Roy Keane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by as_i_say

Don't think Ive ever bothered to comment on the Keane saga before but when talking about WC2002 when the Irish team played the best football of any team of a generation (include charltons) to qualify out of an incredibly tough group-to get to that WC (which might not happen again for a long long time) and hear someone say

"Sometimes standing up for your principles is more important than winning a football tournament".

Utter bol1ox. He should have kept his god dam mouth shut till after the tournament.

---

Yeah and still have people as tall as Niall Quinn cramped up in economy while the suits fly first class with champagne, still be training on "car parks" for pitches, still having a laugh and a joke with the media at barbecues while trying to prepare for the biggest tournament of their lives.:rolleyes: Give me a break. Look up "principles" and see it means standing up for what you believe in regardless of the concequences.
Sure, the lads done great and fair play to them and maybe we could have done better with Roy or maybe not, we'll never know, but The Genesis report exonerated both him and Mick so to say he should have kept his mouth shut is like saying the guy has no spine. I don't think so. Football in this country at that level is far better run with the help of Roy's spine.
And if he had said nothing for the sake of the World Cup, as soon as he did open his mouth people would have been lynching him for that too saying crap like "why didn't he say it sooner" and "I thought he was captain" and "he doesn't care about the Irish shirt"... oh wait, a lot of people has done that already, not least on here.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

What is your definition of World Class?

Do you support any English team? edit- It's ok I see from one of your previous posts that you hate United, I assume it's a factor when your assessing Keane, although I'm sure you will claim otherwise.

---

My hatred of united only really developed after the chelsea title years, which basically brings Roy Keane out of the equation here. I never said he was a bad player, I'd even say he's great, but not that great. I just found him incredibly frustrating to watch, in most games he took the simple pass instead of the killer ball soooo often. That's not world class.

Because his thuggery took place on the field, it is perfectly fair to take that into account when judging him as a player as well.

In addition I felt the praise of his contribution to Ireland's WCQ campaign in the years leading up to the 02 tournament was inflated beyond reason. It is a total insult to the other 20 or so players who contributed massively to that campaign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razors left peg

now that is just complete rubbish.... Im actually shaking my head in disbelieve of that opinion. I can understand peoples opinions of his personality to a certain extent but to question the man as a player shows a complete lack of any sort of football knowledge.... or just a wind up

---

Is dismissing a post as rubbish your usual modus operandi? He was praised on high by the English media during and (especially) after his playing career, and I feel that there were serious limitations to his game. He functioned superbly in a system that worked for United, but I would never say he was one of those players you could replace the first choice central midfielder of any team in the world with and improve the squad.

I don't much care for your manners and I don't reckon I'll miss a well lot by adding you to my ignore list.

I didnt need the english media or anyone else to tell me he was a great player, I and the vast majority of other people could see for ourselves that he was world class by the way he dominated games at the very highest level.
I still cant believe this thread has decended to a level where his ability as a player is being questioned

The thing about Roy Keane as a overrated player and all - silly as that is
I bet 99.99% of managers and supporters then would have loved to have him play for their team

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I thought he was unjustly left out of many UEFA player of the year polls. etc. He didn't have the television friendly finesse that others had but he did the simple things brilliantly and consistently. He wasn't superbly talented but was amazingly influential in a game, he could just get a grip on it like probably only Vieira could of his era.

---

Fair assessment for me. You would have to wonder why he was left out of all of those polls etc considering they were voted on by both journalists in some instances and coaches in others? Might it have been his disciplinary issues? At least 10 sending offs as far as I recall (a number for thuggish behaviour such as stamping on opponents, over the ball tackles, swinging punches etc.) while playing for a team that generally gets far more leniancy then others from refs is some going yet gets ignored over here. Had an English player got that record, he'd have a far worse reputation in Ireland for on field behaviour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danonion

My hatred of united only really developed after the chelsea title years

---

Why's that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danonion

I just found him incredibly frustrating to watch, in most games he took the simple pass instead of the killer ball soooo often. That's not world class.

---

Well I don't think anybody claims that he had the vision of Ronaldinho or Zidane, doesn't mean his other attributes didn't make him World Class. Anyway to each their own, I always thought Vieria was a tad overrated so I can't really talk.

After following this thread all week I've started reading Red Mist - Roy Keane and the Irish World Cup blues again and it's bringing back painful memories.

Yes, it is an open wound that will NEVER heal until McCarthy, Keane and the fans of the time pass from the planet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Yes, it is an open wound that will NEVER heal until McCarthy, Keane and the fans of the time pass from the planet.

---

a time machine would solve everything!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Yes, it is an open wound that will NEVER heal until McCarthy, Keane and the fans of the time pass from the planet.

---

I actually think it's improved recently! If we qualify for another tournament under Trap it'll put it further to bed but it'll always be talked about.

If half the country weren't slaves to Man U it might be different! :p ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beavis

Less than 3 days after Iran (no need to emphasise the game's importance) :

Manchester United 2 : 0 Leciester City, November 17, 2001 http://www.redcafe.net/archives/report.php?id=278

Yes he had been out for 4 weeks, but he managed to play a full 90. He had his priorities seriously wrong.

---

Ive tried my best to avoid commenting on this thread but I have to respond to this post.

Roy Keane had to persuade Alex Ferguson to allow him to play in the 1st leg in Lansdowne Road cause he had been injured for the previous 4 weeks. The medical team at Old Trafford could have easily said Keane wasn't fit to play either game.

