shaggy

Gah. I could care less about Roy Keane, but I'm really not following your objections. He doesn't have a stellar record in management? Well, quelle surprise. That might be why he's being offered a job as assistant manager. The thing about managers with unblemished records of success, is that clubs often want to appoint them as managers. On that basis would you be happy to have Lambert as an assistant manager after watching the drivel his team has produced over the past two seasons? My objections to Keane coming in go further than that. I'm concerned about how he will react under pressure if we don't get new owners and we have to make do with what we have.

We're not exactly able to attract many good players whilst we're in ownership limbo. I'm not sure why people think we have many options when adding to the squad at this stage. Yes mate that's the most frustrating thing of all and you are right.

The problem is though that Vlaar won't play a full season for us and we will have to rely on our second string centre backs at some stage in the season. Okore is also coming back from a major injury and will need time to adjust even if there is no recurrence of the injury. We therefore desperately need a decent 3rd choice centre back and Senderos wouldn't fill me with a lot of confidence.

Lambert winning the European Cup had no influence whatsoever on the team during his time here. I don't see a failed manager coming in even if it is Roy Keane will make any difference to that. I disagree. Roy Keane is as high profile a player as you get. I wouldn't be surprised if half our players had no idea that Lambert was a Champions League winner. Roy Keane left Man Utd 9 years ago. Given the age of most of our players, they would've watched him on tv as they were growing up. They'll know all about him and, I'm guessing, that the no.2 will spend more time with them than the manager. I think it's a good move by the club, as we're a bit of a pushover at the moment. Yeah, I too see it as a short-term move, but I doubt we would get a better short-term assistant given the circumstances. You don't think our players know that Lambert is a Champions League winner?

Lambert winning the European Cup had no influence whatsoever on the team during his time here. I don't see a failed manager coming in even if it is Roy Keane will make any difference to that.

I'm not sure being in the bottom 3 with a newly promoted side is exactly a failure. As for Ipswich, I thought he finished 15th... Anyway... its all fairly irrelevant given that he isn't being appointed as our manager. There are plenty of people who have been very successful as number 2's and total failures as managers when trying to go it alone. I will judge Keane as an assistant manager on his time here rather than the time he has previously spent in an entirely different role. I think when Keane left Ipswich they were 19th. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Keane Like I said, there are countless examples of amazing assistants being crap managers and vice versa. Obviously you need some skills in both jobs. But the point is being bad at one job doesn't mean you'll be bad at the other. So citing Keane's managerial record as evidence that he'll be a crap assistant doesn't make much sense, especially as it's not even that bad. Which is a fair point to make but its also more than a fair to suggest that as there are similarities between both jobs you can at least form an opinion on ability to motivate which is a common denominator for both jobs and due to Keane's temperament including walking out on Ireland i'm not sure we should gamble on that sort of destabilisation. My main worry is that if we don't get a new owner before the summer window closes then we are in for another relegation struggle and I wonder how Keane would react under that pressure? Your definition of bad also differs from mine so really there's no common ground for further debate on this so i'm going to pull the shutters down and leave it. He seemed fine at motivating Sunderland when they were winning the Championship. He's had 2 jobs. One he did fine in, one he didn't. It's hardly disastrous for a manager in his first ever jobs. There's no more sense in assuming he'll be crap at motivating because he didn't do well at Ipswich than there is in me saying he'll be great at motivating because he did well at Sunderland. It's selective whichever way you look at it. He didn't walk out on Ireland. They sent him home. Since you wish to pursue this then i will grant you your wish. He didn't do a fine job at Sunderland. Yes he got them promoted and after spending 80m left them in relegation trouble. How on anyone's planet is that doing a fine job. O'Neill got a lot of stick from fans for spending that kind of money and getting us to sixth. According to media reports the players at Sunderland actually celebrated when he left as they were so glad to see the back of him. Yes he was sent home but you don't mention the circumstances behind that. He announced that he was pulling out of the squad due to poor training facilities, travel arrangements and so on and then had a change of mind. He then verbally abused the manager. He forced the issue knowing full well what was going to happen and gave the manager little choice but to act.

