Dunphy on RTE

The Muppet

The Muppet wrote:

Which incident are you referring to and how in your opinion did he fail to maintain professional conduct ?

Er the fact that he slated his team mates on MUTV and please dont say he didnt because they just dont cancel interviews for no good reason.

Sure i didnt see the interview and i suppose i dont have concrete proof but it must have been bad if it to be cancelled. There is just way too much speculation for it not to be true.

How many programs are taken off air??? I mean this is the Man United captain !! its not like they cancelled it for the sake of it.

Look im not saying i would disagree with who he slated and and why he slated them but theres a time and a place for this.

He went too far in my book. No matter how bad things are you dont lambaste colleagues unless its too their face.

Sorry to the mods for going off topic

Hobart

Deleted User wrote:

Er the fact that he slated his team mates on MUTV and please dont say he didnt because they just dont cancel interviews for no good reason.

That and the Haaland "incident". If memory serves me right he was also collected from a police cell by his manager after causing an affray(sp?) while pissed. Not his first "falling out" with the demon drink. I suppose it's ironic that Dunphy (a well known drinker) should be defending one of his own, so to speak.

The Muppet

Deleted User wrote:

Er the fact that he slated his team mates on MUTV and please dont say he didnt because they just dont cancel interviews for no good reason.

Sure i didnt see the interview and i suppose i dont have concrete proof but it must have been bad if it to be cancelled. There is just way too much speculation for it not to be true.

How many programs are taken off air??? I mean this is the Man United captain !! its not like they cancelled it for the sake of it.

Look im not saying i would disagree with who he slated and and why he slated them but theres a time and a place for this.

He went too far in my book. No matter how bad things are you dont lambaste colleagues unless its too their face.

Sorry to the mods for going off topic

I fail to see how you can say he went too far without knowing what he actually said. I could not come to that conslusion with the circumstatial evidence we have at the moment, I would have to know what was actually said.

I havn't see a transcript of what was in the interview . I did however see Alan Smith say thet Keane had had a meeting with the players after the interview was pulled and explained to them what he said. Smith said that the MUTV interview had been blown out of proportion by the media and that the players did not have a problem with the interview.

Some people assume United sacked Keane, I would be more inclined to believe that Keane left off his own bat because he was told his contract was not being renewed next summer. I agree that's speculation on my part but considering the information currently in the public domain it's just as plausable and probably more so than the view that he was sacked.

Hobart

The Muppet wrote:

I fail to see how you can say he went too far without knowing what he actually said. I could not come to that conslusion with the circumstatial evidence we have at the moment, I would have to know what was actually said.

A well respected football site has covered it, as have many others. See: http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1605711,00.html if you want an inside line on it. You seem to be amenable to accept non-confirmed reports of the saipan incident. Why the inconsistency?

I havn't see a transcript of what was in the interview .

You won't either. It has been buried by Manu, it was that bad.

I did however see Alan Smith say thet Keane had had a meeting with the players after the interview was pulled and explained to them what he said. Smith said that the MUTV interview had been blown out of proportion by the media and that the players did not have a problem with the interview.

Eh... No you didn't. While Smith acknoledged that Keane explained why he had said what he said, he never said those words.. Here's what Smith said "It has always been there," Smith said when asked what had prompted a United performance unrecognisable from their meek defeats by Middlesbrough and Lille over the previous eight days. "The gaffer has never doubted us and we have never doubted ourselves, but sometimes you need a reminder that you’re at a big club and people can’t let their standards drop. I think everyone knows where it has come from. We accept criticism and rightly so. A club like Manchester United shouldn’t be getting beat and especially not the way we did at Middlesbrough. We’re better than that.

