....just a genuine observation. The strike me as being extremely similar players and similar in terms of what they mean to their respective clubs.

What do the OF fans think?

I think they are totally different Mcstay got the ball and seemed to have more drive and was faster.Ferguson;'s main strength is his reading of the game and passing the ball not running with it.

hard one cause different era's

mcstay played great in a celtic team that wasnt even 2nd best in scotland at times
whereas ferguson has played in a few rangers teams that could have spent money on a replacement if he wasnt good enough (advocaats teams)

to me its like gerrard and lampard debate

one looks good in a team that flatters to deceive and another is one of the first names on the team sheet when fully fit even though the club could spend anything it wanted if it found a better player in his position

so affter all that rambling i'd say its a tie

did mcstay win a league title?

1988
He won three titles.

For sheer entertainment value, there's no contest. McStay every time. For who I would want in my side, I'm really not sure....both cracking players, though I think Barry Ferguson is overhyped a tad.

Sadly Bazza seems to be suffering the same kind of debilitative injury problems which eventually finished Paul.

Having apparently overcome his problems with petulance earlier in his career (kicking ice into Celtic's dugout, daft red cards, aiming sectarian abuse at Chris Sutton live on Sky ...etc.) he has undoubtedly turned into a player. No doubt crossing swords with Neil Lennon taught him some humility, just as Stephen Gerrard learned harsh lessons at the hands of Roy Keane and Patrick Vieira.

But comparisons to McStay A more realistic target for Barry is perhaps reaching the level of Paul Lambert, still achievable should he shake off his injury woes.

That's a good call, though he has a way to go to achieve that. Not that I'm biased or anything.

You dont half just spout chite before thinking eh?

You reckon ferguson can reach the level of European Champion then?

Are you a rankers fan in disguise?

Both are/were decent but both are/were vastly over rated. Ferguson can do no wrong because he is Mr Rangers & McStay was thoroughly 'Celtic Minded' - hence both sets of supporters dribble at the prospect of watching them. Lets call it a draw.

McStay was a far better player, Ferguson is good but having got away from the comfort of the SPL he looked very average in the EPL even allowing for his injuries. I'm not even sure that Ferguson is the best Scottish midfielder at Rangers, he is way over-rated.

Neither of them have proved how good they were/are to be fair.

McStay was superb for Celtic and will remain one of my all time fav Celtic players. However, he didn't play at the highest level in club football unlike Dalglish who did when going to Liverpool.

Would he have been a success down south or in Europe? Who can say.

Ferguson made the switch to Ingerland and didn't do much. That said though I believe Ferguson would have been better served in a more talented outfit as opposed to playing with the garbage Souness assembled in Blackburn.

Both though are club legends and rightly deserve to be lauded by their own supporters.

What he said

Apart from McStay being my all time fav Celt, of course

They're both important and emblematic figures for their respective clubs but I wouldn't say they're similar in terms of their style of play.
I'll put it simply: I prefer Ferguson.

I don't rate Ferguson at all, just think he is so over rated. When is on form he is great but that isn't that often.

Barry went to play in the Premiership and had 9 man of the match in 37 games. Paul McStay on the other hand had this wee ditty written about him

Paul McStay had to stay, cos noone was willing to take him away!

Enough said

I think he has a way to go before he can be bracketed alongside Lambert.

But Bazza is a fine midfielder, when fit, and he displays glimpses of Lambo's silkyness and intelligent use of the ball from time to time.

Of course what sets McStay apart from these two, and from most midfielders of his generation, was what is often termed an "overdrive". That ability to find a fifth gear which leaves opponents standing scratching their noggins.

Paul McGrath famously had one which allowed him to burst into last ditch tackles when all appeared lost. Our Paul on the other hand was by no means a speed merchant but he had the knack for suddenly gliding away from folk or hitting a spellbinding pass, which invariably lifted the crowd and those around him.

McStay was a great talent, he did have that wee exciting streak (before injuries anyway) that few guys in Scotland if any seem to have these days. Similar to Ferguson in that I felt he could have moved away and become an even better player.

Lambert obviously achieved something more than either of those guys by being part of that famous Dortmund team. Both those guys could have developed in the way he did by making a successful move to a different type of football.

