Article on horrible side of Roy Keane

Kingp35

Rod Liddle: Farewell leaves a foul smell wrote:

“I’d waited long enough. I ******* hit him hard. The ball was there (I think). Take that, you ****.”



By the time you read this, Roy Keane will have fixed himself up with a very lucrative contract at another club, I suspect. If this were an honest, decent world, such a thing wouldn’t happen; he would be shunned by every football team from Inverness Cally to Torquay. In fact, if this was a decent world, he wouldn’t get the chance to sign for another club because he’d still be banged up and certainly banned from the game for life.

Sadly, though, we are dealing with professional football, rather than Narnia.

Mr Keane parted company with Manchester United on Friday, with or without bellowing his favoured, anatomically peculiar, riposte: “Stick it up your bollocks.”

Sir Alex Ferguson, a man perpetually afflicted by thick, dense, clouds of hubris, had finally had enough. A little while ago, Keane had done what we in the trade call a “Blunkett”, by which I mean that he had slagged off his colleagues in public one by one, rather than slept with Kimberly Quinn or bought some dodgy shares. That didn’t quite do it for Sir Alex, but subsequent acts of typical petulance and aggression seems to have pushed him over the edge.

And when I say it was late in the day, I mean about four years late in the day.

The story of what this thug did to Manchester City’s defender Alf-Inge Haaland may be well known, but the total lack of meaningful punishment still astonishes me. To recap, during a derby game at Old Trafford in April 2001, Keane lunged at Haaland with a despicable and cowardly challenge and smashed the Norwegian’s knee to pieces. It proved to be the last 90 minutes of first-team football Haaland ever played. Later, in his autobiography, Keane admitted that the assault was premeditated and had been motivated by a foul that Keane had perpetrated against Haaland some years earlier and which had backfired.

You might well wonder why the police failed to take an interest in the matter. If I did the same sort of thing to, say, Patrick Kielty or AA Gill, I would be charged with occasioning grievous bodily harm, no matter how passionately I attempted to justify my actions. In this instance, the police did nothing — because we’re dealing with Premiership football here, remember, and the top stars are bigger than the law.

More pertinently, perhaps, the Football Association — resolute and severe when dealing with the little clubs; spineless, self-serving and compliant when faced with the likes of Manchester United or Liverpool — handed out a fine of about 11 days’ wages and a five-match ban.

Nobody — except Haaland and me — seemed terribly bothered by this leniency. If you are as thick as a plate of mince and forget to take an FA drug test, you get banned for the best part of a season. Deliberately maim a fellow professional and then brag about it, you’re out for a month. But in the normal world, which is the greater crime? Even the Professional Footballers’ Association couldn’t get itself too worked up. The chairman, Gordon Taylor, seemed far more bothered about the tiresome prospect of Haaland suing Keane. “He’s been badly advised,” Taylor remarked of the midfielder’s decision to write about the incident, as if the real crime was in admitting the offence.

“Roy will return from his ban a better player and a better human being,” the former Arsenal player Paul Davis remarked at the time, with evident sympathy. Well, um, not exactly, Paul. What followed was a campaign of spite and vilification directed at the palpably decent and likeable manager of the Irish national team, Mick McCarthy.

Decent, likeable — and, you have to say, extremely successful. But Roy eventually got his way and McCarthy was out — and so too, now, are Ireland, from the World Cup. Mick subsequently guided a very average Sunderland team to the Premiership and only he and God knows how: I hope McCarthy allows himself a wry smile every now and then. One can assume, at least, that Keane’s next contract will not be at the Stadium of Light.