"It wasn’t just Roy. But he’s a proud person and he told us exactly what he had said. Some of the speculation in the papers was absolute rubbish, to be honest. But we went out there and gave a good performance. When you’re a player, you accept criticism, just as you accept praise. You can only do your talking on the pitch, which is what every Manchester United player tries to do That's a quote from Alan Smith. It was also reported that Keane watched the interview with "some" of his teamates. This is unsunbstantiated and probably spin from Manu. It was also reported that Keane was asked to leave while atempting to attend a reserve game, the day before he was sacked.

Some people assume United sacked Keane,

Based on what Fergie said I would have thought that that would be a fair assumption.

I would be more inclined to believe that Keane left off his own bat because he was told his contract was not being renewed next summer. I agree that's speculation on my part but considering the information currently in the public domain it's just as plausable and probably more so than the view that he was sacked.

What information in the public domain? He gave an interview that slated senior players, and by some mad coincidence he leaves within 2 weeks of it? Yea, right.

The Muppet

Hobart wrote:

A well respected football site has covered it, as have many others. See: http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,1563,1605711,00.html if you want an inside line on it. You seem to be amenable to accept non-confirmed reports of the saipan incident. Why the inconsistency?

You won't either. It has been buried by Manu, it was that bad.

So The guardian is a well respected Football site, since when?

Your post is contadictory in itself. In one sentence you say the story has been covered and you follow that by by saying a transcript will never surface because Man U Have buried it , it was so bad. Which is it?

I would bet any money that if the guardian or any other independent media source had the transcript they would publish it. The article you place your faith in is just the same speculation all the papers had which is demonstrated by this quote from it "The exact content of Keane's vitriol is not known " which in non journalistic speak means we do not know exactly what he said.


Where is the inaccuracy between what I said about Alan Smith and the quote you posted?


Sackings are never by mutual consent. Keane would not be keeping the silence he is if he were sacked and if United were going to sack him Fergie would not have said he expected kean back for the next match two days before he left.


I'm trying to keep the personal jibes out of this but In your previous post you asked me did I know the meaning of the word Treason. If you think I was wrong to use that word in teh context I did I suggest you look up the meaning of it. It's usually a sign that a poster that revert's to attacking language typos etc has little to offer the discussion.

Hobart

The Muppet wrote:

So The guardian is a well respected Football site, since when?

quite a while.

Your post is contadictory in itself. In one sentence you say the story has been covered and you follow that by by saying a transcript will never surface because Man U Have buried it , it was so bad. Which is it?

Both. Let me simplify it for you by using an analagy. The transscript of what God said to Moses on the mountain is not available. However plenty has been written about the story. Just because we don't have word for word what was said in the interview, it does not necessarily follow that what has been reported is inaccurate.

I would bet any money that if the guardian or any other independent media source had the transcript they would publish it.

And your point is what exactly?

The article you place your faith in

I'm sorry. You seem to have misunderstood me. I put my faith in no statement. Maybe you would like to point out where I have done this. I merely use an example of 1 media report, to emphasise what has been reported all over the world.

Where is the inaccuracy between what I said about Alan Smith and the quote you posted?

You said that " I did however see Alan Smith say thet Keane had had a meeting with the players after the interview was pulled " . Alan Smith said no such thing. Fairly innacurate.

Sackings are never by mutual consent.

I never said they were.

Keane would not be keeping the silence he is if he were sacked and if United were going to sack him Fergie would not have said he expected kean back for the next match two days before he left.

Never heard of a gagging clause?

I'm trying to keep the personal jibes out of this but In your previous post you asked me did I know the meaning of the word Treason. If you think I was wrong to use that word in teh context I did I suggest you look up the meaning of it. It's usually a sign that a poster that revert's to attacking language typos etc has little to offer the discussion.

I meant it as a question. Do you know the meaning? I don't need to look up the meaning of it, I'm well aware of what the word means.

You, on the other hand, have raised issues that, once rubbeted, you have ignored. I stand by everything I have said. If I have been curt, it is through the need to cut through waffle and get to the point. If you cannot debate and rebutt the issues, may I suggest you go off to the personal issues board and have a whine there then. Your profile would suggest that you are old enough to handle a bit of a debate without getting hurt.

