Roy Keane

**Drumcondra 69er** · 09/01/2011, 12:46 PM

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...e-2489412.html

Had to laugh at the below quotes in particular!

"Yet the cult of Roy Keane is a hardy one. And perhaps that's because it is rooted not in the undeniably wonderful things he did on the pitch but in that Saipan tantrum, an act of petulance elevated by his apologists into a noble gesture.

Why does the myth have such legs that it will likely survive the latest proof that Roy Keane is in no position to scoff from on high at the shortcomings of other managers and players? Perhaps because Saipan was one of the emblematic incidents of the Celtic Tiger era. It struck a chord with people who liked to talk about pushing the envelope while going the extra mile and thinking outside the box going forward. The ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude.'"

"If there was a NAMA for football managers, Roy Keane would be in it."

Maybe he failed to prepare

Had a couple of results been different last week, it would have been Mick McCarthy rather than his old nemesis Roy Keane who got sacked.

And we all know what would have happened then, don't we? Keane would have been out of the traps like a greyhound after a hare to dance on McCarthy's grave. There'd have been a few digs at the Wolves boss and perhaps the statement that Mick had proved he'd always be a failure.

Keane's surprisingly durable corps of camp followers would have greeted these comments with the usual pseudo-sombre prose they reserve for relaying statements from the Mayfield Prophet, the kind of stuff which ends, "Mick wasn't good enough. Roy saw that. In Saipan. So he did."

But it's Mick who has survived and Roy who's bitten the dust. After walking out on Ireland, being slung out of Old Trafford and fleeing from Sunderland, his sacking by Ipswich is the latest in a series of ignominious departures. This one, though, is different. Even Keane can't pretend that his time at Portman Road has been anything other than the most unmitigated of failures.

In the past there has always been a scapegoat to hide behind. With Ireland, the FAI was to blame. Manchester United were at fault because The Great Man's team-mates failed to live up to his uniquely high standards. Even at Sunderland, where he hastily jumped before he was pushed, Keane peddled the line that what really upset him was not the team's poor form but the relationship between club chairman Niall Quinn and owner Ellis Short. This time round, however, it will be more difficult to create a smokescreen.

Or perhaps not. Because, increasingly, Roy Keane makes me think of the great American investigative journalist Jack Anderson's comment, in relation to General Douglas MacArthur, that anyone can glory in a triumph but it takes real talent to portray a defeat as a victory. We will no doubt be hearing about how his latest departure reflects the shortcomings of the club rather than the manager.

The truth is that Ipswich Town will do better once Roy Keane is gone. That's what happened at Sunderland where Steve Bruce has proven able to ignore potential problems in the boardroom and steered the club into the top six. And at Manchester United who, since Keane got the tar for his rant about a lack of competitive spirit among his team-mates, have won the Champions League and three Premier League titles with players he criticised, Rio Ferdinand and Darren Fletcher, playing key roles. The rights and wrongs of those cases have, you would think, been proved pretty conclusively by now. Come to think of it, Ireland played a lot better without Keane in the 2002 World Cup than they did when he returned to the team under Brian Kerr. Things improve when Keane moves on.

Yet we're sure to be treated this week to more blather about how Keane's latest failure has resulted from the inability of his players to display the kind of competitive spirit which their manager alone possesses. We might even get a little sermon about how this kind of footballer is not to be found anymore in the pampered contemporary era. But that will be just Premium Grade A Bull****. The 18 managers whose teams sit above Ipswich in the Championship table were able to find players who could do the job well enough.

For that matter, the notion of Keane as the ne plus ultra of determination makes no sense when you look at his old team-mates Ryan Giggs, two years younger than Keane, and Paul Scholes, three years younger, still excelling at the top six years after their old comrade called time on his Old Trafford career. That Giggs and Scholes have never felt the need to mouth about the supposed shortcomings of their team-mates does not render them any less ferocious as competitors. It is this ability to avoid unnecessary distractions which has enabled them to survive for so long at United.

