QuoteExactly the same applies to the manager of the other team, whether that be Germany, Cyprus or San Marino.Originally Posted by Paulie
And are you saying Robbie Keane isn't "up to it?"
stan stan stan
'How can I hate women, my Mums one!!!' Chris Finch
Exactly the same applies to the manager of the other team, whether that be Germany, Cyprus or San Marino.
And are you saying Robbie Keane isn't "up to it?"
I agree on nearly all of this. The problem is that it is clear Robbie plays best when he is running onto the ball and the ball is being held up by a more physical player. If we want to replicate that we have 2 issues:
Not sure we have such a player who is worth his place. Maybe Morisson coudl do it.
If you do have that role how do you fit in Doyle (not to mention Stokes, Murphy, Long etc)
The question for Stan is whether you rate Robbie so highly you are preapred to sacrifice Doyle (temporarily) to get the best out of him. Or is there a way of playing both (the Robbie behind a front 2 option).
When gamblers are assessing the form in a horse race, they are not actually looking to pick a winner; essentially they are eliminating the horses who can't win, thereby arriving at their choice by a process of elimination. Occasionally, they narrow the field down to two equally likely winners, which they struggle to separate. In such circumstances, they may be tempted to split their stake and back both. This is always wrong. At best, they will lose half of their stake; at worst, they will lose all of it (i.e. should a third horse win). In the end, one horse must have a better chance of winning than the other, and if you really can't decide which of the two it is, you should save your money for another race.
It is the same with decisions like these, except Stan hasn't got the luxury of "waiting for another race". Therefore, if Keane and Doyle really can't play well together (as Jol found out with Defoe and Keane), then Stan has to choose one of them as being a better bet than the other.
And if his choice is Keane, then Stan next has to work out how best to deploy him. Of course, it could just be that he simply does not have the other players to get the best out of Keane, but that is highly unlikely, imo, since Keane has been effective for ROI in the past.
Again, looking to the example of NI, Sanchez had a similar problem with Healy, whereby he needed a big man to play alongside, plus at least one (ideally two) winger to supply them.
For the partner, he tried a couple of possibilities before settling on veteran James Quinn of Peterborough United in the (old) 4th Division! Quinn was never more than a journeyman, but he played some of the best football of his career under Sanchez, not least versus England when he gave £29 million Rio Ferdinand a terrible time!
For the wing, he reverted to veteran Keith Gillespie, about whom he held doubts over his attitude etc.
There were much "better" strikers available to Sanchez, but not with Quinn's "muscular" style and there were younger wingers, whom Sanchez might have picked.
Nonetheless, Sanchez had to make tough decisions; since he knew what he wanted and knew how to get it, the players gained such confidence in him that they went out and gave their all, with sometimes spectacular results.
From what I've seen of Staunton, it seems he didn't know what he wanted from the outset, he just scrambled around hoping to stumble upon the right formula. The players quickly cottoned on to this and confidence plummeted, first in him, then in themselves. This culminated in San Marino.
Of course since then, Stan (possibly under the influence of Sir Bobby? Senior Players? the Press?), looks to have corrected some of the worst of his early mistakes. Which combined with the players' pride and superior ability over very poor opposition, means they've managed to win their recent games.
Nonetheless, he doesn't look to be any nearer solving the "big" problems: e.g. Keane and/or Doyle, Finnan and Carr, John O'Shea's best position, whether to build for 2010 or to get ranking points from this campaign etc.
Worse still, there is precious little evidence that he is ever going to develop into the decision-maker/tactician/man manager necessary to be a success at international level, regardless of how much time he is given.
I think from what I've seen that Doyle and Keane have great potential as a partnership.
Exactly, who says Keane & Doyle can't play together? Two quality forwards who can give any defence trouble if they get decent service and they don't each have to stray 40 yards from goal just to get sight of the ball.
As for Robbie needing a tall man, Doyle's heading ability is superb.
I personally don't think Keane is good enough for us to be picking the players around him who will bring out the best in him. I think Doyle is the better striker even if Keane at present has the better goalscoring record.
I believe Keane's main problems with Ireland are that Staunton made him captain (a role that he's clearly not suited for) coupled with the fact that he's always guaranteed a place on the teamsheet and doesn't have to earn his selection (a similar criticism can be aimed at a number of Irish players). At Spurs he knows he'll be dropped if he has a couple of bad performances. This is clearly not the situation for Ireland.
