Put Keane in charge, urges Giles
from the Irish Independent
FORMER Irish manager John Giles, one of Mick McCarthy's most staunch allies during the Saipan fiasco, now believes McCarthy should be fired as Irish manager and replaced by his sworn enemy Roy Keane as player manager.
Yesterday, in an incredible volte face, McCarthy received the kiss of death from the respected soccer pundit, with Giles outlining four reasons why Keane should take over as Ireland's player manager.
John Giles's friendship with Eamon Dunphy was severed when they took opposing sides during the tumultuous events in May before the start of the World Cup. Now Giles believes McCarthy will have to be jettisoned to save Irish soccer after disastrous performances in the first two European championship qualifiers, being beaten by both Russia and Switzerland.
John Giles said he saw a clear parallel with his own experience, when he became player manager of Ireland at the age of 32.
He said: "Roy Keane is at the stage in his career when he takes an awful lot of responsibility on the pitch, and he couldn't take any more responsibility if he was player manager.
"I was in the same position when I became player manager. Liam Tuohy finished, and I was okay under Liam, but I was frightened someone else would come in I wouldn't get on with. I thought if I wanted to do it it right, what I felt to be right, I should do it myself.
"I think Roy Keane is in a similar position. It depends if he wants to do it."
In a Sunday Independent phone poll, the public (who once strongly supported McCarthy in his row with Keane) are now divided on the issue.
Asked 'Who do you feel that the Irish soccer team need the most at the moment Mick McCarthy or Roy Keane?', some 51 per cent sided with the manager and 49 per cent with the Man Utd star.
Giles says that making Keane player manager is the obvious solution and would "kill a lot of birds with one stone. First, it would restore to the team Ireland's most competitive player. Second, it would bypass any fear of friction between Keane and the team, some of whom remain indignant about his behaviour in the Far East.
"Keane never had much of a relationship with his team-mates anyway and as player manager, he would be required to keep them at arm's length," said Giles.
"Perhaps most importantly for Keane, he could return to the international game on his own terms. He could organise the practice and make sure all the facilities and health drinks, suited his needs."
Giles admitted that firing McCarthy and replacing him with Keane would be regarded as "an abject surrender to the pure arrogance of the player. I just can't see how, in the long-term, Mick McCarthy can dodge the bullet."
Boylesports bookies are offering 20-1 for Keane to get the manager's job, though Dave O'Leary is the firm favourite at 9/4. The odds of McCarthy leaving or being fired before the next competitive match against Georgia in March have been slashed to 5/4.
There is also support for Celtic manager Martin O'Neill (11/4), while ex-Wimbledon manager and former Irish international Joe Kinnear is fancied at 5/1.
JEROME REILLY
Re: Put Keane in charge, urges Giles
Quote:
Originally posted by Éanna
Giles says that making Keane player manager is the obvious solution and would "kill a lot of birds with one stone. First, it would restore to the team Ireland's most competitive player. Second, it would bypass any fear of friction between Keane and the team, some of whom remain indignant about his behaviour in the Far East.
"Keane never had much of a relationship with his team-mates anyway and as player manager, he would be required to keep them at arm's length," said Giles.
"Perhaps most importantly for Keane, he could return to the international game on his own terms. He could organise the practice and make sure all the facilities and health drinks, suited his needs."
Giles admitted that firing McCarthy and replacing him with Keane would be regarded as "an abject surrender to the pure arrogance of the player. I just can't see how, in the long-term, Mick McCarthy can dodge the bullet."
Is he not totally contradicting himself between these paragraphs? :confused: :rolleyes:
