Rohr v NFF - Fifa verdict pending!

[icee]

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

It is not about being stubborn. I liked Rohr. I travelled to the WC in 2018 excited about what he had done with the team. I was dissapointed after WC 2018 and when he stayed on, I was happy for him to build with a young team.

I remember being the only one defending him as I watched the 2-0 loss against Madagascar with friends. Subsequently, even though I was unhappy with the loss against Algeria, I never called for his head. Even after the draw against Sierra Leone, I did not call fir his head.

I was very critical of him in the home game against Benin Republic, but I praised him profusely after the excellent away win against Cape Verde. I only called for his sack after the terrible home display against Cape Verde. This was due to an accumulation of poor results.

You may not agree with me that sacking him was right. But nobody should tell me that I arrived at this position without careful consideration.

My guy, the real question is, did you see this absolutely disastrous outcome coming? What really could be worse? And what was your response to those that loudly and incessantly warned against it?
What is the point of change when you come out in the worst possible situation - which is what you were being warned against?

The ‘stubbornness’ is not that you are denying your decision to have him sacked. You are not one of those that are distancing themselves from their own campaign.
The stubbornness is refusing to even consider that you might have been wrong and maybe a little more consideration should have been given to those ‘WOWOs’ that called for restraint.
The calls were endless and if you were - and still are - one of those that met such calls with derision, then ‘stubbornness’ is in order. So it’s not even ‘wisdom in hindsight’.

Basically, by not recognizing all that, you are saying that if you’d had a crystal ball at the time showing you where we are now, you still would have had him sacked in the same circumstances.
Ol Boi, weytin dem dey call dat one nah?

By the way…you are more or less the only anti-Rohr person I can properly engage with on this issue. The feelings are far too raw and the overwhelming majority are just annoying me and I need to exercise restraint. So no vex say I’m ‘dragging matter’ with you. Na love.
Na only you I fit talk am with.

I'm not anti-Rohr. I just felt he had overstayed his welcome and would not have qualified us for the WC. I have not changed my kind on that position.


There was always a chance that we would not qualify. Even Senegal needed penalty kicks to win both the AFCON and qualify for the WC. However, I did not see Rohr qualifying us either, hence my decision to back his sack. The main villian here is Pinnick. He took too long to sack Rohr once the decision was made for him to go. And the uncertainty about Eguavoen's and Peseiro's roles did not help.

So it was not a mistake to sack Rohr. The mistake was allowing Pinnick near our NFF.

You are not dragging the matter Bro. It would be boring if we all had the same opinions. For now we have to look for the next game and try to cheer our team, whether we like the coach or not.

Bros, doing the right thing BUT at the wrong time is the same as doing the wrong thing. They could have let **** continue to the ANC as the timing was so short and he had not failed to meet any of his stipulated targets, then if he didn’t meet his ANC target then you have grounds to disengage him. Yes the bigger problem is the NFF and the way they handle things in general. Specifically how they went about firing **** is indicative of their deep-rooted issues and part of the reason some of us were saying that was not the right way to do things. And clearly it has blown up in their faces.

You have to develop a federation based on accountability and doing things the right way if you want to be successful and it’s way bigger than ****. But to act like they did it things right regarding his sacking is laughable at this point…

I do not disagree with you. The NFF cocked things up and I alluded to it on one of my posts on this thread. And when they did not appoint a replacement immediately after sacking him I was ok with him taking us to the AFCON. However the decision to sack him was ultimately the right one. I do not believe that he would have qualified us for the World Cup

I disagree with your opinion but understand you have a right to your thinking and conclusions. I do have a question for you per the bolded text. What precedent or past performances from Rohr makes you believe he would not have qualified us for the WC? He got us to the playoffs remember?..I'm curious

[shaq]

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

It is not about being stubborn. I liked Rohr. I travelled to the WC in 2018 excited about what he had done with the team. I was dissapointed after WC 2018 and when he stayed on, I was happy for him to build with a young team.

