The Kevin Keegan thread

[Frazzle]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

 

 

He's a shrewd journalist in that he realises that you can win just as many readers by writing what people want to hear as you can by writing a load of controversial, complaint inspiring nonsense like the majority of journalists do.

 

That article is just that, what a lot of people want to hear.

Or what some spoilt numpties don't like to hear...

 

The last sentence of bobyule wasn't there when I first replied. What a load of nonsense. Reducing Keegan's managerial credentials on a lack of trophies is so ignorant that you hardly can take it serious.

 

Anyway. Football isn't about winning, it's about how you play. © Johan Cruijff

 

I'd agree the last sentence of bobyule's post isn't right at all.

 

Well taking a look at the records, I see that Cruyff won 24 trophies as a player, and 11 as a manager. You don't get a haul like that if winning isn't important to you.

 

Winning shouldn't be the only thing, but it is important. Surely.

 

There's a difference between being a good manager and being a winner. A winner has a bit of steel which takes them through the inevitably dodgy times when things aren't going well and everyone's saying how crap you are. It also helps if you have good ideas and good judgement that you feel you can rely on. That way when you're under pressure you still think clearly.

 

For me, Keegan fails on both counts.

 

Don't agree with you there bob. I think Keegan always had a very clear vision of what he wanted and to his credit he never wavered from it in that for him football had to be about entertainment. He isn't flawless by any means but he was never fuzzy on that one.

 

Well fair point, but the entertainment at all costs is a bit of a cop-out, because no-one likes losing. When Keegan had his head in his hands when Liverpool beat us 4-3, he wasn't thinking, what an entertaining game. He was hurting.

 

I guess you could describe the commitment to attacking football at all times, and the neglect of defence, a 'clear vision'. But there are times when the brave decision is to batten down the hatches and admit that victory is the most important. I don't know if you saw the 'Time of Our Lives' programme with Ginola, Bez and Howey, but they oozed frustration at the team's inability to finish the job. Charging forward at all times can be like a refusal to face up to the situation you're really in. You can say afterwards, 'We may have lost but we had a good go', but it's like you're denying how important winning really is to you.

 

I've said this before, but the game that really cost us was Blackburn away, about a month before the end of the season, and it really epitomised what was lacking in Keegan's approach. If you remember, we went 1-0 up with 10 minutes to go, and all of a sudden we were back in pole position in the race with Man U. (If we'd won, we'd have gone into the final home match only needing a win to make sure of the title)

 

What happened though was the most awesome collective nervous breakdown. We were absolutely terrible, needing a tactical decision but not getting one. We needed to defend, but we didn't have the mentality or the nous to do that. We were also too nervous to attack, and ended up conceding two soft goals.

 

I guess that the failure to decide to defend, or to prepare any kind of defensive strategy on Keegan's part, wasn't a sign of strength. It was weakness. Or a lack of brains.

was it weakness or lack of brains that lead alex ferguson to blow a real 12point lead over arsenal  2 seasons later ?

Was it weakness or lack of brains when Ottmar OMG Hitzfeld blew a 1-0 lead in a European Cup Final in injury time?

 

I can't remember what happened with Fergie and Arsenal, but I doubt if it was a lack of nerve. You don't win 40 odd trophies without knowing how to close things out.

 

With Bayern, I'd say it was bad luck. They were the better side and should have won. That kind of thing can happen in football.

 

I can't see the relevance here. Yes, it is possible to lose a lead for reasons other than bottling. That doesn't in itself invalidate my opinion on Keegan in 1996.

so when newcastle lose a 12 point lead it's lack of nerve, when man utd do it must be something else ?

 

It doesn't fit into his world view so it has to be ignored. Others have bad luck with Keegan it is lack of ability.

 

Instead of judging the actual achievements under the circumstances and in this kind of style looking for the flaws is a bit simplistic and unfair if you ask me, espercially when persisting on those stupid myths of the 12 point lead and the poor defensive record. I am not sure or rather seriously doubt that any other manager would have been able to achieve the same with Newcastle in these years.

 

A more pertinent question is why Ferguson and Hitzfeld have won so many major trophies and Keegan hasn't won any. I'd say that was more than luck.

 

Ferguson is obviously a top manager but as I've said before he was gifted about eight  internationals (a couple world class) for nothing in the likes of Beckham, Neville x 2, Scholes, Giggs, Butt etc.  That made his job a lot easier.

[madras]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

 

 

He's a shrewd journalist in that he realises that you can win just as many readers by writing what people want to hear as you can by writing a load of controversial, complaint inspiring nonsense like the majority of journalists do.

 

That article is just that, what a lot of people want to hear.

Or what some spoilt numpties don't like to hear...

 

The last sentence of bobyule wasn't there when I first replied. What a load of nonsense. Reducing Keegan's managerial credentials on a lack of trophies is so ignorant that you hardly can take it serious.

 

Anyway. Football isn't about winning, it's about how you play. © Johan Cruijff

 

I'd agree the last sentence of bobyule's post isn't right at all.

 

Well taking a look at the records, I see that Cruyff won 24 trophies as a player, and 11 as a manager. You don't get a haul like that if winning isn't important to you.