We don’t have the money for him down at Millwall, thankfully. And I daresay our training facilities would not meet with his approval. Where will he end up? By now, you may well have the answer. He is a very good footballer and, let’s be honest, in the amoral world of Premiership football that’s all that matters, isn’t it? At the time of writing the rumour mill is grinding away: it could be poor old Everton, it could be West Brom, it could even be as manager of Ireland, which should ensure that they fail to qualify for the next World Cup too (people management doesn’t seem to be Roy’s strong point, does it? And can you imagine the press conferences?) There’s even a rumour flying around that it might be Manchester City, given Keane’s long-standing friendship with Stuart Pearce. Apparently, it was Stuart who taught Roy never to “show pain”, because it’s a sort of weakness. What a perfect irony that would be. If you were a Manchester City supporter, how would you feel about that? If you were Haaland, how would you feel about that? All of a sudden, “stick it up your bollocks ” seems an eminently succinct, understated and appropriate response.

Sadly every bit of it is true.

whiskeyman

Not a Utd fan.... not a fan of Keane the man, but a huge fan of Keane the player.

The remark about him being "above the law" and comparing the "assault"... Did Haaland ever try and press charges by any chance?
If not, the whole middle section of this article is flawed...

Kingp35

whiskeyman wrote:

Not a Utd fan.... not a fan of Keane the man, but a huge fan of Keane the player.

The remark about him being "above the law" and comparing the "assault"... Did Haaland ever try and press charges by any chance?
If not, the whole middle section of this article is flawed...

As a Leeds fan and Haaland being an ex Leeds player I followed this alot. I actually got the article of a Leeds forum so it shows how much Leeds fans still follow this story.

To answer your question yes he did intend to ad actually went about putting together a case to take legal action but was persuaded not to in the end. In my opinion the FA certainly had a big part to play in this. That tackle ended his career and he would have had every right to sue Keane

Roddy23

Yes its originally form the Sunday times. read it on Sunday, dont know if I agree with all of it though.

BKtje

it is very anti manu in general (whenever manu/staff are mentioned its in a negative light). That said not much in there is flawed but some points are just strung together to make him seem worse and get that writers point accross.

What followed was a campaign of spite and vilification directed at the palpably decent and likeable manager of the Irish national team, Mick McCarthy.

What has that got to do with

“Roy will return from his ban a better player and a better human being,” the former Arsenal player Paul Davis remarked at the time, with evident sympathy. Well, um, not exactly, Paul

As far as im aware he did learn his lesson and didnt actually cause any other injuries etc. His fight with McCarthy was to do with standards and wether you feel he was right or wrong you can't deny that he felt he was doing it for the good of the squad.

McCarthy was likeable but as a manager had major flaws. The author seems to think that these flaws were caused by Keane. Come on.

Decent, likeable — and, you have to say, extremely successful.

Extremely succesful? Thats debateable.

While the article states many facts, they dont all link up the way the author wishes the uninformed to think. Finally, wasn't it Haalands other knee that caused him to retire? (and i think haaland should have sued keane. Even if that wasnt the reason he retired he still ****ed up his knee..maybe not in the immediate future but deffo in the long term on those cold mornings when he gets older)

ButcherOfNog

Kingp35 wrote:

That tackle ended his career and he would have had every right to sue Keane

no it didn't, i would assume thats why he didn't persue the case

dirkey_wynne

Kingp35 wrote:

That tackle ended his career and he would have had every right to sue Keane

Eh, Haaland retired due to an injury to his other knee!

Big Nelly

Seems to me he is just trying to be controversal!! nothin in there we havent heard about already and has been discussed many times.....usual crap jorno....cant think of proper story so drags up stuff from a few years ago!!! I wouldnt even bother reading any more of his articles if this is the tripe that he is writing!!

Pigman II

That's the same guy who wrote the "I'm glad Ireland didn't qualify" article last month. Wind up merchant tbh but I agree about his point wrt to McCarthy.

SteM

Yeah, read this on Sunday. I didn't think it was a particularly good piece, plenty of opinion in there. I thought it was a nice shot at United in general from Rod when I read it to be honest.

masterK

dirkey_wynne wrote:

Eh, Haaland retired due to an injury to his other knee!

Exactly. It's the one fact in the whole Keane & Haaland debacle that is conveniently forgotton about and any article on the subject that fails to mention it can be dismissed as rubbish IMO.