I remember being the only one defending him as I watched the 2-0 loss against Madagascar with friends. Subsequently, even though I was unhappy with the loss against Algeria, I never called for his head. Even after the draw against Sierra Leone, I did not call fir his head.

I was very critical of him in the home game against Benin Republic, but I praised him profusely after the excellent away win against Cape Verde. I only called for his sack after the terrible home display against Cape Verde. This was due to an accumulation of poor results.

You may not agree with me that sacking him was right. But nobody should tell me that I arrived at this position without careful consideration.

My guy, the real question is, did you see this absolutely disastrous outcome coming? What really could be worse? And what was your response to those that loudly and incessantly warned against it?
What is the point of change when you come out in the worst possible situation - which is what you were being warned against?

The ‘stubbornness’ is not that you are denying your decision to have him sacked. You are not one of those that are distancing themselves from their own campaign.
The stubbornness is refusing to even consider that you might have been wrong and maybe a little more consideration should have been given to those ‘WOWOs’ that called for restraint.
The calls were endless and if you were - and still are - one of those that met such calls with derision, then ‘stubbornness’ is in order. So it’s not even ‘wisdom in hindsight’.

Basically, by not recognizing all that, you are saying that if you’d had a crystal ball at the time showing you where we are now, you still would have had him sacked in the same circumstances.
Ol Boi, weytin dem dey call dat one nah?

By the way…you are more or less the only anti-Rohr person I can properly engage with on this issue. The feelings are far too raw and the overwhelming majority are just annoying me and I need to exercise restraint. So no vex say I’m ‘dragging matter’ with you. Na love.
Na only you I fit talk am with.

I'm not anti-Rohr. I just felt he had overstayed his welcome and would not have qualified us for the WC. I have not changed my kind on that position.


There was always a chance that we would not qualify. Even Senegal needed penalty kicks to win both the AFCON and qualify for the WC. However, I did not see Rohr qualifying us either, hence my decision to back his sack. The main villian here is Pinnick. He took too long to sack Rohr once the decision was made for him to go. And the uncertainty about Eguavoen's and Peseiro's roles did not help.

So it was not a mistake to sack Rohr. The mistake was allowing Pinnick near our NFF.

You are not dragging the matter Bro. It would be boring if we all had the same opinions. For now we have to look for the next game and try to cheer our team, whether we like the coach or not.

Bros, doing the right thing BUT at the wrong time is the same as doing the wrong thing. They could have let **** continue to the ANC as the timing was so short and he had not failed to meet any of his stipulated targets, then if he didn’t meet his ANC target then you have grounds to disengage him. Yes the bigger problem is the NFF and the way they handle things in general. Specifically how they went about firing **** is indicative of their deep-rooted issues and part of the reason some of us were saying that was not the right way to do things. And clearly it has blown up in their faces.

You have to develop a federation based on accountability and doing things the right way if you want to be successful and it’s way bigger than ****. But to act like they did it things right regarding his sacking is laughable at this point…

I do not disagree with you. The NFF cocked things up and I alluded to it on one of my posts on this thread. And when they did not appoint a replacement immediately after sacking him I was ok with him taking us to the AFCON. However the decision to sack him was ultimately the right one. I do not believe that he would have qualified us for the World Cup

I disagree with your opinion but understand you have a right to your thinking and conclusions. I do have a question for you per the bolded text. What precedent or past performances from Rohr makes you believe he would not have qualified us for the WC? He got us to the playoffs remember?..I'm curious

I think that's what Araoko says to himself in order to sleep better at night. One can only assume it's absolute bantery at this point

[maceo4]

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

It is not about being stubborn. I liked Rohr. I travelled to the WC in 2018 excited about what he had done with the team. I was dissapointed after WC 2018 and when he stayed on, I was happy for him to build with a young team.

