Dunphy: Keane is not a good manager

redout

Dunphy has said on RTE radio that Keane is not going to make a good manager. He said he has brought in 40 players and 41 have left. Spent between £70 - 80 millilon in the process. He goes on to say that he is following on like a great deal of magnificent footballers who dont make good managers.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2008/1201/dunphy_av.html

L'prof

redout wrote: »

Dunphy has said on RTE radio that Keane is not going to make a good manager. He said he has brought in 40 players and 41 have left. Spent between £70 - 80 millilon in the process. He goes on to say that he is following on like a great deal of magnificent footballers who dont make good managers.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2008/1201/dunphy_av.html

And what are your views on this matter?

redout

jasonorr wrote: »

And what are your views on this matter?

I have said in the Ince/Keane thread that I think Keane still has alot to learn and could benefit by becoming an assistant but I would not agree with Dunphy and say that he is a bad manager. If Keane has proved one thing in his career it is that he is a winner and strives to be the best. I dont see why management should any different.

Dave!

Yeah heard that this morning

The interviewer then pointed out that he took Sunderland from the bottom to the top of the Championship (won manager of the year award there BTW), kept them in the Premiership, and is now in a better position than this time last year, to which Dunphy responded "yeah well you can make the argument... but if you put all those statistics to the side... blah blah gimme a drink yada yada" (verbatim quote by the way)


I don't think he's a bad manager really. Pretty inexperienced and has squandered alot of money, but I'm not gonna write him off after 3 seasons, each of which was an improvement on the last (the situation at the bottom of the PL is obviously very tight so you can't really read too much into the position now). Maybe he should have spent some time as an assistant somewhere before getting a big job.

But Dunphy said something to the effect of "there are some great great players who will never be good managers, and Roy Keane is one of them". That's some serious clairvoyant skills that chap has! Keane is 37 ffs, give him a few more years before you write him off

Quint

What happened to:

"Keane is right. Keane is always right"

L'prof

redout wrote: »

I have said in the Ince/Keane thread that I think Keane still has alot to learn and could benefit by becoming an assistant but I would not agree with Dunphy and say that he is a bad manager. If Keane has proved one thing in his career it is that he is a winner and strives to be the best. I dont see why management should any different.

But just because he was a very successful player, does not mean he'll be a successful manager! I do feel it's too early in his career to be writing him off, but that's what Dunphy does best! I'm sure if Keane ever starts winning trophies, his opinion will change!

whatawaster

If he keeps Sunderland up this year, the 70 million will probably have been recouped from 3 years of television money and hopefully he will have brought some degree of stability to the club. i think he's done pretty well overall. They need to get over this blip though.

pwd

I think a lot of people had unrealistic expectations after they got promoted. I'd say he's a good manager. Not good at selecting and attracting players to sign it seems, but I'd say he's good at motivating, encouraging a team mentality. He's certainly good at boosting the profile of the club anyway, and has loads of drive. Like people point out, he's very new and inexperienced for a manager in the premier league. I'd say there's a reasonable chance he could develop into an excellent manager. I think the people who are most disappointed with him are the ones who expected him to magically be one straight away. I'd say that he doesn't overrate himself and is determined to improve, and see no reason why he won't.

Unearthly

Not the first time he has had a go at Keane as a manager.

It's like he feels he has to criticise him every week to make up for bumming him so much as a player.

eagle eye

I think what Roy Keane has done over the last season and a half is try to get a good solid base team. He has brought in a lot of players who are talented or might not have got a fair shout at other clubs.

I think he is succeeding in that he now seems to have that solid base.

The next step is to maintain the club and show stability. You then can bring in the three or four players that would be required to make the club a real threat in the premier league.

I thinks he has done a great job so far. I think he is going to be around for a long time and be a very successful manager.

TwoShedsJackson

He needs to get better in the transfer market anyway, the majority of his signings have been complete dross.

KerranJast

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

He needs to get better in the transfer market anyway, the majority of his signings have been complete dross.

At the time of those transfers (a) the selling clubs knew Sunderland had money and were in dire need of players so gouged them over selling price and (b) its Sunderland What half decent player wants to go to the one of the coldest, most miserablest parts of England to play in front of some of the most fickle fans in the league?

stovelid

I think Keane himself has admitted that in the absence of a decent scouting network, he has had to rely on players he has some experience of. I agree too that the perception of Sunderland as a spending club, and the unattractiveness of the region means less bang for your buck in the transfer market.

He is also unlucky insofar that Sunderland are probably only second to Newcastle in the unrealistic expectation stakes.

