I agree with Elroy but I can't help thinking Keane's flippant and careless attempt at backheeling the ball in at Atletico Madrid (attempting to get his first for Liverpool?) infuriated Benitez. It was all downhill from there.
Printable View
I agree with Elroy but I can't help thinking Keane's flippant and careless attempt at backheeling the ball in at Atletico Madrid (attempting to get his first for Liverpool?) infuriated Benitez. It was all downhill from there.
'I think far too much value is rested on speculations about isolated incidents, blown up out of all proportion, in order to explain a managererial cold shouldering'
Andy Reid :D
double standards...Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...hotograph.html
It sure is double standards by Redknapp, but Keano would be foolish to use it as an excuse. Maybe Redknapp needed an excuse to offload him, but the point is Robbie gave him that excuse.
You'd have to feel for Robbie, he's been excellent for us more often than not, and he has put his country first when he could have been grieving. He's another player I reckon that still would have plenty to offer on the continent, but with a young wife and new child he probably doesn't want the upheaval. There was a decent rumour doing the rounds that he turned down Besiktas in the summer, a move that would have suited him well I would have thought, and given that his wife is both glamourous and smart, she could have ecked out a decent career too.
He still is good enough for decent EPL teams, but West Ham are not one of these. This move needs to be a good one Robbie, it will be tough to get a decent move in the summer if you go to West Ham and they go through the trapdoor.
Hardly.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
Last time out, Redknapp gave specific instructions that there was to be no Spurs players Christmas Party (there had been a whole load of sh1t about the one at Man U etc, inc. false rape allegations). Yet (Team Captain) Keane invited 15 other players to Dublin, under the guise of a "Golfing Trip", without Redknapp's knowledge. This was three days before a home game with Wolves, which Spurs lost.
Whereas this time, it was an officially sanctioned party, four days before their next game (which was always a good bet to be cancelled, since Blackpool do not have undersoil heating). Moreover, King is injured for another few weeks anyhow, so was hardly making himself "unfit" through boozing.
That said, whilst King is a player whom Harry admires (when fit, the best Centre Back in the entire EPL imo), Harry is no mug, either. With Keane, he has continued to involve him whilst he has no other option, but will offload him as soon as he can get enough money for a replacement.
Therefore I suspect similar with Ledley - if/when Harry can find a suitable replacement, he'll do so, which will mean he's no longer dependent on Ledley. As it was, signing Willie Gallas was a (rather inspired) stopgap.
In the end, Harry's something of a pragmatist, in which regard he will also be aware that Ledley is a real legend at Spurs, immensely popular with the fans, and whose career has essentially been blighted through no fault of his own (injury), unlike others who've been the architect of their own downfall.
But Harry's no soft touch, either. In the circumstances, it may be that he has decided not to humiliate the guy publicly but still bollocked him in private.
I said I "quite liked" him i.e qualified approval, and on the basis of regular reading of his stuff. Had you even heard of Olley before I posted the link?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Hmmm. What exactly is Tardelli trying to say? That Keane's exit from Inter was nothing to do with him? On the basis that club coaches in Italy have little or none of the say over transfers which their counterparts usually do in England, that would appear very plausible.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Yet the club did not actually sell Keane straightaway; rather he was sent out on loan - something which a coach should have more say over. And if it is any guide (OK, it's probably not!), Keane's wiki entry states: "However, Keane's dream move to Italy soon soured when Lippi was sacked. Lippi's successor, Marco Tardelli, deemed Keane to be surplus to requirements"
My guess is that for whatever reason, Tardelli didn't rate Keane at Inter, so agitated to move him on. But now when he finds the player is his star striker for ROI, he has to finesse that earlier episode, hence the "straight bat".
On a more general note, Keane has always been one of my favourite players at WHL, both for his style of play, and his ability. But I have to say that I have had to revise my opinion of his true ability somewhat since Spurs signed Van Der Vaart. For VDV is a very similar type of player, but also so much better, that maybe I overrated Robbie somewhat?
