'Zero Shots On Target' Is a Serious Discussion Point

[Damunk]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

[zee]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

We have no problem with scoring.................we will always score goals when needed, it is the hallmark of this team.
My fear is just about conceding easy goals that end up demoralising the whole team...............the problem is a goalkeeping one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cellular]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

We have no problem with scoring.................we will always score goals when needed, it is the hallmark of this team.
My fear is just about conceding easy goals that end up demoralising the whole team...............the problem is a goalkeeping one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chief Zee. It is disturbing that in a friendly that we did not have a shot on goal.
The result to me is sorta irrelevant.

We can fix the no shot on goal with personnel (currently on the team) and tactics.

We are a counter-attacking team... we did not execute any successful counterattack yesterday.

Some of our starters yesterday are more effective coming off the bench.

PS., we are finding out that we are yet to find a player capable of replacing Mikel.

[danfo driver]

And so what? Are we the first team to have zero shots on target? Do we have zero shots on target every game?

How can you watch that game and analyze the game and come here and write "Zero shots on Target is a serious discussion point?"

Sorry, it is NOT. It is not even a point worth discussing. There was a reason why we didnt have a shot on target in this one specific match... and the reason was very very clear. It is not a problem.

[zee]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

We have no problem with scoring.................we will always score goals when needed, it is the hallmark of this team.
My fear is just about conceding easy goals that end up demoralising the whole team...............the problem is a goalkeeping one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chief Zee. It is disturbing that in a friendly that we did not have a shot on goal.
The result to me is sorta irrelevant.

We can fix the no shot on goal with personnel (currently on the team) and tactics.

We are a counter-attacking team... we did not execute any successful counterattack yesterday.

Some of our starters yesterday are more effective coming off the bench.

PS., we are finding out that we are yet to find a player capable of replacing Mikel.

Kpom
I know......I know too well.

[Komani]

We don't have someone who can hold on to the ball and build from deep. Even when Mikel is around, he has to drop deep to help with build up. One of the reasons why I've wanted Mikel to play deep alongside Ndidi with Iwobi as 10 and Etebo outwide.
Rohr clearly wants Mikel closer to the attack so we're stuck with mostly 2 box to box destroyers behind.
Joel Obi coming in might help because even though he's a box to box mid/destroyer like Onazi and Ndidi, he is a much better ball carrier(forget about last night).
Ideally we need another creative presence outwide and Iwobi needs to start asserting himself much much more.
Sad that Ogu seems to be the only thing close to a dlp(other than Mikel) that we have on the team.

[Cellular]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

And so what? Are we the first team to have zero shots on target? Do we have zero shots on target every game?

How can you watch that game and analyze the game and come here and write "Zero shots on Target is a serious discussion point?"

Sorry, it is NOT. It is not even a point worth discussing. There was a reason why we didnt have a shot on target in this one specific match... and the reason was very very clear. It is not a problem.

Just had to requote what Damunk wrote to see if your post addressed his post.

He is talking about this specific game.
Why didn't we have a shot on goal?
What could have been the problem with us not having a shot on goal?
Is this an aberration?
Is it due to what we did not do or due to what the opponent did?

[ohenhen1]

There is no problem. It was a friendly. The coach is most likely not showing everything to the prying eyes and he was experimenting. Our defense has improved that is a good sign.

[Ayo Akinfe]

Anyway, we will see what Rohr does. I am sure he knows he needs to work on the team's creativity, so we will just have to sit back and rely on his judgement.

I for one am happy to go along with whatever he deems best. Were I in his shoes though, this is what i would do:

[1] Play Kelechi Nwakali as my playmaker
[2] Play Tyronne Ebuehi and Joel Obi as my fullback with a mandate to get forward and provide width
[3] Play Victor Moses and Henry Onyekuru as my wide forward with a mandate to run into the penalty area at every opportunity.

So far, I am yet to read of any better plans. However, we have until June to sort this out.

[pajimoh]

Why do you guys keep insisting we fo not have shots on goal? Even if we didn't, is this the second, third or fourth game we've not had a shot on goal for it to be a problem?

Sometimes you have to win ugly, but win.

We played Poland away, on a cold night with a 19 year ok making his full debut, and a right back also man Ng his full debut. Mixed with M Obi missing in action and J Obi returning after over 4 years absence.

One tree don't make a forest and one game don't make a good or bad team. Chillax dudes, we won.

