Kerr -becoming a Sad Figure

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

I think that Staunton was appointed largely so the FAI could be seen to be dealing with Kerr's failings. I read an article a while ago that new managers are often appointed on the basis of the previous manager's failings. IIRC, it took Newcastle as an example, Keegan was seen as tactically inept at the end of his first reign, so Gullit ,who had a reputation of solid football following his stint at Chelseas was appointed. Gullit was sacked because he didn't understand the Geordie spirit, so Robson - a Geordie who bled for the club - was appointed. Robson was given the boot because he wasn't seen as a disciplinarian within the club, and Souness, who had a history of enforcing discipline, was appointed. And so on. It can be applied to the England national side as well, The public perception of Hoddle was (and still is) that the players couldn't get along with him (noone would care about his religious beliefs if he was successful, Domenech is known for bizarre astrology beliefs, but it's largely ignored because of his success). Keegan was appointed because he had a history of fantastic man management. When he left, Ericsson was appointed because he was a far better tactician than Keegan. Following his departure, and the outcry of appointing a foreigner (remember Harris' rant about selling their history down the fjord to a nation of skiers and hammer throwers who spend half their lives in darkness?), the most qualified English coach was appointed. After that failed miserably, the FA went with actual success, rather than potential.
Going back to Staunton and Kerr, the public reaction at the end of Kerr's reign was that he had lost the spirit of the dressing room. Staunton was appointed partially on the basis that he had been there in the successful years, and would being that spirit back. In the build up to the Sweden game their was a lot of talk in the press about how easy it was to talk to the players and manager, as compared to under Kerr where it was nigh impossible to get a quote outside of a press conference.
Like it or not, Staunton's failure will forever be linked with Kerr.

---

If a manager is successful then no matter how crazy his beliefs or coaching methods there are commentators/journalists/fans that will declare these crackpot ideas the answer to every problem on the face of the earth.These people are spoofers without an original idea of their own and there are far more of them out there than most people realise

Like most people i was enthusiastic about Kerr's appointment but instead of the clever tactician and brave decision maker we expected, the job just seemed too big for him. My main memory is of him constantly picking our strongest 11 for friendly matches and beating sides who were using the games to experiment, giving a false impression that we were doing well. In fact we became completely dependant on Duff as an attacking outlet because we hadnt tried anything else and just became predictable for teams we played against competitively. His whole approach was negative and cautious and smacked of failure to experiment for fear of failure. The last straw was bringing back RK knowing he would expect to be guaranteed a starting place in competitive games and wouldnt accept being substituted. It may have made Kerr popular with armchair fans but it wasnt the sign of a strong manager.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RiffRaff

Like most people i was enthusiastic about Kerr's appointment but instead of the clever tactician and brave decision maker we expected, the job just seemed too big for him. My main memory is of him constantly picking our strongest 11 for friendly matches and beating sides who were using the games to experiment, giving a false impression that we were doing well. In fact we became completely dependant on Duff as an attacking outlet because we hadnt tried anything else and just became predictable for teams we played against competitively. His whole approach was negative and cautious and smacked of failure to experiment for fear of failure. The last straw was bringing back RK knowing he would expect to be guaranteed a starting place in competitive games and wouldnt accept being substituted. It may have made Kerr popular with armchair fans but it wasnt the sign of a strong manager.

---

Not to mention the factthat it allienated certain players within the squad and kept 'Saipan' on the boil. RK's best days were behind him at that stage for me and it was little more then PR. Had he come back when Kerr was first appointed when he was initially asked he may have made a difference to that Euro campaign but it was too late when he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Not to mention the factthat it allienated certain players within the squad and kept 'Saipan' on the boil. RK's best days were behind him at that stage for me and it was little more then PR. Had he come back when Kerr was first appointed when he was initially asked he may have made a difference to that Euro campaign but it was too late when he did.

---

roy was at least as good if not better than any other ctre midfield option we had under kerr. not as spectacular as wc 2002 qualifying but still our best option. i would suggest the fact that he was missing from some of our more important qualifiers was one of the reasons we failed to qualify. why are we so special that the re-introduction of a 'bad boy' alienates other players in the squad? it happens in other national teams far bigger than us all the time. i think our national team and what surrounds it needs to grow up a little

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Not to mention the factthat it allienated certain players within the squad and kept 'Saipan' on the boil. RK's best days were behind him at that stage for me and it was little more then PR. Had he come back when Kerr was first appointed when he was initially asked he may have made a difference to that Euro campaign but it was too late when he did.

