Keane on Haaland

Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>

No, I would want him to get a punishment according to the 'crime'</strong><hr></blockquote>

Which in your eyes would be what?
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>

I'm not whinging

Merely observing that you only focus on negative Man United stories</strong><hr></blockquote>


No I don't...

I recently gave credit to Beckham re his treatment of that ill kid

You only remember the bad stuff
 
Originally posted by Rory 7:
<strong>

Put it this way. Its double standards. It was obvious that Keane took revenge back then and the FA ignored it. But now that Keane admits it was revenge everyone jumps up and down about it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

There's a difference between suspected intent and the player himself admitting it..

And whether or not their was intent was certainly quesioned on here at the time..
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>

There's a difference between suspected intent and the player himself admitting it..

And whether or not their was intent was certainly quesioned on here at the time..</strong><hr></blockquote>

There is a difference yeah.
So all those cases of suspected intent are less serious than when a player admits it?
Whats your point?
The only difference is the authorities chose to ignore it at the time. And now that Keane was honest enough/stupid enough to admit it they are thinking about re-visiting their decision. Its double standards.
We suspected your intentions but never asked you or explored it. We dished out a mandory fine and ban in full 'suspicion' of the intent. But for God's sake don't ever come out and admit you intented to hurt him. Coz then we'll have to be honest about what goes on on football pitches. Its double standards.

Keane was wrong. He admittted. We all knew what he did wrong. And now that he gives an honest account of what happened nearly two years later there is uproar. Its bollox Davo. A non-story.
 
But there's the point that if FA won't react they give a clear sign that planning in advance and making a tackle that can easily end players career will be punished with only 4 game ban.

So lets assume West Brom player decides to make that kind of tackle against e.g. Beckham. Beckham never plays footie again, opposition player gets 4 match ban. The player tells after the game it was his intention to ´do´ Beckham. That's OK with you?

And forget about the Håland-Keane incident that happened earlier, it was Keanes own fault and doesn't make any difference even if it wasn't. And also, it's not the point that Keane didn't finish Håland's career.That kind of behaviour just can't be tolerated in football games.
 
Originally posted by Rory 7:
<strong>

I'm only having a laugh Davo. Yeah I can see there are two sides to it. Keano's tackle on Haaland was out of order. We knew it was out of order back then and we knew the background to the tackle. It was fecking obvious why Keane decided to tackle Haaland. Now there is uproar again because part of his book describes what he was thinking on the pitch at the time.

Put it this way. Its double standards. It was obvious that Keane took revenge back then and the FA ignored it. But now that Keane admits it was revenge everyone jumps up and down about it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This really is the point that everyone is missing. The guy is retelling something that happened. It was stupid and dangerous, but it was a moment of madness and it's history. I'm sure this discussion went on at the time, but it is just bandwagon jumping for you all to act as if this is news to you. The guy is describing something that happened to him in the past and he is being honest.
I would love to read the whole piece and not just the media edited version, he may be apologising for or embarrased by the incident.

The Liverpool lads are being overly bitter about the whole thing on here today and it is petty.
 
Originally posted by ET:
<strong>But there's the point that if FA won't react they give a clear sign that planning in advance and making a tackle that can easily end players career will be punished with only 4 game ban.

So lets assume West Brom player decides to make that kind of tackle against e.g. Beckham. Beckham never plays footie again, opposition player gets 4 match ban. The player tells after the game it was his intention to ´do´ Beckham. That's OK with you?

And forget about the Håland-Keane incident that happened earlier, it was Keanes own fault and doesn't make any difference even if it wasn't. And also, it's not the point that Keane didn't finish Håland's career.That kind of behaviour just can't be tolerated in football games.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Fair points about how a player making a statement opens up the whole thing. But surely it is done and dusted. How can they re-visit a case that was so plainly obvious 18 months ago. And I agree it isn't tolerable on a footbal pitch. I'm sure Keano would say the same thing and I bet in the book he says that he is sorry for losing the plot that day despite all of his reasons.
 
Originally posted by Lynott:
<strong>

It was stupid and dangerous, but it was a moment of madness and it's history.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's just the point you are missing, it wasn't a moment of madness. If it was, this topic wouldn't even exist.

I respect Keane as player but I can't accept that kind of behaviour.
 
Originally posted by ET:
<strong>

That's just the point you are missing, it wasn't a moment of madness. If it was, this topic wouldn't even exist.

I respect Keane as player but I can't accept that kind of behaviour.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't agree with what he did either, but the fact that he is retelling an incident from 2 years ago and how he felt at the MOMENT it happened does not mean it was premeditated.
 