Keane, on the other hand, has sought distraction with the single-minded intensity of an alcoholic seeking an early house. Because what is most striking about his ubiquitous media contributions is not just how mean they've been but how gratuitous. Was there any need for all those swipes at John Delaney and the FAI? Any purpose in sneering about Liam Brady's role with Giovanni Trapattoni? Did he really need to slag off Shay Given and the Irish team after their loss to France? Or rub it in to the English players after their World Cup debacle? Especially when he had enough footballing problems of his own to keep him busy.

The irony is that, despite his purported disdain for the media, Keane in recent times had become a younger version of those old windbag pros, the likes of Alan Mullery and Rodney Marsh, who function as quote factories for journalists short of something to fill out a page. He was a tabloid columnist without a column, a bullying curate eager to read people from the altar while remaining utterly ignorant of the beam in his own eye. Ipswich fans can be excused for detecting a lamentable lack of focus from the man they'd welcomed with open arms and high hopes.

Yet the cult of Roy Keane is a hardy one. And perhaps that's because it is rooted not in the undeniably wonderful things he did on the pitch but in that Saipan tantrum, an act of petulance elevated by his apologists into a noble gesture.

Why does the myth have such legs that it will likely survive the latest proof that Roy Keane is in no position to scoff from on high at the shortcomings of other managers and players? Perhaps because Saipan was one of the emblematic incidents of the Celtic Tiger era. It struck a chord with people who liked to talk about pushing the envelope while going the extra mile and thinking outside the box going forward. The ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude.'

In the end, just as Seanie and the boys did more damage than any 'ah sure it'll do' merchant could ever have done, Roy Keane proved to be a lesser manager than Mick McCarthy. That his managerial reputation plummeted in sync with the Tiger seems oddly fitting. A man who thought, or affected to think, that anything other than a World Cup victory for Ireland was a failure ended up struggling to keep his team out of the Championship relegation zone. If there was a NAMA for football managers, he'd be in it.

Then again, maybe he just failed to prepare.

**Lionel Ritchie** · 09/01/2011, 1:35 PM

It's an unkind if not unfair assessment. I thought the comparison with Scholes and Giggs was a bit low. Keane is apparently carrying long term injuries that are going to result in hip replacements at an improbably young age.

I'm sorry it didn't work out foir him because he has a similar Buy Irish policy to the one I operate when playing FIFA on the PS. Unfortunately he appears to other things to a similar standard as I do on the PS as well.

**legendz** · 09/01/2011, 2:15 PM

If McCarthy had gone before Keane he'd have been the front runner to take over at Ipswich and clean up Keane's mess there.

**seanfhear** · 09/01/2011, 2:29 PM

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...e-2489412.html

Had to laugh at the below quotes in particular!

.

Was there some dej�-vu all over again in that there post.

**Colbert Report** · 09/01/2011, 3:06 PM

Originally Posted by SkStu

No its not. Do you understand the concepts of part time or full-time work? Someones earnings dont determine what someones employment status is. The MLS is a full-time, professional league. Player signed to the MLS make their living from playing in the MLS irrespective of how much they are paid.

No they don't. Full-time means that you are paid enough money to not have to do another job. For example, Henry Burris is a full-time player in a part-time league. Most CFL players have second jobs, I know this because I have worked with lots of them here in Calgary. Only the top players in the CFL like the marquee skill positions are full-time. Nik Lewis, one of the best WRs in the game, gets paid 80k a year, I know that because it it public information. That's why he also works at my gym as a personal trainer.

The MLS is no different. Sure, David Beckham and Thierry Henry are full-time players, but if you think most of their team-mates don't have second, sometimes higher-paying jobs, then you're kidding yourself.

**theworm2345** · 09/01/2011, 5:28 PM

Originally Posted by Colbert Report

No they don't. Full-time means that you are paid enough money to not have to do another job. For example, Henry Burris is a full-time player in a part-time league. Most CFL players have second jobs, I know this because I have worked with lots of them here in Calgary. Only the top players in the CFL like the marquee skill positions are full-time. Nik Lewis, one of the best WRs in the game, gets paid 80k a year, I know that because it it public information. That's why he also works at my gym as a personal trainer.