Tbf, it is not just with Keane that I've had cause to reappraise my opinions. In fact, when I look at how competitive* the present Spurs team is, compared with what it was like even a couple of seasons ago, I now begin to appreciate why we were never real contenders then, rather we just "flattered to deceive". I suspect that Redknapp spotted the difference straightaway, including that players of Robbie's calibre may be very good, but aren't quite top quality?
* - Still not making any predictions, mind!
not sure thats a risk harry would take to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
would ledleys hangover not affect his rehab?
not an identical situation to robbie but not far from it so I stand by my assertion
Of course it is double standards. Harry Redknapp said before that drinking at WHL was a no-no.
"I'll implement a strong rule next season that drinking is a no-no here. Footballers should not drink. You shouldn't put diesel in a Ferrari. I know it's hard but they are earning big money, they are role models to kids. We wouldn't get these problems if the players weren't drinking. There's still too much of a drinking culture in English football but it's not as bad as it used to be. At Tottenham we do a lot with kids, a lot of them underprivileged. We have to set an example. Too much drinking goes on in this country. Too many people are not happy unless they have had a drink.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...ur/8045213.stm
Alcohol and fitness certainly don't mix generally, but in King's particular situation, he is still weeks away from returning, so his midweek p1ss-up will NOT have affected his availability for the Blackpool game in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
The difference that Xmas parties were specifically banned by HR last year, but permitted this year. However, we can be certain that "permission" to attend a party is not the same as permission to get p1ssed at one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
And we can be quite certain that had other Spurs players been similarly p1ssed, we'd have heard about it, therefore we must assume that none was.
Anyhow, I suspect HR's reasoning this time was that by permitting an official party, a degree of scrutiny could be maintained, for in the end, if players really want to sneak off for a sly session, even at home, that can always be arranged.
As for his treatment of Robbie and Ledley, if you look at the facts, they are not so different. When HR heard about Robbie's episode, he initially "hit the roof" - I suspect it was sprung upon him in an interview. But when next interviewed, he was much more conciliatory ("it's sorted", "he's still our Captain" etc etc).
Yet as subsequent experience shows, "Robbie's cards were marked" from that day on. I suspect that the same may apply in Ledley's case i.e. officially it's "not a problem", but behind-the-scenes it's entirely different.
In fact, thinking about it, you can add David Bentley to the list of "problems" Harry has had to deal with at Spurs. DB is known for having an "attitude" (Wenger didn't stick with him for long, for instance). Tbf, he's not a complete wrong 'un like Joey Barton, say, but he has his moments. But when i saw it was DB who tipped a big bin of water over HR on live TV (after the Man city game last season which clinched CL qualification), thereby drenching his smart suit, I wondered how HR might react. Publicly, at least, HR has never slagged off DB or his ability and he made a joke about auctioning the suit for charity etc. But neither is he the sort to accept a player questioning his authority, even in jest. Therefore I think it not coincidental that he hasn't picked him since, other than in an emergency or for a "dead" game.
Therefore if Harry can persuade Levy to stump up the necessary cash in January, I can easily see him signing a striker as back-up to VDV, a right-sided midfielder* as back-up to Lennon and a Centre-back, as back-up to Dawson/Gallas. In which case, that would be three more blows to the prospects at WHL of Keane, Bentley and King (though Ledley will probably be retained out of respect for what he's done for the club).
* - David Beckham on loan from LA Galaxy, perhaps?
As I said above, permitting a party is not the same as granting "carte blanche" to get p1ssed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Some of the Spurs players are teetotal and it seems certain that Ledley was the only one of the remainder who overdid it at the party, otherwise the papers would at least have hinted at it.
But as I've tried to argue, just because Harry hasn't slagged off Ledley publicly, we should not assume that he's not taking further action privately.