I remember being the only one defending him as I watched the 2-0 loss against Madagascar with friends. Subsequently, even though I was unhappy with the loss against Algeria, I never called for his head. Even after the draw against Sierra Leone, I did not call fir his head.

I was very critical of him in the home game against Benin Republic, but I praised him profusely after the excellent away win against Cape Verde. I only called for his sack after the terrible home display against Cape Verde. This was due to an accumulation of poor results.

You may not agree with me that sacking him was right. But nobody should tell me that I arrived at this position without careful consideration.

My guy, the real question is, did you see this absolutely disastrous outcome coming? What really could be worse? And what was your response to those that loudly and incessantly warned against it?
What is the point of change when you come out in the worst possible situation - which is what you were being warned against?

The ‘stubbornness’ is not that you are denying your decision to have him sacked. You are not one of those that are distancing themselves from their own campaign.
The stubbornness is refusing to even consider that you might have been wrong and maybe a little more consideration should have been given to those ‘WOWOs’ that called for restraint.
The calls were endless and if you were - and still are - one of those that met such calls with derision, then ‘stubbornness’ is in order. So it’s not even ‘wisdom in hindsight’.

Basically, by not recognizing all that, you are saying that if you’d had a crystal ball at the time showing you where we are now, you still would have had him sacked in the same circumstances.
Ol Boi, weytin dem dey call dat one nah?

By the way…you are more or less the only anti-Rohr person I can properly engage with on this issue. The feelings are far too raw and the overwhelming majority are just annoying me and I need to exercise restraint. So no vex say I’m ‘dragging matter’ with you. Na love.
Na only you I fit talk am with.

I'm not anti-Rohr. I just felt he had overstayed his welcome and would not have qualified us for the WC. I have not changed my kind on that position.


There was always a chance that we would not qualify. Even Senegal needed penalty kicks to win both the AFCON and qualify for the WC. However, I did not see Rohr qualifying us either, hence my decision to back his sack. The main villian here is Pinnick. He took too long to sack Rohr once the decision was made for him to go. And the uncertainty about Eguavoen's and Peseiro's roles did not help.

So it was not a mistake to sack Rohr. The mistake was allowing Pinnick near our NFF.

You are not dragging the matter Bro. It would be boring if we all had the same opinions. For now we have to look for the next game and try to cheer our team, whether we like the coach or not.

Bros, doing the right thing BUT at the wrong time is the same as doing the wrong thing. They could have let **** continue to the ANC as the timing was so short and he had not failed to meet any of his stipulated targets, then if he didn’t meet his ANC target then you have grounds to disengage him. Yes the bigger problem is the NFF and the way they handle things in general. Specifically how they went about firing **** is indicative of their deep-rooted issues and part of the reason some of us were saying that was not the right way to do things. And clearly it has blown up in their faces.

You have to develop a federation based on accountability and doing things the right way if you want to be successful and it’s way bigger than ****. But to act like they did it things right regarding his sacking is laughable at this point…

I do not disagree with you. The NFF cocked things up and I alluded to it on one of my posts on this thread. And when they did not appoint a replacement immediately after sacking him I was ok with him taking us to the AFCON. However the decision to sack him was ultimately the right one. I do not believe that he would have qualified us for the World Cup

I don't know how we could say that given he had a history of qualifying us from an even tougher series. These Ghana matches were the type that pragmatic/safe/boring ****-ball would have worked well for, but who knows. What I do know, is we would have been in a much better place to assess that AFTER the ANC. And if it doesn't work out, we would have a better view of how to move forward and have more than 3 weeks for the replacement. Because if **** met his target and got us to the ANC Finals (which a similarly defensive team in our group did - Egypt) then he would have earned the right to prosecute the WCQ matches.

Whats just so annoying about this whole fiasco is the NFF just always finds ways to do things backwards. I mean the last time they had a perfect opportunity to disengage **** was after his WC 2018 failure. He didn't meet his target and so NFF was well within their rights to move a different direction, but instead re-upped his contract with picnic defending him vehemently. You defend and reward failure, but then punish the same individual when they are actually meeting what you asked them to do - in the guise of 'averting a disaster'...they really make zero sense...