I'm not sure being in the bottom 3 with a newly promoted side is exactly a failure. As for Ipswich, I thought he finished 15th... Anyway... its all fairly irrelevant given that he isn't being appointed as our manager. There are plenty of people who have been very successful as number 2's and total failures as managers when trying to go it alone. I will judge Keane as an assistant manager on his time here rather than the time he has previously spent in an entirely different role. I think when Keane left Ipswich they were 19th. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Keane Like I said, there are countless examples of amazing assistants being crap managers and vice versa. Obviously you need some skills in both jobs. But the point is being bad at one job doesn't mean you'll be bad at the other. So citing Keane's managerial record as evidence that he'll be a crap assistant doesn't make much sense, especially as it's not even that bad. Which is a fair point to make but its also more than a fair to suggest that as there are similarities between both jobs you can at least form an opinion on ability to motivate which is a common denominator for both jobs and due to Keane's temperament including walking out on Ireland i'm not sure we should gamble on that sort of destabilisation. My main worry is that if we don't get a new owner before the summer window closes then we are in for another relegation struggle and I wonder how Keane would react under that pressure? Your definition of bad also differs from mine so really there's no common ground for further debate on this so i'm going to pull the shutters down and leave it.

So he is definitely coming to us then?

We'll have to agree to differ then because as I've already said there are elements within a manager's job than can also be transferred to a number two and vice versa such as system choice and getting the players to play within the system and motivational skills. Keane has been found wanting on both even back in the Championship so on that basis it's certainly not nonsense to question his probable appointment with us and if you include his temperament on and off the pitch especially since we've already sacked a coach, or coaches for bullying for me it really isn't the way to go.

Comparing the records of Keane to Mourinho in any shape or form is ridiculous.

Yeah that's more than fair but in some cases there really isn't a distinction between the two and that's what I'm getting at. It can be more of a partnership than something clearly defined with both the manager and coach/number two exchanging responsibilities on the day to day running of the team depending upon the circumstances which was why I brought the point up about Keane's record as a manager when clearly he would have had some input in coaching his teams. So you could say the best course of action would be to give him a flipping chance first before writing him off based on his managerial record which may or may not matter (and isn't even bad anyway). How's your aunt by the way? His managerial record is disastrous as already quoted and all my aunts are dead so thanks very much for asking. So disastrous he took Sunderland from the bottom to the top of the league, to win the Championship. Then left them when they were in the bottom three in the Premiership and got Ipswich to 19th in the Championship before being sacked.

Yeah that's more than fair but in some cases there really isn't a distinction between the two and that's what I'm getting at. It can be more of a partnership than something clearly defined with both the manager and coach/number two exchanging responsibilities on the day to day running of the team depending upon the circumstances which was why I brought the point up about Keane's record as a manager when clearly he would have had some input in coaching his teams. So you could say the best course of action would be to give him a flipping chance first before writing him off based on his managerial record which may or may not matter (and isn't even bad anyway). How's your aunt by the way? His managerial record is disastrous as already quoted and all my aunts are dead so thanks very much for asking.

yep. What's your point? yep. What's your point? And why is it in this thread about the future assistant manager of the club? I would have thought the point would have been obvious but obviously not. We are talking about the merits of Roy Keane coming in as a coach/number two/motivator. I asked the question what does a manager do? Does a manager have any influence on the training pitch? If he does then a manager should also be judged on his coaching ability to get the team playing well. Keane has had minimal success as a manager so why would he suddenly become a good coach or motivator when he hasn't consistently been that elsewhere through being a manager. If you're telling me that Keane has had no input at all into coaching his other teams to play a system of his choice then fine. I wasn't. I was simply replying to you saying he had never improved a team. There are countless examples of good assistants being crap managers and vice versa. There is quite clearly a difference in the jobs, so in my opinion, using a managerial record to predict how good someone will be as an assistant is extremely limited at best, especially a managerial career that is so short thus far. Yeah that's more than fair but in some cases there really isn't a distinction between the two and that's what I'm getting at. It can be more of a partnership than something clearly defined with both the manager and coach/number two exchanging responsibilities on the day to day running of the team depending upon the circumstances which was why I brought the point up about Keane's record as a manager when clearly he would have had some input in coaching his teams. I would have loved to have a young Roy Keane in our midfield but as a number two following on from what has happened recently in conjunction with employing someone who has admitted intentional injury to another player is not the way to go for me.

Alls good and no need for the sarky.

yep. What's your point? yep. What's your point? And why is it in this thread about the future assistant manager of the club? I would have thought the point would have been obvious but obviously not. We are talking about the merits of Roy Keane coming in as a coach/number two/motivator. I asked the question what does a manager do? Does a manager have any influence on the training pitch? If he does then a manager should also be judged on his coaching ability to get the team playing well. Keane has had minimal success as a manager so why would he suddenly become a good coach or motivator when he hasn't consistently been that elsewhere through being a manager. If you're telling me that Keane has had no input at all into coaching his other teams to play a system of his choice then fine.