₦airaland Forum

TheGoodJoe:
Disagree with Baxter's opinion. We did not create chances, not that we were poor finishing.

When you say a team lacked quality upfront, it means that a side crested chances but the forwards did not take their chances. In this case, Iheanacho was in good position to score but the passes did not come clean. So I think Baxter meant we did not have a quality attack midfield because as I said before we had enough opportunities to put three goals in the first half.

Napoleon55:
add the no.10 shirt player,fifa always pick no.10 shirt players as their best. Sometimes they r wrong

goldfish80:
This is a nice rendition of what transpired between the eagles and South Africa.

In addition to what you said, I think Rohr got it wrong trying to play all the big players at the once. This really unbalanced the midfield.

Breaking up the partnership of Onazi/Etebor like witnessed against Algeria at the Base of the midfield wasn't a smart move.
The team would have been in better shape if Onazi/ Etebo continued at the Base while Ndidi pairs Ekong at CB, Iwobi drops to the advanced midfield role while Kayode replaced Iwobi on the wings.

I don't know why, but I see Ndidi having the same trajectory as Kompany who started off as a DM.
Ndidi at CB would have definitely been a better choice than Awaziem. Until last year, Ndidi was a centre back and I've read Shakespeare tell the media he will try Ndidi in defence at some point.

Finally, I can't figure out why our full backs didnt get down the wings and added width to the attack. I belive their inability to get up and down the wings contrived to make our attacks predictable and easy to intercept by the SA defence. This greatly affected the delivery of Moses because there was always a spare man on him when got away from his marker.

Icon4s:
Your first paragraph is just the summary of why our attack could not break down the SA defense.

For eg in that first half Iheanacho was practically kept off on several occasions. There were through balls from the midfield in that first half but they were either intercepted by their organized CB pairing or they kept Iheanacho off.

To rescue the situation, Iwobi had to play wide to pull usually two of the defenders to him. Expecting a disorganization of the CB pairing which could have given room for Iheanacho to operate. But his lack of athletism limited him to wide positions plus the SA defenders made sure he never made progress into the their 18yards box.

Etebo in an attempt to break the defence started making solo runs - what he is known for but his finishing touches let him down as he was always putting himself in a difficult position to aim at goal. Etebo's problem now I think is the 'Jack of all trade but master of none'. I think we need to define the role he will play for the national team and confine him to it. I recommend the CM. The role he played against Algeria.

Simon Moses has not improved a bit. He is not a starter IMO. He tried to use his skill and pace to outwit the SA defenders but his crosses were either not timely or too wide. At a point he was just playing crosses not directly targeting any player and expecting a miracle to happen.

Iheanacho was not much involved in the game. The major highlight I have of him was the pass he gave to Etebo that he missed. Secondly were the countless times he was caught in off side positions. The SA coach probably after seeing Iheanacho at City has understood that the only way to stop him from playing is not to allow the balls to get to him. We saw that happen several times at City this season. Iheanacho rides on the back of good Atracking midfield and wings play. He is still our most lethal finisher.

Kayode substituting Iheanacho was when the game ended for Nigeria.

Let me analyse Rohr's thinking before the substitution: We were on a 4-3-3 formation and under sparadic attacks from SA. Depleting the midfield further by removing either Iwobi or Simon would spell more doom. In the balance of play SA was having the upper hand in the midfield at that point in time. He left the two wingers and pulled out Iheanacho with the expectations that Kayode who is more of a natural striker than Iheanacho would have been able to use his pace and skills to outwit the SA defenders on a one on one basis. Alas it turned out that Rohr over estimated Kayode's abilities. At a time in the game I asked if Kayode was still on that field.

Musa's introduction was to introduce more direct play as Iwobi was practically kept wide and we made more incursion into the SA defense as he was even able to combine well on one or two occasions with Kayode. But the player to finish those moves was not there. Had Iheanacho been kept in the game.... who knows?

Osimhen, was the final trow of the die. We were 2-0 down already and so he just had to gamble by pulling out Simon. Osimhen made some good touches and edge of the box moves but not good enough to make anything happen.

Mikel and V. Moses would have obviously made the difference. What the SA defenders did was to keep Iwobi and Simon in wide positions something Moses would have been able to break with his dribbling skills, pace and direct play.
Mikel would have been able to break down the organised SA defense with his dribbling skills, ball holding and shielding abilities plus timely release of the ball for Iheanacho.