I've seen a little of what goes on at football clubs, including Spurs, for myself. Which is why I don't always take what I read in the papers at face value.
my initial thoughts when reading about this was that it smacked of double standards but its not really. The difference is in the deception that Keane employed in organising the Dublin trip. Im with Ealing Green on this one (crikey).
he banned the party last year as he doesnt want his players drinking. He has come out many times complaining about the drinking culture in football and says he doesnt want his players drinking. Yet his club captain falls around the place drunk this year and unlike last year when keane got major grief he lets king off the hook. double standards to most id say.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
king has a glass knee / knees. i would have thought the chances of him doing further damage to his injury would increase hugely while stumbling around drunk.
careful jbyrne, you'll take someones eye out with that post!Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
This is of course the same Harry Redknapp who once mused about the difficulty of bonding woth foreign players....Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
"With the foreigners it's more difficult. Most of them don't even bother with the golf, they don't want to go racing. They don't even drink."
There is no comparison with King being drunk this year though, Robbie took it upon himself to go directly against instructions last year re their Christmas Party, EG is right on this (never thought I'd type those words....).
I think a Villa is the best he can hope for now, West Ham would be a graveyard. Shame he didn't tough it out at Liverpool, he'd be playing regulalry there now no doubt and would probably be doing alright. Even under Benetiz I reckon he'd have got back in the way their injury and general squad issues went in Benetiz's last year in charge.
He brought 16 players to Dublin on a golfing trip in December :bigsmile:. What exactly did Redknapp think a golfing trip to Dublin in December would entail? Strolls along frosty fairways with cups of tea and biscuits afterwards?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er
The 'golfing' trip wasnt sanctioned either though - so not sure what your point is ifk?
It was "sanctioned". The other 15 players went on the golfing trip of their own accord knowing full well what they were buying into.Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior
Those who consider Harry is employing double standards are going by what he is quoted as saying in the Press. So that when King was reported to be drunk in midweek and Harry didn't "slam" him, they contrast this with what occurred with Keane.
My point is to judge HR not by his (reported) words, but by his actions, for with RK, though his initial reaction was to give out against him, he almost immediately retracted this, claiming that his "fitness" (both senses of the word) to play was not impaired by the Dublin trip, so that he picked Keane to play the next game (against Wolves), including retaining the captaincy.
On the face of it, therefore, there is not that much difference between the (public) treatment of the two players. However, whilst HR was soon conciliatory towards RK in the Press, in practice, RK's "cards were marked" at WHL from that moment. As such, I have no doubt whatever that if HR could have got rid of him in January for a suitable replacement, he would have gone. He couldn't (no doubt because the figures didn't suit Levy), so instead he "exiled" him to Celtic for a period on loan. And since then he has only ever featured when it has suited Harry.
I suggest that we wait and see how HR deals with Ledley over the next year or two, to see his real (as opposed to newspaper) reaction. On which point, it may not be entirely coincidental that Dawson (CB and occasional captain) has just come back after 3 months out and it was announced today that Woodgate (CB) might even make a surprise comeback "soon".
It's all a bit reminiscent of when Ferguson took over at MU. They had a reputation of being a "drinking club" under Atkinson, led by the "Three MustGetBeers", Robson, Whiteside and McGrath. Although it was nothing personal, Fergie soon got rid of the last two, but kept Robson. I'm sure this was purely from pragmatism i.e. he needed Robson, despite his excesses.
I suspect (hope, actually) that HR will take "the Robson approach" with Ledley, since on his day, he is up there with VDV & Modric (and eventually Bale?) as being arguably world-class.
Forget the press. The facts that matter are;Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Harry took issue with the drinking on the golfing trip.
Harry took issue with King getting hammered at the Christmas party.
There's your double standard.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
You don't need to suspect or hope anything. Spurs won't get rid of King for the reason you state (plus his popularity with Spurs and Glentoran fans alike). Robbie isn't world-class (and with the Liverpool episode no longer a fan favourite) i.e. expendable.
Btw There's nothing unusual here. Double standards are applied at other clubs. Certain players will always be more expendable than others.