Getting them promoted, and keeping them up should be enough to give him time to build a team at his age and level of experience.

zAbbo

I don't get why people complain about the price the club has paid for players, it's not like Keane does the negotiating with the other clubs for the transfer fee.

Quint

zAbbo wrote: »

I don't get why people complain about the price the club has paid for players, it's not like Keane does the negotiating with the other clubs for the transfer fee.

Not sure how it'd done exactly, but if you're told you have £60m to spend, you decide on someone like Mascherano who you think you'll get for £20m Liverpool want 30m, the club won't just go out and buy him. Keane, or the manager would surely be informed and he'll know that if they buy him he'll only have 30m left instead of 40.

Bateman

stovelid wrote: »

I think Keane himself has admitted that in the absence of a decent scouting network, he has had to rely on players he has some experience of.

What does that mean? Could it not be said that he has had enought time to put in place a "decent scouting network"? Does he not know enough people who he can trust to work as scouts for him?

Aidric

Eamon Dunphy is the classic case of someone who has bought in to their own hype. He is like a circus act at this stage, performing tricks in the form of mildly controversial outbursts, guaranteed to garner attention. I've seen more conviction from a toddler.
As for Keane he's done an admirable job so far in firstly gaining promotion, then consolidating their position in the premiership in his first year up. It's understandable that the supporters are getting frustrated because he has been given the funds to buy players, yet they find themselves in the relegation zone. That said, it's too early in the season to be writing them off and the way teams have been taking points off each other this year, who knows what way things will pan out.
He honestly can't afford to be throwing away points at home against the likes of Bolton, however, as these are the likes of teams who will be down there come the end of the season. I'm reserving judgement for now, post christmas league position could tell a lot.

SantryRed

Keane's done well consolidating in the Premiership?

Did you see the amount of money he has spent in the past two seasons?
For them to be anywhere near the relegation zone even at this time of the season is very bad.

Bubs101

Keane won the Championship taken over a side that was bottom of the championship. He get a promoted team in the Premiership. he's a good manager. Good managers aren't the likes of Fergie or Wenger or even Redknapp, they're the great ones. Good managers are the likes of Moyes or Bruce maybe.

As for the money he's spent, that's the board's fault. They gave him the money to spend. Even after they saw how he spent the money they gave him more in the second season. Buying players is becoming less of a part of managing everyday. England's the only major league where managers still control transfers. If I were Sunderland, I'd bring in a Moggi or a Galliani figure and let Keane get it done

Bungalow Bill

I would like to make a few points in defence of Roy Keane because I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

Sunderland are only two points behind Man City, why isn't Mark Hughes job in doubt?

The argument that he has spent more money than Ferguson is ridiculous, Sunderland have had to pay over the odds for any player that was willing to come to a newly promoted club. If West Brom had 30 million to buy a striker, they couldn't buy Berbatov because he wouldn't go there. You have to prove yourself before you can get good players to sign.

Despite popular belief, he hasn't actually wasted 80 million. He was building from scratch, and a lot of these players are actually quite good. Craig Gordon, Steed Malbranque,Kenwyne Jones, Anton Ferdinand, Kieron Richardson, Andy Reid, Phil Bardsley, Dibril Cissé.

redout

Bubs101 wrote: »

England's the only major league where managers still control transfers. If I were Sunderland, I'd bring in a Moggi or a Galliani figure and let Keane get it done

Are you on crack ? Premiership managers having control over their team affairs is something Spanish and Italian managers crave. It does not work on alot of occasions and I would hate to see it creep into the premiership.

Do you believe giving a manager players who he does not want is actually a good thing or clever ? It happened at Chelsea, Mourinho did not want Shevchenko or Ballack. It happened at Newcastle also and Keegan walked. Do you think the Real Madrid manager wants all these superstars that the president signs ? Schuster does not want Ronaldo, President Calderon does but and thats the bottom line.

When a manager lose's control over team affairs then on most occasions you are on a slippery slope in my opinion.

Aidric

SantryRed wrote: »

Keane's done well consolidating in the Premiership?

Did you see the amount of money he has spent in the past two seasons?
For them to be anywhere near the relegation zone even at this time of the season is very bad.

There's 7 points seperating Everton in 7th from Sunderland in 18th, hardly a huge gap. Can you clarify exactly where you think Sunderland should be?

Keane - Great player, not so great manager.

Is he gonna walk away when the tough gets going (again)?

Probably....hopefully...

Bubs101

redout wrote: »

When a manager lose's control over team affairs then on most occasions you are on a slippery slope in my opinion.