If it is doable I would have pleased with God to take Mikel's age back to at least 25!. We are not ready to move on without him.

All these wahala was bc we met a very organized defense.

Then also I think Rohr spent more time focusing on our strength and not much on SA's weaknesses while reverse was the case for SA.

I have the belief that we still qualify. We can also beat SA away.

I wish Ikeme, Balogun, Mikel And Moses quick recovery. They are the back bone of the team. August in not far away again.

forgiveness:
Seriously! Did dis man watch the match?

1, There was no time Iwobi moved to the wing to rescue the game. He was designated to play on the wings from onset. Likewise Iheanacho was designated to play the no9 role.


2, Etebor was designated to play as the ATM role from the onset but he failed woefully. Now, ya eyes don clear he is jack of all trades made possible by the Nigerian coaches. He is neither good as a CM. Play him as a left winger then you will see the American wonder in him. Take it to the bank.


3, Simon Moses was the only player opening the space but his crosses are for big strikers with ability on the air and he was the one that tested the keeper who made a fine save. As you can see, Iheanacho is not a complete striker. In short he is not a striker. Period. All analyst rated Moses highly but na for here I dey read different thing.

4, Iheanacho is not a starter for the no 9 shirt in the National team. He brings nothing to the table since he was moved to that position. If there is no space for him as a second striker then he must sit on the bench. Period. We can't continue with this try and error wey dey kill people.


5, Oga, Iwobi was not on the field when Kayode came in for Iheanacho. I no know where you saw Kayode played with Iwobi. When Kayode came in for Iheanacho, it was Ahmed Musa and Moses Simon on the flank and we saw we almost scored goals which was practically missing when Iheanacho was on the field. Ndidi and Etebor wasted those chances with their selfish play. Go and watch the match again with open mind and stop being confused.


Thank you.

Icon4s:
Your first paragraph is just the summary of why our attack could not break down the SA defense.

For eg in that first half Iheanacho was practically kept off on several occasions. There were through balls from the midfield in that first half but they were either intercepted by their organized CB pairing or they kept Iheanacho off.

To rescue the situation, Iwobi had to play wide to pull usually two of the defenders to him. Expecting a disorganization of the CB pairing which could have given room for Iheanacho to operate. But his lack of athletism limited him to wide positions plus the SA defenders made sure he never made progress into the their 18yards box.

Etebo in an attempt to break the defence started making solo runs - what he is known for but his finishing touches let him down as he was always putting himself in a difficult position to aim at goal. Etebo's problem now I think is the 'Jack of all trade but master of none'. I think we need to define the role he will play for the national team and confine him to it. I recommend the CM. The role he played against Algeria.

Simon Moses has not improved a bit. He is not a starter IMO. He tried to use his skill and pace to outwit the SA defenders but his crosses were either not timely or too wide. At a point he was just playing crosses not directly targeting any player and expecting a miracle to happen.

Iheanacho was not much involved in the game. The major highlight I have of him was the pass he gave to Etebo that he missed. Secondly were the countless times he was caught in off side positions. The SA coach probably after seeing Iheanacho at City has understood that the only way to stop him from playing is not to allow the balls to get to him. We saw that happen several times at City this season. Iheanacho rides on the back of good Atracking midfield and wings play. He is still our most lethal finisher.

Kayode substituting Iheanacho was when the game ended for Nigeria.

Let me analyse Rohr's thinking before the substitution: We were on a 4-3-3 formation and under sparadic attacks from SA. Depleting the midfield further by removing either Iwobi or Simon would spell more doom. In the balance of play SA was having the upper hand in the midfield at that point in time. He left the two wingers and pulled out Iheanacho with the expectations that Kayode who is more of a natural striker than Iheanacho would have been able to use his pace and skills to outwit the SA defenders on a one on one basis. Alas it turned out that Rohr over estimated Kayode's abilities. At a time in the game I asked if Kayode was still on that field.

Musa's introduction was to introduce more direct play as Iwobi was practically kept wide and we made more incursion into the SA defense as he was even able to combine well on one or two occasions with Kayode. But the player to finish those moves was not there. Had Iheanacho been kept in the game.... who knows?