The MLS is no different. Sure, David Beckham and Thierry Henry are full-time players, but if you think most of their team-mates don't have second, sometimes higher-paying jobs, then you're kidding yourself.

Never though I'd see the day (former Bears quarterback and I believe Grey Cup MVP) Henry Burris got a mention on foot.ie

**Drumcondra 69er** · 09/01/2011, 5:58 PM

Originally Posted by seanfhear

Was there some dej�-vu all over again in that there post.

Or in that there career.......

**Charlie Darwin** · 09/01/2011, 6:16 PM

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...e-2489412.html

Had to laugh at the below quotes in particular!

"Yet the cult of Roy Keane is a hardy one. And perhaps that's because it is rooted not in the undeniably wonderful things he did on the pitch but in that Saipan tantrum, an act of petulance elevated by his apologists into a noble gesture.

Why does the myth have such legs that it will likely survive the latest proof that Roy Keane is in no position to scoff from on high at the shortcomings of other managers and players? Perhaps because Saipan was one of the emblematic incidents of the Celtic Tiger era. It struck a chord with people who liked to talk about pushing the envelope while going the extra mile and thinking outside the box going forward. The ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude.'"

"If there was a NAMA for football managers, Roy Keane would be in it."

It's never a good thing when journalists try to compare incidents in sports to the Celtic Tiger/economy/politics in general.

**ArdeeBhoy** · 09/01/2011, 6:53 PM

Good to see Eamonn 'Grumpy' also indulging in hypocrisy over his former star pupil. Amnesia is clearly an issue also.

**rebelmusic** · 09/01/2011, 7:55 PM

I think it's unfair to say Keane would have thrown a few digs at McCarthy if he was let go. Ipswich got thrashed today 7-0 anyway so it will be interesting to see how a new manager fairs.

**Scram** · 10/01/2011, 9:00 AM

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...e-2489412.html

Had to laugh at the below quotes in particular!

"Yet the cult of Roy Keane is a hardy one. And perhaps that's because it is rooted not in the undeniably wonderful things he did on the pitch but in that Saipan tantrum, an act of petulance elevated by his apologists into a noble gesture.

Why does the myth have such legs that it will likely survive the latest proof that Roy Keane is in no position to scoff from on high at the shortcomings of other managers and players? Perhaps because Saipan was one of the emblematic incidents of the Celtic Tiger era. It struck a chord with people who liked to talk about pushing the envelope while going the extra mile and thinking outside the box going forward. The ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude.'"

"If there was a NAMA for football managers, Roy Keane would be in it."

Maybe he failed to prepare

Had a couple of results been different last week, it would have been Mick McCarthy rather than his old nemesis Roy Keane who got sacked.

And we all know what would have happened then, don't we? Keane would have been out of the traps like a greyhound after a hare to dance on McCarthy's grave. There'd have been a few digs at the Wolves boss and perhaps the statement that Mick had proved he'd always be a failure.

Keane's surprisingly durable corps of camp followers would have greeted these comments with the usual pseudo-sombre prose they reserve for relaying statements from the Mayfield Prophet, the kind of stuff which ends, "Mick wasn't good enough. Roy saw that. In Saipan. So he did."

But it's Mick who has survived and Roy who's bitten the dust. After walking out on Ireland, being slung out of Old Trafford and fleeing from Sunderland, his sacking by Ipswich is the latest in a series of ignominious departures. This one, though, is different. Even Keane can't pretend that his time at Portman Road has been anything other than the most unmitigated of failures.

In the past there has always been a scapegoat to hide behind. With Ireland, the FAI was to blame. Manchester United were at fault because The Great Man's team-mates failed to live up to his uniquely high standards. Even at Sunderland, where he hastily jumped before he was pushed, Keane peddled the line that what really upset him was not the team's poor form but the relationship between club chairman Niall Quinn and owner Ellis Short. This time round, however, it will be more difficult to create a smokescreen.

Or perhaps not. Because, increasingly, Roy Keane makes me think of the great American investigative journalist Jack Anderson's comment, in relation to General Douglas MacArthur, that anyone can glory in a triumph but it takes real talent to portray a defeat as a victory. We will no doubt be hearing about how his latest departure reflects the shortcomings of the club rather than the manager.

