D-Day for KEANO

JOBT

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Messages
1,848
Location
Greatness ...... well about 10 games from it actua
yes it is almost upon us, tommorow at the reebok stadium roy will argue his case in front of the FA

<a href="http://www.soccernet.com/england/news/2002/1014/20021014mufckeane.html" target="_blank">Full Story ..</a>


so what do people reckon will be the outcome ????

personally i would think that keane and his legal team must have some sort of argument as to why he is not-guilty as he pleaded just that.... maybe they can get out of it as the book was actually written by sombody else ?? :confused:

Surely the UTD legal team would have spotted anything that would incrimiante keane further ??? and if they didn't why not ???

opinions ?? (on the topic of the hearing only please, the for/against keane argument is worn out)


<img src="graemlins/keano.gif" border="0" alt="[Keano]" /> <img src="graemlins/keano.gif" border="0" alt="[Keano]" /> <img src="graemlins/keano.gif" border="0" alt="[Keano]" /> <img src="graemlins/keano.gif" border="0" alt="[Keano]" /> <img src="graemlins/keano.gif" border="0" alt="[Keano]" />
 
The FA have charged Keane on two counts. The first relates to the claim that he said he deliberately set out to injure Haaland as an act of revenge.

This charge really is all about how the FA interpret Keane's (Dunphy's) words in the book. Its a very tricky one and I'm not sure if the FA have a solid case. Just to remind us the passage in question say "I'd waited long enough, take that you cnut etc." Now here Keane really has to argue that the waiting bit of that sentence relates to during the match. Or that somehow it is his ghost writer's turn of phrase rather than his own. This, to me is the key sentence in the case of pre-meditation. The whole thing is very open to interpretation and I doubt the FA are willing to take the risk of Keane bringing them to a civil court where linguists will argue over the semantics of the book.

The second addresses the question of Keane publishing an account of the incident for financial reward.

This second one is far more important to football, in general, than anyone is making out. It is effectively a freedom of speech argument. Are players and managers going to be allowed freedom of speech like everyone else in the country or are they going to be gagged by the threat of FA 'disrepute' charges? The whole thing again is open to interpretation and it could, depending on tomorrow, have a far reaching impact upon how players and managers talk about the game. Lets be honest, most football interviews and books are very predicable, hence the cliche culture that has built up over time. (Game of two halves, an honest pro etc.)

I have a feeling that tomorrow won't be the end of the affair. Keane will be fined that my guess and will be banned. If the ban is too harsh, more than six matches, he will bring the FA to civil court where under human rights and EU law he can argue that his freedom speech rights have been impeded. If they come down too heavy we could have another Bosman It could be that type of case.

But I hope that the FA are afraid that Keane might go down that road and find some 'third way' . Who knows what type of negotiations have been going on behind closed doors?

Personally I hope the whole thing allows players and managers to be a lot more honest in what they say and publish. Keane's book is the best football book I have read since "Hand of God: The Diego Maradona Story". Its interesting to note that both books upset the establishment. Thats always a good thing in my opinion.
 
If anyone out there believes in prayer ,,,get on your knees and no swearing while you are doing it ...its Keanes and our only ope from a ban ....The Fa are being pressurised by the media to make an example of Keane and inded all things United ( see how they treated that daft Fergie story at the week end 0 ..we need higher authority on our side tomorrow
 
Originally posted by Kilcarman:
<strong>If anyone out there believes in prayer ,,,get on your knees and no swearing while you are doing it ...its Keanes and our only ope from a ban ....The Fa are being pressurised by the media to make an example of Keane and inded all things United ( see how they treated that daft Fergie story at the week end 0 ..we need higher authority on our side tomorrow</strong><hr></blockquote>

What did the FA do to Fergie at the weekend?
Click to expand...
 
hearing started 5 minutes ago.

Fingers crossed for Roy, heres hoping for justice and the FA appoligise for wasting his time <img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" />
 
Originally posted by Murt:
<strong>hearing started 5 minutes ago.

Fingers crossed for Roy, heres hoping for justice and the FA appoligise for wasting his time <img src="graemlins/nervous.gif" border="0" alt="[Nervous]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>


<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
Click to expand...
 
he'll be found guilty with bringing the in disrepute..... 5 match ban I reckon.

