So, the Football Association of Ireland wants to appoint Roy Keane as the country's next manager, does it? Yes, if various reports in the English media today are to be believed. Which they shouldn't be. Because the claims seem to have been spawned by nothing more reliable than two openly speculative opinion pieces that appeared in the Irish press last Sunday. There are no quotes to support them, no views from nebulous "sources", no tangible indication that either the player or the association is giving the matter any serious thought whatsoever.
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's true that the FAI works in mysterious ways - Mick McCarthy was appointed in 1996 after four humdrum seasons in charge of Millwall at a time when Joe Kinnear, then working miracles with Wimbledon, was pleading for the post. Even the ultimately successful appointment of Jack Charlton baffled most observers at the time, who had believed it was a run-off between local favourite Liam Tuohy and Liverpool legend Bob Paisley. So a move for total novice Keane is not impossible, especially given that another of the country's great midfield generals, John Giles, served as player/manager in 1975 when simultaneously managing West Bromwich Albion.
It's also true that, a lot like in 2003, when Kerr was appointed, there are no obviously outstanding candidates. But the only fact that the speculation about the Irish job really reveals is that the current incumbent, Brian Kerr, is very unlikely to get a contract renewal when his current deal expires in 2006. And in this observer's opinion, he will not deserve one.
That may seem a reckless statement given that Ireland, with two games left to play, could still top their group. But I believe they won't, nor will they sneak into a play-off spot. The momentum is with the opposition, Ireland are missing several key players through injury and suspension, and Kerr has made at least one crucial blunder in almost every important match to date. It will be scandalous if Ireland don't qualify - because they have the players and have had the opportunities to win the group relatively comfortably - but that is what is about to happen.
The main gripe against Kerr is his failure to be flexible, to respond to opportunities as they arise. Perhaps this shortcoming is borne of conservatism, perhaps it betrays a technocrat's refusal to trust human variables and instead put all his faith in some abstract system (little wonder it was once reported that Gerard Houllier wanted to make Kerr his right-hand man at Liverpool).
It's as clear as the nose on Andy O'Brien's face that Kerr's master plan was to claim away draws against Ireland's three main rivals (France, Switzerland and Israel), then whop them all at home. A reasonable enough theory. What's more, the fixture list teed this scenario up nicely, as Kerr and the FAI, following the strategy successfully used by Mick McCarthy for the 2002 World Cup qualifiers, cajoled the other nations into letting Ireland play all three of their big opponents away first (the French protested, reckoning this would give Ireland an unfair advantage, but they eventually agreed when the Irish claimed they wouldn't be able to host anyone during 2004 or early 2005 because Lansdowne Road would be under renovation).
In all three matches - in Paris, Basel and Tel Aviv - it became obvious that Ireland were the better team and could nick maximum points if they attacked with gusto. In Paris, they met a French team in disarray: confidence was crushed by a shoddy Euro 2004 showing, manager Raymond Domenech was openly at war with several players, and a slew of retirements, injuries and suspensions meant that rather than face Zinedine Zidane, Patrick Vieira and Claude Makelele, the Irish central midfield had to take on 20-year-old debutant Rio Mavuba and Alou Diarra, a player who didn't make a single appearance for Liverpool during three years on Anfield's books.
In Switzerland and Israel, Clinton Morrison scored early but still the Irish couldn't win. The draw in Israel was particularly outrageous, since the Irish were manifestly superior in every department but betrayed an arrogance and/or fear seldom seen from a Republic of Ireland team and began to patronise their opposition by toying with them and playing for time. They deservedly conceded a last-minute equaliser.
The folly of clinging to his plot so rigidly was was rammed home in Dublin last June when Israel refused to roll over and instead stole a 2-2 draw. They were able to do this partially because of an astonishing goalkeeping performance by Dudu Aouate, something Kerr claimed afterwards it was impossible to legislate for. Wrong. If Ireland had taken three points in Tel Aviv (not to mention Paris and Basle), they would have had a cushion to soften the blow of that draw. And besides, would even an inspired Aouate have been able to withstand the pressure if the Irish had made a like-for-like replacement when Robbie Keane got injured in the 27th minute, rather than switching to a 4-5-1? When 2-0 up in the first half. At home. To Israel.
A second area where Kerr has disappointed is motivation. He presided over one of the most soulless displays of any Irish sports team ever when - with qualification for Euro 2004 still a real possibility - his side simply folded to gift, as it happens, Switzerland a 2-0 win.
One of the main reasons he got the job in the first place was because he was reputed to have an excellent relationship with the younger players in the squad, having worked with them successfully at youth level. He himself continually played this up, joshing affectionately about Damien Duff, in particular, in a way that almost suggested he was some kind of father figure to the Chelsea winger.
But he has flagrantly failed to get the best out of Duff, whose performances throughout the campaign have gradually sunk from promising to anonymous, at times even bordering on disinterested. Talk of him disliking Kerr's conservatism is easy to credit.
Duff's worst performance was his last one, in the home clash with France (and can only partially be excused by the fact that the French double-marked him). That was the one match where the Irish attacked, or at least tried to, with genuine gusto from start to finish. But it was an entirely different French side to the one that the Irish had declined to finish off in Paris 11 months previously. Zidane, Vieira and Makelele were all back and their belief was restored. And there was always the chance that one of Les Bleus would come up with the sort of wonder strike that Thierry Henry produced to win the match. But if Ireland had been ambitious and assertive earlier in the campaign, that goal would never have been as damaging.