The Rooster

Kingp35 wrote:

Sadly every bit of it is true.

Nope its not.

Haaland made a complete recovery from the injury sustained in the Keane tackle. He retired from a different injury.

No doubt that Keane was a scumbag in his earlier years, but he matured, grew-up, copped on to himself. The Haaland attack was probably the last real element of the old Roy.

In the case of Haaland it was sad for him the injury he picked up when playing MU, and it was sadder still when he picked up a worse injury that ended his career. These things happen in football, unfortunately, though I'd have less sympathy for Haaland than I have for most other players, given that Haaland once stood over a player who'd suffered a cruciate knee injury and goaded him.

Illkillya

Indeed, this writer is just trying to make his voice heard, I bet hes sitting at home reading boards.ie delighted that people are discussing him.

'Mr Keane parted company with Manchester United on Friday, with or without bellowing his favoured, anatomically peculiar, riposte: “Stick it up your bollocks.” '
You can't say things like that... it is very very bad journalism. You could just as well say 'Mary Robinson parted company with the United Nations on Friday, with or without bellowing her favoured, anatomically peculiar, riposte: “Stick it up your bollocks.”'

Pigman II

The Rooster wrote:

No doubt that Keane was a scumbag in his earlier years, but he matured, grew-up, copped on to himself.

Ah yes, the more mature Keane who subsequently walked out on his country and then later had to be let-go from his job. What age is he now? 17? 18?

Kingp35

dirkey_wynne wrote:

Eh, Haaland retired due to an injury to his other knee!

D'Oh!!

To say he fully recovered from that Knee injury would be a lie too. It was smashed to pieces pretty much

The Rooster

Pigman II wrote:

Ah yes, the more mature Keane who subsequently walked out on his country and then later had to be let-go from his job. What age is he now? 17? 18?

Saipan and leaving MU had notihng to do with immaturity.
Keane sets himself and others certain standards. If they are not reached he's not happy, and he lets people know about it. He tells it straight.

A strong manager makes sure his best player is on the pitch - assuming that he's not a total disruptive influence that nobody wants to play it.

Jack Charlton, for his all his many many faults as a manager, was at least a strong manager. No matter McGrath did or didnt do, Charlton always made sure he played. McCarthy was not a strong manager, he got the Ireland job too early in his managerial career. There was never any question that the Irish team would be better without Keane. Even if Keane was in the wrong over Saipan, for a manager not to be able to manage it so his best player was on the field is a sign of a poor manager. All this crap by people arguing over who was in the wrong over Saipan. The absolute fact is, and few seem to grasp it, is both were in the wrong. But the buck stops with the manager at the end of the day - he had it within his power to make sure Keane was happy and played, but he wasnt capable of doing it.

No matter what Keane has got up to, both in his immature days and his mature opininated days, Ferguson has always made sure Keane played. Keane is now passed his best, he's 34, and perhaps injury prone. No longer needed it seems - though I must say I'm very surprised Ferguson didnt wait until after confirmation of qualifying through the group stages of the CL. Reportedly, Keane was well on target to be available for the final game.

The Rooster

Kingp35 wrote:

D'Oh!!

To say he fully recovered from that Knee injury would be a lie too. It was smashed to pieces pretty much

But his knee did fully recover. It was not smashed to pieces. He did play again. Albeit for less than 90 minutes because of another injury.

Kingp35

The Rooster wrote:

But his knee did fully recover. It was not smashed to pieces. He did play again. Albeit for less than 90 minutes because of another injury.

It was a very serious injury that caused major damage to his knee. Yes he recovered enough to possibly make a come but no it did not fully recover.

TheMonster

Fact - He didn't play much after the tackle
Fact - The Injury that forced him to retire was to his other knee.
Fact - He had injury problems in that knee prior to the tackle.