What, like Lippi's Juventus? Or Capello and Sacchi's Milan. You have to get the right guy to buy the players but your statement is ridiculous.

tony1kenobi

KerranJast wrote: »

What half decent player wants to go to the one of the coldest, most miserablest parts of England to play in front of some of the most fickle fans in the league?

There are 40 of them since Keane joined according to the stats.

Keane is a bit of a log, but you can't fault that badger beard....It's a beaut.

OPENROAD

Bubs101 wrote: »

Keane won the Championship taken over a side that was bottom of the championship. He get a promoted team in the Premiership. he's a good manager. Good managers aren't the likes of Fergie or Wenger or even Redknapp, they're the great ones. Good managers are the likes of Moyes or Bruce maybe.

I would rate Moyles well above Keane and maybe even Bruce, Keane has spent a huge amount of money on lots of players, many of whom have not worked out. Actually I would rate Phil Brown higher, hasnt had much money to spend but has got on with things quietly and spent well.

redout

Bubs101 wrote: »

What, like Lippi's Juventus? Or Capello and Sacchi's Milan. You have to get the right guy to buy the players but your statement is ridiculous.

It is in no way ridiculous. I quite clearly stated "on most occasions" which would be to imply that on some occasions it does work but in general no it does not.

tony1kenobi

OPENROAD wrote: »

I would rate Moyles well above Keane and maybe even Bruce, Keane has spent a huge amount of money on lots of players, many of whom have not worked out. Actually I would rate Phil Brown higher, hasnt had much money to spend but has got on with things quietly and spent well.

Phil Brown is the business. He will be the next Spurs manager. Probably around June.

Quint

Aidric wrote: »

Eamon Dunphy is the classic case of someone who has bought in to their own hype. He is like a circus act at this stage, performing tricks in the form of mildly controversial outbursts, guaranteed to garner attention. I've seen more conviction from a toddler.

Ironicly that sounds just like a Dunphy rant!

Bungalow Bill wrote: »

I would like to make a few points in defence of Roy Keane because I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

Sunderland are only two points behind Man City, why isn't Mark Hughes job in doubt?

It is according to the papers today!

Pigman II

redout wrote: »

He goes on to say that he is following on like a great deal of magnificent footballers who dont make good managers

Wasn't it Dunphy who started this trend?

IRISHSPORTSGUY

I just want to say straight away I'm a Sunderland fan. Yes, Keane has spent a lot of money, but last season albeit he spent a lot of money several poor players, they were the only players he could attract to a club that had been yo-yoing been the first and second tier of English football for years.

This season's Premier League is the most bizarre in years - there is no cannon fodder or whipping boy and there's just 5 pts separating 10th from 18th. Hull and Stoke in particular are putting up a big fight and WBA are on a bad run of form at the moment but are playing decent football and it wouldn't surprise me if they started stringing a few results together, and climbed out of the relegation zone.

We have managed to attract a higher profile of player to the club this season - Chimbonda (best right back I've seen at Sunderland for years), Cisse who has been outstanding and has 6 league goals already, Malbranque is near the top of the Premier League assists table. Anton Ferdinand looks like he's going to join the long string of youth players who have improved 100 fold since leaving West Ham............... but then there's the signings who haven't impressed - Diouf doesn't look like a centre forward or a right winger and has been utter ****, Tainio is decent but a sicknote (as Spurs fans foretold) and McCartney hasn't really impressed since coming back and has picked up an injury to compound that. David Healy is just sh!t.

Along with the injuries, Keane is doing far too much chomping and changing and we haven't had an unchanged side for ages. One of Royston's biggest problems is he is awful tactically - eg: 4-1 down against Bolton and he brings on two defensive midfielders for attacking midfielders (and arguably our best players that day), and other days David Healy/Daryl Murphy (both whom are awful) for Cisse. That's one of the two main problems he has at the moment, the other being the hesitancy over a new contract and his words in the media - FFS if you want to go do it now or not the summer and stop creating uncertainty in the dressing room!

Bubs101

redout wrote: »

It is in no way ridiculous. I quite clearly stated "on most occasions" which would be to imply that on some occasions it does work but in general no it does not.

So Italian football doesn't work in general??? What about Spanish football??? It is in every way ridiculous. Every club in Italy has a "director of football"

Pigman II

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

Keane is doing far too much chomping and changing

Keane does the changing, Reid does the chomping.

Bateman

Pigman II wrote: »

Wasn't it Dunphy who started this trend?

No, he was a not great player who turned out to be a not-great manager. In short, he's done nothing of note to justify the authority that his opionions command.

