Liverpool FC Forum

GYBS wrote:

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

when did he ever play 8 out of 10 for us ? certainly wasnt enough times.

And yeah Bob can understand its not the best policy but maybe they wanted to save a bit of bit money to get a real top quality striker or player in during the summer and now they can with the money saved with keane

Are you still going on about Keane?
I though I said forget about him

Seriously though just clear this point up for me:
Did Rafa want Keane in the first place or was he forced on him?
If he wanted him why didnt he give him time to settle?
If he didnt want him why did he play him at all if he was only looking for a way to get rid of him?
Cheers

GYBS wrote:max if you havent got anything more worthwhile than to insult me suggest you just keep it quiet and stick to your riddles while the grown ups talk football .

funny you mention riddles when you're the one often asking stupid questions, cause arguments and post stupid pics of a broken record over 6 times. hypocrite.

and no Max its not a bad day  its just the red-font yank.

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

Flight wrote:Keane was given more than a chance. He started 14 out of the first 17 games.

And the tabloid lies about him being dropped after scoring are rubbish. That happened twice - one was against Newcastle, when he had just played two games in five days (and was also our best performance of the season) and the other was against Spurs when he didn't even make the bench.

Every chance he got he was extremely poor. The most telling thing and the last straw was that his team mates stopped looking for him with the ball.

He bottled it and wasn't capable of learning what the training staff were trying to teach him.

Flight wrote:

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

Keane was given more than a chance. He started 14 out of the first 17 games.

And the tabloid lies about him being dropped after scoring are rubbish. That happened twice - one was against Newcastle, when he had just played two games in five days (and was also our best performance of the season) and the other was against Spurs when he didn't even make the bench.

Every chance he got he was extremely poor. The most telling thing and the last straw was that his team mates stopped looking for him with the ball.

He bottled it and wasn't capable of learning what the training staff were trying to teach him.

He started 13 out of the first 17 games, made four subs appearances of 5, 4, 20 and 1 mins respectively. He started 15 of the first 19 games.

Bit harsh to say "Every chance he got he was extremely poor", he missed chances but he wasn't poor every game and it was mainly his misses that got the criticism.

I'd love to know the real reason he was a) bought and b) sold, rather than theories on here. Someone felt he was worth paying £20.3m for, why then did someone (possibly someone else) decide to sell six months down the line?!? A goal every four appearances isn't great, but six months isn't a long time to turn it around.

Then again maybe the selective fans on here deserved him being sold, the ones that backed Keane when they didn't do the same for Voronin :-

Voronin - 6 goals in 28 apps (1586 mins, 264 mins/goal)
Keane - 7 goals in 28 apps (1801 mins, 257 mins/goal)

Keane scored 3 goals in his last 5 appearances in a Liverpool shirt, Voronin scored 2 goals in his last 5 appearances and in a Liverpool shirt. Keane was back by a few on here, was Voronin?!? 

Owzat wrote:

Flight wrote:

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

Keane was given more than a chance. He started 14 out of the first 17 games.

And the tabloid lies about him being dropped after scoring are rubbish. That happened twice - one was against Newcastle, when he had just played two games in five days (and was also our best performance of the season) and the other was against Spurs when he didn't even make the bench.

Every chance he got he was extremely poor. The most telling thing and the last straw was that his team mates stopped looking for him with the ball.

He bottled it and wasn't capable of learning what the training staff were trying to teach him.

He started 13 out of the first 17 games, made four subs appearances of 5, 4, 20 and 1 mins respectively. He started 15 of the first 19 games.

Bit harsh to say "Every chance he got he was extremely poor", he missed chances but he wasn't poor every game and it was mainly his misses that got the criticism.

I'd love to know the real reason he was a) bought and b) sold, rather than theories on here. Someone felt he was worth paying £20.3m for, why then did someone (possibly someone else) decide to sell six months down the line?!? A goal every four appearances isn't great, but six months isn't a long time to turn it around.