Baz, what are the odds?
 
an 8 match ban as originally thought by the press IMO. He already served the original 3 from the red card so we probably won't see him until almost the New Year.
 
can't believe you're all being so realistic about this. . .i can see a whitewash coming, 2-week fine and a slapped wrist. he'll blame it all on dunphy misrepresenting him. . .
 
Originally posted by michael owen's mum:
<strong>he'll blame it all on dunphy misrepresenting him. . .</strong><hr></blockquote>

exactl, hell get off on a technicality. If he says "their Dunphys words, not mine" they cant touch him imo.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Murt:
<strong>

exactl, hell get off on a technicality. If he says "their Dunphys words, not mine" they cant touch him imo.</strong><hr></blockquote>

all he needs is the tape of dunphy interviewing him or a ropey transcript. . .dunphy will claim (ludicrously in his case) "artistic license". . .and what the feck is the f.a. going to do to dunphy?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Murt:
<strong>

exactl, hell get off on a technicality. If he says "their Dunphys words, not mine" they cant touch him imo.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Rubbish....it's his blxxdy book ffs.He should be banned for 6 months for being a complete lout ,but knowing the Man Utd bum sniffers at the FA ,he'll probably get a suspended ban and a slap on the wrist.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>


Rubbish....it's his blxxdy book ffs.He should be banned for 6 months for being a complete lout ,but knowing the Man Utd bum sniffers at the FA ,he'll probably get a suspended ban and a slap on the wrist.</strong><hr></blockquote>

so...will he sue dunphy for 'misrepresentation'?

is dunphy's journalistic career in ruins having put words into the mouth of his subject without checking with him first and getting his client into a disrepute charge?

just thinking dunphy is having a right laught at keano over this and is getting paid just the same
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by smash:
<strong>

so...will he sue dunphy for 'misrepresentation'?

is dunphy's journalistic career in ruins having put words into the mouth of his subject without checking with him first and getting his client into a disrepute charge?

just thinking dunphy is having a right laught at keano over this and is getting paid just the same</strong><hr></blockquote>

What utter tosh.......keane is the 'author' whether he actually writes it or not is irrelevant.He commissioned Dunphy and approved what was written.He therefore takes full responsibility and after all,it does sound like Keane's words doesn't it ???

I can't believe the blind loyalty of the apologists on this forum for Keane....what next from you lot?....argue that it wasn't Hitler's fault for the holocaust???
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>

What utter tosh.......keane is the 'author' whether he actually writes it or not is irrelevant.He commissioned Dunphy and approved what was written.He therefore takes full responsibility and after all,it does sound like Keane's words doesn't it ???

I can't believe the blind loyalty of the apologists on this forum for Keane....what next from you lot?....argue that it wasn't Hitler's fault for the holocaust???</strong><hr></blockquote>


you're assuming too much. it's possible that keane didn't proof read the book pre-publication. . .if you're suing for libel, you don't sue the individual journalist, do you? you sue the paper / publishing house. . .
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>

What utter tosh.......keane is the 'author' whether he actually writes it or not is irrelevant.He commissioned Dunphy and approved what was written.He therefore takes full responsibility and after all,it does sound like Keane's words doesn't it ???

I can't believe the blind loyalty of the apologists on this forum for Keane....what next from you lot?....argue that it wasn't Hitler's fault for the holocaust???</strong><hr></blockquote>

read the book before you comment. If you're going to post based on what you've read in the papers you're clearly an idiot jumping on the bandwagon.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>Rubbish....it's his blxxdy book ffs.He should be banned for 6 months for being a complete lout ,but knowing the Man Utd bum sniffers at the FA ,he'll probably get a suspended ban and a slap on the wrist.</strong><hr></blockquote>

for starters he shouldnt be questioned at all. Just because he told the truth, Steven Gerard did George Boateng in a few yrs back. He bullshits that he never intends to hurt anyone and then he clobbers Viera in the charity shield.
"bringing the game into disrepute" :rolleyes: its football, not a sandwich making tournament for old ladies, footballs a tough game.
If they can do anything to Keano they should do the same to any dangerous tackle that looks delibarate, if not free speech is comprimised. Keane will probably get off on a technicality ie that they wernt his words, we all know he meant to do it and that lots of players try to hurt each other. What difference does a few words 2 yrs later make?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Murt:
<strong>

