We should have given the job to Paseiro right after Cape Verde

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

i rest my case , the NFF and the clueless press are to blame 100%

The result would have been the same or even worse. You can bet that the team would have been picked for him since he would have had no clue who our most effective players were. Do you really think he’s the one who made the decision to include Musa, Dessers and Mofi but not Iheanacho in the current squad? Maybe now, he’s beginning to be more familiar with the players. Anyway, I wish him the best of luck


Cheers.

[bret- hart]

i rest my case , the NFF and the clueless press are to blame 100%

The result would have been the same or even worse. You can bet that the team would have been picked for him since he would have had no clue who our most effective players were. Do you really think he’s the one who made the decision to include Musa, Dessers and Mofi but not Iheanacho in the current squad? Maybe now, he’s beginning to be more familiar with the players. Anyway, I wish him the best of luck


Cheers.

Ghana, Tunisia and Cameroon changed their coaches and still qualified for the WC. If we had Pizzaro yes we would have qualified. The NFF basically sabotaged the team.

[maceo4]

All I know is a full time coach gives you a better chance than an interim one, all day everyday. Nowhere in the world do they expect an interim coach to do anything more than just steady the ship and keep it from sinking, but they are not expecting them to win trophies. Even the players won’t fully respect someone whose just there holding a spot till they find a real coach.

[vancity eagle]

If only picnic kept his word…ohh well

And you think it was Pinnick that was at fault ?

As if there are no external forces at work.

[packerland]

Looking back at the whole thing now, I agree this coach should have taken over the SE team from the days of the AFCON. Personally, I thought Egu, with his presentation and all, will get the job done.

I won’t lie I thought he would get the job done. He was also calm during the press conferences. I knew we were I trouble when he started running his mouth & giving he out tactics whenever a mic was put in his face. When allowed Pinnick to crash his half time talk, I was convinced he was clueless yes man.

[maceo4]

If only picnic kept his word…ohh well

And you think it was Pinnick that was at fault ?

As if there are no external forces at work.

So they are the ones that made him lie to us on tv about Peseiro? Interesting…

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

All I know is a full time coach gives you a better chance than an interim one, all day everyday. Nowhere in the world do they expect an interim coach to do anything more than just steady the ship and keep it from sinking, but they are not expecting them to win trophies. Even the players won’t fully respect someone whose just there holding a spot till they find a real coach.

Stop reasoning like a primary 1 pupil. The designation of full time coach offers no advantages over one designated as an interim coach given the daunting obstacles to overcome in a very short period of time. Things like player familiarity are a much more important factor in the short term. That’s the main reason for appointing interim coaches. I have pointed out previously that Peseiro did not pick this team so no one should expect miracles until he becomes more familiar with the team and is able to choose his preferred players. It is comical that people are ejaculating seismically over a narrow and fortuitous victory over Sierra Leone, a team we are supposed to beat with our eyes closed given that they are ranked 86 places below the SuperEagles


Cheers.

[vancity eagle]

All I know is a full time coach gives you a better chance than an interim one, all day everyday. Nowhere in the world do they expect an interim coach to do anything more than just steady the ship and keep it from sinking, but they are not expecting them to win trophies. Even the players won’t fully respect someone whose just there holding a spot till they find a real coach.

Stop reasoning like a primary 1 pupil. The designation of full time coach offers no advantages over one designated as an interim coach given the daunting obstacles to overcome in a very short period of time. Things like player familiarity are a much more important factor in the short term. That’s the main reason for appointing interim coaches. I have pointed out previously that Peseiro did not pick this team so no one should expect miracles until he becomes more familiar with the team and is able to choose his preferred players. It is comical that people are ejaculating seismically over a narrow and fortuitous victory over Sierra Leone, a team we are supposed to beat with our eyes closed given that they are ranked 86 places below the SuperEagles


Cheers.

While I agree with most of your post. Sierra Leone are no pushovers. What happened the last 2 times we played them ?

They are also coming off of a nations cup where they drew with both Algeria and Ivory Coast.

Then add that disgraceful pitch into the mix and it all adds up.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

All I know is a full time coach gives you a better chance than an interim one, all day everyday. Nowhere in the world do they expect an interim coach to do anything more than just steady the ship and keep it from sinking, but they are not expecting them to win trophies. Even the players won’t fully respect someone whose just there holding a spot till they find a real coach.

Stop reasoning like a primary 1 pupil. The designation of full time coach offers no advantages over one designated as an interim coach given the daunting obstacles to overcome in a very short period of time. Things like player familiarity are a much more important factor in the short term. That’s the main reason for appointing interim coaches. I have pointed out previously that Peseiro did not pick this team so no one should expect miracles until he becomes more familiar with the team and is able to choose his preferred players. It is comical that people are ejaculating seismically over a narrow and fortuitous victory over Sierra Leone, a team we are supposed to beat with our eyes closed given that they are ranked 86 places below the SuperEagles


Cheers.

