Cybereagles

Cellular wrote:

txj wrote:

Cellular wrote:There's no law or rule that says you can't qualify out of your group while building a team for the future.

He currently/presently has the team to do such.

I don't understand the deliberate lowering of standards for Rohr. All he did was just qualify us for the World Cup... he is yet to do anything to justify the confidence you guys are bestowing on him as if he is the only one capable of doing something most of our coaches have done since 94.

Not quite sure I understand the basis of the confidence in this team on here...(more on that in a piece I'm working on btw)

I would just add that decisions such as this would need to be made on the basis of proper analysis not a blanket rule.

Why do I say this?

There is a 2nd round finish that is still worthy of a sack!

So, what is/are your bare minimum expectations?

Or do you retain him based on "artistic merit" and "degree of difficulty"?

The minimum expectation remains unchanged. I speak to the decision surrounding performance.

Cellular wrote:

fabio wrote:

Damunk wrote:DONT BE ANNOYED O, JUST WONDERING.....

Pinick said today while speaking with Channels Sports News that there is a common joke in the NFF that "this team is better prepared for (WC) 2022 than 2018".
So it seems the team is ultimately being groomed for 4 years time when it'll be expected to be at its peak -
obviously with a few new additions that come on stream over time.

So, what if.... (I'll add the mandatory 'God forbid') this team should get knocked out in the very first round in Russia?

Should Rohr be sent packing?
Or would we be willing and able to see out the medium to long term plan?

Just asking. Let's face it. Like Pinnick keeps saying, "this is a young team."
A very young team.
Probably the youngest at the WC.....

Pinnick can keep his inside joke to himself.

The minimum required is second round elimination.

This deliberate lowering of standards for Pinnicks (failure) regime must stop.

Tell me about it.

They are acting like we haven't qualified for the World Cup in the past.

Dude better get to the second round.

Onigbinde also had a young team in 2002...we should not lower standards for anyone, unless there is a general agreement that from now henceforth, no-one gets fired for not getting out of round 1.

Keshi, with the likes of Babatunde, Uchebo, Ameobi, that #2 (I forget his name), made it to second round, and lost to France with atrocious refereeing and a sub-par Mikel.

Cellular wrote:There's no law or rule that says you can't qualify out of your group while building a team for the future.

He currently/presently has the team to do such.

I don't understand the deliberate lowering of standards for Rohr. All he did was just qualify us for the World Cup... he is yet to do anything to justify the confidence you guys are bestowing on him as if he is the only one capable of doing something most of our coaches have done since 94.

Thank you chief,just because the guy is white nothing else.Her should be let go if he cant get pass the group stage.
I feel like this team is good enough to go all out for the trophy.
1)His target number one should be top the group.
2)Second round beat the team infront of you,if you top a group with Argentina then you likely might miss France who wants to top their group also.Denmark should be beaten this time around but respect them.
3)From last 8 play a do or die game as you set your eye on the trophy.
If this man cant take this team to next round he should be fired,

Damunk wrote:

Cellular wrote:

Damunk wrote:

Cellular wrote:

txj wrote:

Cellular wrote:There's no law or rule that says you can't qualify out of your group while building a team for the future.

He currently/presently has the team to do such.

I don't understand the deliberate lowering of standards for Rohr. All he did was just qualify us for the World Cup... he is yet to do anything to justify the confidence you guys are bestowing on him as if he is the only one capable of doing something most of our coaches have done since 94.

Not quite sure I understand the basis of the confidence in this team on here...(more on that in a piece I'm working on btw)

I would just add that decisions such as this would need to be made on the basis of proper analysis not a blanket rule.

Why do I say this?

There is a 2nd round finish that is still worthy of a sack!

So, what is/are your bare minimum expectations?

Or do you retain him based on "artistic merit" and "degree of difficulty"?

Our expectations are QF at least but that is not to say we go ahead and just "sack" if those expectations are not met.