[proclaimjesus02]

Not a fan of the NFF and their uselessness, but abeg Rohr should go and rest with this brouhaha with the NFF, he has no case Fifa should stress themselves about.

He's entitled to lost wages as a result of early termination of his contract. It's basic contract law.
Pay up!

I agree. But still he was rightly sacked. NFF should pay up

Ok. They wanted to avoid a disaster so they sacked him, the disaster was successfully avoided.

Time to pay up

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

It is not about being stubborn. I liked Rohr. I travelled to the WC in 2018 excited about what he had done with the team. I was dissapointed after WC 2018 and when he stayed on, I was happy for him to build with a young team.

I remember being the only one defending him as I watched the 2-0 loss against Madagascar with friends. Subsequently, even though I was unhappy with the loss against Algeria, I never called for his head. Even after the draw against Sierra Leone, I did not call fir his head.

I was very critical of him in the home game against Benin Republic, but I praised him profusely after the excellent away win against Cape Verde. I only called for his sack after the terrible home display against Cape Verde. This was due to an accumulation of poor results.

You may not agree with me that sacking him was right. But nobody should tell me that I arrived at this position without careful consideration.

But should we have sacked Rohr when there was no credible replacement and the deal with Peseiro was likely to fall through?

I think a proper risk analysis of the situation would have suggested that we had a better chance with keeping Rohr when there is no replacement than relying on a gamble with Eguavon.

[Cellular]

Not a fan of the NFF and their uselessness, but abeg Rohr should go and rest with this brouhaha with the NFF, he has no case Fifa should stress themselves about.

He's entitled to lost wages as a result of early termination of his contract. It's basic contract law.
Pay up!

I agree. But still he was rightly sacked. NFF should pay up

Ok. They wanted to avoid a disaster so they sacked him, the disaster was successfully avoided.

Time to pay up

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Kpom!

[Damunk]

Not a fan of the NFF and their uselessness, but abeg Rohr should go and rest with this brouhaha with the NFF, he has no case Fifa should stress themselves about.

He's entitled to lost wages as a result of early termination of his contract. It's basic contract law.
Pay up!

I agree. But still he was rightly sacked. NFF should pay up

Ok. They wanted to avoid a disaster so they sacked him, the disaster was successfully avoided.

Time to pay up

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Kpom!

Oga, you nor go Kpom proclaimjesus02’s follow-up comment too?

[Ugbowo]

I am with Aruako here. I still believe it was the right decision to fire Rohr. It was coming.

The mistake was the replacement not the timing. Ghana and to an extent Cameroon, clearly showed us that it doesn't matter when you hire a coach as long as you hire the right one.

[Damunk]

Whats just so annoying about this whole fiasco is the NFF just always finds ways to do things backwards. I mean the last time they had a perfect opportunity to disengage **** was after his WC 2018 failure. He didn't meet his target and so NFF was well within their rights to move a different direction, but instead re-upped his contract with picnic defending him vehemently. You defend and reward failure, but then punish the same individual when they are actually meeting what you asked them to do - in the guise of 'averting a disaster'...they really make zero sense...

If they were going to sack him after the 2018 World Cup, it wouldn’t have been for not hitting his given targets.
I might be wrong, but I seem to recall that his target when hired was to qualify us for the WC.
Maybe because of the very low base we were starting from at the time.
There are too many false narratives so I won’t be surprised if what you have stated here is not actually the case, despite the popularity of the view.

[Damunk]

I am with Aruako here. I still believe it was the right decision to fire Rohr. It was coming.

The mistake was the replacement not the timing. Ghana and to an extent Cameroon, clearly showed us that it doesn't matter when you hire a coach as long as you hire the right one.