---

what players did it exactly alienate. That crap was brought up before he came back and we were warned that half the squad would quit if it happened... did one single player quit ????
He might have been past his best at the time but he was still a hell a lot better than any midfielder in the squad and his performance in Lansdown against the French was excellent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbyrne

roy was at least as good if not better than any other ctre midfield option we had under kerr. not as spectacular as wc 2002 qualifying but still our best option. i would suggest the fact that he was missing from some of our more important qualifiers was one of the reasons we failed to qualify. why are we so special that the re-introduction of a 'bad boy' alienates other players in the squad? it happens in other national teams far bigger than us all the time. i think our national team and what surrounds it needs to grow up a little

---

Give it a rest, the very fact that you refer to the games he missed reinforces the point that he was well past his best being totally injury prone by then. It's my opinion that it was a bad move by Kerr and a PR stunt on Roy's part. He did okay when he played but his effictiveness was way overstated by a media obsessed with him such as in the away game in France when he was overshadowed by far by a limited player like Kilbane in midfield yet every two bit journalist creamed themselves over his performance.

It's a fact that is p1ssed off some (by no means all) of the squad. It was a gamble by Kerr that didn't pay off for me, was way too backward looking depending on a prodigal son who was always likely to miss games rather then moving on and trying to build something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razors left peg

what players did it exactly alienate. That crap was brought up before he came back and we were warned that half the squad would quit if it happened... did one single player quit ????
He might have been past his best at the time but he was still a hell a lot better than any midfielder in the squad and his performance in Lansdown against the French was excellent

---

Not everyone quits a squad just because they don't like someone involved in it.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Not everyone quits a squad just because they don't like someone involved in it.....

---

I dont like some of the people I work with either, doesnt mean I feel Alienated or make me any worse at my job

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razors left peg

I dont like some of the people I work with either, doesnt mean I feel Alienated or make me any worse at my job

---

Fair enough, that comment was tounge in cheek. Not quite the same though is it?

All I'm saying though is that I've heard, on good authority, that a number of players weren't happy with the the way Keane was chased back particulalry after turning Kerr down the first time. These things can affect a dressing room and players relationship with their manager (which, whether as a result of that or not defintely dipped in this case). Had Keane been the player he was a couple of years previous then this probably wouyldn't have made any difference but it's my opinion that Kerr pinned his chances too much on RK's return and suffered because of it.

it was a no brainer taking keane back. he was better than the options we had end of story. as for some players bein upset. so what? when they stand up to be counted on the pitch then they can moan off it. Kerrs record at international level is ok. better than macarthy in my opinion(who got forever to try get Ireland thru and then only when keane dragged them thru). staunton doesnt count as his reign was a farce. trapp is a good manager but remains to be seen what he can achieve with technically mediocre players who blame everyone but themselves for failures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Fair enough, that comment was tounge in cheek. Not quite the same though is it?

All I'm saying though is that I've heard, on good authority, that a number of players weren't happy with the the way Keane was chased back particulalry after turning Kerr down the first time. These things can affect a dressing room and players relationship with their manager (which, whether as a result of that or not defintely dipped in this case). Had Keane been the player he was a couple of years previous then this probably wouyldn't have made any difference but it's my opinion that Kerr pinned his chances too much on RK's return and suffered because of it.

---

I would still have Roy Keane in the team ahead of the likes of Matt Holland, Liam Miller, Kevin Kilbane, Lee Carsley and the rest. Im no fan of Kerr but I do think that bringing Keane back was one of the few high points of his management

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

it was a no brainer taking keane back. he was better than the options we had end of story. as for some players bein upset. so what? when they stand up to be counted on the pitch then they can moan off it. Kerrs record at international level is ok. better than macarthy in my opinion(who got forever to try get Ireland thru and then only when keane dragged them thru). staunton doesnt count as his reign was a farce. trapp is a good manager but remains to be seen what he can achieve with technically mediocre players who blame everyone but themselves for failures.

---

Kerr's record is better than Mc Carthy's???. Well done Billy. 2-2 Israel - HA!!!!

All that can be said is that Mc Carthy got a job immediately after leaving the Irish set up where I might add he did a wonderful job whereas Kerr on the other hand to quote the vomit Dunphy was a 'nothing manager' who has not been truely employed since. Beat that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigmanCas

Kerr's record is better than Mc Carthy's???. Well done Billy. 2-2 Israel - HA!!!!