 

Winning shouldn't be the only thing, but it is important. Surely.

 

There's a difference between being a good manager and being a winner. A winner has a bit of steel which takes them through the inevitably dodgy times when things aren't going well and everyone's saying how crap you are. It also helps if you have good ideas and good judgement that you feel you can rely on. That way when you're under pressure you still think clearly.

 

For me, Keegan fails on both counts.

 

Don't agree with you there bob. I think Keegan always had a very clear vision of what he wanted and to his credit he never wavered from it in that for him football had to be about entertainment. He isn't flawless by any means but he was never fuzzy on that one.

 

Well fair point, but the entertainment at all costs is a bit of a cop-out, because no-one likes losing. When Keegan had his head in his hands when Liverpool beat us 4-3, he wasn't thinking, what an entertaining game. He was hurting.

 

I guess you could describe the commitment to attacking football at all times, and the neglect of defence, a 'clear vision'. But there are times when the brave decision is to batten down the hatches and admit that victory is the most important. I don't know if you saw the 'Time of Our Lives' programme with Ginola, Bez and Howey, but they oozed frustration at the team's inability to finish the job. Charging forward at all times can be like a refusal to face up to the situation you're really in. You can say afterwards, 'We may have lost but we had a good go', but it's like you're denying how important winning really is to you.

 

I've said this before, but the game that really cost us was Blackburn away, about a month before the end of the season, and it really epitomised what was lacking in Keegan's approach. If you remember, we went 1-0 up with 10 minutes to go, and all of a sudden we were back in pole position in the race with Man U. (If we'd won, we'd have gone into the final home match only needing a win to make sure of the title)

 

What happened though was the most awesome collective nervous breakdown. We were absolutely terrible, needing a tactical decision but not getting one. We needed to defend, but we didn't have the mentality or the nous to do that. We were also too nervous to attack, and ended up conceding two soft goals.

 

I guess that the failure to decide to defend, or to prepare any kind of defensive strategy on Keegan's part, wasn't a sign of strength. It was weakness. Or a lack of brains.

was it weakness or lack of brains that lead alex ferguson to blow a real 12point lead over arsenal  2 seasons later ?

Was it weakness or lack of brains when Ottmar OMG Hitzfeld blew a 1-0 lead in a European Cup Final in injury time?

 

I can't remember what happened with Fergie and Arsenal, but I doubt if it was a lack of nerve. You don't win 40 odd trophies without knowing how to close things out.

 

With Bayern, I'd say it was bad luck. They were the better side and should have won. That kind of thing can happen in football.

 

I can't see the relevance here. Yes, it is possible to lose a lead for reasons other than bottling. That doesn't in itself invalidate my opinion on Keegan in 1996.

so when newcastle lose a 12 point lead it's lack of nerve, when man utd do it must be something else ?

 

It doesn't fit into his world view so it has to be ignored. Others have bad luck with Keegan it is lack of ability.

 

Instead of judging the actual achievements under the circumstances and in this kind of style looking for the flaws is a bit simplistic and unfair if you ask me, espercially when persisting on those stupid myths of the 12 point lead and the poor defensive record. I am not sure or rather seriously doubt that any other manager would have been able to achieve the same with Newcastle in these years.

 

A more pertinent question is why Ferguson and Hitzfeld have won so many major trophies and Keegan hasn't won any. I'd say that was more than luck.

because fegruson spent a long time at a club who for years could outspend just about everyone. keegan spent 2 years in that position and came very close....how long did it take ferguson to win the league whilst laying claim to being the biggest club in the world ?

 

maybe the question should be given what ferguson inherited at man utd both on and off the pitch..what took him so long ?

[NJS]

 

A more pertinent question is why Ferguson and Hitzfeld have won so many major trophies and Keegan hasn't won any. I'd say that was more than luck.

 

Has anyone said that Keegan is/was a better manager than those or the best manager ever in the universe?

 

The point is he did wonders with Newcastle and was piss unlucky not to go all the way - to abuse a man for that and call him a loser is fucking pathetic.

 

 

 

[cp40]

No news from the panel yet then. Looks like it is going to be weeks rather than days before we find out 

 

 

just the news this thread needs.

[Cronky]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have fucked Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

[madras]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have f***ed Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

i'm not so sure the winning mentality exists. if it did what happened to man utd's 2 seasons after it won them the league instead of us ?

 

what happened to arsenal winning mentality after their lossless season ?

 

is it not really a belief that you are better than the opposition often based on the fact that you are better than the opposition ?

[Isegrim]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

 

 

He's a shrewd journalist in that he realises that you can win just as many readers by writing what people want to hear as you can by writing a load of controversial, complaint inspiring nonsense like the majority of journalists do.

 

That article is just that, what a lot of people want to hear.

Or what some spoilt numpties don't like to hear...

 

The last sentence of bobyule wasn't there when I first replied. What a load of nonsense. Reducing Keegan's managerial credentials on a lack of trophies is so ignorant that you hardly can take it serious.

 

Anyway. Football isn't about winning, it's about how you play. © Johan Cruijff

 

I'd agree the last sentence of bobyule's post isn't right at all.