The Muppet

Hobart wrote:

quite a while.

Both. Let me simplify it for you by using an analagy. The transscript of what God said to Moses on the mountain is not available. However plenty has been written about the story. Just because we don't have word for word what was said in the interview, it does not necessarily follow that what has been reported is inaccurate.

I get it ,Like the Saipan incident do you mean. Funny then that when earlier I made comments on well publicised events in Saipan you labelled them as "dubious allegation" and asked me was I there. Could you explain that inconsistancy to me?.

Hobart wrote:

And your point is what exactly? I'm sorry. You seem to have misunderstood me. I put my faith in no statement. Maybe you would like to point out where I have done this. I merely use an example of 1 media report, to emphasise what has been reported all over the world.

So you dont believe the story as reported either. Just because something is reported all over the world does not make it factual. If in doubt ask the Lawlor family or Sadam about his WMD's

Hobart wrote:

You said that " I did however see Alan Smith say thet Keane had had a meeting with the players after the interview was pulled " . Alan Smith said no such thing. Fairly innacurate..

I quote Alan Smith for you own Post "It wasn’t just Roy. But he’s a proud person and <b>he told us exactly what he had said.</b> Some of the speculation in the papers was absolute rubbish, to be honest."

So if he didn't have a meeting with the players when and how did Keane Tell them what he had said?

Hobart wrote:

I never said they were. Never heard of a gagging clause?..

LOL come now Hobart even you don't believe that Roy Keane would sign a Gagging Clause if he wanted to say something publically he would say it.

Hobart wrote:

I meant it as a question. Do you know the meaning? I don't need to look up the meaning of it, I'm well aware of what the word means. .

You insinuation that I did not know the meaning of the word Treason inspired me to Look it up at Dictionary.com.

trea·son Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign,
trea·son A betrayal of trust or confidence.

can you explain whats wrong with using the word in the context I used it?

Hobart wrote:

You, on the other hand, have raised issues that, once rubbeted, you have ignored. I stand by everything I have said. If I have been curt, it is through the need to cut through waffle and get to the point. If you cannot debate and rebutt the issues, may I suggest you go off to the personal issues board and have a whine there then. Your profile would suggest that you are old enough to handle a bit of a debate without getting hurt.

I'm not in the least bit hurt Hobart and I,m well able to take what comes my way on an internet forum. I do try to be careful in this forum as threads can get out of hand so it's best to leave the personal stuff out and just debate the issue. I told you why I ignored some of your points but all I got back was a rather juvinile "whatever".

The Muppet

The Muppet wrote:

I fail to see how you can say he went too far without knowing what he actually said. I could not come to that conslusion with the circumstatial evidence we have at the moment, I would have to know what was actually said.

I havn't see a transcript of what was in the interview . I did however see Alan Smith say thet Keane had had a meeting with the players after the interview was pulled and explained to them what he said. Smith said that the MUTV interview had been blown out of proportion by the media and that the players did not have a problem with the interview.

Some people assume United sacked Keane, I would be more inclined to believe that Keane left off his own bat because he was told his contract was not being renewed next summer. I agree that's speculation on my part but considering the information currently in the public domain it's just as plausable and probably more so than the view that he was sacked.

You dont really need to know what was said. the course of events which surrounded the interview give us some indication that keane may have crossed the line. I mean regardless of his age what club would let go of their captain 12/13 games into a premiership season considering how important on the pitch he still is to them??? like he has been sent home from a world cup and now effectively let go by Man United.

The Muppet

Deleted User wrote:

You dont really need to know what was said. the course of events which surrounded the interview give us some indication that keane may have crossed the line..

I can agree with that . Yes we have had "indication that he may have crossed the line" but then again he may not have crossed the line. We will never know for sure which it is unlesss the interview surfaces.