All that can be said is that Mc Carthy got a job immediately after leaving the Irish set up where I might add he did a wonderful job whereas Kerr on the other hand to quote the vomit Dunphy was a 'nothing manager' who has not been truely employed since. Beat that one.

---

Kerr's record in terms of points per game is exactly the same as McCarthy's was and McCarthy had more time in the job with his best results not coming until near the end. IMO Kerr probably should have been kept on considering who we got in instead. We may have qualified for Euro 2008 if Kerr was still around, but anyway that's all in the past now. As for McCarthy getting a job after Kerr, he already had a bit of a reputation in England due to playing there and managing there previously whereas Kerr's stock would have been relatively low in England. McCarthy has arguably failed at the two jobs he's had since leaving the Irish job.

As for the whole RK thing, is there really any need to bring it up again? Kerr made a decision that he thought was best for the team and most people ageed with it at the time as far as I'm aware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Give it a rest, the very fact that you refer to the games he missed reinforces the point that he was well past his best being totally injury prone by then..

---

anyone can break their foot whether in their prime or not and thats what Roy did

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

It's a fact that is p1ssed off some (by no means all) of the squad.

---

its a fact if it can be proved. prove it?

if players were annoyed at the return of one of our best ever players still playing at the highest club level possible then id say the problem was with them and says a lot about their ambitions

[QUOTE=Drumcondra 69er;956344]

I was a staunch supporter at the time of his appointment and much as I thought he should go had a degree of sympathy when his contract wasn't renewed but he's behaved with such a degree of bitterness since then it's almost impossible not to disike him now. His glee at the Cyprus debacle when he was commentating at the game was unforgiveable and made little sense when you consider it was only Shay Given that prevented a similar scoreline the previous year when he was in charge


I agree with all of that.

[QUOTE=Drumcondra 69er;956620]Give it a rest, the very fact that you refer to the games he missed reinforces the point that he was well past his best being totally injury prone by then. It's my opinion that it was a bad move by Kerr and a PR stunt on Roy's part. He did okay when he played but his effictiveness was way overstated by a media obsessed with him such as in the away game in France when he was overshadowed by far by a limited player like Kilbane in midfield yet every two bit journalist creamed themselves over his performance.

this has to be one of the most stupid comments ever made on this forum..PR stunt!! well done you muppet.. keane was still our most influential player at that time.. he got injured because he was past his best?? i say 18/19 years get injured all the time - is this because they are also past their best??
is there any way stupid people like yourself with ridiculous comments can be removed from this thread so that others can chat sensibly??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cartman

is there any way stupid people like yourself with ridiculous comments can be removed from this thread so that others can chat sensibly??

---

From someone who cannot spell or use Capital letters :rolleyes:

this has to be one of the most stupid comments ever made on this forum..PR stunt!! well done you muppet.. keane was still our most influential player at that time.. he got injured because he was past his best?? i say 18/19 years get injured all the time - is this because they are also past their best??
is there any way stupid people like yourself with ridiculous comments can be removed from this thread so that others can chat sensibly??[/QUOTE]

No need to get personal Cartman. Anyhow he is one of the better and more articulate posters on here and I have no problems with him having an opinion and either should you. Now go write something sensible if you are able.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigmanCas

Kerr's record is better than Mc Carthy's???. Well done Billy. 2-2 Israel - HA!!!!

All that can be said is that Mc Carthy got a job immediately after leaving the Irish set up where I might add he did a wonderful job whereas Kerr on the other hand to quote the vomit Dunphy was a 'nothing manager' who has not been truely employed since. Beat that one.

---

plenty of poor results under macarthy. 3-2 loss to macedonia and 4-2 loss to russia and plenty of drivel in between. As for the only bet Cyprus one nil lark. he bet them 3-0 at home and one nil away. stan drew at home and was hammered away. and despite winning four nil macarthys team struggled away from home against them. as did lots of teams over the last few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

As for the only bet Cyprus one nil lark. he bet them 3-0 at home and one nil away. stan drew at home and was hammered away.