I'm unsure as to which is / was the more overrated.

Fixed.

ferguson's best moments were when he was younger, he was cocky and showboated and the fans loved it. mcstay was a good good pro, lacked a bit of ambition because he could have went to a top english side had he shown any appetitie for that, and improved himself as a player subsequently. his loyalty is not in question, nor his ability, but he could have played not only in a better league, but done so at a top side.

funnily enough the best single 90 mins I saw in person from a Scottish midfielder was rangers 4 - celtic 1 at ibrox the same year as the 5-1 ray wilkins game (i think). It was the new years match and it was arch bampot Derek Ferguson. Absolutely pissed all over mcstay for the first 45 minutes - which had rangers up 3-1. strolled the second half, his pass for mark walters goal (the forth) was sublime - a definition of playing simple defence splitting through balls. I have never seen barry ferguson even touch that performance from his brother. i think, in his defence, he admits his brother was the better player (better=more skilled).

so for me, mcstay shades it over the length and consistency of their careers. As for Lambert, he couldn't lace barry ferguson's boots, and it disnae matter whit medals he came back from germany with. Lambert was a specialist, a defensive specialist, that's all.

Now, as for Durrant......he could have had it all without the injury, his games againts aberdeen ij the skol cup final (3-3, and 3-2) was UNBELIEVABLE. SO young when he got injured, a huge huge loss for scottish football.

I'm not so sure that moving abroad is the be all and end all. Consider the example of John Collins, another fine midfielder who doubtless enjoyed a significant boost to his bank balance and ego after moving to Monaco - without ever really improving as a player.

The marauding goalscoring winger and free kick specialist was converted into an unremarkable anchorman. By the time he pitched up at Wattie's dire Everton side he was little more than a clapped out defensive utility player! Albeit a millionaire several times over and with a smugness level to match.

At Dortmund Lambert benefited from the absence through injury of Paulo Sousa. The Portuguese was for my money the best player of their 'golden generation' - better even than Rui Costa etc. - but was always injured. Lambo was signed as his understudy but worked hard got his rewards and well done to him. Anyway there's no doubt the guy could play.

As for Bazza let's not forget his sojourn in Lancashire was always part of a Souness scam along the lines of the great Boumsong heist. And fair enough he got a serious injury (again) but the fact remains he failed to cover himself in glory. As a like-for-like comparison, even Billy McKinlay made a better fist of it at Blackburn!

Finally 'the white Pele' Durrant may well have been better than them all before his injury. Likewise if my mother had wheels she'd be a bicycle!

I disagree about Collins - going to Monaco was really the making of him as a player, it was by making that move that he was considered a top level player, not to mention the move got him to a club capable of reaching the latter stages of the Champions League. Sure, he changed as a player, but so did Lambert - he was an attacking midfielder for us and Motherwell. The thing about those guys was that they weren't good enough as those "marauding" types to be played that way at a higher level.

Edit: Durrant is an interesting addition to the discussion though - he had the same burst that McStay had. As you say though it's just speculation as to what he'd have become.

I would've got the punctuation right. Then again, you'll maybe be better at it yourself when you finish your Standard Grades.

I always thought McStay was shite.

Mind you, having to hold together a midfield with Peter Grant in it would have tested anyone's skills.

I'm sure I remember someone on here saying that your mother was a bike.

Does that mean she actually does have wheels?

I think the Celtic midfield of Provan, McStay, McLeod, and Burns was quite simply one of the best homegrown midfields Scottish Football has ever seen. With the others being, obviously, the Lisbon Lions and the magnificent Rangers side of the early sixties.
As to who's better McStay or Ferguson that's a tough one as they were such different players, McStay was the one for the killer pass and probably had a better shot. Ferguson though is terrific at finding and making space for himself no matter how busy the midfield, and his probing runs with and without the ball are excellent.
I find it difficult to split them, I'd give it a score draw.

Paul Mcstay played with some great players and some shite ones as well though.
I remember him playingwith, Mick Galloway,Peter the pointer ,Cascarino, Gerry Creaney,Martin Hayes and Rudi Vata.

He also played with Murdo ,Provan, Nicholas, Maclair,etc in that team of 86.
He carried Celtic in his later years big time.