Move to West Ham is being held up by bonus demands.
exactly. they lost their next match so harry blames the trip and takes it out on keane. if they had won i doubt it would have had much of a mention at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
keanes form dipped greatly after we "lost" to france. he has not since re-discovered it and thats the reason that harry wants to pass him on.
The greedy ****** has asked for an extra million if West Ham stay up. The 65k a week isn't enough for him......Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Fancies himself as a bit of a saviour then. He'll need to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
Yeah. But he's at the end of his career. He needs to bring in the green whilst he can. If his goals keep WH up then its a million well spent.
West Ham already have too many first team strikers (Cole, Obinna, Piquionne, McCarthy, Hines, Nouble, and Sears (who is **** but will still probably get a look))...I'd take Keane over any of them besides maybe Cole, who he can play alongside like he did Quinn, but Obinna, Hines, and Piquionne give them a different option so he may still not be playing as much as he'd like. The three I just mentioned can all play on the wing (more Obinna and Hines than Piquionne) as can Nouble, but then again so do Stanislas, Boa Morte, Barrera, Dyer, Faubert (more of a fullback), and young Anthony Edgar. In short, they have no dearth of attacking options (who haven't been scoring enough, but then again neither has Robbie, albeit in limited time), and while on his day Robbie is a better option than most of them, he hasn't been in the form that he would need to be to lock down a starting place there (again though, in limited time), which is what is needed from an Irish perspective.
I wish him all the best though if he does join...with Parker and Noble providing him with service (especially those little balls over the top he loves to latch on to) and if he can feed off Carlton Cole's ability to be a target man (though he's another guy who needs to find his form), he could be a hit there.
My understanding of the additional 1M to move to West Ham was that it was a request from Spurs, not Keane?
Watched him on the Late Late last night and frankly he came across as a class act. A true football fan. He was uneqivocal in his desire that his son be considered Irish and looks forward to his playing for us (even going so far as to have his wife fly back to Dublin to have the baby!). Just came across as a decent lad. Hope a good move materializes. Birmingham might be a good option vis a vis playing time.
I thought as much that you were using Wikipedia as a source/support for your guesses.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Tardelli's comment in 2008 about Keane were similar to his comments about Keane in 2000 when at Inter.
Inter and Keane
New Inter coach Marco Tardelli has used Keane sparingly since taking over from the sacked Marcelo Lippi, but admitted he was a Keane fan when he took over the job.
"Of course I know about Robbie Keane," he said. "If he wasn't here, I'd try to sign him."
The reason for his sale from Inter was most probably as was stated - financial, there were plenty of offers to sign Keane from Inter. He was the new kid - behind the other top strikers at Inter. Tardelli was told he had to shed some of the financial burden and most probably that became a priority after the early Champions League exit in 2000.
The facts:
- Keane is one of the all time top scorers in the premiership.
- Keane is 30, not 34.
- He has played for Inter Milan, Liverpool, Tottenham and Celtic. He has no shortage of experience playing with winning teams.
- He is the captain of his country and carries a huge marketing weight as a result.
I do think Robbie Keane should be seen as quite marketable and should be attractive to a lot of clubs, I certainly don't want to see him being a desperation signing from a relegation threatened club when hes much better than that.
What he needs isn't so much game time as it is confidence, he needs to be at a club where he's regarded as a cut above their other striking options, a club that won't sub him after 30 minutes, a club that he isn't under the threat of being dropped after 1 bad game.
The main thing Keane needs to thrive is to be an important player in a team and the place security that comes from that. He has it at Ireland, he had it at Celtic and he had it for many years at Tottenham. His attitude is questionable and when his playing time is cut like it was at Liverpool or at his second spell at Tottenham Keane diminishes into a very poor player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murfinator
What exactly has he won with these teams?? The only winning experience he has is the league cup in 07/08.
He may also still be captain of his country, but his marketablilty relies solely on scoring goals, something he has not done consistently in the Premier League in quite a while now.