Txj is right. There shouldn't be a blanket rule. That's just silly.

There are a million scenarios that can get us ejected from the tournament before our expectations are met and they may not be down to the coach at all.

Hypothetical Scenario 1:
We beat Croatia
Draw with Iceland
Lose to Argentina 2-3 from a last minute goal which cameras show was clearly offside.
We lose out on goal difference to Croatia, all down to that dubious goal.
We sack Rohr one time.

Hypothetical Scenario 2
We draw with Croatia.
We beat Iceland
We draw 1-1 with Argentina with 10 men after we have Ndidi sent off on 55 minutes after a dive by Aguero cons the ref.
Argentina scapes through with Croatia.
We sack Rohr one time.

Hypotheical Scenario 3:
We lose to Croatia
We draw with Iceland
We beat Argentina 2-0 but need to win by 3 clear goals to qualify
Argentina and Croatia go through
We sack Rohr one time.

Now you tell me how impossible these scenarios are and what beneft there is to moronically following a blanket rule as is being suggested.

Then he better not "What if"!

Chief, I AM SIMPLY TESTING YOUR RESOLVE HERE.
Its a simple question: In the above circumstances would you write Rohr's sack letter before they arrive back @MMIA?

You must recall occasions when our teams have lost but the general mood in Nigeria has been favourable.
Its a simple question to real-life scenarios.
Feel free to do your own what ifs?

NO RUN O.....

Doc, I resemble an Arsenal fan?

You play to win the game!

Not participation trophies, not moral victories...

The only scenario I will give him a pass is if we get eliminated by a coin toss. PERIOD!

charlie wrote:Whatever happens, even if we lose all 3 games, Rohr must be left alone to groom these kids...

Perfect example of the perils that can befall the most innocent and well intended parlance. "Groom" is heavily indebted to Yorkshire's ravenous reprobates from rendering it amongst the most sickening of verbs in Lizzie's language. Moving on...

There's no reason to assume 4 more years will translate into anything other than a blank page and brand new contest. Four years from now, new prospects will emerge, some of great potential will plateau or plummet and others will fill the expanse in between. Football is predictably unpredictable and awash with constants and consistencies.

Should Rohr be given right to remain if the WC ends in absolute failure? Has such a privilege been afforded others? If he fails, he has failed and failure merits it's just reward.

I am ambivalent about this issue. Personally, I do not support the wily-nily sacking of our coaches because I believe that it has an adverse effect on team building and my preference is some stability at the level of the coaching staff.

I would consider it outrageous to sack Rohr simply based on the team not making it beyond the first round. That outcome, without examination of the team's play, is problematic considering that we are not favored by many neutrals to actually come out of the group. Take the two scenarios below:

A
Nigeria Croatia 0-1(Nigeria conceding a late controversial penalty for the goal)
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-0
Croatia Argentina 1-0
Nigeria Argentina 1-1
Croatia Iceland 0-0

B
Nigeria Croatia 0-2
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-1 (Iceland has a pk saved late by Ezenwa )
Croatia Argentina 0-1
Nigeria Argentina 1-2
Croatia Iceland 3-1

In my opinion, Nigeria has done enough in scenario A and to fire the coach will be outrageous. In scenario B, yes fire the coach. What is the difference? It is a matter of some certainty that the team is poor. In Scenario A, the pattern does not indicate that outcome, in B it provides that indication.

Enugu II wrote:I am ambivalent about this issue. Personally, I do not support the wily-nily sacking of our coaches because I believe that it has an adverse effect on team building and my preference is some stability at the level of the coaching staff.