Everyone concerned obviously decided this was not a case for grounds in suing Keane - it woul have been thrown out.

p.pete

I don't like the way the article laughs off Keane's potential as a manager - it'll be a while until he's a great manager but I reckon he's similar to AF in a lot of ways and has enourmous potential. He has high standards and loads of respect from fellow professionals.

Keane v McCarthy has nothing to do with the Haaland incident, hopefully in 20 years Keane regrets that incident, mostly he's been a model professional however.

Guy:Incognito

Regardless of what you think of Keane, tbh you can forget the two parties involved in the tackle full stop. If Haaland had pursued and won a case, and if indeed as the muppet who wrote the article said he should be jailed, it would have had set a dangerous precident and had a damaging effect on football an dprobably sport as a whole.


The last thing players need when playing is constanly having the thought of "oh crap, what if this tackle goes wrong and he sues me?". Then you have high tackles in Rugby that may not be deliberate but rather clumsy, it would lead to every sport becoming minimal contact.

Bottom line is, I have seen a lot worse tackles through the years and the fact of Roy's book is the only reason this one is long running. Where is the journalists call for shearer to be jailed for hi sstamping that should have seen him banned before WC98 (iirc) but was swept under the carpet by the fa. How about Gazza's one on gary charles (again not sure if its the right player) in the early 90's where he injured himself. There are plenty more.

p.pete wrote:

I don't like the way the article laughs off Keane's potential as a manager - it'll be a while until he's a great manager but I reckon he's similar to AF in a lot of ways and has enourmous potential. He has high standards and loads of respect from fellow professionals.

I think he'll be a very good manager. I reckon he'll have players wanting to play their hearts out for him, and he won't tolerate ****. Ferguson respected him for that, and it's the reason he is universally respecte in world football. I'm sure even McCarthy would admit to himself that he would have loved to have gone to the WC with 22 players who had Roys commitment and drive and belief that they could win it, rather than the fai and most people s belief that "aah sure we're a small country, the knock-out stages will do us"

Third_Echelon

The article is shabby journalism to be honest. Keane is by no means flawless, but it just sounds like a rant really...

How some people get a job in the press is beyond me.

Personally, I think Roy will make a great manager. He has passion and spirit and 2nd best isn't good enough. I'm sure after some experience, any team would give their left nut to have roy keane as their manager....

Dustaz

Illkillya wrote:

'Mr Keane parted company with Manchester United on Friday, with or without bellowing his favoured, anatomically peculiar, riposte: “Stick it up your bollocks.” '
You can't say things like that... it is very very bad journalism. You could just as well say 'Mary Robinson parted company with the United Nations on Friday, with or without bellowing her favoured, anatomically peculiar, riposte: “Stick it up your bollocks.”'

Well actually you couldnt. Mary Robinson is not known for saying "stick it up your bollocks". Roy Keane IS known for saying "Stick it up your bollocks". Clear enough?

The last thing players need when playing is constanly having the thought of "oh crap, what if this tackle goes wrong and he sues me?".

Theres a difference between a tackle going horribly wrong and injuring someone by accident and spending close to a year planning a violent assault that if perpetrated on the street would land him in jail. Thats the crucial difference.


What always bothered me about the Haaland incident was the minor nature of its genesis. If Alfie had have been banging keanos missus or slapped one of his children or something, then maybe there would be some way that balanced people could understand Roy's anger. But it was nothing like that. Haaland laughed at keane when his (potentially dangerous) foul went wrong and roy injured himself. I would have done the exact same thing on a sunday league pitch. Roy took this as a grievous attack on him and planned his revenge and attempted to put haaland out of the game for good. This is NOT a balanced person. This, coupled with most of his other high profile stunts, hints at someone with significant pyschological problems.

eirebhoy

Liddle:

"It’s true that a lot of England supporters — all of the ones I know, at least — were certainly very interested in the score from Lansdowne Road last week: they were cheering on the Swiss with almost as much fervour as they were cheering on the national side. But then, Motty didn’t interrupt his commentary of the England versus Poland game to say: “. . . and it’s absolutely terrific news from Dublin, where the P addies are on their way out of the World Cup”."