Osimhen, was the final trow of the die. We were 2-0 down already and so he just had to gamble by pulling out Simon. Osimhen made some good touches and edge of the box moves but not good enough to make anything happen.

Mikel and V. Moses would have obviously made the difference. What the SA defenders did was to keep Iwobi and Simon in wide positions something Moses would have been able to break with his dribbling skills, pace and direct play.
Mikel would have been able to break down the organised SA defense with his dribbling skills, ball holding and shielding abilities plus timely release of the ball for Iheanacho.

If it is doable I would have pleased with God to take Mikel's age back to at least 25!. We are not ready to move on without him.

All these wahala was bc we met a very organized defense.

Then also I think Rohr spent more time focusing on our strength and not much on SA's weaknesses while reverse was the case for SA.

I have the belief that we still qualify. We can also beat SA away.

I wish Ikeme, Balogun, Mikel And Moses quick recovery. They are the back bone of the team. August in not far away again.

Icon4s:
Your first paragraph is just the summary of why our attack could not break down the SA defense.

For eg in that first half Iheanacho was practically kept off on several occasions. There were through balls from the midfield in that first half but they were either intercepted by their organized CB pairing or they kept Iheanacho off.

To rescue the situation, Iwobi had to play wide to pull usually two of the defenders to him. Expecting a disorganization of the CB pairing which could have given room for Iheanacho to operate. But his lack of athletism limited him to wide positions plus the SA defenders made sure he never made progress into the their 18yards box.

Etebo in an attempt to break the defence started making solo runs - what he is known for but his finishing touches let him down as he was always putting himself in a difficult position to aim at goal. Etebo's problem now I think is the 'Jack of all trade but master of none'. I think we need to define the role he will play for the national team and confine him to it. I recommend the CM. The role he played against Algeria.

Simon Moses has not improved a bit. He is not a starter IMO. He tried to use his skill and pace to outwit the SA defenders but his crosses were either not timely or too wide. At a point he was just playing crosses not directly targeting any player and expecting a miracle to happen.

Iheanacho was not much involved in the game. The major highlight I have of him was the pass he gave to Etebo that he missed. Secondly were the countless times he was caught in off side positions. The SA coach probably after seeing Iheanacho at City has understood that the only way to stop him from playing is not to allow the balls to get to him. We saw that happen several times at City this season. Iheanacho rides on the back of good Atracking midfield and wings play. He is still our most lethal finisher.

Kayode substituting Iheanacho was when the game ended for Nigeria.

Let me analyse Rohr's thinking before the substitution: We were on a 4-3-3 formation and under sparadic attacks from SA. Depleting the midfield further by removing either Iwobi or Simon would spell more doom. In the balance of play SA was having the upper hand in the midfield at that point in time. He left the two wingers and pulled out Iheanacho with the expectations that Kayode who is more of a natural striker than Iheanacho would have been able to use his pace and skills to outwit the SA defenders on a one on one basis. Alas it turned out that Rohr over estimated Kayode's abilities. At a time in the game I asked if Kayode was still on that field.

Musa's introduction was to introduce more direct play as Iwobi was practically kept wide and we made more incursion into the SA defense as he was even able to combine well on one or two occasions with Kayode. But the player to finish those moves was not there. Had Iheanacho been kept in the game.... who knows?

Osimhen, was the final trow of the die. We were 2-0 down already and so he just had to gamble by pulling out Simon. Osimhen made some good touches and edge of the box moves but not good enough to make anything happen.

Mikel and V. Moses would have obviously made the difference. What the SA defenders did was to keep Iwobi and Simon in wide positions something Moses would have been able to break with his dribbling skills, pace and direct play.
Mikel would have been able to break down the organised SA defense with his dribbling skills, ball holding and shielding abilities plus timely release of the ball for Iheanacho.

If it is doable I would have pleased with God to take Mikel's age back to at least 25!. We are not ready to move on without him.

All these wahala was bc we met a very organized defense.

Then also I think Rohr spent more time focusing on our strength and not much on SA's weaknesses while reverse was the case for SA.

I have the belief that we still qualify. We can also beat SA away.

I wish Ikeme, Balogun, Mikel And Moses quick recovery. They are the back bone of the team. August in not far away again.

Mickael2:
oga is it that you cannot comprehend simple English?

