Liverpool FC Forum

[akumaface]

Keano will be mad if he sees this thread as he can't possibly believed he is being compared to Voronator....

[DrPepe]

It's a shame that you've "had your fill" of suggestions that keane was hard done by Doc. Best bet is not to read the comments I reckon.

The truth of the matter in my opinion is that Keane's treatment at the hands of the manager was nothing short of ridiculous. He started slowly, as players often do, but it is the managers job to use whatever assets are at his disposal to their maximum in ordere to facilitate an attempt to win trophies. Ten minutes of watching N'Gog play should have been enough to convince anyone that it was in everyone's interests for Keane to find some form just in case Torres got injured. Now in order to help a player find form, you can cajole, you can bullsh!t, you can put your arm around his shoulder, you can praise him up. Basically, whatever it takes to get him to play well was worth it, particularly given the vulnerability of Torres's fitness.

Instead, we allowed ourselves to get embroiled in a power struggle over who actually gave the final go-ahead to pay the fee, and the good of the team was sacrificed IMHO in order to make a point. The time to have arguemnts about the size of the fee and who gave the go ahead to actually pay it, was at the very earliest just before the transfer window, and in all likelyhood at the end of the season.

So as I say, it's the managers job to get the players to play somewhere near their maximum. I've listed a couple of ways which that can be made more likely, but we didn't do those. On both of the occasions when Keane scored two goals in one match, we hauled him off and dropped him in the next match. Now had he have played in the next match, there is a chance that he would have scored again and got himself on a roll (particularly as one of the games in question was against Newcastle).

Instead though, we decided to do everything we could to ensure the player lost any confidence he had. Even worse than that, much worse than that in fact because I don't give a feck about Robbie Keane, was we then decided to sell him without bringing in a replacement. the result of that was we then had to play Torres in virtually every match (amaziong for an arch rotationer to put himself in that position) despite the fact that he patently obviously wasn't 100% for some of the matches.

It amazes me that people offer up Torres being injured for much of the season as a viable excuse for us not winning the title (it's a good reason too) and then are prepared to completely write off the importance of the way we treated a bloke who we signed for 20 million quid for the express purpose of covering for such an eventuality. It's not about whether or not Robbie Keane is worth 20 million quid, whether or not he is a good player or any of that stuff. We NEEDED him to play somewhere near the potential of his ability, and fecking him about was never likely to achive that. His form at Spurs since doesn't demonstrate that he's actually a sh!t player, it merely conforms how completely we destroyed him.

Even if it makes the old blood boil a bit, it's still worth reading the "poor old Keane" posts  just for entertainment value - especially if the attempted defence is as (IMO) unconvincing as yours is Mick   

"The truth of the matter" is that keane didn't look convincing at any point in his lfc career -  by that i mean either in attitude or ability.

I woudl disagree that watchign Ngog for 10 minutes was enough to dismiss him in favour of keane - imo the youngster showed enthusiasm, willing and a fair amount of promise in his ~15 (yes 15!) appearances for the club so far. Keane was given a good crack of the whip by rafa and had amassed 15 appearances already by October last season  (spending 70%+ of LFCs game time  ON the pitch - in total playing 28 of our 34 games by my calculations)

And apologies for getting into the specifics a little too much, but i think you're being a bit disingenuous implying Keane's braces of goals followed by him being (mass?) rotated the next game, as being bad man management - his first brace was against wba and he misses the next game (a CC game vs spurs) -a game where regular  first teamers like  cavaleri, agger, hyppia , degen, babel, dossena, elzhar, plessis and ngog all started....keane was straight back in for the next important game - a starting place in the first team away at Bolton in the league

His other brace of goals came against bolton at home in our 3-0 win - the game he was "hauled off" / dropped for was at newcastle less than 48 hours later  - i do not think it;s particularly  heinous of rafa to rest a striker who has just played the full 90 against Bolton (a FULL game! perhaps Rafa was giving keane the chance to get a confidence  building hat trick  ). Rafa made 4 starting changes in addition to Keane being dropped - so the poor fella wsn't being singled out in any way. And guess what ? Keane was back in a starting berth in the very next game

And as for :

His form at Spurs since doesn't demonstrate that he's actually a sh!t player, it merely conforms how completely we destroyed him.

please , please my sides are splitting - if the guy is that brittle , then he never was the player that the manager gave him the chance to be ... he returns to the womb-like embrace of Harry "man manager" Redknapp at spurs (ask D.Bent how he enjoys harry's man-management, btw), and scores just 4 goals the rest of the season , in a teamwith one of the best records for the 2nd half of the season...