The truth is that Ipswich Town will do better once Roy Keane is gone. That's what happened at Sunderland where Steve Bruce has proven able to ignore potential problems in the boardroom and steered the club into the top six. And at Manchester United who, since Keane got the tar for his rant about a lack of competitive spirit among his team-mates, have won the Champions League and three Premier League titles with players he criticised, Rio Ferdinand and Darren Fletcher, playing key roles. The rights and wrongs of those cases have, you would think, been proved pretty conclusively by now. Come to think of it, Ireland played a lot better without Keane in the 2002 World Cup than they did when he returned to the team under Brian Kerr. Things improve when Keane moves on.

Yet we're sure to be treated this week to more blather about how Keane's latest failure has resulted from the inability of his players to display the kind of competitive spirit which their manager alone possesses. We might even get a little sermon about how this kind of footballer is not to be found anymore in the pampered contemporary era. But that will be just Premium Grade A Bull****. The 18 managers whose teams sit above Ipswich in the Championship table were able to find players who could do the job well enough.

For that matter, the notion of Keane as the ne plus ultra of determination makes no sense when you look at his old team-mates Ryan Giggs, two years younger than Keane, and Paul Scholes, three years younger, still excelling at the top six years after their old comrade called time on his Old Trafford career. That Giggs and Scholes have never felt the need to mouth about the supposed shortcomings of their team-mates does not render them any less ferocious as competitors. It is this ability to avoid unnecessary distractions which has enabled them to survive for so long at United.

Keane, on the other hand, has sought distraction with the single-minded intensity of an alcoholic seeking an early house. Because what is most striking about his ubiquitous media contributions is not just how mean they've been but how gratuitous. Was there any need for all those swipes at John Delaney and the FAI? Any purpose in sneering about Liam Brady's role with Giovanni Trapattoni? Did he really need to slag off Shay Given and the Irish team after their loss to France? Or rub it in to the English players after their World Cup debacle? Especially when he had enough footballing problems of his own to keep him busy.

The irony is that, despite his purported disdain for the media, Keane in recent times had become a younger version of those old windbag pros, the likes of Alan Mullery and Rodney Marsh, who function as quote factories for journalists short of something to fill out a page. He was a tabloid columnist without a column, a bullying curate eager to read people from the altar while remaining utterly ignorant of the beam in his own eye. Ipswich fans can be excused for detecting a lamentable lack of focus from the man they'd welcomed with open arms and high hopes.

Yet the cult of Roy Keane is a hardy one. And perhaps that's because it is rooted not in the undeniably wonderful things he did on the pitch but in that Saipan tantrum, an act of petulance elevated by his apologists into a noble gesture.

Why does the myth have such legs that it will likely survive the latest proof that Roy Keane is in no position to scoff from on high at the shortcomings of other managers and players? Perhaps because Saipan was one of the emblematic incidents of the Celtic Tiger era. It struck a chord with people who liked to talk about pushing the envelope while going the extra mile and thinking outside the box going forward. The ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude.'

In the end, just as Seanie and the boys did more damage than any 'ah sure it'll do' merchant could ever have done, Roy Keane proved to be a lesser manager than Mick McCarthy. That his managerial reputation plummeted in sync with the Tiger seems oddly fitting. A man who thought, or affected to think, that anything other than a World Cup victory for Ireland was a failure ended up struggling to keep his team out of the Championship relegation zone. If there was a NAMA for football managers, he'd be in it.

Then again, maybe he just failed to prepare.

That's very good DC69 but I have to say that I 100% agree with Keane in his assessment of the "sure it'll do" Irish attitude. I can't fault his ambition but the problem is he keeps tripping up over his own ego and his inability to let go of bitterness.

**geysir** · 10/01/2011, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Scram

That's very good DC69 but I have to say that I 100% agree with Keane in his assessment of the "sure it'll do" Irish attitude. I can't fault his ambition but the problem is he keeps tripping up over his own ego and his inability to let go of bitterness.