Deleted User wrote:

I mean regardless of his age what club would let go of their captain 12/13 games into a premiership season considering how important on the pitch he still is to them??? like he has been sent home from a world cup and now effectively let go by Man United.

Again thats an circumstantial assumption. You could be right but it's just as plausable to assume that United told Keane they were not going to renew his contract next summer and he decided to leave with immediate effect.

Keane was under legal contract Until next summer, Keane would have to have breached that contract for United to have grounds to sack him.
What club is going to continue Pay €180 000 per week for a player that was on the decline due to age and injury? I don't know which version of events are true and until more information surfaces all we have to go on is the statements issued to date that the seperation was by mutual consent.

Hobart

The Muppet wrote:

I get it ,Like the Saipan incident do you mean. Funny then that when earlier I made comments on well publicised events in Saipan you labelled them as "dubious allegation" and asked me was I there. Could you explain that inconsistancy to me?.

Yes, kind off. So the weight of evidence points to Keane being sacked, just as the weight of evidence points to him being wrong in saipan. So, yes I suppose you could draw a parallel between the two. P.S. By weight of evidence I meanthat Keane and Dunphy have 1 version of events about what happened insaipan. While the players and Mccarthy have another.Both ended in similar circumstances, with Keane "leaving" with his tail between his legs.

So you dont believe the story as reported either.

If you mean the "mutual conscent" spin, well then No. I think's it's a ball of crap.

Just because something is reported all over the world does not make it factual. If in doubt ask the Lawlor family or Sadam about his WMD's

Thanks for the clarification.

I quote Alan Smith for you own Post "It wasn’t just Roy. But he’s a proud person and <b>he told us exactly what he had said.</b> Some of the speculation in the papers was absolute rubbish, to be honest."

You can selectively quote all you like. You put forward the ascertion that Smith had said that the players said that they had no problem with what Keane had said. This is untrue. 1 player came out and said that "It wasn't Roy". Not the plethoria of players you suggest. OR his manager.

LOL come now Hobart even you don't believe that Roy Keane would sign a Gagging Clause if he wanted to say something publically he would say it.

LOL....cough.. I do actually.

You insinuation that I did not know the meaning of the word Treason inspired me to Look it up at Dictionary.com.

trea·son Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign,
trea·son A betrayal of trust or confidence.

can you explain whats wrong with using the word in the context I used it?

Again I did not say that your use of the word was incorect. I was trying to figure out why you would use it in the manner in which you did. Why did you personalise it? I never said that you or Keane where Traitors.

I'm not in the least bit hurt Hobart and I,m well able to take what comes my way on an internet forum. I do try to be careful in this forum as threads can get out of hand so it's best to leave the personal stuff out and just debate the issue. I told you why I ignored some of your points but all I got back was a rather juvinile "whatever".

You got a "juvinile" whatever when you went off on a rant of waffle and tried to claw back some ground, when you had completely lost the point of my initial reply. You have "tried" to raise points, and quickly dropped them, when confronted with the facts.

BaZmO*

The Muppet wrote:

Keane was under legal contract Until next summer, Keane would have to have breached that contract for United to have grounds to sack him.
What club is going to continue Pay €180 000 per week for a player that was on the decline due to age and injury? I don't know which version of events are true and until more information surfaces all we have to go on is the statements issued to date that the seperation was by mutual consent.

I'm no expert in contract law, but wouldn't Keane himself be in breach of his contract if he decided to leave? And also, why would Utd. give him a pay out if he decided to leave? Doesn't make good business sense to me.

B.

The Muppet

BaZmO* wrote:

I'm no expert in contract law, but wouldn't Keane himself be in breach of his contract if he decided to leave? And also, why would Utd. give him a pay out if he decided to leave? Doesn't make good business sense to me.

B.

He would that's where the mutual consent comes into it , I never heard of anyone being sacked by mutual consent , did you? There is no point speculating about the reason for payouts etc but a payment as a gesture of goodwill would not be uncommon for long serving employees and could answer your question.