Very possible (and for Daniel Levy, very typical!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fergie's Son
When Man City loaned Joe Hart to Birmingham, they charged a £1m loan fee, with Brum to pay his wages (as well as giving a - rumoured - undertaking to select him).
And how did you figure that one out, Sherlock? From where I posted:Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
"And if it is any guide (OK, it's probably not!), Keane's wiki entry states..."
Neither you nor I knows what really went on at Inter between Tardelli and Keane. You seem to be relying on newspaper quotations, which in my experience cannot be entirely relied upon (to say the least).Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Therefore I prefer to form my opinions by reviewing the facts, which are that soon after Tardelli took over, Keane left on loan, then was subsequently transferred permanently.
Of course in Italy, a "manager" (coach actually) will often see players transferred over his head, even without any consultation, if eg the Club Owner thinks it a good deal financially. However, loaning a player is different, since it does not actually bring in any significant revenue and in Keane's case will not have freed up a large wage bill.
Therefore it may be that Tardelli actually instigated the loan, in order to free up a place in his new squad.
Or maybe not.
In which case all we can say is that Tardelli doesn't appear to have gone out on a limb to keep Keane at Inter.
Nor, as Trap's assistant, can we place too much reliance on what he says to the Irish Press about the player, since even if he doesn't rate Keane, he (and Trap) have few realistic alternatives and cannot buy a replacement (obviously) for someone who is a bit of a hero with the fans since long before their arrival.
I also read that the £1m "bonus" demand was from the club, not the player. I'd have posted it except Fergie's Son had already done so.
(Sadly) I tend to agree with you over Murfinator, Weldoninho.Quote:
Originally Posted by weldoninhio
If you look at Keane's record over the last two and a half seasons, it's rather poor (at least by the standards of a top player).
2010/11 Spurs: He has started two EPL games (subbed both times) and been a late sub for another four games. No goals.
2009/10 Spurs: Played 3 full EPL games, started another 12 but was subbed and came on as late sub another 5 times. Six goals.
2009/10 Celtic: Played 16 SPL games. Twelve goals.
2008/09 Spurs: Played 13 full EPL games, being subbed late in a 14th. Five goals.
2008/09 Liverpool: Played 4 full EPL games, was subbed in another 12 and came on as sub in three more. Five goals.
Fair enough, he may have played other games (eg Cup, European, ROI etc) and he may certainly have been messed around by Managers and Chairmen etc.
But in the end, 20 full EPL* games in two and a half seasons for a 30 year old who hasn't been badly injured, is not the sort of record to attract a leading club to splash out a big fee on a player for a permanent transfer.
Imo, his best bet would be to accept a move, if only on loan, to any EPL club he can get who will pick him regularly (Wolves? WHU? Brum? Everton? Villa?), and hope to make enough of an impression to restore his (fading) reputation.
* - I don't rate the SPL as being any sort of recommendation these days, tbh.
Are you still rattling on, confusing facts with opinions based on poor quality surmising.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Yes I do put some value on direct uncontradicted quotes as an accurate enough source and an accurate enough indicator of Tardelli's opinion in 2000. I value them way higher than obvious cynical slanted journalism in that London paper, or lazy entries in Wikipedia, or your surmises.
No, I do not know what really happened at Inter. All the known facts, support what Tardelli says happened. Tardelli quoted in 2008, when newly arrived assistant Irish manager, is entirely consistent with his quotes from 2000.
And this is piece of your mind, quoted from your earlier musings, is prittle prattle.
Quote:
My guess is that for whatever reason, Tardelli didn't rate Keane at Inter, so agitated to move him on. But now when he finds the player is his star striker for ROI, he has to finesse that earlier episode, hence the "straight bat".
"Uncontradicted quotes" is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
You may be prepared to believe what you read in the papers without question (or at least when it suits your view), but I am not. Which is why I feel that that quotation of Tardelli's may actually be contradicted by the facts.