---

Kerr beat Cyprus as most bosses do, and it's nothing to tell the grandkids about. Staunton didn't and was fired, as you should be if you can't beat Cyprus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Agree generally although his senior record deserves to be questioned. When the chips were down (Russia at home and Swiss away for Euro 2004 when 6 points would have qualified us and France and Swiss at home for WC2006) he failed. You also have to point to our propensity under him to throw away winning positions (Russia again for 04, Swiss away and Israel home and away for 06) as a result of safety first tactics in general as a major minus. His best result was still only a 'moral victory' away to France in a game we should have won.

I was a staunch supporter at the time of his appointment and much as I thought he should go had a degree of sympathy when his contract wasn't renewed but he's behaved with such a degree of bitterness since then it's almost impossible not to disike him now. His glee at the Cyprus debacle when he was commentating at the game was unforgiveable and made little sense when you consider it was only Shay Given that prevented a similar scoreline the previous year when he was in charge. Kerr was in charge for some of the most insipid performances I've witnessed from an Ireland team (twice against the Swiss and against Cyprus despite the win) that were practically as bad as what we witnessed under Staunton.

---

i think thats a massive lie. i watched the game too and i think his commentary was very dignified. i didnt hear any glee in his voice and its pretty tough not to be critical when youre being paid for your opinion and we've just been stuffed by cyprus. he wasnt nearly as critical as every other irish football fan i know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saint morrissey

i think thats a massive lie. i watched the game too and i think his commentary was very dignified. i didnt hear any glee in his voice and its pretty tough not to be critical when youre being paid for your opinion and we've just been stuffed by cyprus. he wasnt nearly as critical as every other irish football fan i know.

---

I never heard his commentary as I was at the match, but I was talking to him and Trevor Welch after the match in the Step Inn and he was gloating at the fact we were beaten, except Im not a violent person I would have smacked him one,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

and despite winning four nil macarthys team struggled away from home against them. as did lots of teams over the last few years.

---

id take a struggling 4-0 away win anyday! id say that was a record home defeat for cyprus over the last decade

In all honesty do you remember the match?
Ireland were struggling til keane took control of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cartman

this has to be one of the most stupid comments ever made on this forum..PR stunt!! well done you muppet.. keane was still our most influential player at that time.. he got injured because he was past his best?? i say 18/19 years get injured all the time - is this because they are also past their best??
is there any way stupid people like yourself with ridiculous comments can be removed from this thread so that others can chat sensibly??

---

Fantastic standard of debate, worthy of your namesake. Well done. Can't believe the school holidays have rolled around so quickly again. :rolleyes:

Most of that post doesn't even make sense but I'd disagree with your assertion that Keane was our most influential player during that failed campaign. You're entitled to your opinion though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenforever

I never heard his commentary as I was at the match, but I was talking to him and Trevor Welch after the match in the Step Inn and he was gloating at the fact we were beaten, except Im not a violent person I would have smacked him one,

---

Exactly. To quote him 'The comedy show continues'. Very undignified for me considering the waxy one nil we got the previous year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Exactly. To quote him 'The comedy show continues'. Very undignified for me considering the waxy one nil we got the previous year.

---

And the 1-1 in Tel Aviv and he goes down to the fans later gloating at a great result, should have let Bobby Sands smack him:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

In all honesty do you remember the match?
Ireland were struggling til keane took control of the game.

---

we werent great but a 4-0 win is impressive away from home no matter who its against. considering what happened in our following two trips there it makes it even more impressive. keane was outstanding that night all the same

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbyrne

we werent great but a 4-0 win is impressive away from home no matter who its against.

---

A 4-0 win against full timers might look a bit more impressive. Cyprus is one of the games where you can't win. Win and it's "so what?", lose and it's "question time".

Kerrs behaviour since he was let go by the FAI has certainly changed. I know he annoyed a few St Pats fans in Denmark too after they were heavily beaten with his attitude in the bars.

On TV and in print he comes across as bitter. When he just talks about football he is is a top class brain on the game but when discussing personalities or the politics of the game he comes across as bitter and petty and bitchy. It seems that it was his personality that held him back with Ireland and not his football brain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cartman

is there any way stupid people like yourself with ridiculous comments can be removed from this thread so that others can chat sensibly??

---

No need for this type of comment. Everyone's opinions are valid even if you don't personally agree with them.

The truth is there is still a huge division of opinion amongst Irish fans about RK, Saipan and his return a few years later. Someone else stated above that most fans were in favour of his return under Kerr but it has never been that clearcut. I know a lot of people, myself included, who wanted Keane to come back when Kerr was initially appointed to try and kill the Saipan incident quickly. However the fact that it took Roy another two years to make that decision didn't impress me at the time.

