WHEN IRISH EYES ARE SEETHING

I use the word 'hypocrites' to describe the English FA deliberately, for
there can be no doubt of two central facts. Firstly, that Roy's sin is not
the supposed offence, but the fact that he talked about it publicly, thereby
lifting a veil which the authorities would prefer had remained lowered.
Secondly, that for all their protestations that they are bringing justice
and objective judgment to the case, the FA have in fact simply ignored the
defence's case in order to make a public example of football's new Al
Capone. For there can be no doubt, given the statements of Keane himself and
of Eamonn Dunphy, that Roy is being held responsible for words which he
never actually uttered. The fact that the authorities have simply rejected
arbitrarily the solid defence of artistic license reminds me of those old
cases from Victorian England wherein crusty Establishment judges would
simply refuse to entertain a plea from the defendant that he never actually
made the fabricated confession presented as exhibit A.

I suppose it will be said by some that Roy has to bear responsibility for
words published under his name. There is some truth in this, although I do
recall that David O'Leary was recently allowed to argue publicly that he didn't even know the title of his own book. I also dimly recall the case ofan American baseball hero who successfully denied that the contents of his autobiography were his own words. However, it surely should be a cause of some sympathy for Roy that he was evidently so badly advised by those who are supposed to have his interests at heart. I am thinking here in particular of his agent Michael Kennedy and his manager Alex Ferguson, both of whom had ample opportunity to warn Roy of the possible consequences of his words.

However, there is no point now crying over spilt Beamish and what concerns
me is the next stage in this farce. Roy is a proud man who evidently genuinely believed he had done no wrong and he will be sorely tempted to
take this case to appeal and ultimately judicial review. Indeed, there is an
argument that, with careful juggling, Keane's team could spin this affair out over the whole season, thus indefinitely postponing the ban - all the while hoping to overturn it entirely.

However, bitter pill though it is to swallow, most Reds will probably concede that he should take the punishment offered and put an end to the matter lest he run the danger of being forced to serve the ban at a more critical juncture of the season. For Manchester United are in the fortunate
position of leading a very easy champions league group and are handily placed in the premiership. In other words, if we have to lose Roy for a month, better it be now whilst he recovers from injury than, say, in crucial
mid-March.

Will anyone learn valuable lessons as a result of this sorry farrago? Players will recognise that newspaper serialisation profits come at a heavy
potential cost; United will take the opportunity, no doubt, to enforce a clampdown on employees' verbal outpourings; and, dare I suggest, my fellow
ghost-writers will have been reminded just how much import the literary
sentence may carry. And, sadly, the already strained relationship between my
club and the FA will be stretching to breaking point in the months to come. I suspect that next time Adam Crozier needs a favour, he needn't bother dialling Sir Alex's number.