Originally posted by Lynott:

I don't agree with what he did either, but the fact that he is retelling an incident from 2 years ago and how he felt at the MOMENT it happened does not mean it was premeditated.<hr></blockquote>

I thought like that too earlier but...

"I waited until five minutes from the end. I ****ing hit him hard. I think the ball was there. 'Take that, you ****'.

...after that first sentence I didn't think like that anymore.
 
Originally posted by Rory 7:
<strong>

There is a difference yeah.
So all those cases of suspected intent are less serious than when a player admits it?
Whats your point?
The only difference is the authorities chose to ignore it at the time. And now that Keane was honest enough/stupid enough to admit it they are thinking about re-visiting their decision. Its double standards.
We suspected your intentions but never asked you or explored it. We dished out a mandory fine and ban in full 'suspicion' of the intent. But for God's sake don't ever come out and admit you intented to hurt him. Coz then we'll have to be honest about what goes on on football pitches. Its double standards.

Keane was wrong. He admittted. We all knew what he did wrong. And now that he gives an honest account of what happened nearly two years later there is uproar. Its bollox Davo. A non-story.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Nearly 2 years later?

Can you not see the difference between suspected intent and the player admitting it? The doubt has gone, its an unprecedented case...

I'm not convinced any big punishment will be handed out, but they're clearly looking at..hence their context remark..
 
Haaland's 'long term' injury is with his other leg and not the one Keane kicked! - check it, children! Keane and his advisors are not idiots so the question is why is Keane now admitting to malicious intent?

Probably because he'll sue Haaland if he sues him.

Don't blame Keane. Most decent fellers would 'ave done the same!
 
Roy Keane isn't stupid.

If anything, he's too open and up front. That's what gets him into trouble.

He wasn't right in what he did to Haaland, but I'm sure he isn't the only player to have made a deliberate bad challenge. Just the only one honest enough to admit it.
 
I wonder how many of the words used in the biog are Keanes ? How much editorial control did he have ? How much is Dunphys own highly selective agenda .? I believe Keane was badly advised in his choice of biographer. Could Fergie have not introduced him to Hugh Mc Ilvanney , or even Tom Humphries of the Irish Times , but Dunphy who has made a career as a controversalist wrong man entirely and betwen them have put keane and maybe United too beyond he pale for many .......

We did not need such a Biog at this time in his career , frankly he deserved better

The whole style , content, timing ,and serialisation is crass .
He doesnt need the money ,or the publicity, and the image all non head bangers will have of him ...will be of a lout , a drunk , a thoroughly unpleasant man that not even his years of great skills and committment for United and Ireland will expugn .

I am sad and depressed at all I have read so far .....
 
I am a United fan but I am disappointed about Keane, I dont like the guy, I really dont, for the first time in my life, but I have to accept it; going that bad in a tackle and then admitting that he wanted to get him; thats just not professional and I dont care how much he has given to United but shame on him.
I would not want to know him. :mad:
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>

I agree.

Most supporters I know condemn what he's done, but will always love him as the superb footballer he is</strong><hr></blockquote>

I must admit, if he played for any other club, I would have slated him for this. I guess that's what supporting your team is about.
 
listen dont forget dunphy's part in this, and the man he is. he's a publicity-mongering suckarse for sure. he's not clean and will have put his own 'journalistic' twist to it to make nit sound how he deems fit.
 
Roy's "honesty" is no defence at all....the text on Haaland is a blatant admission of assault, and I suspect McCarthy could sue for libel as well if he wanted to pursue it. There's a difference between sticking your neck out, and generally acting as though you're such a special case that the normal laws of the land don't apply.

One of the contributing factors to last season's poor start was allegedly Stam's book. Now here we are again...how high on anybody's wish list was another row about another damn book 24 hours before a key European game and four days before the start of the season ?

If it results in action in the form of a suspension from the FA then that will be another unwelcome disruption in a season where we want everyone on the field and focused on the job in hand.

Thanks captain. Loyalty swings both ways, and I cannot see how the club is best served by any of the material that has been published this week. Don't we have lawyers who review this stuff before it is published for christ's sake ?
 
Originally posted by Enrique Deschamps:
<strong>I am a United fan but I am disappointed about Keane, I dont like the guy, I really dont, for the first time in my life, but I have to accept it; going that bad in a tackle and then admitting that he wanted to get him; thats just not professional and I dont care how much he has given to United but shame on him.
I would not want to know him. :mad: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Totally agree Keane is a nut
:mad:
 
What Keane did was wrong. The book is mercenary and ill-advised.

He was banned at the time for violent conduct. What can they ban him for now. Bringing the game into disrepute? Can of worms there, because we all know that players try and get revenge after incidents.

Anybody who feels it is revelation, and that their team doesn't contain players who do such things is talking crap.