Bateman

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

his words in the media - FFS if you want to go do it now or not the summer and stop creating uncertainty in the dressing room!

If you want to talk about media utterances, look at Quinn. When Bolton had a hellish run of form, they made a couple of statements backing Megson (who I think is a terrible manager, but anyway...), now that Sunderland are going through a rough patch, Quinn is talking about how top-heavy the squad is, how players will have to leave in January before more come in - basically indirectly criticising the manager.

Boggles

Bateman wrote: »

Quinn is talking about how top-heavy the squad is, how players will have to leave in January before more come in - basically indirectly criticising the manager.

Our shock Horror, just telling the truth! :eek:

redout

Bubs101 wrote: »

So Italian football doesn't work in general??? What about Spanish football??? It is in every way ridiculous. Every club in Italy has a "director of football"

Look if you offered Bernd Shcuster, Pep Guardiola, Carlo Ancelotti etc full control over team affairs they would bite your hand off. It is not a good system to employ unless you are willing to abide by it as a manager. The above managers have chosen to abide by it but I guarantee you they would take full control of team affairs if offered it.

Do you really believe players should be forced on a manager and pressure to pick certain players ? Del Bosque did not want all the Galactico's but had to pick them or face the wrath of the club. Like I mentioned Schuster will take Ronaldo because it is Calderon's order not because he thinks he is the right player for his team. Another example is Madrid's impending signing of Huntelaar, again not schusters pick but mijatovic's.

British based managers will not accept it and evidence is already there in the shape of Mourinho, Keegan and now Joe Kinnear. Also I pointed out that the system only works some times and not most of the time and the evidence also shows that it works for very few teams. Example being Juventus 27 titles in Italy, Real Madrid 31 titles in Spain compared to only 18 for Liverpool in England. Look at the amount of different league winners in England compared to Spain and Italy. There is a big difference in the numbers especially with Spain. If these managers in Italy and Spain had been given control you could argue they would have had different results.

England 23 different league winners
Italy 17 different league winners
Spain 9 different league winners

Bateman

Boggles wrote: »

Our shock Horror, just telling the truth! :eek:

Yeah, if he wanted to tell the truth he could have added something in like "well myself and the board have to look at how and why we allowed such a large squad to be assembled, whether or not we have to be more prudent in future".

carlop

Bubs101 wrote: »

Keane won the Championship taken over a side that was bottom of the championship. He get a promoted team in the Premiership. he's a good manager. Good managers aren't the likes of Fergie or Wenger or even Redknapp, they're the great ones. Good managers are the likes of Moyes or Bruce maybe.

As for the money he's spent, that's the board's fault. They gave him the money to spend. Even after they saw how he spent the money they gave him more in the second season. Buying players is becoming less of a part of managing everyday. England's the only major league where managers still control transfers. If I were Sunderland, I'd bring in a Moggi or a Galliani figure and let Keane get it done

Cue Sunderland's mysterious rise up the premiership:pac:

GuanYin

Would anyone here have called Ferguson a good manager 2-3 years into his managerial career at Aberdeen?

Aidric

Pigman II wrote: »

Wasn't it Dunphy who started this thread?

FYP.
Yep, a publicity whore, is Eamon.

stovelid

Bateman wrote: »

What does that mean? Could it not be said that he has had enought time to put in place a "decent scouting network"? Does he not know enough people who he can trust to work as scouts for him?

I read an article where Keane himself said he had to buy players he had direct experience of because of just that. I think he used the example of Ferguson who basically had to rebuild the United youth and scouting system from scratch over a few years.

Could be an excuse but it's plausible enough. Sunderland have money, but it's hard to attract established players to what is, for all the cash, basically a bottom tier team with mid tier aspirations. Add the unattractiveness of the region as a draw for players, and it's obvious that the best chance for Keane would be to find lesser known players, which requires decent, trusted people to find those players, unless you think that people like Ferguson go and scout all the players themselves? Or ask rival managers and players to do it?

I'm not saying he has spent wisely: he hasn't. But the board are also culpable to some respect. However, he has still made some good buys.

For storming the championship, and staying up last year, he deserves at least this season to try and build further.

As for Dunphy: lover's tiff basically. I love Dunph, but does anybody really take him seriously when impartiality is needed?