for starters he shouldnt be questioned at all. Just because he told the truth, Steven Gerard did George Boateng in a few yrs back. He bullshits that he never intends to hurt anyone and then he clobbers Viera in the charity shield.
"bringing the game into disrepute" :rolleyes: its football, not a sandwich making tournament for old ladies, footballs a tough game.
If they can do anything to Keano they should do the same to any dangerous tackle that looks delibarate, if not free speech is comprimised. Keane will probably get off on a technicality ie that they wernt his words, we all know he meant to do it and that lots of players try to hurt each other. What difference does a few words 2 yrs later make?</strong><hr></blockquote>

not a very strong legal argument that mate...
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by spinoza:
<strong>

read the book before you comment. If you're going to post based on what you've read in the papers you're clearly an idiot jumping on the bandwagon.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Listen,I haven't read the book but it's hardly unreasonable to expect the book to be the same as the press articles.

Keane has to take responsibility for what was written,a defence of negligence (in not proof reading all of the book,say) is no defence at all.

Frankly,Keane is a thug and is a poor role model for kids (how many of them will try to copy Keane's example of 'doing a Haaland' ??)

He should get 6 months minimum.
Click to expand...
 
just heard that dunphy has turned up at the reebok. is this a good idea? he always seems to rub everyone up the wrong way if you ask me...
 
IMO they can't touch him based on freedom of speech. But if they do Keane will drag the FA to every court in the land. Its about time we had footballers publishing books that reflect the reality of the game. The 'image' footballers often portray is so full of double standards. Fair play to Keano. The FA can shove whatever they throw at him up their bollix.
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>

Frankly,Keane is a thug and is a poor role model for kids (how many of them will try to copy Keane's example of 'doing a Haaland' ??)

He should get 6 months minimum.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Its a good thing there are no gooners at the FA
;)
Click to expand...
 
Coz the FA are so in awe of United's dominance and power of the game he actually won’t get banned at all. He'll be made honorary member and they'll ban Steven Gerrard & Patrick Viera for seven months instead!
 
Originally posted by smash:
<strong>just heard that dunphy has turned up at the reebok. is this a good idea? he always seems to rub everyone up the wrong way if you ask me...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Dunphy has plenty of experience with libel cases of his own. I don' think he'll let Keane down today. I reckon Keane will get a six match ban for two counts of disrepute.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Rams:
<strong>Coz the FA are so in awe of United's dominance and power of the game he actually won’t get banned at all. He'll be made honorary member and they'll ban Steven Gerrard & Patrick Viera for seven months instead!</strong><hr></blockquote>

:D Good one !......you know,it certainly sounds convincing !
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>


Listen,I haven't read the book but it's hardly unreasonable to expect the book to be the same as the press articles.

Keane has to take responsibility for what was written,a defence of negligence (in not proof reading all of the book,say) is no defence at all.

Frankly,Keane is a thug and is a poor role model for kids (how many of them will try to copy Keane's example of 'doing a Haaland' ??)

He should get 6 months minimum.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No more or no less than Viera or Henry, my high horsed friend!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>


Listen,I haven't read the book but it's hardly unreasonable to expect the book to be the same as the press articles.

Keane has to take responsibility for what was written,a defence of negligence (in not proof reading all of the book,say) is no defence at all.

Frankly,Keane is a thug and is a poor role model for kids (how many of them will try to copy Keane's example of 'doing a Haaland' ??)

He should get 6 months minimum.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The book IS different from the press articles. :rolleyes: If you believe the papers, well, you're gullible as well as an idiot.

It's a matter of context. Keane believes, and so do I, that the remarks were taken out of the context that he meant them in. Unfortunately they are also ambiguous, so the FA has a case. The onus is on Keane to prove that the remarks could have been taken out of context via the negligence defence.