I've been reading a lot of his articles since I read the one with the above quote and he's just completely anti-Irish. I'm not a fan of the English but then again I don't work for the times.

yop

Pointless inciting "journalism".

Smells of ABU and Anti - Irish. If Haaland had a case then as said he should have followed it up.

Guy:Incognito

Dustaz wrote:

What always bothered me about the Haaland incident was the minor nature of its genesis. If Alfie had have been banging keanos missus or slapped one of his children or something, then maybe there would be some way that balanced people could understand Roy's anger. But it was nothing like that. Haaland laughed at keane when his (potentially dangerous) foul went wrong and roy injured himself. I would have done the exact same thing on a sunday league pitch. Roy took this as a grievous attack on him and planned his revenge and attempted to put haaland out of the game for good. This is NOT a balanced person. This, coupled with most of his other high profile stunts, hints at someone with significant pyschological problems.

So what about the 3 threads on the rugby forum (2 regarding spear tackles and 1 was an elbow) All 3 are potentialy fatal, so surely fall into a more serious area, yet none recieved bans and are more or less forgotten about. Oh and they were completely unprovoked, I dont see what BOD could have done in 90 secs of rugby to warrant that.

Keane didnt touch Haaland when he did his cruciate, he ran beside him and kind of stubbed his leg, hardly see how this could be deemed dangerous on Haaland seeign as the first thing he knew of it was when he turned aroun and saw KEane on the ground.

Dustaz

Stekelly wrote:

So what about the 3 threads on the rugby forum (2 regarding spear tackles and 1 was an elbow) All 3 are potentialy fatal, so surely fall into a more serious area, yet none recieved bans and are more or less forgotten about. Oh and they were completely unprovoked, I dont see what BOD could have done in 90 secs of rugby to warrant that.

Totally agree that spear tackles are dangerous and a much tougher stance should be taken on them than the IRB appears to want to take. However, i think youve just proved my point. Somehow i doubt umaga mealanu (sp) sat down and planned to take BOD with the tackles. Roy keane sat down for a year and planned to take Haaland out. It was pre-meditated.

Keane didnt touch Haaland when he did his cruciate, he ran beside him and kind of stubbed his leg,

Kind of stubbed his leg while trying to foul him... We all laughed at gazza when he did it too.

Pigman II

The Rooster wrote:

Saipan and leaving MU had notihng to do with immaturity.
Keane sets himself and others certain standards. If they are not reached he's not happy, and he lets people know about it.

Well shouldn't we all be grateful that we have a guiding light like him there to show us the error of our ways? It's a wonder how we ever qualified for 2 major championships before he came on the scene.

No matter what Keane has got up to, both in his immature days and his mature opininated days, Ferguson has always made sure Keane played.

Oh so because he's older and more 'mature' now his acts of recklessness, thoughtlessness, public betrayal, selfishness and mutiny can all be put down an 'opinionated' nature?

Keane is now passed his best, he's 34, and perhaps injury prone. No longer needed it seems - though I must say I'm very surprised Ferguson didnt wait until after confirmation of qualifying through the group stages of the CL. Reportedly, Keane was well on target to be available for the final game.

Do you honestly believe Keane is gone now because Ferguson saw no more use for him as a player? If you do then you are kidding yourself. That's 2m quid down the drain for nothing just to pay him off til the end of the season. Hell even if Fergie had never planned to play him for the rest of the season (and you know there was zero liklihood of that yourself) ManU could still be sending him round the world right now opening superstores or whatever other nonsense that 'business' gets up to these days. Face it, whether he walked or was pushed it was not because of his playing abilities.

The Rooster

Pigman II wrote:

Well shouldn't we all be grateful that we have a guiding light like him there to show us the error of our ways? It's a wonder how we ever qualified for 2 major championships before he came on the scene.

