Harry said, 'you're an idiot, move on'. Quite straight forward."

Haha.

It may be pedantic, but I wish people would learn to write before being let loose on sites like Sky. Not only is the whole article quite poorly written, we are also treated to aberrations like 'sure-up'. I'm just surprised there isn't a 'should of' in there somwhere.

sorry but i do wish we hadn't bought him, i know he will score some goals, don't think it will be very many, and he's a nice guy but it really really frustrates the hell out of me the way we play when he's in the side. Its almost as if Harry is obliged to play him because of the world cup coming up and doing so still wants to accommodate Keane because he's captain so we have an unbalanced midfield and hit too much long ball.. Its at times like this i wish Harry was less of a mate and more like Raffa and Capello... very frustrating

So you're saying that Redknapp has had 26 years of club management, being sacked only once, and achieved it all by being so unprofessional? Interesting.

rafa could see that keane was crap and didn't play him

The headline - essentially "One man different to another" - is a bit daft too.

He couldn't see it enough not to pay nearly 20 million for him though.

10th highest scorer since the Premier League began. Most likely going to be 8th before the end of the season and very likely to be in the top 5 when he retires.

But yeah, he's crap.

The difference is Harry is sane, and Rafa is mad.
Poor Crouchy will not be at the world cup I think. Too many preferred options ahead of him as far as Fabio is concerned.

One more (off topic) point on the Keane saga: I can't help noticing that his league goals-to-game ratio is higher this season (1 in 2) than it has been throughout his career (1 in 2.6). Could this be significant? Perhaps it's a matter of link up play: is Keane now doing slightly less of that, or doing it less obsessively/effectively, on Harry's recommendation no doubt, but getting more goals as a result? I guess everyone can see that his game has changed (more Michael Owen perhaps that Berbatov) but they're now focusing too much on what's missing, rather than what's been added?

This would make sense of the whole tiresome debate: both sides are right. Keane is less of a player (because he's become more of a goal scorer than a creater), but for the same reason he's more of a player (a better goalscorer).

The part of the article which makes me cringe is that you only have to be better than Heskey or Cole to get in the England squad. We will do well to get out of the group stages in the WC.