The timing was wrong more so because there was no credible replacement.
Because Ghana beat us the way they did does not make their decision an act of genius.
Nine times out of ten they probably wouldn’t have qualified at our expense.

[Cellular]

I am with Aruako here. I still believe it was the right decision to fire Rohr. It was coming.

The mistake was the replacement not the timing. Ghana and to an extent Cameroon, clearly showed us that it doesn't matter when you hire a coach as long as you hire the right one.

The mistake was on the replacement as many who are dispassionate about this have stated.

The cynic in me tells me that it was like a self-fulfilling legacy... Pinnick didn't fully buy-in and was forced to come to a compromise... falsely believing that those who talked a good game had the answers.

He should've gone with Salisu and not have Eguavoen.
But he couldn't take the pressure.

[Cellular]

I am with Aruako here. I still believe it was the right decision to fire Rohr. It was coming.

The mistake was the replacement not the timing. Ghana and to an extent Cameroon, clearly showed us that it doesn't matter when you hire a coach as long as you hire the right one.

The timing was wrong more so because there was no credible replacement.
Because Ghana beat us the way they did does not make their decision an act of genius.
Nine times out of ten they probably wouldn’t have qualified at our expense.

They would have... based on our record against Ghana.

I had stated as much that the worst team for us to draw was Ghana based on history.

[1naija]

Then we should pay up. I hope you guys can contribute towards the legal fees and the breach of contract payment.

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Kpom!

[packerland]

Not a fan of the NFF and their uselessness, but abeg Rohr should go and rest with this brouhaha with the NFF, he has no case Fifa should stress themselves about.

He's entitled to lost wages as a result of early termination of his contract. It's basic contract law.
Pay up!

I agree. But still he was rightly sacked. NFF should pay up

Ok. They wanted to avoid a disaster so they sacked him, the disaster was successfully avoided.

Time to pay up

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

stubborn as a ram

[joao]

Your reap what you sow, ...you get what you pay for, ...you blunder, you admit it.
The fact of football is that it is a no guarantee endeavor, but many herein seem to overlook that part.

[Bigpokey24]

Then we should pay up. I hope you guys can contribute towards the legal fees and the breach of contract payment.

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Kpom!

i am not contributing ish.. instead **** needs to give us our money back, similar to Kelvin Cato

[maceo4]

Whats just so annoying about this whole fiasco is the NFF just always finds ways to do things backwards. I mean the last time they had a perfect opportunity to disengage **** was after his WC 2018 failure. He didn't meet his target and so NFF was well within their rights to move a different direction, but instead re-upped his contract with picnic defending him vehemently. You defend and reward failure, but then punish the same individual when they are actually meeting what you asked them to do - in the guise of 'averting a disaster'...they really make zero sense...

If they were going to sack him after the 2018 World Cup, it wouldn’t have been for not hitting his given targets.
I might be wrong, but I seem to recall that his target when hired was to qualify us for the WC.
Maybe because of the very low base we were starting from at the time.
There are too many false narratives so I won’t be surprised if what you have stated here is not actually the case, despite the popularity of the view.

I remember his target being round of 16, I've never heard of an SE coach not having at least that target at a WC, that wouldn't even make any sense...

[aruako1]

Then we should pay up. I hope you guys can contribute towards the legal fees and the breach of contract payment.

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Kpom!

Of course the NFF should pay up

[aruako1]

Not a fan of the NFF and their uselessness, but abeg Rohr should go and rest with this brouhaha with the NFF, he has no case Fifa should stress themselves about.

He's entitled to lost wages as a result of early termination of his contract. It's basic contract law.
Pay up!

I agree. But still he was rightly sacked. NFF should pay up

Ok. They wanted to avoid a disaster so they sacked him, the disaster was successfully avoided.

Time to pay up

Yes. And the change didn't work out. Thin line between success and failure. We move. But Rohr was rightly sacked

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

stubborn as a ram

Haba

[bushboy]

I am with Aruako here. I still believe it was the right decision to fire Rohr. It was coming.