 

Well taking a look at the records, I see that Cruyff won 24 trophies as a player, and 11 as a manager. You don't get a haul like that if winning isn't important to you.

 

Winning shouldn't be the only thing, but it is important. Surely.

 

There's a difference between being a good manager and being a winner. A winner has a bit of steel which takes them through the inevitably dodgy times when things aren't going well and everyone's saying how crap you are. It also helps if you have good ideas and good judgement that you feel you can rely on. That way when you're under pressure you still think clearly.

 

For me, Keegan fails on both counts.

 

Don't agree with you there bob. I think Keegan always had a very clear vision of what he wanted and to his credit he never wavered from it in that for him football had to be about entertainment. He isn't flawless by any means but he was never fuzzy on that one.

 

Well fair point, but the entertainment at all costs is a bit of a cop-out, because no-one likes losing. When Keegan had his head in his hands when Liverpool beat us 4-3, he wasn't thinking, what an entertaining game. He was hurting.

 

I guess you could describe the commitment to attacking football at all times, and the neglect of defence, a 'clear vision'. But there are times when the brave decision is to batten down the hatches and admit that victory is the most important. I don't know if you saw the 'Time of Our Lives' programme with Ginola, Bez and Howey, but they oozed frustration at the team's inability to finish the job. Charging forward at all times can be like a refusal to face up to the situation you're really in. You can say afterwards, 'We may have lost but we had a good go', but it's like you're denying how important winning really is to you.

 

I've said this before, but the game that really cost us was Blackburn away, about a month before the end of the season, and it really epitomised what was lacking in Keegan's approach. If you remember, we went 1-0 up with 10 minutes to go, and all of a sudden we were back in pole position in the race with Man U. (If we'd won, we'd have gone into the final home match only needing a win to make sure of the title)

 

What happened though was the most awesome collective nervous breakdown. We were absolutely terrible, needing a tactical decision but not getting one. We needed to defend, but we didn't have the mentality or the nous to do that. We were also too nervous to attack, and ended up conceding two soft goals.

 

I guess that the failure to decide to defend, or to prepare any kind of defensive strategy on Keegan's part, wasn't a sign of strength. It was weakness. Or a lack of brains.

was it weakness or lack of brains that lead alex ferguson to blow a real 12point lead over arsenal  2 seasons later ?

Was it weakness or lack of brains when Ottmar OMG Hitzfeld blew a 1-0 lead in a European Cup Final in injury time?

 

I can't remember what happened with Fergie and Arsenal, but I doubt if it was a lack of nerve. You don't win 40 odd trophies without knowing how to close things out.

 

With Bayern, I'd say it was bad luck. They were the better side and should have won. That kind of thing can happen in football.

 

I can't see the relevance here. Yes, it is possible to lose a lead for reasons other than bottling. That doesn't in itself invalidate my opinion on Keegan in 1996.

so when newcastle lose a 12 point lead it's lack of nerve, when man utd do it must be something else ?

 

It doesn't fit into his world view so it has to be ignored. Others have bad luck with Keegan it is lack of ability.

 

Instead of judging the actual achievements under the circumstances and in this kind of style looking for the flaws is a bit simplistic and unfair if you ask me, espercially when persisting on those stupid myths of the 12 point lead and the poor defensive record. I am not sure or rather seriously doubt that any other manager would have been able to achieve the same with Newcastle in these years.

 

A more pertinent question is why Ferguson and Hitzfeld have won so many major trophies and Keegan hasn't won any. I'd say that was more than luck.

 

Hitzfeld needed a couple of years and an amount of funds that nearly bancrupted a club that is still suffering from this more than 10 years later...

 

I am not saying that Keegan is a better manager than the likes of Ferguson, Hitzfeld or Wenger. But he did a damn good piece of work during his stint in the 90s that even without winning a trophy was a success in itself that wouldn't have been achieved by many others - if at all. Devaluing this is ignorance at best.

[TRon]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

 

 

He's a shrewd journalist in that he realises that you can win just as many readers by writing what people want to hear as you can by writing a load of controversial, complaint inspiring nonsense like the majority of journalists do.

 

That article is just that, what a lot of people want to hear.

Or what some spoilt numpties don't like to hear...

 

The last sentence of bobyule wasn't there when I first replied. What a load of nonsense. Reducing Keegan's managerial credentials on a lack of trophies is so ignorant that you hardly can take it serious.

 

Anyway. Football isn't about winning, it's about how you play. © Johan Cruijff

 

I'd agree the last sentence of bobyule's post isn't right at all.

 

Well taking a look at the records, I see that Cruyff won 24 trophies as a player, and 11 as a manager. You don't get a haul like that if winning isn't important to you.

 

Winning shouldn't be the only thing, but it is important. Surely.

 

There's a difference between being a good manager and being a winner. A winner has a bit of steel which takes them through the inevitably dodgy times when things aren't going well and everyone's saying how crap you are. It also helps if you have good ideas and good judgement that you feel you can rely on. That way when you're under pressure you still think clearly.

 

For me, Keegan fails on both counts.