Not sure of the relevance or point of this comment! I'll just reiterate that its his style to let people know when he's not happy with them. That can be deemed a strength or weakness depending on your POV. He's certainly be a very useful asset in his time for both Ireland and MU.

Oh so because he's older and more 'mature' now his acts of recklessness, thoughtlessness, public betrayal, selfishness and mutiny can all be put down an 'opinionated' nature?

Hyperbolic nonsense. Though Keane certainly has weaknesses.
Recklessness - rarely seen now, but I wouldnt say never.
Thoughtlessness - would never associate this with him. I'd say he's a deep thinker, and usually has a fair idea what reaction he'll get.
Public betrayal - ! That's mad. The man does have too much pride, definitly a deadly sin. But a good manager would have managed it.
Selfishness - no doubt. Winning is what he focuses on. He's selfish in his means to achieve that.
Mutiny - !!!! I don't recall him over-throwing anyone in power and inserting himself as their replacement.

Do you honestly believe Keane is gone now because Ferguson saw no more use for him as a player? If you do then you are kidding yourself. That's 2m quid down the drain for nothing just to pay him off til the end of the season. Hell even if Fergie had never planned to play him for the rest of the season (and you know there was zero liklihood of that yourself) ManU could still be sending him round the world right now opening superstores or whatever other nonsense that 'business' gets up to these days. Face it, whether he walked or was pushed it was not because of his playing abilities.

Not that 2m is anything to MU, but its not "down the drain" - they've just paid it sooner.
No more than you, I dont know what the real reason was, and as I said I can't understand why it couldnt have waited a few weeks at least. I'd say playing ability was a consideration though. Do you honestly believe that if he was still 29 that he would not have been offered a new contract and thus stayed put?

MrJoeSoap

Just as a matter of interest, what exact punishment did Keane serve for the "tackle" on Haaland?

Guy:Incognito

Pigman II wrote:

Well shouldn't we all be grateful that we have a guiding light like him there to show us the error of our ways? It's a wonder how we ever qualified for 2 major championships before he came on the scene..

Brazil Qualified for the WC without Pele, Argentina did it without Maradonna, does that take away from how good they were?

redspider

eirebhoy wrote:

I've been reading a lot of his articles since I read the one with the above quote and he's just completely anti-Irish.

Yes, I agree with you on this. His articles on the Irish team and on Roy reek with anti-Irishness. If we were jewish he would be lambasted as a neo-Nazi, as an anti-semetic. His editor lets him get away with this Irish-bashing even though the title sells a lot of copies in Ireland, and even though it has its own Irish edition. Why both of these articles werent pulled or at least edited down I dont know. There were several letters written in complaining to the Editor and they published a couple of those. I usually avoid his articles as I dont give him any credence but after a day or so I read the article on Roy.

redspider

Pigman II

The Rooster wrote:

Not sure of the relevance or point of this comment! I'll just reiterate that its his style to let people know when he's not happy with them. That can be deemed a strength or weakness depending on your POV. He's certainly be a very useful asset in his time for both Ireland and MU.

Being right all the time is a strength. Being right (in your head) and taking a 'my way or the highway' approach is not.

Hyperbolic nonsense. Though Keane certainly has weaknesses.

Yes, many of which I have listed.

Not that 2m is anything to MU, but its not "down the drain" - they've just paid it sooner.

So instead of having a still decent player available to you for 4-6 months you for 2m you are now instead getting NOTHING for that 2m? That's money down the drain as far as I'm concerned. Unless of course the mere presence of said player was SO detrimental to your team that it was actually worth 2m just to get rid of him. That speaks volumes about Keane if that is the case.

No more than you, I dont know what the real reason was, and as I said I can't understand why it couldnt have waited a few weeks at least. I'd say playing ability was a consideration though. Do you honestly believe that if he was still 29 that he would not have been offered a new contract and thus stayed put?