On a sidenote I'm absolutely dying with a hangover in work today. Getting some dodgy looks from people who know I was out for the football last night. Wrecked.
Last edited by youngirish; 02/05/2007 at 9:28 AM.
I was actually referring to our midfield. It's obviously a lot more difficult for our strikers to score goals if the midfield players don't have the ability to open up the opposition's defence. I think it's far too early to say whether or not Keane and Doyle can strike up an effective partnership. Hopefully with the creativity of Stephen Ireland our midfield can begin to give them some more clear cut chances. I'm not saying that the onus is entirely on the midfield to create goal scoring opportunities but they do need to do better in this regard than they have been doing over the past number of years.And are you saying Robbie Keane isn't "up to it?"
I don't think that's a problem in the slightest. Obviously competition doesn't give you more ability, more confidence or more intelligience, it makes you try that little bit harder. If Robbie put in more effort he'd become a liabilty. I'd prefer him to relax a bit more and stay in and around the penalty box.
Competition for places brings out the best in most players and Keane is one of those players IMO. I don't understand how him putting in more effort means he becomes a liability. Surely more effort and less lying on his ar*e with his hands up in the air is what's needed.
I think he means that he concentrates on doing his job as a striker rather than dropping back in midfield to try do their job as well.
we need a fit steven reid back in midfield to hide the deficiencies that robbie feels he needs to come back to plug , doyle and keane will be a great partnership, if stephen ireland or andy reid or whoever is supplying them quality ball..
Was he crazy!! Yeah , in a very special way , an Irishman.
I slept, and dreamed that life was Beauty;
I woke, and found that life was Duty.
or both
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Well I certainly don't think lack of effort is Keane's problem.
Keane has been absolutely top class for Spurs for the last two seasons, alongside a variety of partners, in one of the top three Leagues in Europe, plus the UEFA Cup (this season).
Prior to that, he has has several seasons at top level, having been signed for big money by a number of leading managers.
I'd have thought his record for ROI pre-Staunton has not been bad, either (though I stand to be corrected on that one)
Therefore, he is clearly one of ROI's top three players, along with Given and Duff.
Doyle certainly has the look of a fine player, but he has only had one season at top level, plus one just below, on his CV.
Consequently, unless there is an overriding reason why not, Keane can reasonably expect to be first choice striker. To get the best out of him, he needs a big guy alongside. Doyle is the obvious first choice to try, but it will take perhaps half a dozen games before it will be evident whether that works.
If it does, fine. If it doesn't, then Stan has a choice to make:
1. Drop Keane, to be replaced by Doyle as the main man up front; or
2. Drop Doyle and try someone else alongside Keane; or
3. Pick Keane in a different position e.g. in the "hole" behind two front players.
As a Spurs fan, I'm biased, but I think
1. would be insane;
2. would be brave, but possibly necessary;
3. could work, but hardly ideal.
Anyhow, the point is, these are exactly the sort of decisions which test a manager's mettle. Stan doesn't appear (to me, at least), to have much of a clue about any of it. My guess is that the players cottoned on to this almost from the start, to the detriment of their performance.
With Keane, as the player who has played under more top managers than anyone else in the ROI team, my guess is that he is suffering from enormous frustration. On the one hand, he cares about playing for his country, especially as captain; on the other hand, he knows that even his best efforts are liable to be frustrated by playing for an idiot. (Had he been Roy Keane, rather than Robbie, he'd have stormed off by Stan's second game - if not sooner!)
As for your other points, Jol made Robbie his Vice-Captain last season. As a result, he has been captaining Spurs for the last few months in Ledley King's absence. If the captaincy has had any effect, it can only have been beneficial, since his form in that time has been outstanding.
As for being "guaranteed" a place, he has spent the last couple of seasons under Jol vying with Defoe (an England striker) for a place in the team. However, it has been clear since before Christmas that he has won that particular contest, with Jol publicly calling him one of his "untouchables". Again, his form has been excellent since then; in fact, I can't recall him playing better throughout his entire Spurs career.