He said Musa and Kayode linked up well, he said the SA defence confined Iwobi to the wide areas alone. Guy you are getting outta control I swear

Icon4s:
Your first paragraph is just the summary of why our attack could not break down the SA defense.

For eg in that first half Iheanacho was practically kept off on several occasions. There were through balls from the midfield in that first half but they were either intercepted by their organized CB pairing or they kept Iheanacho off.

To rescue the situation, Iwobi had to play wide to pull usually two of the defenders to him. Expecting a disorganization of the CB pairing which could have given room for Iheanacho to operate. But his lack of athletism limited him to wide positions plus the SA defenders made sure he never made progress into the their 18yards box.

Etebo in an attempt to break the defence started making solo runs - what he is known for but his finishing touches let him down as he was always putting himself in a difficult position to aim at goal. Etebo's problem now I think is the 'Jack of all trade but master of none'. I think we need to define the role he will play for the national team and confine him to it. I recommend the CM. The role he played against Algeria.

Simon Moses has not improved a bit. He is not a starter IMO. He tried to use his skill and pace to outwit the SA defenders but his crosses were either not timely or too wide. At a point he was just playing crosses not directly targeting any player and expecting a miracle to happen.

Iheanacho was not much involved in the game. The major highlight I have of him was the pass he gave to Etebo that he missed. Secondly were the countless times he was caught in off side positions. The SA coach probably after seeing Iheanacho at City has understood that the only way to stop him from playing is not to allow the balls to get to him. We saw that happen several times at City this season. Iheanacho rides on the back of good Atracking midfield and wings play. He is still our most lethal finisher.

Kayode substituting Iheanacho was when the game ended for Nigeria.

Let me analyse Rohr's thinking before the substitution: We were on a 4-3-3 formation and under sparadic attacks from SA. Depleting the midfield further by removing either Iwobi or Simon would spell more doom. In the balance of play SA was having the upper hand in the midfield at that point in time. He left the two wingers and pulled out Iheanacho with the expectations that Kayode who is more of a natural striker than Iheanacho would have been able to use his pace and skills to outwit the SA defenders on a one on one basis. Alas it turned out that Rohr over estimated Kayode's abilities. At a time in the game I asked if Kayode was still on that field.

Musa's introduction was to introduce more direct play as Iwobi was practically kept wide and we made more incursion into the SA defense as he was even able to combine well on one or two occasions with Kayode. But the player to finish those moves was not there. Had Iheanacho been kept in the game.... who knows?

Osimhen, was the final trow of the die. We were 2-0 down already and so he just had to gamble by pulling out Simon. Osimhen made some good touches and edge of the box moves but not good enough to make anything happen.

Mikel and V. Moses would have obviously made the difference. What the SA defenders did was to keep Iwobi and Simon in wide positions something Moses would have been able to break with his dribbling skills, pace and direct play.
Mikel would have been able to break down the organised SA defense with his dribbling skills, ball holding and shielding abilities plus timely release of the ball for Iheanacho.

If it is doable I would have pleased with God to take Mikel's age back to at least 25!. We are not ready to move on without him.

All these wahala was bc we met a very organized defense.

Then also I think Rohr spent more time focusing on our strength and not much on SA's weaknesses while reverse was the case for SA.

I have the belief that we still qualify. We can also beat SA away.

I wish Ikeme, Balogun, Mikel And Moses quick recovery. They are the back bone of the team. August in not far away again.

Icon4s:
Your first paragraph is just the summary of why our attack could not break down the SA defense.

For eg in that first half Iheanacho was practically kept off on several occasions. There were through balls from the midfield in that first half but they were either intercepted by their organized CB pairing or they kept Iheanacho off.

To rescue the situation, Iwobi had to play wide to pull usually two of the defenders to him. Expecting a disorganization of the CB pairing which could have given room for Iheanacho to operate. But his lack of athletism limited him to wide positions plus the SA defenders made sure he never made progress into the their 18yards box.

Etebo in an attempt to break the defence started making solo runs - what he is known for but his finishing touches let him down as he was always putting himself in a difficult position to aim at goal. Etebo's problem now I think is the 'Jack of all trade but master of none'. I think we need to define the role he will play for the national team and confine him to it. I recommend the CM. The role he played against Algeria.