[kazza]

I never rated Keane and was certainly confused when we bought him. His arm waving, screaming at team mates and sulky looks were detrimental to team spirit (and that is what we saw on tv) all the while missing sitters, hense we played our best football when he left. He never made it at any big club and was not good enough for us or his price tag. His goals at Spurs I were manly due to the clever play of Berbatov and he benefited. Voronin gelled alot better within the team and while they were about the same technically, Veronin had a better attitude and was free. So for us Voronin was better than Keane. I never heard so many excuses as to why he never performed, blaming Raffa.. Please

My limited footballing knowledge two cents 

[bigmick]

So what you're saying is that he was a truly awful signing Doc, 20 million quid well and truly spunked. I agree with you in many ways, we certainly should have looked into his character and suitability before pledging to spend/spunk that amount of money on him. Was/is he worth that much? History tells us no he isn't. Incredibly of course, even at 20 million he wasn't our worst signing of that particular Summer, that distinction went to Dossena.

Anyway back to the handling of him. Having shelled out 20 million quid on a player who was ostensibly bought to cover for Torres should ill luck befall him, I believe it was/is the responsibility of the manager to give us the best chance possible of being actually able to use him should an emergency arise. As is was, the subbing him game after game, the dropping him when he scored etc only served to make him a shell of the player we bought. Should Keane have been made of sterner stuff? Quite possibly, although it might have been an idea to have worked out his frailty in that particular department before we signed him.

Whichever way you look at it, we signed a striker for 20 million quid who could both partner Torres or cover for him (it's worth remembering that that was the idea). As the season wore on, we desperately needed cover for Torres, and Keane was unable to supply it. Now whether that was because he wasn't actually good enough in the first place and his signing was an awful one, or because wegave him no chance whatsoever to find his best form is by the by in many respects. My own feeling is that both statements are largely true, but equally whichever way you look at it the manager is 100% culpable for the whole fiasco.

[DrPepe]

So what you're saying is that he was a truly awful signing Doc, 20 million quid well and truly spunked. I agree with you in many ways, we certainly should have looked into his character and suitability before pledging to spend/spunk that amount of money on him. Was/is he worth that much? History tells us no he isn't. Incredibly of course, even at 20 million he wasn't our worst signing of that particular Summer, that distinction went to Dossena.

Anyway back to the handling of him. Having shelled out 20 million quid on a player who was ostensibly bought to cover for Torres should ill luck befall him, I believe it was/is the responsibility of the manager to give us the best chance possible of being actually able to use him should an emergency arise. As is was, the subbing him game after game, the dropping him when he scored etc only served to make him a shell of the player we bought. Should Keane have been made of sterner stuff? Quite possibly, although it might have been an idea to have worked out his frailty in that particular department before we signed him.

Whichever way you look at it, we signed a striker for 20 million quid who could both partner Torres or cover for him (it's worth remembering that that was the idea). As the season wore on, we desperately needed cover for Torres, and Keane was unable to supply it. Now whether that was because he wasn't actually good enough in the first place and his signing was an awful one, or because wegave him no chance whatsoever to find his best form is by the by in many respects. My own feeling is that both statements are largely true, but equally whichever way you look at it the manager is 100% culpable for the whole fiasco.

i agree he was certainly a failure, and the buck stops with Rafa

However, I don't believe that the main reason he failed was the managers treatment of him

[kazza]

subbing him game after game, the dropping him when he scored etc only served to make him a shell of the player we bought.

This did not happen initially as he was given plenty of chances to perform and played poorly, he missed alot of sitters. The dropping him and subbing him thing only happened at the end of the spell.

I am not saying this happened but if you were manager and a player showed you up and maybe called you a c*nt  would you roll over and let him tickle your stomache or drop him and then sell him off in the Jan window. Selling him turned out a good thing, most on here would agree.

[account deleted by request]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

[Ray Pugh]

It's a shame that you've "had your fill" of suggestions that keane was hard done by Doc. Best bet is not to read the comments I reckon.

The truth of the matter in my opinion is that Keane's treatment at the hands of the manager was nothing short of ridiculous. He started slowly, as players often do, but it is the managers job to use whatever assets are at his disposal to their maximum in ordere to facilitate an attempt to win trophies. Ten minutes of watching N'Gog play should have been enough to convince anyone that it was in everyone's interests for Keane to find some form just in case Torres got injured. Now in order to help a player find form, you can cajole, you can bullsh!t, you can put your arm around his shoulder, you can praise him up. Basically, whatever it takes to get him to play well was worth it, particularly given the vulnerability of Torres's fitness.

Instead, we allowed ourselves to get embroiled in a power struggle over who actually gave the final go-ahead to pay the fee, and the good of the team was sacrificed IMHO in order to make a point. The time to have arguemnts about the size of the fee and who gave the go ahead to actually pay it, was at the very earliest just before the transfer window, and in all likelyhood at the end of the season.

So as I say, it's the managers job to get the players to play somewhere near their maximum. I've listed a couple of ways which that can be made more likely, but we didn't do those. On both of the occasions when Keane scored two goals in one match, we hauled him off and dropped him in the next match. Now had he have played in the next match, there is a chance that he would have scored again and got himself on a roll (particularly as one of the games in question was against Newcastle).