There is no doubting how good a player he was for us (especially in the 94 and 2002 World Cup qualifying campaigns) but there is always a lingering regret for me that he didn't play a hell of a lot more games in the years in between. The games after his return weren't anywhere near his best: of the 6 competitive games he played in 2004 and 2005 we only won 2 games, both against the Faroes. I'd much rather remember him in 1994,2000 and 2001 before it all went wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastTerracer

No need for this type of comment. Everyone's opinions are valid even if you don't personally agree with them.

The truth is there is still a huge division of opinion amongst Irish fans about RK, Saipan and his return a few years later. Someone else stated above that most fans were in favour of his return under Kerr but it has never been that clearcut. I know a lot of people, myself included, who wanted Keane to come back when Kerr was initially appointed to try and kill the Saipan incident quickly. However the fact that it took Roy another two years to make that decision didn't impress me at the time.

There is no doubting how good a player he was for us (especially in the 94 and 2002 World Cup qualifying campaigns) but there is always a lingering regret for me that he didn't play a hell of a lot more games in the years in between. The games after his return weren't anywhere near his best: of the 6 competitive games he played in 2004 and 2005 we only won 2 games, both against the Faroes. I'd much rather remember him in 1994,2000 and 2001 before it all went wrong.

---

Very well put, pretty much sums up my take on it. Totally agree about the period between 94 and 02 campaigns notwithstanding his cruciate injury although given his mindset during that period it's debatable how many squads he may have shown for in any case.

I see Kerr was at it again in the Times last Saturday, taking swipes at the new regime for first annoucing the team a few days before kick-off, not selecting Andy Reid and not attending cross channel fixtures... he is entitled of course to write what he thinks but it all just smacks of deluded bitterness and makes him look like a small man!

And Trap duly responded if I recall correctly (according to the Tribune I think); made some comment that if it was Jack Charlton or some "successful" manager he may have paid heed to the comments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reality Bites

I see Kerr was at it again in the Times last Saturday, taking swipes at the new regime for first annoucing the team a few days before kick-off, not selecting Andy Reid and not attending cross channel fixtures... he is entitled of course to write what he thinks but it all just smacks of deluded bitterness and makes him look like a small man!

---

Totally agree with you...sure he's entitled to his opinion but what is pathetic is the petty manner in which he makes what I assume he alone thinks are clever insightful comments, just because he was fixated on knowing the family tree of every player that ever played doesn't mean that he was a good coach , it just meant he had lots of info on the opposition.

His snide comments about naming the team in advance as Trap did and thus leading to discontent in the squad was plain sad...methinks he's almost delusional and it would appear that he's hoping Trap will fail...also his put down of Whelan (who he reminded us he had capped a all levels) as being not up to it summed up his poor judgement... Trap is not perfect but offers a lot more than Kerr ever did... i was glad when Kerr got his chance, then accepted that he wasn't up to it, pity he can't accept the same...

i think trap naming the team early is better. everyone knows who's playing and it shows he knows what he wants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

He did okay when he played but his effictiveness was way overstated by a media obsessed with him such as in the away game in France when he was overshadowed by far by a limited player like Kilbane in midfield yet every two bit journalist creamed themselves over his performance.

---

hahahahaha, i was at that match, keane owned the french midfield. his positioning was incredible. kilbane did a lot of running, but keane was running the show.

i remember keane had to go off for about 30 seconds in the first half after his shorts had ripped. nobody knew what had happened or why he'd gone off at the time. the sigh of relief in the away end when he came back onto the pitch could be heard all the way in ireland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Very well put, pretty much sums up my take on it. Totally agree about the period between 94 and 02 campaigns notwithstanding his cruciate injury although given his mindset during that period it's debatable how many squads he may have shown for in any case.

---

during the euro 96 qualifiers ireland were relying on old players and outdated tactics and were outplayed by a younger dutch team

during most of the france 98 campaign keane was out with a career threatening injury

i thought he was impressive for the euro 2000 qualifiers. especially when you consider that at the time we had a very weak squad in a very difficult group and were relying on the likes of mark kennedy for creativity. shame keane was suspended for the macedonia match. against turkey away in the playoffs he nearly won it for us.

only for the fact that we lost 1-0 like....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

only for the fact that we lost 1-0 like....

---

We drew 0-0 and went out on away goals IIRC