That is, Inter signed RK for a big fee when Lippi was their coach. Lippi gave him reasonable game time. Then Lippi was sacked and replaced by Tardelli. Next RK found himself farmed out on loan, before being transferred permanently. Throughout this process, neither the player changed, nor did the Owner, just the coach, Tardelli.
Of course there may be a plausible alternative explanation, but those bare facts suggest Tardelli may not have rated RK. Which if correct, is hardly likely to be contradicted by Tardelli when he "inherited" RK some years later, since he was by now in no position to loan/transfer him from the ROI squad as had happened with Inter. Hence the journalist's "straight bat" comment.
Why would a senior journalist writing for the main London paper, about a prominent and popular player at a leading London club, be "cynical" or slanted" against the player? I have read quite a bit of Olley's stuff and as a fan both of Spurs and Keane, I think I would have detected any bias against either club or player before now.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Meanwhile I doubt whether you had even heard of Olley before I posted his article.
Could it simply be that Tardelli wanted results asap and had no time to invest in a young player? Given the promise of Keane's early career and his reasonably good start at Inter it'd have been odd for anyone "not to rate him". Sometimes a good player just doesn't fit a manager's plans. Sometimes supporters are hungry for big names, especially when they've had little success. There could be any one of a number of reasons other than simply Tardelli made a quick judgment and didn't rate him. Maybe he didn't, but Keane's had a pretty successful, albeit far from stellar, career since then. Given Serie A's relative decline versus the EPL over the last decade, it'd be hard to think that a good EPL player wouldn't also have been a good Serie A player.
Irish Times reporting that Pardew might be interestedin Keane at Newcastle.
I'd love to see him playing off Andy Carroll but being a fairly loathesome club right now...I hope not.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
You miss the point by a country mile. We are talking about Tardelli. The only thing that has some value are Tardelli quotes and context.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
I don't chose to believe anything but I put a much higher value on a direct quote in context which has not been contradicted.
Get it?
Keane was still a kid then, and no one expected him to claim a first team place in a few months considering who was ahead of him. He was signed for proven promise.Quote:
That is, Inter signed RK for a big fee when Lippi was their coach. Lippi gave him reasonable game time. Then Lippi was sacked and replaced by Tardelli.
Nothing he did at Inter lessened that proven promise. He left Inter, unblemished.
That does not mean Keane flopped at Inter or that Tardelli did not rate him as high as he said he did in 2000.Quote:
Next RK found himself farmed out on loan, before being transferred permanently. Throughout this process, neither the player changed, nor did the Owner, just the coach, Tardelli. Of course there may be a plausible alternative explanation, but those bare facts suggest Tardelli may not have rated RK.
Tardelli had made "straight bat" comments about Robbie Keane in 2000. Something you chose not to put any value on. Tardelli's straight bat statements in 2008 are very similar to his "straight bat" comments in 2000.Quote:
Which if correct, is hardly likely to be contradicted by Tardelli when he "inherited" RK some years later, since he was by now in no position to loan/transfer him from the ROI squad as had happened with Inter. Hence the journalist's "straight bat" comment.
I never heard of Olley before, what does that matter?Quote:
Why would a senior journalist writing for the main London paper, about a prominent and popular player at a leading London club, be "cynical" or slanted" against the player? I have read quite a bit of Olley's stuff and as a fan both of Spurs and Keane, I think I would have detected any bias against either club or player before now.
Meanwhile I doubt whether you had even heard of Olley before I posted his article.
I don't know why that journalist chose to write a cynical article based on his poor knowledge of Keane's early career. Maybe there are people, who work in the media, whose mindset is similar to yourself - who have a tendency to waffle on endlessly, expressing the baseless notions that float through their head at any given time and persist with them, even when faced with a more rational and supported explanation. Whether you/Olley was/is a fan of Keane is irrelevant.
You really don't know the value of substance, do you? nor have you been blessed with a minimum degree of objective rationality.
According to this website, Robbie is out with a hamstring injury and is not expected to be available to play until January 16th.
http://www.physioroom.com/news/engli...0b480e6179b5f6