players at this point and I think they are the 2 players that are fighting for the spot as the best player in PL history.
As in for wide attackers/strikers?
The irony is most all time PL XI will look like this as a front 3, because people will shoehorn the players in together:
Henry --- Kane --- Salah
(people mostly forget about Shearer these days)
Which would be terrible in terms of balance and constantly overrun.
Are you sure about Robben? I remember him being constantly injured in Chelsea and he only became that good when he came to Bayern.
Becks was very good but I would still rate Giggs more highly than Beckham. And Cristiano was obviously on the different level.
There was a short period when it was between Robben and Cristiano as the best/most excited wingers in PL. To be fair it was more about their potential promise but he did get into PL Team of the season in his first year here (2004/05). Obviously he was never the true Robben that we know by the later part of his career but I'd say that after Becks' departure and Cristiano's emergence you could try to slot Robben in there for a season... although realistically it's probably a straight line of succession from Beckham to Cristiano.
Do people really put Kane in their all-time PL XI all that often? Henry does often gets pushed out wide though, which is a shame.
I guess it depends on the age of the presenters/host as whilst Lineker runs things Shearer normally gets in (this is BBC from 2022) and you tend to get a large % of players from earlier PL years.
Newer online ones you tend to see VVD, Cech, Rodri, Salah and Kane a lot more + to be honest it's usually just decided by how many fans vote from certain teams.
I'm asking about Kane specifically as I've rarely seen him getting picked. His absolute best seasons are a notch below the very best by his peers, he doesn't have any titles and the only thing he can provide are pure numbers and overall consistency... but so can Shearer or Rooney — or, of course, Henry, who is often picked up front (as he should). Even the team that he has played for doesn't have that romantic allure that more or less guaranteed Gerrard a place in most XI's even though better and most consistent midfielders get overlooked — just because of how numerous and impactful Liverpool's fanbase is and for a long time Gerrard was their only potential realistic nominee.I guess it depends on the age of the presenters/host as whilst Lineker runs things Shearer normally gets in (this is BBC from 2022) and you tend to get a large % of players from earlier PL years.
Newer online ones you tend to see VVD, Cech, Rodri, Salah and Kane a lot more + to be honest it's usually just decided by how many fans vote from certain teams.
For van Dijk & Rodri you can argue that their peaks are arguably the best for their respective position (I'm on the fence with van Dijk personally but you can argue that); the likes of Salah and De Bruyne have both peak level & longevity (to be honest, van Dijk isn't that far off on that aspect as well but the injury mid-peak didn't help). While Kane has probably the toughest competition for at best two spots up front with Henry & Shearer (arguably two of the best players in league's history), Rooney (longevity & peak), Cantona (impact) and a bunch of incredibly impressive names like Agüero, Suárez, Cole, van Persie etc. (none of whom realistically get into that XI but all of whom are comparable to Kane in one way or another).
It is funny, because I love Neville and thinks hes very underrated. I would argue though for a league best (which for me its still between him and walker), stands out a bit.I guess it depends on the age of the presenters/host as whilst Lineker runs things Shearer normally gets in (this is BBC from 2022) and you tend to get a large % of players from earlier PL years.
Newer online ones you tend to see VVD, Cech, Rodri, Salah and Kane a lot more + to be honest it's usually just decided by how many fans vote from certain teams.
Also I thikn Terry is overrated, but I realize im in a small minority with that.
Central CF is almost always Shearer, as Henry moves left as said, but Kane is the one there or thereabouts these days and I remember seeing him picked in most online ones. Sad, as a United fan, as I think Rooney as an all round player is better than both, but he only played CF for a few seasons late on. I think as time goes on and the voter base naturally becomes more and more populated by younger people, Kane will become top pick unless Haaland stays in the league and wins more. More than ever people seem to just look as stats for proof of ability these days. I never see any of those other names, as you say, put into the team but they always will give a nod to Bergkamp or RVN or Suarez without ever putting them in.
I guess if you specified playing 4411, making someone pick a 10 and not just two 9's (Shearer/Kane) you would see Rooney in many teams.
Giggs certainly dominated, and by many considered the greatest PL player in history, eightly or wrongly, but an inside forward today has a very different role than a winger in a 4-4-2. I doubt Salah could replicate Giggs in that role
I think consensus now is
Ronaldo - Henry - Salah
Five years ago it was
Henry - Shearer - Ronaldo
No doubt shape and club bias influence too.
100%.
Barnes. 
I've found him to become more and more boring to watch as the years have passed, and his productivity has increased.
Sticking up for my man here. A lot of modern fans dont realise just how good Barnes was, he stood out in an already dominating Liverpool side. I'm not suggesting he was on a par with Best, but I get the argument that both players managed to completely run the show from a wide position, albeit in different eras.Barnes.
