Why was Roy Keane never ranked in World/Euro player of the year?

censuspro · 03-02-2010 03:41PM #1

Just following on from one of my threads. I noticed that Roy Keane was not ranked in the World Soccer Magazine Player of the Decade Top 50. I then had a look on wikipedia and it appears that he was never shortlisted for World/European Player of the year. I was quite surprised considering that there seems to be a general consensus that Roy Keane was one of the best players of his generation.

Any thoughts on why he never made the rankings if you consider that some of his counterparts were shortlised e.g. Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham.

SlickRic · 03-02-2010 03:46PM

not flashy.

a bit of a thug.

also, DMs generally find it difficult to do well in those awards.

not glamorous enough a job within the team.

kryogen · 03-02-2010 03:48PM

well, they are English and he isnt would be my gut reaction

it really is a shame he was never shortlisted though, but it is rare for a player like him to get it, he isnt skillful particularly

GavRedKing · 03-02-2010 03:52PM

He wasnt a creator of goals or a scorer of very many goals, his position and contribution to the team was that of a defensive one, he was ultimately being compared with the likes of Zidane and Figo who gave a lot more attacking power to the team and generally wonmore games the way they played.

niallk · 03-02-2010 03:54PM

Roy's best years were in the nineties, with his peak being his robot season of 98-99. Top 50 of last decade maybe but not that one.

Mr. Presentable · 03-02-2010 03:58PM

My thoughts:

Keane was a destructor of football, so not attractive.

Outside of Man U fans and some Ireland fans, he wasn't rated among the "best of his generation".

censuspro · 03-02-2010 04:01PM

kryogen wrote: »

well, they are English and he isnt would be my gut reaction

it really is a shame he was never shortlisted though, but it is rare for a player like him to get it, he isnt skillful particularly

That's what I thought initially. But when I had look at some of the winners and nominees there were alot of defensive and midfield players in there:

1991: Lothar Matthaus
1992: Thomas Hasler
1995: Paolo Maldini
1997: Roberto Carlos
1999: David Beckham
2002: Oliver Kahn
2005: Frank Lampard
2006: Fabio Cannavaro

magma69 · 03-02-2010 04:02PM

Well many respected pundits and former players have him down as top player. He is in Pele's greatest players of all time list. I do think players with attacking qualities get more recognition. You will never see a goal keeper or defender as number 1 in any of those lists.

blinding · 03-02-2010 04:05PM

It did not help that he was from a country that is not that economically powerful in world football.

Had he played for one of the big footballing countries he would have been in with a good shout.

Also he was more destroyer than creator and that allied with above did not help.

Smegball · 03-02-2010 04:12PM

Its the same way Claude Makelele never got the same credit, although Keane was a better all round player and leader, unless you are incredible, incredible in defence in a world cup year or you score lots and lots of goals and or assist you won't particularly have a chance. It doesn't take anything away from the quality of the player.

meditraitor · 03-02-2010 04:12PM

During his career there was a few other amazing midfielders, Zidane, rivaldo, figo, seedorf, davids, viera, nedved etc etc

With the exception of Zidane there was much of a muchness between keane and those mentioned, so its not really suprising he didnt stand out

Guy:Incognito · 03-02-2010 04:13PM

censuspro wrote: »

That's what I thought initially. But when I had look at some of the winners and nominees there were alot of defensive and midfield players in there:

1991: Lothar Matthaus
1992: Thomas Hasler
1995: Paolo Maldini
1997: Roberto Carlos
1999: David Beckham
2002: Oliver Kahn
2005: Frank Lampard
2006: Fabio Cannavaro

Frank Lampard is attacking and scores goals.Beckham is pretty much the definition of superstar footballer.

Roberto Carlos was never much of a defender.:)

Those two really compound the attacking and flare bias theory

nipplenuts wrote: »

.

Outside of Man U fans and some Ireland fans, he wasn't rated among the "best of his generation".

He was by people who know the game and really matter, ie current and ex players. Most importantly by the ones he played against. They all know he was great.

censuspro · 03-02-2010 04:16PM

blinding wrote: »

It did not help that he was from a country that is not that economically powerful in world football.