Instead though, we decided to do everything we could to ensure the player lost any confidence he had. Even worse than that, much worse than that in fact because I don't give a feck about Robbie Keane, was we then decided to sell him without bringing in a replacement. the result of that was we then had to play Torres in virtually every match (amaziong for an arch rotationer to put himself in that position) despite the fact that he patently obviously wasn't 100% for some of the matches.

It amazes me that people offer up Torres being injured for much of the season as a viable excuse for us not winning the title (it's a good reason too) and then are prepared to completely write off the importance of the way we treated a bloke who we signed for 20 million quid for the express purpose of covering for such an eventuality. It's not about whether or not Robbie Keane is worth 20 million quid, whether or not he is a good player or any of that stuff. We NEEDED him to play somewhere near the potential of his ability, and fecking him about was never likely to achive that. His form at Spurs since doesn't demonstrate that he's actually a sh!t player, it merely conforms how completely we destroyed him.

Completely agree.

We did pay over the odds for Keane but how many fans are now saying go get a back-up striker like Tuncay!!!

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

Rafa destroyed him just to make a point. Simples!

[DrPepe]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

If that caused Keane to be so shi te, then whoopy dooo 

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

no he's not 

[account deleted by request]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

If that caused Keane to be so shi te, then whoopy dooo 

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

no he's not 

Wrong ...... the average for the other forwards is around 50% , even for such star strikers as N'gog and Voronin, for Keane it was around 80%.

[DrPepe]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

If that caused Keane to be so shi te, then whoopy dooo 

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

no he's not 

Wrong ...... the average for the other forwards is around 50% , even for such star strikers as N'gog and Voronin, for Keane it was around 80%.

No - not wrong, really 

I said that all our strikers get substituted - you've just posted that they all get subbed at least 1 in every 2 games which is exactly what i said. Seeing as Keane was a failing striker, i'd expect him to be substituted more.

but don't give me "around 50%" - if you've gone and done the research you can provide actual figures for all of our forwards

[Ace Ventura]

I am staggered that people do not think the way Keane was treated didnt affect his confidence when he was at LFC.
And also to compare him with Voronin despite some stats is ridiculous.
He is a far superior player.

[account deleted by request]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

If that caused Keane to be so shi te, then whoopy dooo 

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

no he's not 

Wrong ...... the average for the other forwards is around 50% , even for such star strikers as N'gog and Voronin, for Keane it was around 80%.

No - not wrong, really 

I said that all our strikers get substituted - you've just posted that they all get subbed at least 1 in every 2 games which is exactly what i said. Seeing as Keane was a failing striker, i'd expect him to be substituted more.

but don't give me "around 50%" - if you've gone and done the research you can provide actual figures for all of our forwards

If you are so concerned with accuracy maybe you could try doing the research yourself rather than coming out with "wet finger in the air" statements?

No you didn't say that they get subbed off one game in 2.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

That is what you said, implying that Keane was treated no differently to the other strikers ....... he was!

Personally I never wanted to sign Keane ,I didn't think he was the type of player we needed, and I said so before and after we signed him, but having signed him I would have thought that it was in the clubs interest to try to get the best out of him. This I don't believe we did.

[DrPepe]

Keane started 23 games and was subbed off in 18 games. He was also subbed off in 4 of his first five games.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

If that caused Keane to be so shi te, then whoopy dooo 

Keane is a very goody player and was certainly a quality alternative or partner for Torres, miles better than Tuncay.

no he's not 

Wrong ...... the average for the other forwards is around 50% , even for such star strikers as N'gog and Voronin, for Keane it was around 80%.

No - not wrong, really 

I said that all our strikers get substituted - you've just posted that they all get subbed at least 1 in every 2 games which is exactly what i said. Seeing as Keane was a failing striker, i'd expect him to be substituted more.

but don't give me "around 50%" - if you've gone and done the research you can provide actual figures for all of our forwards

If you are so concerned with accuracy maybe you could try doing the research yourself rather than coming out with "wet finger in the air" statements?

No you didn't say that they get subbed off one game in 2.

all our forwards get subbed off at around 70mins+ (except for Kuyt, who has the photos)

That is what you said, implying that Keane was treated no differently to the other strikers ....... he was!

Personally I never wanted to sign Keane ,I didn't think he was the type of player we needed, and I said so before and after we signed him, but having signed him I would have thought that it was in the clubs interest to try to get the best out of him. This I don't believe we did.

Why do i want to do research to back up your theory? if you haven't got the figures where did you get 50%/80% from? (did you put your finger in the air?  )

That is what you said, implying that Keane was treated no differently to the other strikers ....... he was!

i think you've misinterpreted what i said here, or splitting hairs. Reel your neck in a bit mate, I never said or implied that Keane's exact proportion of substituions was the same as anyone elses, just  that all our strikers get substituted  - they do, and it happens very often (aside from kuyt  ).

[Dundalk]