In the end, his club form reflects the fact that he is playing for a manager who knows what he is doing, who understands him, and knows how to get the best from him.
His international form in the same period reflects the fact that he's playing for a man who couldn't manage a panic on a sinking ship.
If you drop Keane from the ROI, how long before his replacement's form starts to suffer likewise?
I don't think he should be dropped, as there doesn't seem anybody good enough to replace him at the moment. Maybe if we decided to play with just one up front and someone in the hole he should be, but if we stick with 4-4-2 then keane is currently too good to be left on the bench. However, if stan persists on playing him, he needs to play him in a different role, as robbie doesn't give enough support to the attack. he really needs to get into the box more often. That was evident against San Marino and Wales. Also, although IMO he shouldn't be dropped, he needs to know that he CAN be dropped.
I read that Andy Reid has been training this week and may play at the weekend. If he's fit he should be taken on the US trip and played in midfield.
I would agree with you EalingGreen but for the fact that Keane has been sh*t for Ireland since the 2002 World Cup which is long before Staunton's time in charge so I think it's unfair to blame his International form on Staunton.
And yes Keane is in fine form for Spurs at the moment but he's a player like Bellamy who blows hot and cold at various periods throughout his career. For his club he gets dropped when he blows cold but for Ireland he's a permanent fixture in the team which for me is poor management (you should be in the team on merit not reputation).
And it's not true that he's been untouchable since Christmas. Defoe got a run in the team for a number of games a few months ago at Keane's expense and he'll do so again if Keane has a poor run of form (though with only 2 games left it's unlikely that Jol will make any changes now).
IMO Doyle is a better striker than Keane. He has the all the qualities you look for in a good striker - strong, good in the air, good finisher and fairly pacey while Keane has none of the aforementioned. I would like to see Doyle play a couple of friendlies with Long or Stokes just to see how that goes and if either is playing and scoring regularly in the Premiership next season then possibly start looking at an alternative partnership though at the moment neither's form is good enough to risk in a competitive match.
The difference when Doyle was playing up front on his own against Slovakia compared to Keane in the Wales game was painfully plain to see for everyone.
Last edited by youngirish; 03/05/2007 at 9:31 AM.
The difference between Ireland's performance against Slovakia than against Wales was obvious for everyone to see.The difference when Doyle was playing up front on his own against Slovakia compared to Keane in the Wales game was painfully plain to see for everyone.
I'll not argue with you over Keane's ROI form, but you're seriously off the mark when it comes to Spurs.
You say Keane "blows hot and cold". Keane was Spurs fans' Player of the Year last season. He has already scored 21 goals this season, despite having been injured for some games and rested for others. Having seen quite a bit of him, I'd say he's actually been very consistent.
As for his being "dropped", if you look closer at the games where he has played and Defoe has been sub (and vice versa), you'll see that at the beginning of the season it was a straightforward rotation; by Christmas it was clear that Keane was playing and Defoe resting for the games which were Jol's priority (the UEFA Cup especially)
As for Defoe getting back in, there's actually a chance that he'll leave Spurs, since he's obviously second choice to Keane in Jol's opinion (see the Standard article in my post #983 for proof).
Anyhow, getting back to the ROI, I don't see how anyone can argue that Keane's club record makes him potentially one of the ROI's top three players; after all, numerous respected coaches have paid millions of pounds for him through the years, and he's currently keeping out an England international who's valued at £10 m+
And whilst Doyle looks to be potentially a similar standard of player, he still needs more than one season in the Premiership before he can be said to have realised that potential (imo).
In the end, if a player of undoubted pedigree is not repeating his club form for his country, then unless you think the player doesn't care (hardly the case with Keane) you need to look elsewhere for an explanation.
And when you consider the problems in man-management/selection/tactics/motivation etc which Stan has had with other players (Kenny, Carsley, Carr, O'Shea etc), it's not hard to find the answer.
Fair enough, if Staunton is not capable of getting the best from one of his few undoubted stars, and you believe in backing the manager, then he should replace Keane.
But how long before Staunton proves incapable of getting the best from Keane's replacement - whether Doyle or someone else?
In the end, if you've happily owned an expensive car for two or three years and it suddenly develops a fault, do you try and repair it first, or do you immediately replace it with another model which you've barely even seen, never mind driven?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks