Roy Keane and the Knee Injury.

[Bobski]

Simple question, how much did the ACL surgery take from Keane as a player, if at all.

Why do I ask this, I was randomly watching bits of the 1996 FA Cup final on youtube. last night, terrible game, don't recommend anyone suffer through it again, Andy Cole should have won the game in the first 10 mins (Utd started really well) but he was still adapting at that stage to Utd, Cantona barely touched the ball until the winner, McManaman was as usual Liverpool's best player by miles. However Keane was a different level to any other player on the pitch on that day, his ball winning was unreal, recovery speed, agility when closing, spring, anticipation, and still with the same composure and technical strength, completely dominant in any one to one duel.

I don't think he ever quite got back to that physical level after the injury, still a fantastic player and athlete but did we maybe not see his absolute potential/top level due to the injury? Or did he adapt with maturity and experience and just excel in different ways.

 

[Red4Ever]

He played deeper afterwards but I feel his peak was 99 and 2000 seasons
He was Amazing in those early years for us but I feel he faced better midfield competition from arsenal and co as the years progressed

he was still great in the 2003 campaign too in fairness

 

[FujiVice]

You can look at it both ways. The injury contributed to him eventually slowing down in a lot of ways (not from 98 to 2002, mind you). But his diet changed dramatically in that time off. There wasnt a bit of fat on him for the rest of his football career after the ACL injury. When he came back in 1998, he looked like Robocop without his helmet.

 

[Red4Ever]

You can look at it both ways. The injury contributed to him slowing down in a lot of ways. But his diet changed dramatically in that time off. There wasnt a bit of fat on him for the rest of his football career after the ACL injury. When he came back in 1998, he looked like Robocop without his helmet.

yeah I think he stopped drinking too which helped a lot. He was the one person who grew more frustrated after 99, as he felt some took the foot off the gas. These frustrations eventually led to an exit but Keane, like his manager, had the right attitude and always remained hungry for more

 

[SER19]

None really. He had his best years after the knee injury and in my opinion was as good as any midfielder in the world from around 99-01. He scored more those years too, and teams actively feared him, both at home and in europe. He was a formidable presence.

 

[Bobski]

He played deeper afterwards but I feel his peak was 99 and 2000 seasons
He was Amazing in those early years for us but I feel he faced better midfield competition from arsenal and co as the years progressed

he was still great in the 2003 campaign too in fairness

I think you are correct about his peak seasons, just wonder if without the injury that peak would have been even higher, he was so quick off the mark in 96. But then we could ask the same questions about so many others, Giggs without the hamstring injuries, does he reach a higher individual peak, possibly but might not have the same longevity.

Liverpool actually had a good midfield at that stage, Barnes was still a class act, silky on the ball, Redknapp was classy but maybe lacked the energy and running power while McManaman was an exceptional player, hugely underrated now I would say, would compare him to someone like Grealish but much more mobile and penetrative. It was the likes of McAteer and Bjornebye and Babb who let them down, teams just didn't have the depth of the squads of now.

Back on Keane, you could say that there tactical reasons that limited some of his play. Back when he started with Ince or young Butt he had much more freedom to chase the ball, when Scholes became his partner he had to be a lot more disciplined as for all the ability Scholes was not a runner or defensive force.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

It was more the hips that did it for Keane. He had several spectacular games for club and country from 1999 to 2003. From about 2003 onwards the hips started to give way and he lost some mobility before his eventual departure. Fergie would have made it up to Keane if he wasn't declining anyway.

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

It was more the hips that did it for Keane. He had several spectacular games for club and country from 1999 to 2003. From about 2003 onwards the hips started to give way and he lost some mobility before his eventual departure. Fergie would have made it up to Keane if he wasn't declining anyway.

Wasn’t he playing as a center back in his final few seasons? The hip injuries and general age related physical decline took more out of him than the ACL did.

 

[Red4Ever]

Wasn’t he playing as a center back in his final few seasons? The hip injuries and general age related physical decline took more out of him than the ACL did.

not really for United
Played much deeper though

 

[Red4Ever]

I think you are correct about his peak seasons, just wonder if without the injury that peak would have been even higher, he was so quick off the mark in 96. But then we could ask the same questions about so many others, Giggs without the hamstring injuries, does he reach a higher individual peak, possibly but might not have the same longevity.

Liverpool actually had a good midfield at that stage, Barnes was still a class act, silky on the ball, Redknapp was classy but maybe lacked the energy and running power while McManaman was an exceptional player, hugely underrated now I would say, would compare him to someone like Grealish but much more mobile and penetrative. It was the likes of McAteer and Bjornebye and Babb who let them down, teams just didn't have the depth of the squads of now.

Back on Keane, you could say that there tactical reasons that limited some of his play. Back when he started with Ince or young Butt he had much more freedom to chase the ball, when Scholes became his partner he had to be a lot more disciplined as for all the ability Scholes was not a runner or defensive force.

yeah interestingly both keane & scholes played deeper as they got older it’s natural for ageing midfielders though

I miss their intelligence!

 

[Irwin99]

Wasn’t he playing as a center back in his final few seasons? The hip injuries and general age related physical decline took more out of him than the ACL did.

Not often but there was talk of him going to end up as a centre back after his hip injury and he put in an outstanding performance at centre back vs Juventus in Turin where we won 3-0 in 2003. His old manager Brian Clough was of the opinion he should move to be being a centre back as he got older. Don't think Keane ever liked playing there though.

 

[Irwin99]

Simple question, how much did the ACL surgery take from Keane as a player, if at all.

Why do I ask this, I was randomly watching bits of the 1996 FA Cup final on youtube. last night, terrible game, don't recommend anyone suffer through it again, Andy Cole should have won the game in the first 10 mins (Utd started really well) but he was still adapting at that stage to Utd, Cantona barely touched the ball until the winner, McManaman was as usual Liverpool's best player by miles. However Keane was a different level to any other player on the pitch on that day, his ball winning was unreal, recovery speed, agility when closing, spring, anticipation, and still with the same composure and technical strength, completely dominant in any one to one duel.

I don't think he ever quite got back to that physical level after the injury, still a fantastic player and athlete but did we maybe not see his absolute potential/top level due to the injury? Or did he adapt with maturity and experience and just excel in different ways.

The hip injury was the big one for Keane, i'm not sure the ACL injury had much change thankfully. If you watch some of the battles between him and Vieira on Youtube you can see him making sprints from one box to another to get a tackle in, the same way he did against Liverpool in 96.

 

[MrMarcello]

I felt he should be have been pushed to central defense around 2004 instead of sticking with the routine blunders of Brown or Silvestre when partnering Rio, or Brown with Silvestre when Rio was suspended.

 

[Who's Kissing Cameras?]

Yes Roy! Backing us up on Sky. Too right. feck off VVD.

 

[GueRed]

Yeah Keane from 1993 -2000 was a fecking beast. I think after the ACL injury in 1997 he came back even stronger tbh.

1998-2000 he was probably the best CM in Europe. Only Vieira and Davids in that timeframe could get near to the standards Keane set.

I think the hip injury and operation in 2002 done him in the end. Understandably he wasnt the same player after that, physically at least...he was still a great captain.

 

[DJ Jeff]

I just looked up Roy's height and it was 1.8m?! I don't know why I always saw him as a shorter guy around 5'9 or so.

 

[Jordi Cruyff 99]

I just looked up Roy's height and it was 1.8m?! I don't know why I always saw him as a shorter guy around 5'9 or so.

That's because you're right; heights of players (and athletes in general, especially heavyweight boxers) are often wildly inaccurate. Kean is definitely not 5'11''. He might be about 177cm.