Definetly! He got rid of Stam at aged 29 and now 4 years on that guy is playing at an even bigger club than ManU! So clearly Fergies not adverse to getting rid of anyone (even players who demonstrably have lots to offer at his level) if they'll threaten his empire and to answer your question I believe that if Keane was 29 now with a contract running out in the summer and he was acting the way he had been over the past months/years that ManU would have no hesitation of getting rid of him too.

Stekelly wrote:

Brazil Qualified for the WC without Pele, Argentina did it without Maradonna, does that take away from how good they were?

I didn't say Keane was a bad player.

Kingp35

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Just as a matter of interest, what exact punishment did Keane serve for the "tackle" on Haaland?

A 5 game ban and 2 weeks wages I think.

MrJoeSoap

Kingp35 wrote:

A 5 game ban and 2 weeks wages I think.

Brilliant.

Without wishing to sound too biased or resentful, David Prutton got a 10 game ban at an absolutely crucial part of the season for us last year for well... you probably know what.

Compare the two offences.

Compare the two punishments.

Pigman II

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Compare the two offences.

Compare the two punishments.

Compare the two clubs.

MrJoeSoap

Pigman II wrote:

Compare the two clubs.

Exactly.

A big club like Southampton are harshly dealt with whereas smaller outfits like United are shown leniency.

Kingp35

Pigman II wrote:

Compare the two clubs.

Best point made in this thread

MrJoeSoap

He got a four match ban for the actual tackle,

THEN...

A five game ban for coming out and admitting he did it purposely in his book for "his financial gain". (Which to anyone with a brain in their head was blatanly obvious anyway)

Unbelievable, how did he get away with this? I don't particularly like the article in the OP, but its hard to argue that Keane wasn't an out-and-out thug at times.

TheMonster

Keanes mistake was admitting it before he retired. Goes on a lot as I pointed out in the other thread. Giles admitted to doing it twice, is he a thug?

MrJoeSoap

Anyone who goes out onto a football pitch with the intention of injuring a specific individual is a thug in my opinion.

Doing it and then admitting it, especially in the way Keane did, shows a serious lack of respect for your fellow professionals (or even amateurs) and lowers yourself. Again, in my opinion.

To be honest, I don't really listen to what Johnny Giles says anyway, he doesn't seem to have a clue whats going on half the time these days anyway.

Pigman II

TheMonster wrote:

Keanes mistake was admitting it before he retired. Goes on a lot as I pointed out in the other thread. Giles admitted to doing it twice, is he a thug?

Well he played for Revie's Leeds side so that pretty much answers that one I guess.

Nunu

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Anyone who goes out onto a football pitch with the intention of injuring a specific individual is a thug in my opinion.

Doing it and then admitting it, especially in the way Keane did, shows a serious lack of respect for your fellow professionals (or even amateurs) and lowers yourself. Again, in my opinion.

To be honest, I don't really listen to what Johnny Giles says anyway, he doesn't seem to have a clue whats going on half the time these days anyway.

Of course you dont. You just want to get across how anti-Keane you are, not unlike a lot of other blinkered individuals on this thread.
Going back to the article. That is the biggest load of crap I have read in a while.

MrJoeSoap

Nunu wrote:

Of course you dont. You just want to get across how anti-Keane you are, not unlike a lot of other blinkered individuals on this thread.

And you want to get across how pro-Keane you are. Its called having an opinion. Messageboards are perfect places to do this.

therecklessone

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Brilliant.

Without wishing to sound too biased or resentful, David Prutton got a 10 game ban at an absolutely crucial part of the season for us last year for well... you probably know what.

Compare the two offences.

Compare the two punishments.

Pigman II wrote:

Compare the two clubs.

Thems is straws your grasping at lads...

Prutton got a 10 match ban for:

two counts of improper conduct in relation to an incident following his sending-off against Arsenal on Saturday, 26th February.

The first charge relates to his failure to leave the field of play promptly following his dismissal and his attempt to remonstrate with the assistant referee, during which he pushed the referee on at least one occasion.

