Well said. There is at least one other player going (even stronger today than Giggs or Scholes) who also fits this category: Javier Zanetti.
Zanetti is another players who's performances defy his age. The only difference I'd point out is that, by common consent (and I do not wish to appear ignorant here), the game in Italy is played at a fraction of the pace, and the physciality (ie, how many times you get fouled) is not the same level either. Giggs was kicked off the park for the best part of decade, and still is to some degree.
This is the main reason. He was a winger in an era when wingers were greatly devalued as a tactical weapon throughout Europe. You could make a case that there were very few orthodox left wingers playing at a very high level from '95-'05. Giggs was forced to adapt to a number of different positions over his career and has shown his class in doing so. I still marvel at a couple of the years he played RW or CM and still played a huge part in this United team. The second reason is that he does not hog the spotlight. As much as it pains me to say this, he is a team player first and foremost. Along with Scholes, he has deferred in celebrity status to Cantona, Kanchelskis, Beckham, Keane, Dwight Yorke, van Nistelrooy, Ronaldo, Rooney, etc. The third reason is that the team at United was never built around him. It was always built around a solid CB pairing, a dynamic CM pairing, and a dynamic FW pairing. Even though United has featured wingers, they've been most successful with building the spine of the team - with the exception of a few years with Ronaldo, Rooney, Quieroz (but even that team had Scholes as the metronome ahead of Vidic/Ferdinand).
This does explain a great deal, in all honesty. He is, and always has been, a great team player. He kind of disappears into the bck ground somewhat, which has succeeded in massking his fantastic individual ability as a player. He's always played second fiddle, in terms of profile, to others in the team, be it Yorke, Beckham, Rooney, Ronaldo, even Keane to a certain degree.
Great post, great question. My theory is that he's such a "team" guy that he does what's necessary within the team to win and was never concerned about the stats that get you into the Top 20. "most decorated player in English football history" tells you he's about wins first and foremost. Shame for people like him and Cafu there's no lifetime achievement award. The guy is amazing. Also, IMO he was hurt by the fact that he wasn't English. It's rare that such a great player doesn't play in the World Cup, especially with such a long, long career. Even Cafu got raise the trophy! If he's English he fills the huge hole on the left side of midfield, everyone obsesses over him every 4 years, and suddenly is a top 20 player evey year.
Definitely IMO. He was already operating at a world class level for a good 4-5 years Scholes established himself.
I guess I have a weak spot for the position Scholes plays/played. He's always been my favorite EPL player. Giggs has more versatility and he's been able to play different positions and stay relevant at his age but Scholes will always be the top for me.
Torn between the two of them, in all honesty. Giggs got you off your seat, but Scholes made it look so easy at times. Both ansolute legends in the Premier League.
Giggs has maintained consistency and adapted a lot better than Scholes has, but Scholes was definitely the better footballer in their primes
It;s a very close call between the two. However, Giggs got 2 clear advantages over Scholes in rating/ranking: 1- In his position as LW: he shone brighter (fortunately not many competitors) while scholes as AM or center midfielder, many great names there to beat him 2- Scholes was diminished in ranking for his indifferent form/performance for England Another claim to say the least, is that Gigg walked into English Football Hall of Fame (2006) before Scholes (in 2008) -