Had he played for one of the big footballing countries he would have been in with a good shout.

Also he was more destroyer than creator and that allied with above did not help.

In fairness George Weah was from a third world country and he won it in 1995 and came second in 1996.

Guy:Incognito · 03-02-2010 04:18PM

censuspro wrote: »

In fairness George Weah was from a third world country and he won it in 1995 and came second in 1996.

The joys of beign a striker that scores goals with a top European team.

Keanes contribution to Utd's and Irelands (relative) success was equal or better than anyone elses mentioned.An immense player to those capable fo looking past teh bells and whistles of flare footballers. The type of player the phrases like "engineroom" were createdfor.

The post Makalele Galactico's are a very real indication of why these players are as or more important than the flash players. Keane could work at any level, but without the ball some of the headline grabbers are'nt worth **** all.

censuspro · 03-02-2010 04:23PM

Stekelly wrote: »

The joys of beign a striker that scores goals with a top European team.

Isnt that what the best strikers in the world do and that's the reason they play for top European team?

It seems as if we are making excuses as to why other players won as opposed to why Roy Keane didnt win. Maybe what the other poster said is right and he's not rated outside of Man U and Ireland?

blinding · 03-02-2010 04:24PM

censuspro wrote: »

In fairness George Weah was from a third world country and he won it in 1995 and came second in 1996.

A goal scorer though

Off topic but he went down hill fast after that.

Guy:Incognito · 03-02-2010 04:25PM

blinding wrote: »

Off topic but he went down hill fast after that.

His repuatation went into the toilet after he started recommending his cousins to other teams.:)

Guy:Incognito · 03-02-2010 04:29PM

censuspro wrote: »

Isnt that what the best strikers in the world do and that's the reason they play for top European team?

It seems as if we are making excuses as to why other players won as opposed to why Roy Keane didnt win. Maybe what the other poster said is right and he's not rated outside of Man U and Ireland?

Keane was playing with a top European team though, and he won the EC. What he isn't though, is a striker. Attacking players get the plaudits, thats just the way it is. Weah had the advantage of being an attacking player. Do you think Weah would have won footballer of the year if he was a right full? (obviously without his goals

)

UnitedIrishman · 03-02-2010 04:29PM

Was rated by everyone in the Premiership and throughout Europe, but his job wasn't one where he'd be center of attention and thus didn't get noticed as much as the Zidane's and the Edgar David's of the world - despite playing the former named off the park in 99' and the latter in 01'.

He was consistently the best player on the pitch for United, whereas those who received the award were either ok or out of this world on a week to week basis.

Personal awards are pretty daft anyways, especially the amount of them are around nowadays. For example, who won Premier League player of the season in 1999 - the year United won the treble? David Ginola. Why? Because the three other nominees were United players - think it was Beckham, Cole and Keane - and the vote was split between them.

DazMarz · 03-02-2010 04:32PM

Despite being a lifelong Chelsea fan, I always loved Roy Keane. He was a man who played the game, who spoke his mind, and who never let the bastards wear him down. He was nothing short of brilliant at times.

The main reason he never got nominated for any of the big awards or so on was that he did not play 'pretty' football. He was the man who got into the thick of it, down and dirty, who tore apart attacks instead of creating them. He was far more essential to a team than a flashy attacker, but flashy attackers always get the headlines, unfortunately. Defenders and goalies only grab headlines usually after spectacular blunders.

Roy Keane was easily one of the best footballers of his time, an essential cog in the Manchester United machine. In spite of all the flashy and splashy players United had while he was there, he never really had trouble getting a place in the team at all, did he? He was a captain of captains and led by example, played with his heart and soul and always gave 110%.

Guy:Incognito · 03-02-2010 04:48PM

Just on the subject of defensive football. I think we are doing an injustice to Keanes attacking capabilities. He scored some important goals and was very often involved in goals. Not nessescarily the assist but maybe a small but important pass somewhere in the move that kept it going.

Utd were an attacking team when Keane was in it and he functioned very well in that.