My point is he’s been important in 2 titles.
O’Shea, whilst a nice player in his prime was ”important” in zero.
Barnes / Best…
Please tell me I didn’t just read this monstrosity.
Please tell me I didn’t just read this monstrosity.
He was really good player. I don’t fault those who don’t know him. Either to young or not born.
The more I think about past the more I think what we saw (20-40 years ago) was peak in football in every way except ridiculous money that destroyed this game. On other hand. Young people will maybe say the same about now when they grow older.
I don't get this notion that people have of Salah as if he's some Roaming, free for all forward scattered across the front three playing where we wants. This is so far from the truth. He very rarely, if ever, drifts out from the right. He's constantly hogging the touchline and playing from there.
You have his first half of the season 24/25 heatmap here.
For comparison, a free roaming forward who likes to drift from the left more centrally in Mbappe:
You have his first half of the season 24/25 heatmap here.
For comparison, a free roaming forward who likes to drift from the left more centrally in Mbappe:
Salah has been the number 1 guy on title winning teams. In every United title winning teams, you can always make an argument about other players than Giggs. You can't say that about Salah.
But it’s two titles compared to 13 titles, and Giggs was important in every single one.
Vardy was the number 1 guy on a title winning team, is he better than Giggs too?
I personally find it a silly argument. That’s not to say Giggs is a better player mind, but I just don’t find it a good argument as to why when one player was extremely important in 13 titles.
I don't remember (m)any people saying he's anything but a right winger/forward, or calling him a roaming player...?I don't get this notion that people have of Salah as if he's some Roaming, free for all forward scattered across the front three playing where we wants. This is so far from the truth. He very rarely, if ever, drifts out from the right. He's constantly hogging the touchline and playing from there.
You have his first half of the season 24/25 heatmap here.
For comparison, a free roaming forward who likes to drift from the left more centrally in Mbappe:
I think he means that people say he gets to do what he wants, which benefits him and boosts his stats.
I always suspect that those suggesting Salah is better than Giggs was, might have not been around back then or just didn't watch United as much.
Giggs was immense. He wasn't just some flair player popping a few goals past Crystal Palace and Stoke. He was running games against Europe's best and in a Premier League featuring genuinely world class players. He was constantly chasing back, putting in a tonne of work off the ball and still able to be the scariest part of our attack 60% of the time. Personally I think only Henry rivals him in terms of the best player the PL has ever seen.
Giggs was immense. He wasn't just some flair player popping a few goals past Crystal Palace and Stoke. He was running games against Europe's best and in a Premier League featuring genuinely world class players. He was constantly chasing back, putting in a tonne of work off the ball and still able to be the scariest part of our attack 60% of the time. Personally I think only Henry rivals him in terms of the best player the PL has ever seen.
Ok, but just to balance it a bit, to the majority of non united fans I don't think they would come close to agreeing.
There is rarely even acknowledgement of the absolutely massive difference in the roles 2-way wingers have compared to wing-forwards; 2-way wingers rarely, if ever get their due in such discussions especially so when goalscoring becomes the primary, which it nearly always does.
There’s more likelihood of a 2-way winger being effective in a wing-forward position than vice-versa, but few care about that due to the hyper focus on goals scored by good or great wing-forwards.
Incidentally, Giggs leads the PL in assists, a primary function of a 2-way winger, but that also isn’t going to be brought up in a discussion vs. a wing-forward because goals trump assists in such a discussion.
In other words, with clear bias from the outset, few assess objectively the merits of the players in the roles they are assigned.
But you also need to look at games played, especially when using totals. Giggs has played a lot more in the pl than Salah.
Sure you can do that. You also then need to work out what is considered a high rate per season for a 2-way winger and where Giggs fits in with accordance to that.
Everyone knows Giggs was world class and was a great part of our three dynasties but I personally think there is no debate with this, he is easily better than Giggs and I say that as someone who watched way more of Giggs than I did of Salah.
I think Giggs clearly has more natural talent than Salah but purely off their individual body of work what is the argument for Giggs over Salah?
Salah has been the PFA Player of the year three times which is a record. Won two PL's as the main man in an era with Pep and his unlimited millions and while he's no Giggs in terms of longevity has outlasted all the players he was competing with as the best in the league and is still going strong.
Giggs was fantastic but he wasn't our main man long enough to be able to be in debates with Salah. Hard to hear but is the truth.
Giggs was definitely more technically gifted, but Salah is an amazing example of getting the most out of yourself
Giggs was the best player on the left I’ve ever seen. But take Giggs off those united teams and they still win everything in sight. Salah is more of a striker but plays on the right so it’s a little hard to compare, but take Salah off our team and we don’t win anything. The question better asked is who was more important to their respective teams and that would be Salah.
I think that’s surprisingly really fair.