Bortey vs Taylor

Don Bortey was an entertainer full of pace and guile, with superb goalscoring techniques but Taylor was a helluva machine. They don& #39;t make them like Charles Taylor any more. Overall Taylor was the better player. Built & delivers like a machine; ice in his veins

Not one attribute Bortey is supremely better than Taylor, not one.

Penalties https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="☑️" title="Ballot box with check" aria-label="Emoji: Ballot box with check">
Freekicks https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="☑️" title="Ballot box with check" aria-label="Emoji: Ballot box with check">
Dribbling https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="☑️" title="Ballot box with check" aria-label="Emoji: Ballot box with check">
Pace https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="☑️" title="Ballot box with check" aria-label="Emoji: Ballot box with check">

Though Bortey was a genius to be fair, he was quite inconsistent. Charles Taylor is the kind of guy you take to war. He delivers consistently without making a fuss

In 2002, Charles Taylor missed over 5 matches as he was trying to secure a move outside. He ending up winning joint topscorer of the league with Don Bortey with 18 gaols apiece. He was one of trinity (+Addo & General) when Hearts became only the 3rd club to win Treble in Africa.

Hans Dieter Schmidt substituting Charles Taylor in the Confederation Cup 2005 after he had scored the opener against Hearts, was one of the reasons they failed to win the trophy. He was their most important player. Bortey was a passenger in that match

Where you sit on the Charles Taylor vs Don Bortey argument has more to do with how you view football than anything else.

If you& #39;re for the aesthetics, then Bortey is your man.

BUT...

If you& #39;re for an overall consistent efficient performer, then you can& #39;t look beyond Taylor.