I may be wrong in my assesment of the situation but until the truth is known my theory is just a plausable as the counter argument.

BaZmO*

The Muppet wrote:

He would that's where the mutual consent comes into it , I never heard of anyone being sacked by mutual consent , did you? There is no point speculating about the reason for payouts etc but a payment as a gesture of goodwill would not be uncommon for long serving employees and could answer your question.

But a "gesture of goodwill" could be Man Utd. saying that he left by mutual consent to save face for the "Proud Cork Man". All speculation of course.

B.

Hobart

The Muppet wrote:

I may be wrong in my assesment of the situation but until the truth is known my theory is just a plausable as the counter argument.

Do you not find it strange that Keane himself had said that he would be staying until the end of the season, and leaving. Some people put it down to some lame attempt by him to secure another contract from Manu. However why would he say that he is staying until the end of the season and then leave? Do you think it might have something to do with his undermining of the players and manager?

header

part offthat post should have been the way dervan is always singing macarthys praises

Hobart

header wrote:

part offthat post should have been the way dervan is always singing macarthys praises

What are you talking about?

BaZmO*

header wrote:

part offthat post should have been the way dervan is always singing macarthys praises

Does your computer only allow you to do one line replies?

B.

LegacyUser

That "header" lad is a shambles. He never makes any sense and who the **** is Dervan!?!?

BaZmO*

cheesedude wrote:

That "header" lad is a shambles. He never makes any sense and who the **** is Dervan!?!?

It's Cathal Dervan, a journalist that isn't very fond of Keane. He once called for supporters to boo him at a match. So Keane isn't very fond of him either.
Before the whole Saipan fiasco the FAI/MacCarthy organised a love in at a BBQ type event with the press and Keane was none too pleased to see Dervan had been invited, can't really blame him to be honest.

B.

LegacyUser

Interesting, thanks for that. Didn't know who he was.

AARRRGH

The Clown Man wrote:

That link isn't working any more.

Anyone got another link/fancy hosting it for a while?

I've made a torrent of the clip. Sharing it now.

http://www.torrents.ie/download.php?id=60394

The Muppet

Hobart wrote:

Do you not find it strange that Keane himself had said that he would be staying until the end of the season, and leaving. Some people put it down to some lame attempt by him to secure another contract from Manu. However why would he say that he is staying until the end of the season and then leave? Do you think it might have something to do with his undermining of the players and manager?

Yes , I do not find it strange for the very reason give.

The Muppet

Apologies for the delay in replying, I've been busy with work.

Hobart wrote:

You can selectively quote all you like. You put forward the ascertion that Smith had said that the players said that they had no problem with what Keane had said. This is untrue. 1 player came out and said that "It wasn't Roy". Not the plethoria of players you suggest. OR his manager. .

By "Selectively quote" you mean I selected a quote from you post that showed you were wrong . You said there was no substantive evidence of a meeting occuring, Smiths quote indicates there was definitely a meeting .

Hobart wrote:

Again I did not say that your use of the word was incorect. I was trying to figure out why you would use it in the manner in which you did. Why did you personalise it? I never said that you or Keane where Traitors.

What are you talking about? I was not even talking about keane when I used the word treason. I was talking about the results of a poll on this forum.

Hobart wrote:

You got a "juvinile" whatever when you went off on a rant of waffle and tried to claw back some ground, when you had completely lost the point of my initial reply. You have "tried" to raise points, and quickly dropped them, when confronted with the facts.

If your opinion was consistant it would be easier to follow you line of thought and respond but your opinion has changed on different points a couple of times in this thread making it difficult to follow you. eg your need for concrete proof on the happening in saipan is at odds with you being ready to accept media reports with the content of Keanes MUTV interview. You have also changed your point on Smiths interview by first disputing that there was a meeting between Keane and the players and the changing that to a completly different point when Smiths quote shows there obviously was.