DazMarz · 03-02-2010 04:49PM

Stekelly wrote: »

Just on the subject of defencsive football. I think we are doing an injustice to Keanes attacking capabilities. He scored some important goals and was very often involved in goals. Not nessescarily the assist but maybe a small but important pass somewhere in the move that kept it going.

Utd were an attacking team when Keane was in it and he functioned very well in that.

Didn't he score 2 against Arsenal in Highbury in the 99/00 or 98/99 season? United won 2-1 I think....

He could score some savagely vital goals, in fairness to him.

IvySlayer · 03-02-2010 04:59PM

I agree with the majority of posters here. One other thing to point out if he did win, he probably wouldn't of cared tbh.

TonyD79 · 03-02-2010 05:11PM

The year United won the European Cup Rivaldo won the World Player of the year award. Also Ginola got the awards in England that season. If there is no stand out flair players then you get the midfielders/defenders having a look in.

Mr.Nice Guy · 03-02-2010 05:12PM

Well Beckham always did well in these awards even in years when he really shouldn't have been nominated. I think those awards are largely based on hype and reputation.

I think those knowledgeable about the game knew of his talent. Didn't Van Gaal say after the Ireland/Holland match in 2001 that Keane was one of/the best player in the world or something to that effect?

keano_afc · 03-02-2010 05:38PM

Probably coz he's from Cork :pac:

blinding · 03-02-2010 05:41PM

keano_afc wrote: »

Probably coz he's from Cork :pac:

That does make a lot of sense:P

stovelid · 03-02-2010 05:51PM

He's from Cork.

He was secretly informed of their intention to give him the award on five occasions between 1993 - 2006 but he refused in order to preserve his burning sense of injustice and oppression.

censuspro · 03-02-2010 05:53PM

Cannavaro won it in 2006 and Oliver Kahn won it in 2002 both World Cup Years where the best players in the world had the opportunity to perfrom and in both cases "defensive" players won player of the year.

I don't think it's fair to say that only knowledgeable players rate Keane, if thats the case then the only people with a knowledge of football are in Ireland and Manchester because based on previous rankings he was never even shortlised. Keane was captain of a treble winning team which wasn't during a World Cup Year, he was also playing for arguably the biggest club in the world. If he was one of the best players in the world surely people outside Ireland would have noticed.

stovelid · 03-02-2010 06:03PM

censuspro wrote: »

Keane was captain of a treble winning team which wasn't during a World Cup Year, he was also playing for arguably the biggest club in the world. If he was one of the best players in the world surely people outside Ireland would have noticed.

Not necessarily.

Down the years, I'm struck by how many pros that rate(d) Paul Scholes, a player that would not have won the kind of plaudits we're talking about here. I've read interviews where players like Ronaldinho, Xavi and Messi have all gushed about him as a player.

I think there is a undercurrent of snobbery toward English players based around perceptions of long-ball and paucity of technique which, although they have basis in fact, don't acknowledge "non-typical" English midfielders down the years such as Scholes, Gascoigne, Le Tiissier, Hoddle, Beardsley and so on.

Keane fits the perceived image of an English midfielder on the continent: busy, slightly thuggish, industrious and brave - a underestimation of his skills as a footballer imo.

And most Irish players are viewed as being the same as English players.

blinding · 03-02-2010 06:04PM

censuspro wrote: »

Cannavaro won it in 2006 and Oliver Kahn won it in 2002 both World Cup Years where the best players in the world had the opportunity to perfrom and in both cases "defensive" players won player of the year.

I don't think it's fair to say that only knowledgeable players rate Keane, if thats the case then the only people with a knowledge of football are in Ireland and Manchester because based on previous rankings he was never even shortlised. Keane was captain of a treble winning team which wasn't during a World Cup Year, he was also playing for arguably the biggest club in the world. If he was one of the best players in the world surely people outside Ireland would have noticed.

His social skills are not all that good.

Perhaps they thought he would snort and snarl at the presentation do.

He might even have fallen out with.... well everybody.

He might even have told them who he believed should have really got it. (If he was in one of those moods you know he would):P

Why was Roy Keane never ranked in World/Euro player of the year?

Comments