JimiTime

Always been a fan of Keane, so maybe i've got my Keane coloured glasses on. But having watched Sunderland this year, they look a better outfit than last year. Their point haul so far backs it up too. Like others have said, its a bit of a mad season so far, and its hard to tell who's going to be relegated (West Brom are defo's though IMO). One win can move you up 6 places at the mo. Very bad patch at the minute, no doubt, but I defo think its time to back the team and the manager rather than the all so common these days 'get him out'. Every year has been an improvement, so Keanes got them going in the right direction. I'd have faith in him, but I would say that:)

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

stovelid

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

His early career at United is a better analogy. He inherited a squad he largely didn't rate, a moribund youth and scouting structure, and had to deal with very high expectations. A lot of fans had also turned against him, until the Robins/FA Cup/Cup Winners Cup/ League cup tided him over until 1993.

Nobody is saying Keane is the new Fergie, but he has shown great promise so far, and this season is far from over.

Mr. Presentable

stovelid wrote: »

Nobody is saying Keane is the new Fergie, but he has shown great promise so far, and this season is far from over.

I'd say he's the new Mick McCarthy. He has demonstrated an ability in a lower division, and exposed an inability in a higher one. He may have his level reached.

Obviously, of course, he is new to the job and may improve, but as we can only judge on what has been put before us, then, in that context, Dunphy is right. /shudder.

RichTea

I'm no fan of his but it's a bit early in his career to be saying that he won't make it as a quality manager.

They all have to start somewhere and learn their trade. This isn't bloody FM!

premierstone

nipplenuts wrote: »

I'd say he's the new Mick McCarthy. He has demonstrated an ability in a lower division, and exposed an inability in a higher one. He may have his level reached.

McCarthy wasnt given 8 million never mind 80 and managed he's country to within a penalty kick of the qf of the world cup

Mr Alan

Gareth Southgate >>>>>>>>>>>>> Roy Keane.

Bubs101

redout wrote: »

Look if you offered Bernd Shcuster, Pep Guardiola, Carlo Ancelotti etc full control over team affairs they would bite your hand off. It is not a good system to employ unless you are willing to abide by it as a manager. The above managers have chosen to abide by it but I guarantee you they would take full control of team affairs if offered it.

Do you really believe players should be forced on a manager and pressure to pick certain players ? Del Bosque did not want all the Galactico's but had to pick them or face the wrath of the club. Like I mentioned Schuster will take Ronaldo because it is Calderon's order not because he thinks he is the right player for his team. Another example is Madrid's impending signing of Huntelaar, again not schusters pick but mijatovic's.

British based managers will not accept it and evidence is already there in the shape of Mourinho, Keegan and now Joe Kinnear. Also I pointed out that the system only works some times and not most of the time and the evidence also shows that it works for very few teams. Example being Juventus 27 titles in Italy, Real Madrid 31 titles in Spain compared to only 18 for Liverpool in England. Look at the amount of different league winners in England compared to Spain and Italy. There is a big difference in the numbers especially with Spain. If these managers in Italy and Spain had been given control you could argue they would have had different results.

England 23 different league winners
Italy 17 different league winners
Spain 9 different league winners

Who was the last great English manager? Who was the last English manager to win the Champion's League? Who was the last English manager to do well in a national competition? There's a reason Italian managers are far better than English ones and it's because they only focus on team selection, management and tactics.

As for the stats you've thrown out, surely it's and indication that if you want a dominant club you should not give the manager control of the funds? After all, until recently Italian and Spanish leagues had much more in terms of quality and yet two teams managed to establish a hegemony there. I think Milan have even won it 19 times (and probably someone in Spain. I don't know much about Italian football) so the second most dominant team in italy is still more dominant that Liverpool.

Also I pointed out that the system only works some times and not most of the time and the evidence also shows that it works for very few teams

Just to make sure, you do realise that you're not just talking about english teams here? The system has worked forever for continental teams. Remember the 7 sisters in Italy? When 7 teams all had outstanding teams based around foreign stars like Thuram, Ortega, Veron, Rui Costa, Batistuta, Mihilovic, Salas, Zamorano, Montero etc. While the English teams were still trying to sign home based players because the managers were slow to adapt the Italian teams flew by them and it took Wenger to bring England up to date by bringing in two players from Italian transfer networks, Viera and Henry. English football is on top now because of money and Man Utd's academy, not their outdated transfer system

premierstone

Bubs101 wrote: »

Who was the last great English manager? Who was the last English manager to win the Champion's League? Who was the last English manager to do well in a national competition? There's a reason Italian managers are far better than English ones and it's because they only focus on team selection, management and tactics.

Its not their nationality that is the issue here its where they manage and how their let manage, how can you seriously think a manager is better off if he has no say in transfers its beyond laughable tbh.

p.s how can you focus on team selection and tactics when you dont know what players your going to have from one transfer window to the next?