 

Don't agree with you there bob. I think Keegan always had a very clear vision of what he wanted and to his credit he never wavered from it in that for him football had to be about entertainment. He isn't flawless by any means but he was never fuzzy on that one.

 

Well fair point, but the entertainment at all costs is a bit of a cop-out, because no-one likes losing. When Keegan had his head in his hands when Liverpool beat us 4-3, he wasn't thinking, what an entertaining game. He was hurting.

 

I guess you could describe the commitment to attacking football at all times, and the neglect of defence, a 'clear vision'. But there are times when the brave decision is to batten down the hatches and admit that victory is the most important. I don't know if you saw the 'Time of Our Lives' programme with Ginola, Bez and Howey, but they oozed frustration at the team's inability to finish the job. Charging forward at all times can be like a refusal to face up to the situation you're really in. You can say afterwards, 'We may have lost but we had a good go', but it's like you're denying how important winning really is to you.

 

I've said this before, but the game that really cost us was Blackburn away, about a month before the end of the season, and it really epitomised what was lacking in Keegan's approach. If you remember, we went 1-0 up with 10 minutes to go, and all of a sudden we were back in pole position in the race with Man U. (If we'd won, we'd have gone into the final home match only needing a win to make sure of the title)

 

What happened though was the most awesome collective nervous breakdown. We were absolutely terrible, needing a tactical decision but not getting one. We needed to defend, but we didn't have the mentality or the nous to do that. We were also too nervous to attack, and ended up conceding two soft goals.

 

I guess that the failure to decide to defend, or to prepare any kind of defensive strategy on Keegan's part, wasn't a sign of strength. It was weakness. Or a lack of brains.

was it weakness or lack of brains that lead alex ferguson to blow a real 12point lead over arsenal  2 seasons later ?

Was it weakness or lack of brains when Ottmar OMG Hitzfeld blew a 1-0 lead in a European Cup Final in injury time?

 

I can't remember what happened with Fergie and Arsenal, but I doubt if it was a lack of nerve. You don't win 40 odd trophies without knowing how to close things out.

 

With Bayern, I'd say it was bad luck. They were the better side and should have won. That kind of thing can happen in football.

 

I can't see the relevance here. Yes, it is possible to lose a lead for reasons other than bottling. That doesn't in itself invalidate my opinion on Keegan in 1996.

so when newcastle lose a 12 point lead it's lack of nerve, when man utd do it must be something else ?

 

It doesn't fit into his world view so it has to be ignored. Others have bad luck with Keegan it is lack of ability.

 

Instead of judging the actual achievements under the circumstances and in this kind of style looking for the flaws is a bit simplistic and unfair if you ask me, espercially when persisting on those stupid myths of the 12 point lead and the poor defensive record. I am not sure or rather seriously doubt that any other manager would have been able to achieve the same with Newcastle in these years.

 

A more pertinent question is why Ferguson and Hitzfeld have won so many major trophies and Keegan hasn't won any. I'd say that was more than luck.

 

Hitzfeld needed a couple of years and an amount of funds that nearly bancrupted a club that is still suffering from this more than 10 years later...

 

I am not saying that Keegan is a better manager than the likes of Ferguson, Hitzfeld or Wenger. But he did a damn good piece of work during his stint in the 90s that even without winning a trophy was a success in itself that wouldn't have been achieved by many others - if at all. Devaluing this is ignorance at best.

 

There was a general feeling around the country that Newcastle had gone as far as they could under Keegan when he left. Whether that was true or not we can only speculate, but it's too easy to take for granted just what was achieved at the time. Keegan might not have been able to improve on what he built but the fact that we haven't been able to get close to those standards since shouldn't be ignored either.

[UV]

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

The people in this thread sticking up for Keegan's ability are the only ones quoting facts. It's the Keegan bashers who just keep bringing up tired old discredited clichés about 12 point leads, naive tactics, a poor defence, etc and pointing to the results of one-off games as if they're the ultimate proof of some greater point.

 

The reality is that in 4 years Keegan took a team which was almost relegated from Division 2 to one which was within 1 game of winning the league (a game which we absolutely dominated and but for the outstanding individual talent of one of the opposition players would have won at a canter).

 

Are you sure your irrational hatred of Keegan isn't blinding you to the truth?

 

 

Here's a question for you. Let's put reality to one side for a moment and say that you're right for once and Keegan's tactical and coaching abilities are poor. In that case how exactly did we manage to get so close to winning in the first place? It can only be because of the sheer quality of the players we had that they somehow managed to do it on their superior skill alone in spite of the hindrance of Keegan's tactics. In that case, surely this makes Keegan one of the best talent spotters in the business does it not? If so, why did you support a system which refused to use his one ability, but gave him a job where he was weak (as you see it)?