Simon Moses has not improved a bit. He is not a starter IMO. He tried to use his skill and pace to outwit the SA defenders but his crosses were either not timely or too wide. At a point he was just playing crosses not directly targeting any player and expecting a miracle to happen.

Iheanacho was not much involved in the game. The major highlight I have of him was the pass he gave to Etebo that he missed. Secondly were the countless times he was caught in off side positions. The SA coach probably after seeing Iheanacho at City has understood that the only way to stop him from playing is not to allow the balls to get to him. We saw that happen several times at City this season. Iheanacho rides on the back of good Atracking midfield and wings play. He is still our most lethal finisher.

Kayode substituting Iheanacho was when the game ended for Nigeria.

Let me analyse Rohr's thinking before the substitution: We were on a 4-3-3 formation and under sparadic attacks from SA. Depleting the midfield further by removing either Iwobi or Simon would spell more doom. In the balance of play SA was having the upper hand in the midfield at that point in time. He left the two wingers and pulled out Iheanacho with the expectations that Kayode who is more of a natural striker than Iheanacho would have been able to use his pace and skills to outwit the SA defenders on a one on one basis. Alas it turned out that Rohr over estimated Kayode's abilities. At a time in the game I asked if Kayode was still on that field.

Musa's introduction was to introduce more direct play as Iwobi was practically kept wide and we made more incursion into the SA defense as he was even able to combine well on one or two occasions with Kayode. But the player to finish those moves was not there. Had Iheanacho been kept in the game.... who knows?

Osimhen, was the final trow of the die. We were 2-0 down already and so he just had to gamble by pulling out Simon. Osimhen made some good touches and edge of the box moves but not good enough to make anything happen.

Mikel and V. Moses would have obviously made the difference. What the SA defenders did was to keep Iwobi and Simon in wide positions something Moses would have been able to break with his dribbling skills, pace and direct play.
Mikel would have been able to break down the organised SA defense with his dribbling skills, ball holding and shielding abilities plus timely release of the ball for Iheanacho.

If it is doable I would have pleased with God to take Mikel's age back to at least 25!. We are not ready to move on without him.

All these wahala was bc we met a very organized defense.

Then also I think Rohr spent more time focusing on our strength and not much on SA's weaknesses while reverse was the case for SA.

I have the belief that we still qualify. We can also beat SA away.

I wish Ikeme, Balogun, Mikel And Moses quick recovery. They are the back bone of the team. August in not far away again.

forgiveness:
.




Can you please explain the @bolded Mr grammar?

forgiveness:
.




Can you please explain the @bolded Mr grammar?

Eseose9:
Nawa o Is like you don't understand what he meant by that statement.
He was trying to project what was on Rohr's mind.Looks like you like arguing for the sake of argument.

Eseose9:
Nawa o Is like you don't understand what he meant by that statement.
He was trying to project what was on Rohr's mind.Looks like you like arguing for the sake of argument.

Icon4s:
Michael2 don't bother explaining. Thanks for the attempt to clarify on my behalf.

That was obviously an error. But you saw where I mentioned that Kayode combined with Musa.

So can we move on please?

somehow:
Everyone but you believe the attack was poor. Can you ever be objective? I don't type much on this thread but I follow it religiously, just couldn't hold in your bias comments again when it comes to anything that has to do with Iheanacho.

Take it or leave it, the attack was poor and a better striker would have done more than what he did that day. (Well he's not a 9 so shouldn't be used as one again.) SS is his position.

Danielnino00:
Asamoah Gyan scored his 50th goal for Ghana yesterday. Meanwhile, our own top scorer of all time who is late(RIP) had only 37 goals..
Seriously after Yekini,Yakubu was the best striker the super eagles ever had.. He could have broken Yekini record if only Nigerians had forgiven him after that miss at South Africa 2010. Even Kanu himself with all the hype and glory(no disrespect) only managed 13 goals in 86 appearances for the eagles.Ahmed Musa self has 13 goals in over 60 appearance. That's pitiful.
maybe Iheanacho can br our own Asamoah Gyan, but he won't do it while playing as a lone striker!

Mickael2:
I can't believe you are still arguing this with theGoodJoe of all people, I am tempted to ask if you are a newbie.

