niyi wrote:
Damunk wrote:
niyi wrote:
Damunk wrote:
niyi wrote:
Two strikers. Onuachu played the first game and couldn't trap a ball then Rohr still brought him on against Guinea and Madagascar. When asked why he wasn't playing Osimhen on two separate occasions, he came up with two separate excuses.
1. He was not showing the right attitude
2. He was not strong enough...
The second excuse is pathetic as Osimhen is particularly known for being strong. Rohr should come out and tell us his real reason for refusing to play the boy until 45 mins in the last game.
Why don't you tell us the reason nah?

I don't claim to know the truth but
I know when I'm being told a lieThe problem here is that you don't know when your bias/prejudice/preconceptions are influencing your interpretation of events. Nobody does.
There is nothing in the public domain that should give you absolute certainty that the claim that Osimhen was not quite up to 'strength' against his older African contemporaries is a lie, if not for your bias.
Even before AFCON, some of us here were innocently stating that Osimhen needs to bulk up. I'm sure the threads are laughing somewhere on EN.
So your total belief that Rohr was "lying" might be totally wrong.
Just sayin'.

Please link us to these threads.
Criticizing player selection and questioning a coach's motivation when decisions are very questionable is normal. In the press conference before South Africa, Ighalo and Rohr spoke to the press and Rohr gloated about Ighalo being his personal project... his motivation seemingly to show Nigerians who abused Ighalo after the world cup they were wrong to do so. Such unprofessional behaviour. Add that to his keeping Osimhen on the bench all through the tournament even when we were chasing a goal against Madagascar, our coach brought on Simon Moses (1 goal all season last season) with Osimhen on the bench. You have to be a chief fence straddler to keep acting like all of this was normal.
By the way, the idea that a special type of strength is needed to play in the AFCON is racist. When Oliseh said Ekong was not strong enough against African opponents, we all came out to criticize him.
If I dig out such a thread, what will it mean to you?
Wouldnt it be a case of you simply dismissing it?
Or would you concede that maybe Rohr is not alone in such a belief and maybe he was not actually ''lying"?
The rest of your post is part of a wider debate but I am referring to this
specific point and how you have convinced yourself Rohr was lying.
Anyway, here's one:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=294855&p=5435816We've said similar things about Sadiq Umar and Awoniyi in the past and there's nothing racist about it.