Then again maybe the selective fans on here deserved him being sold, the ones that backed Keane when they didn't do the same for Voronin :-

Voronin - 6 goals in 28 apps (1586 mins, 264 mins/goal)
Keane - 7 goals in 28 apps (1801 mins, 257 mins/goal)

Keane scored 3 goals in his last 5 appearances in a Liverpool shirt, Voronin scored 2 goals in his last 5 appearances and in a Liverpool shirt. Keane was back by a few on here, was Voronin?!? 

Owzat wrote:

Flight wrote:

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

Keane was given more than a chance. He started 14 out of the first 17 games.

And the tabloid lies about him being dropped after scoring are rubbish. That happened twice - one was against Newcastle, when he had just played two games in five days (and was also our best performance of the season) and the other was against Spurs when he didn't even make the bench.

Every chance he got he was extremely poor. The most telling thing and the last straw was that his team mates stopped looking for him with the ball.

He bottled it and wasn't capable of learning what the training staff were trying to teach him.

He started 13 out of the first 17 games, made four subs appearances of 5, 4, 20 and 1 mins respectively. He started 15 of the first 19 games.

Bit harsh to say "Every chance he got he was extremely poor", he missed chances but he wasn't poor every game and it was mainly his misses that got the criticism.

I'd love to know the real reason he was a) bought and b) sold, rather than theories on here. Someone felt he was worth paying £20.3m for, why then did someone (possibly someone else) decide to sell six months down the line?!? A goal every four appearances isn't great, but six months isn't a long time to turn it around.

Then again maybe the selective fans on here deserved him being sold, the ones that backed Keane when they didn't do the same for Voronin :-

Voronin - 6 goals in 28 apps (1586 mins, 264 mins/goal)
Keane - 7 goals in 28 apps (1801 mins, 257 mins/goal)

Keane scored 3 goals in his last 5 appearances in a Liverpool shirt, Voronin scored 2 goals in his last 5 appearances and in a Liverpool shirt. Keane was back by a few on here, was Voronin?!? 

Owzat wrote:

Flight wrote:

oreilly wrote:

maybe he sodl him so we wouldnt pay the price, as if we sold him in the summer we would have had to pay spurs the full amount and wouldnt have got half of it back

Keane is a 8 out of 10 player. Maybe not a Torres or Gerrard. He certaintly deserved to be given a chance and people should have played to his strength, Rafa's arrogance and stubborn attitude towards forbidding any player to play with their natural flair as opposed to his maths of football is ruining liverpools rep worldwide, no neutral likes to watch us!

Keane was given more than a chance. He started 14 out of the first 17 games.

And the tabloid lies about him being dropped after scoring are rubbish. That happened twice - one was against Newcastle, when he had just played two games in five days (and was also our best performance of the season) and the other was against Spurs when he didn't even make the bench.

Every chance he got he was extremely poor. The most telling thing and the last straw was that his team mates stopped looking for him with the ball.

He bottled it and wasn't capable of learning what the training staff were trying to teach him.

He started 13 out of the first 17 games, made four subs appearances of 5, 4, 20 and 1 mins respectively. He started 15 of the first 19 games.

Bit harsh to say "Every chance he got he was extremely poor", he missed chances but he wasn't poor every game and it was mainly his misses that got the criticism.

I'd love to know the real reason he was a) bought and b) sold, rather than theories on here. Someone felt he was worth paying £20.3m for, why then did someone (possibly someone else) decide to sell six months down the line?!? A goal every four appearances isn't great, but six months isn't a long time to turn it around.

Then again maybe the selective fans on here deserved him being sold, the ones that backed Keane when they didn't do the same for Voronin :-

Voronin - 6 goals in 28 apps (1586 mins, 264 mins/goal)
Keane - 7 goals in 28 apps (1801 mins, 257 mins/goal)

Keane scored 3 goals in his last 5 appearances in a Liverpool shirt, Voronin scored 2 goals in his last 5 appearances and in a Liverpool shirt. Keane was back by a few on here, was Voronin?!?