While I agree with most of your post. Sierra Leone are no pushovers. What happened the last 2 times we played them ?

They are also coming off of a nations cup where they drew with both Algeria and Ivory Coast.

Then add that disgraceful pitch into the mix and it all adds up.

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

[Orion]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

[Orion]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

You're contradicting yourself. You're saying SL is not a bad team but one bad game against them was reasonable grounds to "look beyond Rohr"? The away draw is acceptable for a team of SL's caliber. OK, something clearly went wrong with the game at home in which we were leading 4-0. But that is not enough to discard a coach. A poor home result is not new to the SE. Keshi lost 3-2 to Congo at home, which is even worse. Rohr also lost 2-0 to South Africa before going on to qualify for the WC.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

You're contradicting yourself. You're saying SL is not a bad team but one bad game against them was reasonable grounds to "look beyond Rohr"? The away draw is acceptable for a team of SL's caliber. OK, something clearly went wrong with the game at home in which we were leading 4-0. But that is not enough to discard a coach. A poor home result is not new to the SE. Keshi lost 3-2 to Congo at home, which is even worse. Rohr also lost 2-0 to South Africa before going on to qualify for the WC.

Do you know what contradicting means? Anyway, let’s proceed with the discussion.

The Saro game was just one of a string of poor and underwhelming performances. That particular game wasn’t just a bad game. It was the moment of truth for Rohr. If Italy were to play Iceland at home, for example, and they conceded 4 goals to Iceland after going up 4 goals, Robert Mancini would be fired before he ever had a chance to get on the bus for the trip back to the hotel


Cheers.

[Enugu II]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

You're contradicting yourself. You're saying SL is not a bad team but one bad game against them was reasonable grounds to "look beyond Rohr"? The away draw is acceptable for a team of SL's caliber. OK, something clearly went wrong with the game at home in which we were leading 4-0. But that is not enough to discard a coach. A poor home result is not new to the SE. Keshi lost 3-2 to Congo at home, which is even worse. Rohr also lost 2-0 to South Africa before going on to qualify for the WC.

Orion

Rohr was never sacked for a 4-4 home result against S/Leone despite the decidedly poor result it was. He was sacked for a STRING OF POOR RESULTS. He lost at home to a lowly rated CAR and then tied at home to CPV. A record of poor consecutive results was the reason for his removal.

[vancity eagle]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

You're contradicting yourself. You're saying SL is not a bad team but one bad game against them was reasonable grounds to "look beyond Rohr"? The away draw is acceptable for a team of SL's caliber. OK, something clearly went wrong with the game at home in which we were leading 4-0. But that is not enough to discard a coach. A poor home result is not new to the SE. Keshi lost 3-2 to Congo at home, which is even worse. Rohr also lost 2-0 to South Africa before going on to qualify for the WC.

Do you know what contradicting means? Anyway, let’s proceed with the discussion.

The Saro game was just one of a string of poor and underwhelming performances. That particular game wasn’t just a bad game. It was the moment of truth for Rohr. If Italy were to play Iceland at home, for example, and they conceded 4 goals to Iceland after going up 4 goals, Robert Mancini would be fired before he ever had a chance to get on the bus for the trip back to the hotel


Cheers.

Yeah like he was fired for losing their World Cup to North Macedonia which is even worse.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

We all know what happened the last two times we played them. That’s why it was reasonable to look beyond Rohr


Cheers.

On the contrary, their showing against Benin, Algeria, and CIV (on neutral ground) showed they were a much-improved team and not the whipping boys of old. On reflection, those Rohr results do not look as bad. Although losing a 4-0 lead at home was clearly a failure that any coach should learn from.

Sierra Leone have never been anybody’s whipping boys but a well prepared team of superior quality, like the SuperEagles, should always prevail over them. Losing a 4 - 0 lead against Sierra Leone proved that Rohr was out of his element. That was all on him


Cheers.

You're contradicting yourself. You're saying SL is not a bad team but one bad game against them was reasonable grounds to "look beyond Rohr"? The away draw is acceptable for a team of SL's caliber. OK, something clearly went wrong with the game at home in which we were leading 4-0. But that is not enough to discard a coach. A poor home result is not new to the SE. Keshi lost 3-2 to Congo at home, which is even worse. Rohr also lost 2-0 to South Africa before going on to qualify for the WC.

Do you know what contradicting means? Anyway, let’s proceed with the discussion.

The Saro game was just one of a string of poor and underwhelming performances. That particular game wasn’t just a bad game. It was the moment of truth for Rohr. If Italy were to play Iceland at home, for example, and they conceded 4 goals to Iceland after going up 4 goals, Robert Mancini would be fired before he ever had a chance to get on the bus for the trip back to the hotel


Cheers.

Yeah like he was fired for losing their World Cup to North Macedonia which is even worse.

Horrible example. A weaker team can pack the bus and win by a lucky goal, which was exactly the case. Italy outplayed North Macedonia in every imaginable way except score goals… and they didn’t concede 4 goals, which would have been unforgivable


Cheers.