If you believe Keane is a thug, well, that's your opinion. However, he is an honest man, and that's more than can be said for many other people.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>

What have Vieira and Henry got to do with it?
They've done nothing wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>

They have been guilty of head butts, swinging elbows, attacks on referees and vengeful tackles have they not? Is this not what you mean by thuggery, or is it just because Keane has done it in the past and openly admitted it?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by spinoza:
<strong>

The book IS different from the press articles. :rolleyes: If you believe the papers, well, you're gullible as well as an idiot.

It's a matter of context. Keane believes, and so do I, that the remarks were taken out of the context that he meant them in. Unfortunately they are also ambiguous, so the FA has a case. The onus is on Keane to prove that the remarks could have been taken out of context via the negligence defence.

If you believe Keane is a thug, well, that's your opinion. However, he is an honest man, and that's more than can be said for many other footballers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The book ain't any different, and it clearly suggests that it was premeditated, at least during the game, and makes clear that he held a grudge while rehabilitating. I don't think there can be any doubt that there was a revenge motive for it. But he got a Red card at the time, and that should be the end of it.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by spinoza:
<strong>

The book IS different from the press articles. :rolleyes: If you believe the papers, well, you're gullible as well as an idiot.

It's a matter of context. Keane believes, and so do I, that the remarks were taken out of the context that he meant them in. Unfortunately they are also ambiguous, so the FA has a case. The onus is on Keane to prove that the remarks could have been taken out of context via the negligence defence.

If you believe Keane is a thug, well, that's your opinion. However, he is an honest man, and that's more than can be said for many other footballers.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Question 1)Have you read the book and ,if so,tell me what the book says that is different

Question 2)If the papers incorrectly quoted from the book,why didn't Keane complain (or maybe he felt 'his honesty' had actually been properly reported)

Question 3)Why blame the press? Didn't Keane get handsomely rewarded by them and also,didn't the press articles help stimulate greater sales of the book?

Keane has done pretty well financially out of the book fueled by the excerpts in the press...he has to stand by everything that was written ,therefore.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Rory 7:
<strong>

Dunphy has plenty of experience with libel cases of his own. I don' think he'll let Keane down today. I reckon Keane will get a six match ban for two counts of disrepute.</strong><hr></blockquote>

oh aye he has been a big mate to him so far hasnt he? dunphy needs keane more than keane needs dunphy.

he should stick one on him when this is all over
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by smash:
<strong>

oh aye he has been a big mate to him so far hasnt he? dunphy needs keane more than keane needs dunphy.

he should stick one on him when this is all over</strong><hr></blockquote>
As long as he doesn't admit to doing so in a book afterwards. ;)
Click to expand...
 
_38343135_keanewat300.jpg


Worried??
 
Originally posted by Gillespie:
<strong>

Question 3)Why blame the press? Didn't Keane get handsomely rewarded by them and also,didn't the press articles help stimulate greater sales of the book?

Keane has done pretty well financially out of the book fueled by the excerpts in the press...he has to stand by everything that was written ,therefore.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Keane got a flat fee from the book, therefore he gets the same amount regardless of the amount sold.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Neil Thomson:
<strong>
The book ain't any different, and it clearly suggests that it was premeditated, at least during the game, and makes clear that he held a grudge while rehabilitating. I don't think there can be any doubt that there was a revenge motive for it. But he got a Red card at the time, and that should be the end of it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think the serialisation left a lot to be desired. The focus was quite heavily on the 'premeditated' aspect of it and not how premeditated it was. I think Keane's defence will be this - he held the grudge, but he only decided to hurt Haaland (i.e. the "I've waited long enough" quote) during or just before the match. Is that premeditated? That's for the FA to decide isn't it?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by spinoza:
<strong>

I think the serialisation left a lot to be desired. The focus was quite heavily on the 'premeditated' aspect of it and not how premeditated it was. I think Keane's defence will be this - he held the grudge, but he only decided to hurt Haaland (i.e. the "I've waited long enough" quote) during or just before the match. Is that premeditated? That's for the FA to decide isn't it?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Would hardly be the first grudge in football though would it? I don't think they can do anything to him just cos he admitted it in a book, freedom of speech will win that one, especially in a european court. I think they need a good reason to punish him twice for the same tackle, he got a red card, and a ban, because it was dangerous (and looked very deliberate). Nothing new to warrant further punishment imo.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.