Contrasting opinions are the stuff of dialectic, but if the subject can do no wrong, it's not really possible to engage in any analysis - in my opinion. There's history - and then there's heroes - and hagiography.
One of the great things that one notices about recent historical writing, compared to that of a century ago (or more) is the effort today to decribe and discuss events with less partisan an eye. A great man/victory/campaign etc can still be great, even if flawed. The difference between men and gods?