Given all of the above, how can any Irish fan be confident that Kerr's men will win in Cyprus on Saturday and beat Switzerland in Dublin on Wednesday week? No wonder minds are starting to think of a replacement. But there's no sign that Keane is to be offered the job. Besides, won't he be playing at Celtic? Which reminds me: wonder what Martin O'Neill will be up to by then...
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9753,1584753,00.html
Article continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's true that the FAI works in mysterious ways - Mick McCarthy was appointed in 1996 after four humdrum seasons in charge of Millwall at a time when Joe Kinnear, then working miracles with Wimbledon, was pleading for the post. Even the ultimately successful appointment of Jack Charlton baffled most observers at the time, who had believed it was a run-off between local favourite Liam Tuohy and Liverpool legend Bob Paisley. So a move for total novice Keane is not impossible, especially given that another of the country's great midfield generals, John Giles, served as player/manager in 1975 when simultaneously managing West Bromwich Albion.
It's also true that, a lot like in 2003, when Kerr was appointed, there are no obviously outstanding candidates. But the only fact that the speculation about the Irish job really reveals is that the current incumbent, Brian Kerr, is very unlikely to get a contract renewal when his current deal expires in 2006. And in this observer's opinion, he will not deserve one.
That may seem a reckless statement given that Ireland, with two games left to play, could still top their group. But I believe they won't, nor will they sneak into a play-off spot. The momentum is with the opposition, Ireland are missing several key players through injury and suspension, and Kerr has made at least one crucial blunder in almost every important match to date. It will be scandalous if Ireland don't qualify - because they have the players and have had the opportunities to win the group relatively comfortably - but that is what is about to happen.
The main gripe against Kerr is his failure to be flexible, to respond to opportunities as they arise. Perhaps this shortcoming is borne of conservatism, perhaps it betrays a technocrat's refusal to trust human variables and instead put all his faith in some abstract system (little wonder it was once reported that Gerard Houllier wanted to make Kerr his right-hand man at Liverpool).
It's as clear as the nose on Andy O'Brien's face that Kerr's master plan was to claim away draws against Ireland's three main rivals (France, Switzerland and Israel), then whop them all at home. A reasonable enough theory. What's more, the fixture list teed this scenario up nicely, as Kerr and the FAI, following the strategy successfully used by Mick McCarthy for the 2002 World Cup qualifiers, cajoled the other nations into letting Ireland play all three of their big opponents away first (the French protested, reckoning this would give Ireland an unfair advantage, but they eventually agreed when the Irish claimed they wouldn't be able to host anyone during 2004 or early 2005 because Lansdowne Road would be under renovation).
In all three matches - in Paris, Basel and Tel Aviv - it became obvious that Ireland were the better team and could nick maximum points if they attacked with gusto. In Paris, they met a French team in disarray: confidence was crushed by a shoddy Euro 2004 showing, manager Raymond Domenech was openly at war with several players, and a slew of retirements, injuries and suspensions meant that rather than face Zinedine Zidane, Patrick Vieira and Claude Makelele, the Irish central midfield had to take on 20-year-old debutant Rio Mavuba and Alou Diarra, a player who didn't make a single appearance for Liverpool during three years on Anfield's books.
In Switzerland and Israel, Clinton Morrison scored early but still the Irish couldn't win. The draw in Israel was particularly outrageous, since the Irish were manifestly superior in every department but betrayed an arrogance and/or fear seldom seen from a Republic of Ireland team and began to patronise their opposition by toying with them and playing for time. They deservedly conceded a last-minute equaliser.
The folly of clinging to his plot so rigidly was was rammed home in Dublin last June when Israel refused to roll over and instead stole a 2-2 draw. They were able to do this partially because of an astonishing goalkeeping performance by Dudu Aouate, something Kerr claimed afterwards it was impossible to legislate for. Wrong. If Ireland had taken three points in Tel Aviv (not to mention Paris and Basle), they would have had a cushion to soften the blow of that draw. And besides, would even an inspired Aouate have been able to withstand the pressure if the Irish had made a like-for-like replacement when Robbie Keane got injured in the 27th minute, rather than switching to a 4-5-1? When 2-0 up in the first half. At home. To Israel.
A second area where Kerr has disappointed is motivation. He presided over one of the most soulless displays of any Irish sports team ever when - with qualification for Euro 2004 still a real possibility - his side simply folded to gift, as it happens, Switzerland a 2-0 win.
One of the main reasons he got the job in the first place was because he was reputed to have an excellent relationship with the younger players in the squad, having worked with them successfully at youth level. He himself continually played this up, joshing affectionately about Damien Duff, in particular, in a way that almost suggested he was some kind of father figure to the Chelsea winger.
But he has flagrantly failed to get the best out of Duff, whose performances throughout the campaign have gradually sunk from promising to anonymous, at times even bordering on disinterested. Talk of him disliking Kerr's conservatism is easy to credit.
Duff's worst performance was his last one, in the home clash with France (and can only partially be excused by the fact that the French double-marked him). That was the one match where the Irish attacked, or at least tried to, with genuine gusto from start to finish. But it was an entirely different French side to the one that the Irish had declined to finish off in Paris 11 months previously. Zidane, Vieira and Makelele were all back and their belief was restored. And there was always the chance that one of Les Bleus would come up with the sort of wonder strike that Thierry Henry produced to win the match. But if Ireland had been ambitious and assertive earlier in the campaign, that goal would never have been as damaging.
Given all of the above, how can any Irish fan be confident that Kerr's men will win in Cyprus on Saturday and beat Switzerland in Dublin on Wednesday week? No wonder minds are starting to think of a replacement. But there's no sign that Keane is to be offered the job. Besides, won't he be playing at Celtic? Which reminds me: wonder what Martin O'Neill will be up to by then...
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9753,1584753,00.html