Keane seems to be on a mad mission to speak his version of the truth. Prawn sanwiches, the WC fiasco and now this book. This latest incident does him no credit at all, but he will be banned for telling the truth about football.
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>

Great response...

Hopefully Keane will be made to pay for his actions, ..</strong><hr></blockquote>


Like Gerrard will be for his tackle on Viera?
 
Roy Keane made a bad tackle, he admits to taking a man out, he was out of order, but is he the only one who has carried out such action, no. Remember the likes of Chopper Harris, Billy Bremner, Norman Hunter, Jackie Charlton, all players with long memories and evil intent, there are players in todays game, without mentioning names who will in time go down alongside the players mentioned. But they all have two things in common, hero and villian, hero to their club and villian to the rest, so what's changed, or is this just another Manchester United general dig, the latter I suspect.
 
I'm not objective on this is but nor are many others.

I disagree with what Keano did and accept the punishment. He has now said that it was premeditated. This was suspected but not proven at the time. A rap over the knuckles (a warning, a fine or short ban) is possible. The image of United and of Roy Keane has tarnished. He has gone down in my estimation of him as a person.

When he plays for the club, he will have my backing 100%. If he feels he needs to make statements to the press to get the team hungry, I support him absolutely. If he feels the team miss vocal backing because of some fans hunger for prawn sandwiches, I support him.

I do this because it is in the club's interest. At the end of the day I want us to win trophies. I don't care a great deal about the personal details of the players. I want quality players at the club. And I will support them (almost) beyond reason if they are committed to United.
 
Originally posted by Travis Bickle:
<strong>


Like Gerrard will be for his tackle on Viera?</strong><hr></blockquote>

hardly comparable, are they? only a blinkered fool would fail to spot the difference...
 
He's outright wrong, no two way about it.

Okay Haaland is an idiot, hates United to the bone but he is also a fellow professional. Now his career is totally wrecked by Keane's tackle. Keane of all people should know how it's like to be suffering from long term injuries. He should be best player of his generation but if he did that intentionally he should be punished.

If it's not stupid enough to aim for the leg, it even more stupid of him to blurt everything out while he's still playing for the most glamourous team in the world, just before a new season about to kick off. Bloody stupendous timing.

Now the morale should be sky-high for the Champion League qualifier on Wednesday night.
 
Check out this on the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/photo_galleries/football/2190003.stm" target="_blank">BBC</a> homepage
 
What he has done is bad. I'm sure he will be fined or banned for some games. That's ok. We should not have any problem in the midfield. I support him because he's a Man Utd player and our captain too. Other than that, I don't like it at all.
 
from the beeb...

Ferguson also revealed that United officials saw the book before it was published.

"These books are never done with the club's consent but they do peruse it before it goes to the publishers.

"If it had been felt that there was something untoward in it, the club would have brought it up. The lawyers didn't think there were any problems. It's an honest book."
 
Originally posted by usual_suspect:
<strong>

hardly comparable, are they? only a blinkered fool would fail to spot the difference...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Most people think it should have been a red card. I wondered if Davo was equally concerend that the "right punishment" be given in this case.
 
What i find hard to grasp is that he was prepared to be sent off in a game that United wanted to win.
With only ten players on the pitch it makes it a little bit harder.
Keane is always shouting about commitment from his fellow players maybe he should take a look in the mirror.

Good job we didn`t lose that match.
Would Fergie back him up then.
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>There was even talk of criminal charges for assault in the rag today....</strong><hr></blockquote>

Who wrote the book then? was it keane himself or has he been talking to a writer who has typed down his thoughts. Doesn't necessarily have to be his comments then either, legally that is. Who knows, the fecking writer could say anything and say it was Keane.
 
Originally posted by AhmedDimwitson:
<strong>

Who wrote the book then? was it keane himself or has he been talking to a writer who has typed down his thoughts. Doesn't necessarily have to be his comments then either, legally that is.</strong><hr></blockquote>


It was a direct quote wasn't it?
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>


It was a direct quote wasn't it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hard to say..he probably needs to have it on tape as it won't be repeated if they raise criminal charges.
 
Originally posted by AhmedDimwitson:
<strong>

Hard to say..he probably needs to have it on tape as it won't be repeated if they raise criminal charges.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I can't see criminal charges coming to fore anyway...
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>

I can't see criminal charges coming to fore anyway...</strong><hr></blockquote>

The whole issue of raising charges at all seems rather pathetic. Someone has printed what KEane might have said. Everything would be based on this quote and what are they going to investigate. What Keane was thinking when he made the tackle? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> . It's impossible and tackles like that happen all the time in football, sadly. And what that rag prints can hardly be classed as evidence.