I would consider it outrageous to sack Rohr simply based on the team not making it beyond the first round. That outcome, without examination of the team's play, is problematic considering that we are not favored by many neutrals to actually come out of the group. Take the two scenarios below:

A
Nigeria Croatia 0-1(Nigeria conceding a late controversial penalty for the goal)
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-0
Croatia Argentina 1-0
Nigeria Argentina 1-1
Croatia Iceland 0-0

B
Nigeria Croatia 0-2
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-1 (Iceland has a pk saved late by Ezenwa )
Croatia Argentina 0-1
Nigeria Argentina 1-2
Croatia Iceland 3-1

In my opinion, Nigeria has done enough in scenario A and to fire the coach will be outrageous. In scenario B, yes fire the coach. What is the difference? It is a matter of some certainty that the team is poor. In Scenario A, the pattern does not indicate that outcome, in B it provides that indication.

Let’s not forget the SE coaching position is just a job. At work we know (especially managers) that except a person has life occurrences to keep him in a job, they’re not guaranteed to be there. We’re talking about firing and not about if he leaves for one reason or another. We’re not the only game in town. The NFF should be focused on having a program they can execute not relying on any one coach and seek to staff up accordingly. They should have options if they’re good managers.

Firing a person shouldn’t be a penalty for failure but about a change for the better. We need to reorient ourselves from this scapegoat mentality.

Damunk wrote:

Uncle Damunk, you are free to bump and keep on bumping.

Rohr was given all the resources required and requested for yet Rohr FAILED. There is no escaping and no excuses should be given, Rohr FAILED. He should be sacked for his failure. All this what if analysis... is waste of time.

fabio wrote:

Damunk wrote:

Uncle Damunk, you are free to bump and keep on bumping.

Rohr was given all the resources required and requested for yet Rohr FAILED. There is no escaping and no excuses should be given, Rohr FAILED. He should be sacked for his failure. All this what if analysis... is waste of time.

Uhm, Chief....na you e go pain pass.
Looks like he's staying.
Nigeria has decided to effect change by rejecting change.
We are tired of you 'change' agents!!!

The YeyeMan wrote:

Enugu II wrote:I am ambivalent about this issue. Personally, I do not support the wily-nily sacking of our coaches because I believe that it has an adverse effect on team building and my preference is some stability at the level of the coaching staff.

I would consider it outrageous to sack Rohr simply based on the team not making it beyond the first round. That outcome, without examination of the team's play, is problematic considering that we are not favored by many neutrals to actually come out of the group. Take the two scenarios below:

A
Nigeria Croatia 0-1(Nigeria conceding a late controversial penalty for the goal)
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-0
Croatia Argentina 1-0
Nigeria Argentina 1-1
Croatia Iceland 0-0

B
Nigeria Croatia 0-2
Argentina Iceland 2-1
Nigeria Iceland 1-1 (Iceland has a pk saved late by Ezenwa )
Croatia Argentina 0-1
Nigeria Argentina 1-2
Croatia Iceland 3-1

In my opinion, Nigeria has done enough in scenario A and to fire the coach will be outrageous. In scenario B, yes fire the coach. What is the difference? It is a matter of some certainty that the team is poor. In Scenario A, the pattern does not indicate that outcome, in B it provides that indication.

scenario B
fire the coward

fabio wrote:

Damunk wrote:

Uncle Damunk, you are free to bump and keep on bumping.

Rohr was given all the resources required and requested for yet Rohr FAILED. There is no escaping and no excuses should be given, Rohr FAILED. He should be sacked for his failure. All this what if analysis... is waste of time.

Was he "given" the players to execute his vision? This is a question we want to ignore because we spent all of our time pre-World Cup hyping our players beyond their capabilities. Even now, we continue to hype them thinking that is is only "belief" and "confidence" that was lacking, and "belief" and "confidence" is what made it possible for Mexico to play the kind of superb counter-attacking game they played against a lack-luster Germany.

Damunk wrote:DONT BE ANNOYED O, JUST WONDERING.....

Pinick said today while speaking with Channels Sports News that there is a common joke in the NFF that "this team is better prepared for (WC) 2022 than 2018".
So it seems the team is ultimately being groomed for 4 years time when it'll be expected to be at its peak -
obviously with a few new additions that come on stream over time.