The mistake was the replacement not the timing. Ghana and to an extent Cameroon, clearly showed us that it doesn't matter when you hire a coach as long as you hire the right one.

The timing was wrong more so because there was no credible replacement.
Because Ghana beat us the way they did does not make their decision an act of genius.
Nine times out of ten they probably wouldn’t have qualified at our expense.

They would have... based on our record against Ghana.

I had stated as much that the worst team for us to draw was Ghana based on history.

Really? What part of the 180 minutes of football gave you that impression? We were a Mosses, Ohimhen and Aribo miss away from beating them 3-0 on their own soil. Yes, they qualified at our expense but it had NOTHING to do with any quality football on their part.

[Damunk]

Whats just so annoying about this whole fiasco is the NFF just always finds ways to do things backwards. I mean the last time they had a perfect opportunity to disengage **** was after his WC 2018 failure. He didn't meet his target and so NFF was well within their rights to move a different direction, but instead re-upped his contract with picnic defending him vehemently. You defend and reward failure, but then punish the same individual when they are actually meeting what you asked them to do - in the guise of 'averting a disaster'...they really make zero sense...

If they were going to sack him after the 2018 World Cup, it wouldn’t have been for not hitting his given targets.
I might be wrong, but I seem to recall that his target when hired was to qualify us for the WC.
Maybe because of the very low base we were starting from at the time.
There are too many false narratives so I won’t be surprised if what you have stated here is not actually the case, despite the popularity of the view.

I remember his target being round of 16, I've never heard of an SE coach not having at least that target at a WC, that wouldn't even make any sense...

Let’s both check.
I have no problem with being wrong but I am not sure you are right.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

Haba..World Class Coach Rohr should get a damn job. Nobody wants to hire him.

The Rohrs of the world don’t need jobs… as long as the courtyard iddiot named Pinnick is willing to create a retirement fund for 3rd rate (and I’m being extremely generous) foreign coaches


Cheers.

Yo azz missed 2 Afcon before he was hired. He qualified and won bronze , qualified for the. wC and did well. Now that the team was bounced out of Afcon and WC like Bigporker at a VIPevent he's now 3rd rate.

Ok o. Just pay up and let him take a 3rd rate vacation.

Pay up what? Who told you he is owed? Are you privy to his contract or are you just running your uneducated mouth? Stop trying to play the class clown. You’re not very good at it


Cheers.

[aruako1]

Chai! This aruako stubborn sha!!!!!!

It is not about being stubborn. I liked Rohr. I travelled to the WC in 2018 excited about what he had done with the team. I was dissapointed after WC 2018 and when he stayed on, I was happy for him to build with a young team.

I remember being the only one defending him as I watched the 2-0 loss against Madagascar with friends. Subsequently, even though I was unhappy with the loss against Algeria, I never called for his head. Even after the draw against Sierra Leone, I did not call fir his head.

I was very critical of him in the home game against Benin Republic, but I praised him profusely after the excellent away win against Cape Verde. I only called for his sack after the terrible home display against Cape Verde. This was due to an accumulation of poor results.

You may not agree with me that sacking him was right. But nobody should tell me that I arrived at this position without careful consideration.

My guy, the real question is, did you see this absolutely disastrous outcome coming? What really could be worse? And what was your response to those that loudly and incessantly warned against it?
What is the point of change when you come out in the worst possible situation - which is what you were being warned against?

The ‘stubbornness’ is not that you are denying your decision to have him sacked. You are not one of those that are distancing themselves from their own campaign.
The stubbornness is refusing to even consider that you might have been wrong and maybe a little more consideration should have been given to those ‘WOWOs’ that called for restraint.
The calls were endless and if you were - and still are - one of those that met such calls with derision, then ‘stubbornness’ is in order. So it’s not even ‘wisdom in hindsight’.