 

[PRL]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have fucked Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Ok, they're all fair points, but my original question still stands - who are those, in your time as a Newcastle fan, you have really loved? I can see how it gets annoying with the 'keegan can do no wrong' argument (although i think all but the most blinkered accept this isn't the case), but aren't you at risk of going too far the other way, into the realms of a bit of a misery guts? For anyone between the ages of 20 - 45 I'm going to stick my neck on the line and say the time Keegan was at Newcastle as manager (first time) was their best time as a toon fan. Regardless of title losses, mental breakdowns, walk outs, etc. they were our best times as Newcastle fans. He is the man most responsible for those great times. It's irrelevant whether someone else could have done better with the resources he had at the time, they didn't as they weren't here and we didn't want anyone else here. Yes, recent happenings have tarnished that, but that doesn't stop the fact that what he did was something pretty spectacular. So by all means, hate him for what he's done now (i certainly don't, but that's a different argument) but please don't try and take away from what he did to this club in the early / mid nineties. It was a special time in a lot of people's lives because of what he did. That's not sentimentality from a personal perspective, it's a fact.

[TRon]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have fucked Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Ok, they're all fair points, but my original question still stands - who are those, in your time as a Newcastle fan, you have really loved? I can see how it gets annoying with the 'keegan can do no wrong' argument (although i think all but the most blinkered accept this isn't the case), but aren't you at risk of going too far the other way, into the realms of a bit of a misery guts? For anyone between the ages of 20 - 45 I'm going to stick my neck on the line and say the time Keegan was at Newcastle as manager (first time) was their best time as a toon fan. Regardless of title losses, mental breakdowns, walk outs, etc. they were our best times as Newcastle fans. He is the man most responsible for those great times. It's irrelevant whether someone else could have done better with the resources he had at the time, they didn't as they weren't here and we didn't want anyone else here. Yes, recent happenings have tarnished that, but that doesn't stop the fact that what he did was something pretty spectacular. So by all means, hate him for what he's done now (i certainly don't, but that's a different argument) but please don't try and take away from what he did to this club in the early / mid nineties. It was a special time in a lot of people's lives because of what he did. That's not sentimentality from a personal perspective, it's a fact.

 

Very well said.

[cp40]

Is this thread becoming a biggest post contest?

[Robster]

Is this thread becoming a biggest post contest?

Yes. You lost

[Tooj]

On a general point, when I say that Keegan isn't a winner, that's not a reference to the fact that he hasn't won a major trophy. I'm talking about his mentality, which is more that of a glory hunter, and therefore rather flaky.

 

Sometimes a mediocre manager can fluke a win, and sometimes a good manager can get unlucky and just come up short. Keegan's failure is down to more than bad luck IMO.

 

We only came close to winning something (major) once under Keegan. I don't recall us doing anything in the cups - not even getting to a quarter-final. It was certainly the only season when we came close to winning the league. And the flaws in the Keegan make-up were exposed. It was what Fergie called squeaky-bottom time, when a team has to grind out a result under pressure. All Keegan had in his armoury was the cavalry charge, and when things get tough, that's not enough.

 

I'm sure that when he was a player his mentality was one of the reasons why he achieved so much.

 

It definitely was.

 

But people change, or are changed. I think his confidence has taken a battering. He never seemed quite the same after the "just love it" outburst. Various other things have happened since. The sheer elemental belief that fuelled him – and us – in our early 90s charge for glory seems to be no more. What we see these days is a Kevin with doubts.

 

Without a doubt Ozzie. 

[UV]

hE DINDT HAV ANY DOWTS WHEN HE DECIDED TO TAKE THE CLUB INTO MENSTRUATION!!!!

[OzzieMandias]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have fucked Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Agree completely.

[Keefaz]

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

The people in this thread sticking up for Keegan's ability are the only ones quoting facts. It's the Keegan bashers who just keep bringing up tired old discredited clichés about 12 point leads, naive tactics, a poor defence, etc and pointing to the results of one-off games as if they're the ultimate proof of some greater point.

 

The reality is that in 4 years Keegan took a team which was almost relegated from Division 2 to one which was within 1 game of winning the league (a game which we absolutely dominated and but for the outstanding individual talent of one of the opposition players would have won at a canter).

 

Are you sure your irrational hatred of Keegan isn't blinding you to the truth?

 

 

Here's a question for you. Let's put reality to one side for a moment and say that you're right for once and Keegan's tactical and coaching abilities are poor. In that case how exactly did we manage to get so close to winning in the first place? It can only be because of the sheer quality of the players we had that they somehow managed to do it on their superior skill alone in spite of the hindrance of Keegan's tactics. In that case, surely this makes Keegan one of the best talent spotters in the business does it not? If so, why did you support a system which refused to use his one ability, but gave him a job where he was weak (as you see it)?

 

 

Good post.

[Cronky]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have fucked Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Ok, they're all fair points, but my original question still stands - who are those, in your time as a Newcastle fan, you have really loved? I can see how it gets annoying with the 'keegan can do no wrong' argument (although i think all but the most blinkered accept this isn't the case), but aren't you at risk of going too far the other way, into the realms of a bit of a misery guts? For anyone between the ages of 20 - 45 I'm going to stick my neck on the line and say the time Keegan was at Newcastle as manager (first time) was their best time as a toon fan. Regardless of title losses, mental breakdowns, walk outs, etc. they were our best times as Newcastle fans. He is the man most responsible for those great times. It's irrelevant whether someone else could have done better with the resources he had at the time, they didn't as they weren't here and we didn't want anyone else here. Yes, recent happenings have tarnished that, but that doesn't stop the fact that what he did was something pretty spectacular. So by all means, hate him for what he's done now (i certainly don't, but that's a different argument) but please don't try and take away from what he did to this club in the early / mid nineties. It was a special time in a lot of people's lives because of what he did. That's not sentimentality from a personal perspective, it's a fact.