[ohenhen1]

Our best midfield pairing is still Mikel, Ndidi and Onazi. Leave Mikel in his advanced role. It will be a bad idea to make major changes in the team at this point.

[waka-man]

The attack didn’t click at all yesterday but I wouldn’t worry too much.
Rohr played with a 4411 in the first half. It was a useful experiment, but I suspect it was necessitated by the absence of both Mikel and Etebo. It meant Moses and Iwobi played to wide and too deep. Then Nacho and Ighalo failed to build any kind of partnership.
And yet we won. That’s the good news.
In the second Moses was given license to roam a bit more and that made some difference.
But with Mikel in the team, Rohr will always play him the middle of a three behind a striker (or behind two strikers in a deeper role if he decides to play three at the back).
That will transform the translation from defence to attack and increase the supply lines. We’ll get shots in target.
But for me, to not have shots on target yet score, to largely contain a good side at home, to tough out a win; that’s really good news.
One final note: I agree that shots on target are a useful metric, but shots on goal as a whole are a better measure of an attack. Here were again behind the Poles, but by a margin you would expect for any away side. The same goes for the 57:43 possession split.

[zee]

There is no problem. It was a friendly. The coach is most likely not showing everything to the prying eyes and he was experimenting. Our defense has improved that is a good sign.

Nonsense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[balo]

What could have been the shot on target eventually won us the game.

[Ayo Akinfe]

Our best midfield pairing is still Mikel, Ndidi and Onazi. Leave Mikel in his advanced role. It will be a bad idea to make major changes in the team at this point.

Forget Onazi. He gives the ball away too much.

[danfo driver]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

And so what? Are we the first team to have zero shots on target? Do we have zero shots on target every game?

How can you watch that game and analyze the game and come here and write "Zero shots on Target is a serious discussion point?"

Sorry, it is NOT. It is not even a point worth discussing. There was a reason why we didnt have a shot on target in this one specific match... and the reason was very very clear. It is not a problem.

Just had to requote what Damunk wrote to see if your post addressed his post.

He is talking about this specific game.
Why didn't we have a shot on goal?
What could have been the problem with us not having a shot on goal?
Is this an aberration?
Is it due to what we did not do or due to what the opponent did?

We didnt have a shot on goal specifically because we played deep. This was a tactical battle. We didnt come to Poland to outplay the 6th best team in their own backyard. We came to compete, yes, but not outplay them. We also had to sit deep because they carry a specific threat--- they have the best striker in the world. And additionally, our counter attacks and transition were rushed, understandably because of the circumstances-- the pressure of playing away from home and against such a very good team.

As the game went on, we were content with controlling the game from a defensive perspective. And Poland is a damn damn damn good team! With players in the best clubs in the world, while our best midfielder plays for Leicester, our best defender is in Turkey and our best striker in China. You guys think we have 10 maradonas and one Buffon?

Do you think this thread will be opened if we didnt have a shot on target against Brazil or Spain in their own house? Poland is in the top 6 in the world like Brazil and Spain. People are not processing that, mentally. Everyone is thinking Poland is this backyard team because of their name--Poland.

We played Argentina the other day and did we have zero shots on target? No! Most likely if we had played Argentina at La Bombonera, we may have had no shots on target .... because when you play away games at the top top teams, you tailor your tactics to a specific kind of game-- as Mourinho calls it, "Survival football." You arent going there to control game with the ball or dominate. Usually, you are going there to manage the game. And thats one reason I smiled yesterday. For the first time ever (or in a long time), Nigeria has learned to control games in difficult situations.

I know this may sound arrogant, but I know football well enough, tactically, to understand what happened yesterday... In football, you have to take the circumstances into consideration.

[The YeyeMan]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

As I pointed out earlier it's a concern and indicative of a team that often struggled in build up and were indecisive in the final third. The sooner we get our full compliment of players together the better we'll become.

I think it's time to drop the 2nd striker in Iheanacho idea. He also needs to be in the penalty area when we have set-pieces in wide areas rather than trying to deliver them.

[zee]

Seriously now.
Sentiments aside, we can't sweep this vital statistic under the carpet.
The return of Mikel isn't going to correct this, and neither will Etebo.

So what is the problem?
What do we do?
What are our options?
What is Rohr thinking about this?

And so what? Are we the first team to have zero shots on target? Do we have zero shots on target every game?

How can you watch that game and analyze the game and come here and write "Zero shots on Target is a serious discussion point?"

Sorry, it is NOT. It is not even a point worth discussing. There was a reason why we didnt have a shot on target in this one specific match... and the reason was very very clear. It is not a problem.

