Forum Topic

"Liverpool were the biggest team by far in the 80's,and to blame United's relative lack of success on one man when there were loads of other factors(a Flash Harry manager who wasted loads of money on poor signings"You mean Liverpool were the most successful team. United had the biggest budget by far. Your Flash Harry manager signed Robson and built a team around him. Atkinson is probably one of the more astute tactical managers of that era and his teams were always successful in cups. What he wasn't good at was giving his teams the kind of competitive edge that ensures consistency over a season. Robson's failure to play in at least a quarter of the games each season was probably a key reason for that. Looking back it is hard not to conclude that his drinking was an important factor in his injury problems."Liverpool having a squad and not a team"Most people with any knowledge of the game would remember that the striking thing about Liverpool at the height of their success was that they consistently fielded the same 11 players."it is goals that win games,isn't it?If you are going to compare,at least compare like with like(Robson 169/Keane 51)."You can't say Robson was a better captain and player than Keane based on goals. Keane's role was primarily as a holding midfield player, particularly as he matured. Liverpool fans would believe Emile Heskey is a better player than Alan Hansen if they followed your logic. The main occupant of the United trophy cabinet during the Robson years was a piece of red carpet. With Keane as captain they had the most successful period in their history. It seems to me perverse that any United fan wouldn't regard him as a hero. Certainly the ones at Old Trafford appear to do so, apart from the prawn sandwich brigade of course."a 25 year old Robbo would walk into the current United side"A 45 year old Robbo would probably have a chance of getting into the team they are putting out at the moment

Dan Evans ● 7110d

Kevin,Liverpool were the biggest team by far in the 80's,and to blame United's relative lack of success on one man when there were loads of other factors(a Flash Harry manager who wasted loads of money on poor signings,the league being more competitive then in terms of teams being in the hunt a lot longer,a lot of United's team simply not up for comparison with Liverpool's,Atkinson's tactical naivity,Liverpool having a squad and not a team)I am from Lancashire and have been a Red since I was a foetus and have also seen them many times.I live down here now,but it has not affected my loyalty.By the way, Stuart Pearson was a centre forward(a rather average one too)but it is goals that win games,isn't it?If you are going to compare,at least compare like with like(Robson 169/Keane 51).I agree Robbo was no saint off the pitch,neither was Bobby Moore,George Best and many others.It's on the pitch that really counts..a 25 year old Robbo would walk into the current United side and any other there has been since he hung his boots up.Likewise,England have underachieved massively since 1966 both before and after Robson and have certainly not set the world alight since he retired.They are tactically naive,can't string more than half a dozen passes together and rely too much on a 20 year old to do something unexpected to actually have a flexible game plan.Oh, and the players are not good enough as a unit.If they don't win the World Cup,are you and Mark going to blame Rooney or Owen?.Or Lampard or Gerrard?

Keith Iddon ● 7110d

Kevin,Liverpool were the biggest team by far in the 80's,and to blame United's relative lack of success on one man when there were loads of other factors(a Flash Harry manager who wasted loads of money on poor signings,the league being more competitive then in terms of teams being in the hunt a lot longer,a lot of United's team simply not up for comparison with Liverpool's,Atkinson's tactical naivity,Liverpool having a squad and not a team)I am from Lancashire and have been a Red since I was a foetus and have also seen them many times.I live down here now,but it has not affected my loyalty.By the way, Stuart Pearson was a centre forward(a rather average one too)but it is goals that win games,isn't it?If you are going to compare,at least compare like with like(Robson 169/Keane 51).I agree Robbo was no saint off the pitch,neither was Bobby Moore,George Best and many others.It's on the pitch that really counts..a 25 year old Robbo would walk into the current United side and any other there has been since he hung his boots up.Likewise,England have underachieved massively since 1966 both before and after Robson and have certainly not set the world alight since he retired.They are tactically naive,can't string more than half a dozen passes together and rely too much on a 20 year old to do something unexpected to actually have a flexible game plan.Oh, and the players are not good enough as a unit.If they don't win the World Cup,are you and Mark going to blame Rooney or Owen?.Or Lampard or Gerrard?

Keith Iddon ● 7110d

I'm not joking and yes I'm not a Man U fan which means I've actually seen them play a few times unlike most people calling themselves reds and living down south. You seem to have this simplistic notion that scoring goals determines how good a player is. Do you think Stuart Pearson was a better player than Robson because his goals per game was higher?The transfer budget of Man Utd in the 80s was much bigger than any other team in the league and they were able to buy the best players like they bought Robson himself. They won very little in this period and Robson was probably to blame because he was the centre of the 'A' team drinking culture at the club with players like Norman Whiteside and Paul Mcgrath. The one time I met Robson he was incoherently drunk. When Ferguson arrived he acted quickly to deal with the problem and shape his team into one that was actually capable of winning the league which meant ending the drinking culture that Robson was at the centre of. Keane had his troubles with drink early on in his career but eventually became the totally focused professional. Yes he was a bully but he was a successful one. Keane could dominate a game of football in a way that Robson was never capable of and you could see that he intimidated his opponents. Of course Keane benefited from being amongst a fantastic crop of players but without him they were nowhere near as formidable. Man U were awesome in getting to the final of the Champions League but in the final without Keane they were second best to a mediocre Bayern Munich team and won due to a freakish last few minutes. This has been typical of Man U over the last 6 years - without Keane their results have been poor.Robson missed a huge amount of games and never gave United much more than a three quarters of a season. Look at the record of Frank Lampard and you'll realise that one thing that makes a team champions is their key players being available right through the season. Robson's captaincy of England also saw little success. In 1986 England didn't really click in the World Cup until he got injured and 1988 in Germany was an embarrassment. Ireland with Roy Keane massively over-achieved and who knows what could have happened if he'd stayed on in 2002.I'm not denying Robson wasn't a fantastic player in his way and I'd love it if hand on heart I could say that he was a better player or captain than Keane who I dislike intensely. I don't think Robson would have betrayed his country which makes him the better man but by every other yardstick that matters Keane is superior.

Andy Jones ● 7112d