Keane certainly tripped over his choices of 'sure any old Irish player will do' attitude.
How come he couldn't get decent loan players like Cunningham or Andy Reid?
Why did he have such low "sure it'll do" standards?
It's easy for Keane to be sarcastic about the 'sure it'll do' attitude but the problem is when he doesn't value or even recognise sincere effort and is caustically dismissive of such efforts when they fall short of the goal. Never mind his wall of denial/excuses he offers for his shortcomings. That's what we call hypocrisy.
Under Keane's own criteria (not that I agree with), he is a muppet of the highest order whose own criticism should be taken with a dose of epsom salts.
Surely Scram, you are not one of the
" ******* in every office who vacillates between putting down 'I don't suffer fools gladly' and 'perfectionism' when asked to name a weakness idolised Keane as he worshipped the likes of Seanie FitzPatrick when they talked about the size of their balls and their hatred of the old 'ah sure it'll do' attitude."

**theworm2345** · 11/01/2011, 1:32 AM

Here is an article with a slightly different tone (both of them need to be taken with a grain of salt, I think)
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...g-2490157.html

**Bluebeard** · 11/01/2011, 3:29 AM

A grain the size of Muntanya de Sal.

**Lionel Ritchie** · 11/01/2011, 9:27 AM

Originally Posted by theworm2345

Here is an article with a slightly different tone (both of them need to be taken with a grain of salt, I think)
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...g-2490157.html

Any idea who actually wrote that? They must be Irish based. There's a delusion in there about just how obsessed the UK media are with him (Keane). Their Irish editions for sure bang on about him but their UK parent editions don't give a fraction of the coverage. As the previous article alluded -he's seen ala Holloway as a good source for a mouthy quip on a slow day -scarcely more. Holloway's funnier though and often more inciteful.

**SkStu** · 11/01/2011, 1:55 PM

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Any idea who actually wrote that? They must be Irish based. There's a delusion in there about just how obsessed the UK media are with him (Keane). Their Irish editions for sure bang on about him but their UK parent editions don't give a fraction of the coverage. As the previous article alluded -he's seen ala Holloway as a good source for a mouthy quip on a slow day -scarcely more. Holloway's funnier though and often more inciteful.

nicely played.

**Noelys Guitar** · 11/01/2011, 2:15 PM

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Any idea who actually wrote that? They must be Irish based. There's a delusion in there about just how obsessed the UK media are with him (Keane). Their Irish editions for sure bang on about him but their UK parent editions don't give a fraction of the coverage. As the previous article alluded -he's seen ala Holloway as a good source for a mouthy quip on a slow day -scarcely more. Holloway's funnier though and often more inciteful.

Holloway is also a better manager.

**Charlie Darwin** · 11/01/2011, 2:31 PM

Of course he is - he's had ten years more experience, most of which was relatively undistinguished until his recent successes. Learning through failure and all that.

**theworm2345** · 11/01/2011, 2:48 PM

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Any idea who actually wrote that? They must be Irish based. There's a delusion in there about just how obsessed the UK media are with him (Keane). Their Irish editions for sure bang on about him but their UK parent editions don't give a fraction of the coverage. As the previous article alluded -he's seen ala Holloway as a good source for a mouthy quip on a slow day -scarcely more. Holloway's funnier though and often more inciteful.

Generally when I think Independent and delusional I think Dion Fanning, though I can't be sure.

**Metrostars** · 11/01/2011, 3:54 PM

Originally Posted by Colbert Report

No they don't. Full-time means that you are paid enough money to not have to do another job. For example, Henry Burris is a full-time player in a part-time league. Most CFL players have second jobs, I know this because I have worked with lots of them here in Calgary. Only the top players in the CFL like the marquee skill positions are full-time. Nik Lewis, one of the best WRs in the game, gets paid 80k a year, I know that because it it public information. That's why he also works at my gym as a personal trainer.

The MLS is no different. Sure, David Beckham and Thierry Henry are full-time players, but if you think most of their team-mates don't have second, sometimes higher-paying jobs, then you're kidding yourself.

Incorrect. True there are some young lads who earn the bare minimum who have side jobs coaching youth teams etc but that's very few, maybe 3-4 per team at most.