Just had to requote what Damunk wrote to see if your post addressed his post.

He is talking about this specific game.
Why didn't we have a shot on goal?
What could have been the problem with us not having a shot on goal?
Is this an aberration?
Is it due to what we did not do or due to what the opponent did?

We didnt have a shot on goal specifically because we played deep. This was a tactical battle. We didnt come to Poland to outplay the 6th best team in their own backyard. We came to compete, yes, but not outplay them. We also had to sit deep because they carry a specific threat--- they have the best striker in the world. And additionally, our counter attacks and transition were rushed, understandably because of the circumstances-- the pressure of playing away from home and against such a very good team.

As the game went on, we were content with controlling the game from a defensive perspective. And Poland is a damn damn damn good team! With players in the best clubs in the world, while our best midfielder plays for Leicester, our best defender is in Turkey and our best striker in China. You guys think we have 10 maradonas and one Buffon?

Do you think this thread will be opened if we didnt have a shot on target against Brazil or Spain in their own house? Poland is in the top 6 in the world like Brazil and Spain. People are not processing that, mentally. Everyone is thinking Poland is this backyard team because of their name--Poland.

We played Argentina the other day and did we have zero shots on target? No! Most likely if we had played Argentina at La Bombonera, we may have had no shots on target .... because when you play away games at the top top teams, you tailor your tactics to a specific kind of game-- as Mourinho calls it, "Survival football." You arent going there to control game with the ball or dominate. Usually, you are going there to manage the game. And thats one reason I smiled yesterday. For the first time ever (or in a long time), Nigeria has learned to control games in difficult situations.

I know this may sound arrogant, but I know football well enough, tactically, to understand what happened yesterday... In football, you have to take the circumstances into consideration.

You were making sense until you derailed it by quoting the...............football-coward

[pajimoh]

In fact this is the kind of game that should sweet your belle. They threw everything at us. The defense stretched but did not break. They had all the attack but were breached. We were attacked but remained resolute.

I won't want to be in the Poles shoes this morning.

We did well considering. That is what matters. We've beaten a top South American team, a top European team. So it's looking like our decimation of top African teams was no fluke.

[Enugu II]

Sure, this is an issue but I do not think it is that big of an issue. I would be concerned big time if there were no opportunities to shoot at goal. In tight encounters like this, opportunities are not going to be that plentiful. Note that we did have multiple shots at goal which indicates that there were indeed opportunities to score besides the penalty kick. By my count, we did have at least six shots and I may have under counted. Vic Moses had two shots, and Ekong, Joel, Kelechi, and Ighalo had one each. We were quite close on two of those -- Vic Mo's free kick and Ighalo's header. The fact that they were not on goal is an issue that bothered on accurate shooting but you have to note that rarely do teams even convert any thing close to 30% of their shots at goal.

[zee]

Sure, this is an issue but I do not think it is that big of an issue. I would be concerned big time if there were no opportunities to shoot at goal. In tight encounters like this, opportunities are not going to be that plentiful. Note that we did have multiple shots at goal which indicates that there were indeed opportunities to score besides the penalty kick. By my count, we did have at least six shots and I may have under counted. Vic Moses had two shots, and Ekong, Joel, Kelechi, and Ighalo had one each. We were quite close on two of those -- Vic Mo's free kick and Ighalo's header. The fact that they were not on goal is an issue that bothered on accurate shooting but you have to note that rarely do teams even convert any thing close to 30% of their shots at goal.

Thanks Prof.

[danfo driver]

In fact this is the kind of game that should sweet your belle. They threw everything at us. The defense stretched but did not break. They had all the attack but were breached. We were attacked but remained resolute.

I won't want to be in the Poles shoes this morning.

We did well considering. That is what matters. We've beaten a top South American team, a top European team. So it's looking like our decimation of top African teams was no fluke.

And I am happy we have a coach who is profoundly playing down the result. Clearlly this is a guy who will make sure we learn from our mistakes.

[YemiBrazil]

Is it a clearly defined pattern (over a number of matches)? If not, then what is the issue? To make this a serious discussion, we need our 'shots on target' data for at least our last 5 matches to effectively spot an existing pattern in that direction or determine if it's a disturbing new trend. Tuesday's match should answer a few more questions. A 4-2 win over Argentina was a single event that doesn't say much so also this 1-0 victory over Poland in their backyard with zero shots on target. We need to spot a pattern.