I’m keen – is Roy?
14/04/06 | by Nick Miller

It’s depressing to think that Forest are looking to appoint our fourth permanent manager in five years (of course not counting the assorted caretakers we’ve had in that time). The process that we’ve become all too used to – and good at – rolls around again, with rumour, counter-rumour, suggestion, argument, heated argument and blazing row. This time around, the whisper that refuses to go away is that former Garibaldi sporter, sometime Celtic midfielder and hip-replacement candidate Mr Royston Keane will be the new man in.

Now, of course this suggestion has been met with fierce opposition in many Forest quarters. Gripes include his inexperience, volatility, inability to get on with everyone, and the circumstances in which he left us the first time around. The first three are fair enough, but for those of you who bear a grudge – please grow up; it was thirteen years ago, and he left a relegated mess of a club for the champions. What a tough call that must’ve been.

My initial reaction was that it would be a mistake; he’s too inexperienced, volatile and so on. However, the more I pondered, the more I thought; why the hell not? He’s young and energetic (who knows, we might even squeeze a season or so out of him in the middle of the park), he commands respect, we know he suffers neither fools nor incompetence lightly, and he would be a big draw for potential transfer targets.

Over the past decade or so we’ve apparently tried most of the ‘types’ of boss available; the successful-in-lower leagues gaffer (Clark); the crafty cock-er-nee wheeler dealer (Bassett); the ‘up-and-comer’ (Platt); the unsung, good with the youngsters type (Hart); the laissez faire, one-of-the-lads boss (Kinnear); and the disciplinarian (Megson). After all of these, why not try the highly motivated, take-no-shi’ite manager? Much to our envy and chagrin, it’s worked for Man City.

One of my main reservations about appointing Keane is actually us, the fans. Remember that our past two managers have essentially been hounded out (rightly or wrongly) by increasingly vocal ‘supporters’, so bringing in a manager that half of the City Ground hate from the start does not exactly auger well for the long (even medium) term stability we so desperately need.

However, I think I would place more emphasis on these down sides if there was an obvious, outstanding alternative, but there isn’t. Names like Keegan, McCarthy and Hoddle strike fear into my heart, Phil Brown rather laughably threw his sheepskin hat into the ring (we’ll call you, eh Phil?), Paul Hart has been mentioned but will never work with Doughty, and while I could live with someone like Dave Penney or Phil Parkinson, they don’t exactly inspire and excite.

As for Frank and Charlie, much as they’ve turned us round in the past few weeks, I think giving them the full time job would be a big mistake. Megson assembled a good collection of players, but commanded no respect – I suspect Barlow and McParland are benefiting from simply not being Megson, something that won’t last.

The idea of putting a director of football to work with them is also a non-starter – he would have to be someone experienced and with a relatively high profile, and the lines of power with joint managers are blurred enough as it is, without having someone else sticking their two-penneth in. Ideally I would like Frank and Charlie to stay, as they’re clearly excellent coaches, but joint managing very rarely (if at all) works.

So Roy – come on down, make yourself at home. I for one will welcome you with open and forgiving arms.

Then again, I thought Megson should be given more time, so what do I know?