By all accounts at the time, Ferguson wasn't happy that Keane was playing at all so there was no chance he would be allowed play in the away game too. Also, McCarthy stated at the time that an agreement had been made that Keane would play the 1st leg and then go back to OT to treat the injury.

Also, I remember he didn't look fully fit in the home game. He was nowhere near his best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shakermaker1982

a time machine would solve everything!

---

This should be where I come in, but alas I'm just a great pretender:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denis The Red

...Look up "principles" and see it means standing up for what you believe in regardless of the concequences...

---

Telling people to look up the meaning of a word you yourself don't understand is not a good way to win an argument. It is, however, an excellent way to look like a moron.

prin·ci·ple (prĭn'sə-pəl) http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/pron.gif

n.

1. A basic truth, law, or assumption: the principles of democracy.
2. 1. A rule or standard, especially of good behavior: a man of principle.
   2. The collectivity of moral or ethical standards or judgments: a decision based on principle rather than expediency.
3. A fixed or predetermined policy or mode of action.
4. A basic or essential quality or element determining intrinsic nature or characteristic behavior: the principle of self-preservation.
5. A rule or law concerning the functioning of natural phenomena or mechanical processes: the principle of jet propulsion.
6. Chemistry. One of the elements that compose a substance, especially one that gives some special quality or effect.
7. A basic source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Fair assessment for me. You would have to wonder why he was left out of all of those polls etc considering they were voted on by both journalists in some instances and coaches in others? Might it have been his disciplinary issues? At least 10 sending offs as far as I recall (a number for thuggish behaviour such as stamping on opponents, over the ball tackles, swinging punches etc.) while playing for a team that generally gets far more leniancy then others from refs is some going yet gets ignored over here. Had an English player got that record, he'd have a far worse reputation in Ireland for on field behaviour.

---

I doubt that's the case. Zidane's record is similarly poor - I can recall at least two sendings off for head butts, and his career total is about ten also*. No, I suspect Keane's exclusion from that sort of list is because he wasn't quite as technically gifted as most midfielders in his class. People over rate that sort of thing a little.

* Wikipedia says 14 total.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

I doubt that's the case. Zidane's record is similarly poor - I can recall at least two sendings off for head butts, and his career total is about ten also*. No, I suspect Keane's exclusion from that sort of list is because he wasn't quite as technically gifted as most midfielders in his class. People over rate that sort of thing a little.

* Wikipedia says 14 total.

---

True and I had considered that when posting originally but Zidane was supremely gifted and couldn't be ignored.

That said, I feel people went too far the other way with Zidane, some of the excuses I heard put forward for his behaviour in the WC 06 final were embarrassing, it was disgraceful to react to a bit of sledging like that regardless of how much a dick Materazzi was and quite possibly cost France a second World Cup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

with Zidane, some of the excuses I heard put forward for his behaviour in the WC 06 final were embarrassing,

---

Personally I reckon he lost the head, totally disgusted that he missed a great chance only a minute or two earlier, a header he put straight at Buffon. He knew at that moment he had lost the chance to win a second WC and maybe on a personal level he had lost his shot at immortality. Moments later Materazzi's sledging was just the catalyst that prompted him to let it all out.

Is that embarrassing? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

Telling people to look up the meaning of a word you yourself don't understand is not a good way to win an argument. It is, however, an excellent way to look like a moron.

prin·ci·ple (prĭn'sə-pəl) http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/pron.gif


n.

1. A basic truth, law, or assumption: the principles of democracy.
2. 1. A rule or standard, especially of good behavior: a man of principle.
   2. The collectivity of moral or ethical standards or judgments: a decision based on principle rather than expediency.
3. A fixed or predetermined policy or mode of action.
4. A basic or essential quality or element determining intrinsic nature or characteristic behavior: the principle of self-preservation.
5. A rule or law concerning the functioning of natural phenomena or mechanical processes: the principle of jet propulsion.
6. Chemistry. One of the elements that compose a substance, especially one that gives some special quality or effect.
7. A basic source.

---

Jesus, I didn't have the Oxford dictionary in front of me which clearly you do.
What part of my interpretation of the word is any different to your research on it?
Was it:

1. expediency or expedience
Noun
pl -encies or -ences
The use of methods that are advantageous rather than fair or just.

How was leaving the world cup advantageous to Roy?

Or was it:

3. A fixed or predetermined policy or mode of action?

When he clearly had a policy of wanting better professionalism for himself and his team mates.

Or even:

4. He didn't have a basic or essential quality or element determining intrinsic nature or characteristic behavior: the principle of self-preservation.

When he kept it together for the most part until he was obviously ambushed into a reaction by Mick. Would you have shown restraint if you was accused of feigning injury and not caring about playing for your country?
Do yourself a favour and go watch a game of football every now and again. Put down the book and get some fresh air, you'll feel better for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Personally I reckon he lost the head, totally disgusted that he missed a great chance only a minute or two earlier, a header he put straight at Buffon. He knew at that moment he had lost the chance to win a second WC and maybe on a personal level he had lost his shot at immortality. Moments later Materazzi's sledging was just the catalyst that prompted him to let it all out.

Is that embarrassing? :)

---

Nah, that's reasonable! ;) Still a black mark on his career though, who's to say he wouldn't have had another chance in the game or the chance to bury the winning penalty....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denis The Red

Jesus, I didn't have the Oxford dictionary in front of me which clearly you do.

---

I had the internet (and some schooling). I'm going to make the great leap of logic that you did too. The difference is that you described having principles as standing up for your principles no matter the consequences, which is circular and takes things to logical extremes. You based your argument on that.

take it outside boys