Gernot Rohr's Substitutions????

[Enugu II]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

[Damunk]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

The majority of criticisms of Rohr are far too subjective to be worth analysing beyond a certain point.
Those that do not like him will criticise him when he loses and when he wins; when he substitutes and when he doesn't.

It is what it is. They will find a problem somewhere. Even Ighalo was criticized by someone for not taking the ball on his left foot instead of his right. But watch the video; he didn't take two touches. It was a one-touch right-footed finish but it had t be criticized somehow, some way.

Some of Rohr's greatest critics will create a very loud silence when he does particularly well.
Where is Fabio to give an opinion on yesterday's game?
What is Bigporkey saying?

[Cellular]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

He is reading the game a lot faster. Kudos to him on that.

Let's hope it is not an aberration.


Ps., he had an injury forced substitution. So can't blame him for not being able to sub Ekong later on in the game.

[EMIR KONGI JAFFI JOFFA]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

He just can win, can he? I see you chose to point out that he was forced to use an early sub due to injury.

[Robbynice]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

He just can win, can he? I see you chose to point out that he was forced to use an early sub due to injury.

I don't think you see what Enugu II is doing. He is not taking sides. He made an observation and essentially opened it up for conversation. I might be wrong but I doubt it.

[vancity eagle]

I note that after Rohr had been severally criticized for late substitutions, he made early ones yesterday and here are just a few notes:

1. Two of his substitutions were central to winning yesterday's game -- taking off Mikel and Onuachu.

2. His early substitutions created a problem, however. It made it impossible to replace William Ekong who was clearly injured and was receiving treatment on the sideline but was beaten badly shortly after. Now, if Rohr had left a sub late, would he not have been criticized even though it shows now that such a decision may have been helpful yesterday.

What do you think?

2 things

1. Saving a sub for an injury doesnt mean you have to save all 3 subs until the dying minutes of the game. In the past he has been horribly slow to make even the first sub when it has been painfully obvious change was needed. Saying you are saving them for injury makes no sense. Not for the first 2 subs at least.

2. The first of the subs yesterday was enforced due to injury. The second sub absolutely needed to be made, and Rohr actually gambled yesterday (contrary to his previous nature) and made a 3rd sub with plenty of time left on the clock, and also considering that many of our players were previously ill, this was a HUGE gamble.

Frankly I am happy that Rohr showed us yesterday that he is now more willing to take big risks, because this has been his major problem in the past.

Yesterday he executed his subs and change of formations and tactics PERFECTLY.

In fact I dont think Rohr has ever read a game and made the necessary adjustments as well as he did yesterday in his entire time as SE coach.

This can only be a good thing. AT least now we know he wont just be sitting there helplessly watching without doing anything about it.

[Paveman]

It also depends on the outcome of the game. You can’t decide, from beforehand, if you are going to make late or early subs. In general, Rohr is a conservative man, which has helped the Eagles greatly in certain areas of their game - including team selection - but that makes him a bit more averse to risk taking.
I am a bit inclined to take yesterday’s game tactics with a pinch of salt because of all the team defections. I think he pretty much had very few options.

[olu]

Good substitutions, however, Mikel should never have started in the AM position. Onuachu would also probably have played better if Iwobi started as the AM.

[mystic]

The two second half subs were on point, while the first half sub was injury enforced. However, Jamilu Collins being declared unfit led him to gamble with starting Shehu (who was one of the players coming off illness). That was a gamble that backfired, and if he had to do it all over again, I wonder if he wouldn't have started Chidozie from the beginning, as that would have left him with a sub to react to the late injury to William Troost Ekong.

[icee]

Rohr approached the Burundi game with tactics that may not have been perfect but logical. He thought about it in a reasonable way and i will typically condone good / well reasoned approach even if the result didn't pan out. Onoachu as the target man, with Iwobi on the left showed an obvious attempt at using the "air raid" to neutralize Burundi. Onuachu scored 14 goals out of 23 games this season over 50% were headers. Iwobi put quite a few good crosses in the box the first half and Rohr's logic was quite reasonable. The problem may be that ...Paul needs to be more aggressive and quick at his positioning (more of a fox in the box type attitude) to maximize what appeared to be the main game plan for the first half.

The moment Rohr decided on another approach besides his original air raid idea, his subs then were spot on. Generally , we have a "method to our madness" and have added variation when needed. i expect Nigeria or Egypt to win this tourney. By the way Algeria with Mahrez were not bad at all. It'll be an interesting AFCON. tactics will be key!