 

I'm still passionate about our club, and football in general. At times it feels more like an obsession than love, but the desire is still there. I've loved watching certain players in action - Tony Green, Gazza, Rob Lee, Beardsley, Bellamy and Shearer (before his decline) are particular favourites.

 

I don't know if you're any the wiser there. I'm aware that I was pissing on people's parade a bit with my take on the Caulkin article and that's why I might have seemed a misery. Maybe I should have let it pass but there was something there that really annoyed me.

 

I enjoyed the Keegan rise to the top just like everyone else. I think I enjoyed Sir Bob's upward charge more because I really felt the team was over-achieving, but yeah, of course there were good times with KK. Keegan's not without his qualities - he showed drive and passion and that was important in energising the whole club and persuading players to join. He wouldn't have done it without the heavy financial backing, but yes overall of course it was an achievement.

 

But we didn't win any major trophies, and Keegan hasn't done so throughout his managerial career, which has been very stop-start. I don't think that's bad luck. I think there are certain qualities which the real winners have that Keegan lacks. That's all I was saying.

 

I've posted a lot in this thread and I don't want to be repeating myself, but I'll give you a concrete example of what I think separates the Fergusons of this world from the Keegans.

 

It was 1992 when Ferguson had his first real tilt at the title. There was a neck and neck race with Leeds that year, and Man U just lost out, somewhat undeservedly. Now at that time there was real pressure on the Man U manager. They hadn't won the league since 1967, and a string of managers since Matt Busby had tried and failed. It's a bit like Liverpool now, only worse.

 

Ferguson's master stroke was that in the following close season, he bought precisely nobody. The expectation was that he would do what previous Man U managers had done and try and get in those extra one or two players who would supposedly make the difference. Instead, he gave his players the message that they were good enough and so they were able to move forward from failure. That took both guts and brains, because if they'd failed again, everyone would have been pointing at Ferguson's inaction and blaming that.

 

Halfway through the season, he spent a modest £2million on a certain Frenchman who hadn't held down a regular place at Leeds and who had a reputation for indiscipline. It was completely unexpected and regarded as a risk. Again, Ferguson wasn't afraid and backed his own judgement.

 

How did Keegan respond to failure? He went and spent a world record fee on the England centre forward. Shearer was a very good player but scoring wasn't the problem and the money could have been spent somewhere else. He compounded the error by taking the No 9 shirt from last season's leading goalscorer. Halfway through the season, he lost heart and walked.

 

Basically, Ferguson faced up to failure and kept a cool head. Keegan had the stuffing knocked out of him and his nerve and judgement followed. I don't know if you saw that recent 'Time of our Lives' programme with Ginola, Howey and Bez, but what came across was their anger and frustration at Keegan's failure to push on from 2nd place. The mark of the winner is the ability to respond and learn from a setback.

[johnnypd]

it's not bad luck that he hasn't won a trophy, but nor does that make him a bad manager. he is a very good manager with flaws and i think most recognise this, even the ones who are allegedly 'blinded by love'. you seem to be arguing that he is not a great manager like Ferguson - but no one is saying he is. basically you're responding to these imaginary figures who apparently hold keegan up as a god who can do no wrong. but who actually thinks that outside of your imagination?

 

it is fine to focus on his flaws, on the failures that kept us from winning the top prize. but you also have to give him credit based on the fact that we ever got so close to winning it in the first place, taking us from an awful position to the brink of the greatest club side in the country. that in itself is evidence of ability, even if it doesnt automatically put him in the category of ferguson or wenger or mourinho. these manager are clearly a step above. While i think keegan on his day is almost as good as any, he doesn't have that long-term drive that others have where they sustain success, at one club or many, over decades, but instead seems to function in extremely intense bursts that, for a while at least, drives sides on.

 

though i suppose it is testiment to his ability that even his critics jump to compare him with someone like SAF.

[dcmk]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have f***ed Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Ok, they're all fair points, but my original question still stands - who are those, in your time as a Newcastle fan, you have really loved? I can see how it gets annoying with the 'keegan can do no wrong' argument (although i think all but the most blinkered accept this isn't the case), but aren't you at risk of going too far the other way, into the realms of a bit of a misery guts? For anyone between the ages of 20 - 45 I'm going to stick my neck on the line and say the time Keegan was at Newcastle as manager (first time) was their best time as a toon fan. Regardless of title losses, mental breakdowns, walk outs, etc. they were our best times as Newcastle fans. He is the man most responsible for those great times. It's irrelevant whether someone else could have done better with the resources he had at the time, they didn't as they weren't here and we didn't want anyone else here. Yes, recent happenings have tarnished that, but that doesn't stop the fact that what he did was something pretty spectacular. So by all means, hate him for what he's done now (i certainly don't, but that's a different argument) but please don't try and take away from what he did to this club in the early / mid nineties. It was a special time in a lot of people's lives because of what he did. That's not sentimentality from a personal perspective, it's a fact.