Basically, by not recognizing all that, you are saying that if you’d had a crystal ball at the time showing you where we are now, you still would have had him sacked in the same circumstances.
Ol Boi, weytin dem dey call dat one nah?

By the way…you are more or less the only anti-Rohr person I can properly engage with on this issue. The feelings are far too raw and the overwhelming majority are just annoying me and I need to exercise restraint. So no vex say I’m ‘dragging matter’ with you. Na love.
Na only you I fit talk am with.

I'm not anti-Rohr. I just felt he had overstayed his welcome and would not have qualified us for the WC. I have not changed my kind on that position.


There was always a chance that we would not qualify. Even Senegal needed penalty kicks to win both the AFCON and qualify for the WC. However, I did not see Rohr qualifying us either, hence my decision to back his sack. The main villian here is Pinnick. He took too long to sack Rohr once the decision was made for him to go. And the uncertainty about Eguavoen's and Peseiro's roles did not help.

So it was not a mistake to sack Rohr. The mistake was allowing Pinnick near our NFF.

You are not dragging the matter Bro. It would be boring if we all had the same opinions. For now we have to look for the next game and try to cheer our team, whether we like the coach or not.

Bros, doing the right thing BUT at the wrong time is the same as doing the wrong thing. They could have let **** continue to the ANC as the timing was so short and he had not failed to meet any of his stipulated targets, then if he didn’t meet his ANC target then you have grounds to disengage him. Yes the bigger problem is the NFF and the way they handle things in general. Specifically how they went about firing **** is indicative of their deep-rooted issues and part of the reason some of us were saying that was not the right way to do things. And clearly it has blown up in their faces.

You have to develop a federation based on accountability and doing things the right way if you want to be successful and it’s way bigger than ****. But to act like they did it things right regarding his sacking is laughable at this point…

I do not disagree with you. The NFF cocked things up and I alluded to it on one of my posts on this thread. And when they did not appoint a replacement immediately after sacking him I was ok with him taking us to the AFCON. However the decision to sack him was ultimately the right one. I do not believe that he would have qualified us for the World Cup

I disagree with your opinion but understand you have a right to your thinking and conclusions. I do have a question for you per the bolded text. What precedent or past performances from Rohr makes you believe he would not have qualified us for the WC? He got us to the playoffs remember?..I'm curious

Thanks Bro for disagreeing in a mature way. He got us to the playoffs (beating Cape Verde impressively away) but two of his last three games (CAR and Cape Verde at home) got me worried. Especially the Cape Verde game. I did not see him qualifying us after that insipid display against Cape Verde at home.

[maceo4]

Whats just so annoying about this whole fiasco is the NFF just always finds ways to do things backwards. I mean the last time they had a perfect opportunity to disengage **** was after his WC 2018 failure. He didn't meet his target and so NFF was well within their rights to move a different direction, but instead re-upped his contract with picnic defending him vehemently. You defend and reward failure, but then punish the same individual when they are actually meeting what you asked them to do - in the guise of 'averting a disaster'...they really make zero sense...

If they were going to sack him after the 2018 World Cup, it wouldn’t have been for not hitting his given targets.
I might be wrong, but I seem to recall that his target when hired was to qualify us for the WC.
Maybe because of the very low base we were starting from at the time.
There are too many false narratives so I won’t be surprised if what you have stated here is not actually the case, despite the popularity of the view.

I remember his target being round of 16, I've never heard of an SE coach not having at least that target at a WC, that wouldn't even make any sense...

Let’s both check.
I have no problem with being wrong but I am not sure you are right.

**** was setting round of 16 target while picnic and co were setting a semi final target Mschew…

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dailypost. ... %3Famp%3D1

Rohr told L'Equipe,
"They are already out of the group stage to go to the round of 16, especially in 2014 when they faced the French team (0-2 defeat)”

"We will try to do as well. Unfortunately,
here, the ambitions are a little more
excessive: the team must reach at least
the semifinals.

“We have the ambition of the leaders to manage…”