Richard Keogh has played well at centre back this season. To dispute this suggests you have 'anti Keogh specs'. No matter, football is about opinion. And I don't have £10 billion to put on a bet. Just because someone praises a player you don't rate, no need to bemoan the state of lesser footballing afficionados who 'love Michael Doyle, yada yada yada'. If you're going to patronise, try watching a match without any preconceptions and without making up childish bets. On balance, I would say Cranie is the more technically able of the two centre backs. I would say that Keogh doesn't misplace a huge amount of passes, has good pace and is a willing worker (uh oh, there's me showing a lack of class, I know) and has been a steady performer at centre back all season.
Better than Nilsson? Never.
Better than McNamee? Entirely objective, but I really liked McNamee when not injured and thought him slightly better on the ball, so I will say no.
Do I think my footballing opinion is better than anyone else?
Well, yes. If I'm honest. So cancel the previous paragraph. Each to their own, I think we all have someone within earshot who is loudly bang wrong in their opinions of players. If you don't think so, it's you.