 

I'm still passionate about our club, and football in general. At times it feels more like an obsession than love, but the desire is still there. I've loved watching certain players in action - Tony Green, Gazza, Rob Lee, Beardsley, Bellamy and Shearer (before his decline) are particular favourites.

 

I don't know if you're any the wiser there. I'm aware that I was pissing on people's parade a bit with my take on the Caulkin article and that's why I might have seemed a misery. Maybe I should have let it pass but there was something there that really annoyed me.

 

I enjoyed the Keegan rise to the top just like everyone else. I think I enjoyed Sir Bob's upward charge more because I really felt the team was over-achieving, but yeah, of course there were good times with KK. Keegan's not without his qualities - he showed drive and passion and that was important in energising the whole club and persuading players to join. He wouldn't have done it without the heavy financial backing, but yes overall of course it was an achievement.

 

But we didn't win any major trophies, and Keegan hasn't done so throughout his managerial career, which has been very stop-start. I don't think that's bad luck. I think there are certain qualities which the real winners have that Keegan lacks. That's all I was saying.

 

I've posted a lot in this thread and I don't want to be repeating myself, but I'll give you a concrete example of what I think separates the Fergusons of this world from the Keegans.

 

It was 1992 when Ferguson had his first real tilt at the title. There was a neck and neck race with Leeds that year, and Man U just lost out, somewhat undeservedly. Now at that time there was real pressure on the Man U manager. They hadn't won the league since 1967, and a string of managers since Matt Busby had tried and failed. It's a bit like Liverpool now, only worse.

 

Ferguson's master stroke was that in the following close season, he bought precisely nobody. The expectation was that he would do what previous Man U managers had done and try and get in those extra one or two players who would supposedly make the difference. Instead, he gave his players the message that they were good enough and so they were able to move forward from failure. That took both guts and brains, because if they'd failed again, everyone would have been pointing at Ferguson's inaction and blaming that.

 

Halfway through the season, he spent a modest £2million on a certain Frenchman who hadn't held down a regular place at Leeds and who had a reputation for indiscipline. It was completely unexpected and regarded as a risk. Again, Ferguson wasn't afraid and backed his own judgement.

 

How did Keegan respond to failure? He went and spent a world record fee on the England centre forward. Shearer was a very good player but scoring wasn't the problem and the money could have been spent somewhere else. He compounded the error by taking the No 9 shirt from last season's leading goalscorer. Halfway through the season, he lost heart and walked.

 

Basically, Ferguson faced up to failure and kept a cool head. Keegan had the stuffing knocked out of him and his nerve and judgement followed. I don't know if you saw that recent 'Time of our Lives' programme with Ginola, Howey and Bez, but what came across was their anger and frustration at Keegan's failure to push on from 2nd place. The mark of the winner is the ability to respond and learn from a setback.

 

What utter bullshit.

[Tooj]

In response to bobyule;

 

I believe we would have won the title the year before if we'd have had Shearer instead of Ferdinand. Ferdinand's form before Christmas was absolutely phenomenal, yet after Christmas he really struggled at times. This to me was his mentality, he missed a lot of half chances if you will and never was the greatest when he had time to think. Whereas if we'd have had Shearer in that Man Utd game both home and away (were Sir Les also missed a 1 vs 1 with Schmeichel) and those other games were his form alluded him I personally think we would have had enough, as Shearer's mental strength was on another level to Ferdinand's. So I think the signing of him was completely justified, although I agree the No 9 shirt could have been handled in a different way.

 

A lot of people to me see Keegan bottled it, I don't think he did. What let him down as those players who got us into that great position not being able to carry on that form, players such as Sir Les and Rob Lee. Although he was never able to spot a decent keeper for us though. If we'd have had a world class keeper at the time that would have made a lot of difference.

[Tooj]

As you get older and wiser, you learn to be more careful about who you fall in love with. There are glamorous people who promise the earth but are in reality selfish. They end up leaving and hurting you. There are others less attractive who end up delivering the goods. You can carry on not learning the lesson, parading your bleeding heart like it's a badge of honour and end up like a battered wife, or you can build a real relationship. That takes time and patience, of course.

 

Caulkin's articles are like a Chinese meal. Superficially good but lacking substance.

 

Football isn't only about dreaming, it's about winning. Keegan has won nothing. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

 

Apologies to go back to this post, but only just updating myself on this thread. Aside from this being a rather patronising post (look at me, i'm a cynic, i know better than you,but one day you'll learn young padowan) can I ask who the people you fell in love with at Newcastle are, Bob? Not to touch a sensitive area, but i'm guessing you are older than a lot on here, but unless you're over 50 I doubt you have many memories of us winning anything more meaningful than the first (second) division under Keegan and even if over 50, to have allowed yourself to only fall in love with one Newcastle team / manager must be a pretty depressing state of affairs for a big football fan, i'd honestly question why you even bother.