#Fact: Iheanacho's first touch has been poor since the match against Algeria, I think the boy seriously needs to start learning how to control the ball with a second touch in tight positions, I wonder what he is learning from Pep's drill if his first touch is getting worse by the day. Saturday wasn't an exception, he was making runs on the wrong side of the midfielders, you have 2 right footed midfielders apporaching from the DMF position, your runs should be in such a way that it would favour their right foot but he will be standing behind the last defender on the left side waiting for a miracle, and even when the miracle came he couldn't outpace a 35 year old GK like you said but the other day I said Kayode is faster than Nacho and some of them wanted to kill me.

TheGoodJoe always says that he wants Nacho to play more like Suarez, so do you think that Suarez would have stayed up top all match long looking for a lucky pass? When such conditions happen in Barcelona you see Suarez dropping deep, and he and whoever is there will start playing 1-2s from outside the box to unlock the defence and if Nacho did something similar, trust me Iwobi feeds on those kinds of play and he would have brought Iwobi into the game which makes me believe that even if Iwobi moved into the middle nothing would have changed because Nacho wasn't just great. There is a reason why Pedro and Willian score a lot for Chelsea because their lone forward brings others into play

bigblangston:
I can't believe someone tapped into my subconscious to bring out all these. Expect to be served some papers from my lawyers when this public holiday is over. And someone still said kelechi was impressive on Saturday

somehow:
Everyone but you believe the attack was poor. Can you ever be objective? I don't type much on this thread but I follow it religiously, just couldn't hold in your bias comments again when it comes to anything that has to do with Iheanacho.

Take it or leave it, the attack was poor and a better striker would have done more than what he did that day. (Well he's not a 9 so shouldn't be used as one again.) SS is his position.

goldfish80:
This is exactly what I have tried to communicate to TheGoodJoe. Funny enough, Rantie was the closest I saw to Suarez not Kelechi.

I expected to see Kelechi try to get closer to Etebo and sometimes even switch positions, allowing Etebo or even Ndidi the space to run behind him from deep which would inevitably destabilise the South African organisation at the back.

If Kelechi had dropped a bit deeper, Etebo/Ndidi would have had the space to make untracked runs from deep inside the Nigerian half. I can tell you CBs don't like dealing with those kind of runs. Box to box midfielders like Vidal, Lampard,Pogba trive on this sort of situations.

Kelechi playing off the shoulder of the last defender, waiting for an inch perfect through ball was not a wise move because those through balls will always appear over hit, under hit and definitely make the passer look stupid with the organized defence of the South Africans. And Khune well stationed in goal to play the sweeper role.

Someone who didn't play the game won't understand that the defensive setup made those passes look bad.

TheGoodJoe:

Please explain how the attack was poor. Take it or leave it does not work in any way.

I have explained why Iheanacho's performance was not poor. He made the right runs. His positioning was good.

The reason we did not rip the South Africans apart was because of poor final passes.

So you explain how he was poor.

Loogan:
Peeps here running their mouth anyhow forming analyst...for people saying iheanacho is not a striker or top 9, I don't understand you people, this guy came out of one of the best academies in the world a certified 9 and people here be forming as if they know more the the trained personnel whom watched his progress and trained him...or the SE team a hould now be structured to fit iheanacho because he is better as a SS? Even at man city under pep guadiola he has played as a striker so what's the fuss, he dosent get enough delivery against South Africa and people start calling for his head saying he should never be used as a striker this boy is our highest goal scorer since roah reign predominantly used as a striker fear God....Football of this age a foward player (striker) is required to be able to play multiple positions upfront, Griezmman is a SS but he plays as a top striker for atletico to excellence effect so what is the noise...what does a striker do that iheanacho can't?....thegoodjoe is trying to explain that iheanacho wasn't giving good delivery and made very good runs but wasn't feed enough and people be slating him that he's biased, don't know how some of you watch a match.

TheGoodJoe:

I hope you are kidding. No striker in the world can do better with zero good chances created from the midfield. Watch the game again, Nacho's runs were perfect and the final balls to him were atrocious. Even CR7 and Messi can not do much in such scenario.

somehow:
Take it or leave it, he performed badly, a good striker falls back to ask for the ball if the ball does not get to him while staying forward. common sense for strikers (ditto: Suarez, Costa, Van, Mane e.t.c)

somehow:
@loogan

Iheanacho a certified 9?

10th wonders of the world