The second charge relates to his threatening words and/or behaviour towards a match official.

Paulo Di Canio got an 11 match ban for a push on Paul Alcock:

Di Canio did not wait to gauge the reaction. Snarling with rage, he stalked down the tunnel and awaited the inevitable carpeting.

He got it: Wednesday immediately suspended their errant employee, in the hope that the FA would take a lenient view of his misdemeanour, but despite both that and Di Canio’s claim that Alcock had dived, the authorities handed him an 11-game ban.

Of course, ManYoo get preferential treatment, Eric Cantona got tickets for the WWE after his attack on Matthew Simmons, and Rio Ferdinand a week in Ibiza for missing a drugs test...:rolleyes:

MrJoeSoap

Yeah cos Prutton "pushed" the referee...

Keane deliberately threw all his weight behind a tackle aimed at seriously injuring an opponent (which it did), and got a 9 match ban. He showed no remorse and went on to write a book including his satisfaction at injuring another player (who never played again, albeit because of other injuries, but I'm sure had Keane not made his "tackle" on Haaland, the latter would have had a few more games in his career.)

Prutton on the other hand, was extremely remorseful. He has since been heavily involved in community work and has taken his punishment like a man and kept his head down ever since.

Keane still hasn't shown remorse, quite simply, because he obviously has none.

Cantona got deserving punishment, Ferdinands was very harsh, Keanes was far too lenient.

Do people not agree with this?

Necronomicon

I can't stand jackasses who write articles like this, ripping into footballers and have never contributed anything to the game themselves, aside from being a part of a bs rag like The Sun.

Guy:Incognito

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Yeah cos Prutton "pushed" the referee...

Keane deliberately threw all his weight behind a tackle aimed at seriously injuring an opponent (which it did), and got a 9 match ban. He showed no remorse and went on to write a book including his satisfaction at injuring another player (who never played again, albeit because of other injuries, but I'm sure had Keane not made his "tackle" on Haaland, the latter would have had a few more games in his career.)

Prutton on the other hand, was extremely remorseful. He has since been heavily involved in community work and has taken his punishment like a man and kept his head down ever since.

Keane still hasn't shown remorse, quite simply, because he obviously has none.

Cantona got deserving punishment, Ferdinands was very harsh, Keanes was far too lenient.

Do people not agree with this?

tacklng is part of the game, abusing the ref isnt, so its just the severity of the tackle after that.

Whats peoples problem with Rio's ban. Logic kicks in here. Missinng a drug test HAS to carry a heavier ban than failing one, otherwise no one would take them if they were on drugs cos they'd know the ban would be less. Use your head.

I dont think Keanes was harsh, I was a shocking tackle but I've seen worse that get left at the standard red card ban.

The Muppet

therecklessone wrote:

Of course, ManYoo get preferential treatment, Eric Cantona got tickets for the WWE after his attack on Matthew Simmons, and Rio Ferdinand a week in Ibiza for missing a drugs test...:rolleyes:

Excellent , Can I use that one in future Ronan?

The article is thrash.


[off topic]
Sorry for the off topic and apologies if this sounds patronsising but I have to say this thread is an excellent example of how the soccer forum has altered for the better over the last few years. Seeing the amount of true football supporters here putting their club loyalties aside and standing up for one of the greatest players this country has ever produced is refreshing. It would not have happened in the past.
[/off topic]

MrJoeSoap

Stekelly wrote:

tacklng is part of the game, abusing the ref isnt,

Depends on your definition of "abusing".

Stekelly wrote:

so its just the severity of the tackle after that.

Do they come much more severe than Keane's? A three game ban for seriously injuring an opponent is lenient in my books.

galwaydude

the journalist is a tool if you ask me.He is so anti irish its unbelievable.I read on another forum that he was sacked from the guardian for similar tactics. The guy just wants to make a name for himself. He was put of the airways in the UK.

Keane is a legend and will make a great manager and this is coming from a liverpool fan.