 

To further your analogy and make it slightly more specific as one of the comments on the discussed article did, I'd rather have f***ed Cheryl Cole in the face a few times and have the photos to prove it, even if that meant getting dumped for Ashley fricking Cole and humiliated. As your analogy feels pretty much like one tired cliche, here's another - better to have loved and lost than never loved at all. If someone told me we could have one trophy but none of the Keegan years I know which I would choose. Do you think being a Portsmouth fan and having won an FA Cup against Cardiff would make you feel more excited about the game than watching our team in the 90s?

 

I suppose I took the risk of being patronising, but I was irritated by what I felt was a silly article and the way lots of people were reacting to it.

 

Loving and losing and not loving at all aren't the only options. That's the point. The winning mentality combines passion with the ability to think clearly, remain focused and remain strong when things are going against you.

 

Another problem with falling in love is that you can lose sight of reality. That's what seems to happen with a lot of supporters of Keegan.

 

An issue with our club is this tendency to indulge in hero-worship. At times, it feels like a substitute for success, or at least it acts like a block to it.

 

Ok, they're all fair points, but my original question still stands - who are those, in your time as a Newcastle fan, you have really loved? I can see how it gets annoying with the 'keegan can do no wrong' argument (although i think all but the most blinkered accept this isn't the case), but aren't you at risk of going too far the other way, into the realms of a bit of a misery guts? For anyone between the ages of 20 - 45 I'm going to stick my neck on the line and say the time Keegan was at Newcastle as manager (first time) was their best time as a toon fan. Regardless of title losses, mental breakdowns, walk outs, etc. they were our best times as Newcastle fans. He is the man most responsible for those great times. It's irrelevant whether someone else could have done better with the resources he had at the time, they didn't as they weren't here and we didn't want anyone else here. Yes, recent happenings have tarnished that, but that doesn't stop the fact that what he did was something pretty spectacular. So by all means, hate him for what he's done now (i certainly don't, but that's a different argument) but please don't try and take away from what he did to this club in the early / mid nineties. It was a special time in a lot of people's lives because of what he did. That's not sentimentality from a personal perspective, it's a fact.

 

I'm still passionate about our club, and football in general. At times it feels more like an obsession than love, but the desire is still there. I've loved watching certain players in action - Tony Green, Gazza, Rob Lee, Beardsley, Bellamy and Shearer (before his decline) are particular favourites.

 

I don't know if you're any the wiser there. I'm aware that I was pissing on people's parade a bit with my take on the Caulkin article and that's why I might have seemed a misery. Maybe I should have let it pass but there was something there that really annoyed me.

 

I enjoyed the Keegan rise to the top just like everyone else. I think I enjoyed Sir Bob's upward charge more because I really felt the team was over-achieving, but yeah, of course there were good times with KK. Keegan's not without his qualities - he showed drive and passion and that was important in energising the whole club and persuading players to join. He wouldn't have done it without the heavy financial backing, but yes overall of course it was an achievement.

 

But we didn't win any major trophies, and Keegan hasn't done so throughout his managerial career, which has been very stop-start. I don't think that's bad luck. I think there are certain qualities which the real winners have that Keegan lacks. That's all I was saying.

 

I've posted a lot in this thread and I don't want to be repeating myself, but I'll give you a concrete example of what I think separates the Fergusons of this world from the Keegans.

 

It was 1992 when Ferguson had his first real tilt at the title. There was a neck and neck race with Leeds that year, and Man U just lost out, somewhat undeservedly. Now at that time there was real pressure on the Man U manager. They hadn't won the league since 1967, and a string of managers since Matt Busby had tried and failed. It's a bit like Liverpool now, only worse.

 

Ferguson's master stroke was that in the following close season, he bought precisely nobody. The expectation was that he would do what previous Man U managers had done and try and get in those extra one or two players who would supposedly make the difference. Instead, he gave his players the message that they were good enough and so they were able to move forward from failure. That took both guts and brains, because if they'd failed again, everyone would have been pointing at Ferguson's inaction and blaming that.

 

Halfway through the season, he spent a modest £2million on a certain Frenchman who hadn't held down a regular place at Leeds and who had a reputation for indiscipline. It was completely unexpected and regarded as a risk. Again, Ferguson wasn't afraid and backed his own judgement.

 

How did Keegan respond to failure? He went and spent a world record fee on the England centre forward. Shearer was a very good player but scoring wasn't the problem and the money could have been spent somewhere else. He compounded the error by taking the No 9 shirt from last season's leading goalscorer. Halfway through the season, he lost heart and walked.

 

Basically, Ferguson faced up to failure and kept a cool head. Keegan had the stuffing knocked out of him and his nerve and judgement followed. I don't know if you saw that recent 'Time of our Lives' programme with Ginola, Howey and Bez, but what came across was their anger and frustration at Keegan's failure to push on from 2nd place. The mark of the winner is the ability to respond and learn from a setback.

 

What utter bullshit.

 

I was going to say. They were more angered at him leaving, especially Ginola who promised to stay for Keegan. Not his inability to build on the 2nd place.

[Guest afternoonfix]

wonder if keegan is watching the team he 'loves'?

[Guest Heneage]

wonder if keegan is watching the team he 'loves'?

Liverpool were on last night mate.

[Tooj]

wonder if keegan is watching the team he 'loves'?

 

Wolves?