So, what if.... (I'll add the mandatory 'God forbid') this team should get knocked out in the very first round in Russia?

Should Rohr be sent packing?
Or would we be willing and able to see out the medium to long term plan?

Just asking. Let's face it. Like Pinnick keeps saying, "this is a young team."
A very young team.
Probably the youngest at the WC.....

bad luck tongue

ohsee wrote: Was he "given" the players to execute his vision? This is a question we want to ignore because we spent all of our time pre-World Cup hyping our players beyond their capabilities. Even now, we continue to hype them thinking that is is only "belief" and "confidence" was what is lacking and this is what made it possible for Mexico to play the kind of superb counter-attacking game they played against a lack-luster Germany.

No coach in a Football (national team) is "given" players to execute his vision... The coach will have to work with the available resources.

fabio wrote:

ohsee wrote: Was he "given" the players to execute his vision? This is a question we want to ignore because we spent all of our time pre-World Cup hyping our players beyond their capabilities. Even now, we continue to hype them thinking that is is only "belief" and "confidence" was what is lacking and this is what made it possible for Mexico to play the kind of superb counter-attacking game they played against a lack-luster Germany.

No coach in a Football (national team) is "given" players to execute his vision... The coach will have to work with the available resources.

100% correct. Now what if the available resources are not up to par to achieve the results expected?

ohsee wrote: 100% correct. Now what if the available resources are not up to par to achieve the results expected?

An honourable person will have assessed the resources before accepting the job. If not up to par, will not accept the job or accept will a disclaimer from the very beginning.

'What If', REBOOTED




AFCON 2019

SCENARIO 1
Winners: Egypt (AET, On PKs)
Runners Up: Nigeria
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 2
Winners: Nigeria (AET, On PKs)
Runners Up: Egypt
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 3
Winners: Senegal
Runners Up: Egypt
Third Place: Morrocco (AET, PKs)
Fourth Place: Nigeria
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 4
Winners: Morrocco
Runners Up: Egypt
Third Place: Nigeria
Fourth Place: Senegal
Do we sack?

This damunk vexes me a lot, we can see how he approves mediocrity..my goodness, what's wrong with some people. Rohr failed at worldcup and you are back wanting to keep him if another what if pops up again. I don't get it...what's your end game here?

Bigpokey24 wrote:This damunk vexes me a lot, we can see how he approves mediocrity..my goodness, what's wrong with some people. Rohr failed at worldcup and you are back wanting to keep him if another what if pops up again. I don't get it...what's your end game here?

Damunk wrote:
'What If', REBOOTED




AFCON 2019

SCENARIO 1
Winners: Egypt (AET, On PKs)
Runners Up: Nigeria
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 2
Winners: Nigeria (AET, On PKs)
Runners Up: Egypt
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 3
Winners: Senegal
Runners Up: Egypt
Third Place: Morrocco (AET, PKs)
Fourth Place: Nigeria
Do we sack?


SCENARIO 4
Winners: Morrocco
Runners Up: Egypt
Third Place: Nigeria
Fourth Place: Senegal
Do we sack?

What's the real difference in the last two scenarios?

kalani JR wrote: What's the real difference in the last two scenarios?

You know our people like to pick and choose our arguments, so I'm giving them room for that. The debate is in what circumstances do we sack, knowing there are many who are advocating sacking the coach should we fail to win the trophy?
I'm just curious what they and others would recommend in various possible scenarios.


Key points to note in bold.

Scenario 3:
Senegal, arguably the continent's strongest team (on paper) wins the tournament.
Nigeria is beaten in the semi-final to fourth place by Morocco on Pks, aet


Scenario 4:
Nigeria beats Senegal, arguably the continent's strongest team (on paper) to take third place in the semi-final in regular time.

The day we imbibe discipline, integrity, and patience in our collective culture .. the better