Kelechi Iheanacho

[FireFox]

Oops.

Hopefully this doesn't stop him from starting again soon.

[KingsX]

When I said "Hide Kelechi" I didn't mean "Hide Kelechi's brain".

[Matt]

Did get hooked because what he did today or was there an injury or something?

 

Tbh as soon as it all kicked off (Rightly, wrongly or indeed stupidly) and Cantwell stormed half the pitch to grab him by the scruff of the neck (Perhaps slight exaggeration but looked like the from the kop end) I thought i'd get him off because I didn't think his head would be right after.

 

Edited 14 December 2019 by Matt

[OadbyBlue]

He started quite well but I think got visibly rattled after the little scuffle and their fans booing him, after that had a couple of awful touches 

[lcfcben76]

Combination of what went on, his performance and tactics I feel. Brendan knew he got it wrong with the diamond and needed to change it sooner rather than later, Kelechi was the obvious choice to go off. I did think he would wait till half time, mind.

[Guest Cujek]

I think he did absolutely the right thing, **** sportsmanship when the title is on the line. 

 

Thier player should have been sent off (**** was wearing a headband as well) and they should have had the other guy sent off. 

 

Why should we kick it out just because one of their players fancies a lie down, you telling me he couldn't have rolled off the pitch if he wanted to. 

 

It was their choice to kick it out of play therefore our ball and Kelechi had every right to do what he did. 

 

The fact they acted like pussies all game, rolling about, committing fouls like they were going out of fashion means they would have deserved to have to have lost, its just a shame we dropped 2 points on the *****. 

 

****ing bunch of 7 toed inbred bastaards, **** off back to the championship where you belong. 

[Yes N'Didi]

It’s the referees responsibility to stop a game if he wants to, usually when there is a head injury. Clearly the player was trying to break up play and slow the game down. We played on, they then put the ball out (their decision) when they retained possession. It was rightly our throw, as indicated by the referee when they wanted the ball back. If they had put the ball out for our player then I can understand the reaction, but it was their decision and the player didn’t even require treatment.

 

Whether or not Rogers didn’t want the headache of scoring under those circumstances I don’t know, but I can’t fault Kelechi here.

[cal21212121]

Gray was getting instructions before the incident even happened, we needed to change shape and Nacho was the unfortunate sacrifice. 

[jammie82uk]

8 minutes ago, Yes N'Didi said:

It’s the referees responsibility to stop a game if he wants to, usually when there is a head injury. Clearly the player was trying to break up play and slow the game down. We played on, they then put the ball out (their decision) when they retained possession. It was rightly our throw, as indicated by the referee when they wanted the ball back. If they had put the ball out for our player then I can understand the reaction, but it was their decision and the player didn’t even require treatment.

 

Whether or not Rogers didn’t want the headache of scoring under those circumstances I don’t know, but I can’t fault Kelechi here.

Completely agree, although I thought the situation wasn’t well handled by the Ref when Kelechi was fouled and then surrounded, it appeared to me and others around me that the keeper had actually kicked him while he was on the ground but the incident was checked by Var so I assume it couldn’t have been the case 

 

 

[LestaAl]

13 minutes ago, cal21212121 said:

Gray was getting instructions before the incident even happened, we needed to change shape and Nacho was the unfortunate sacrifice. 

Agree Nacho was the sacrifice for the required change of format, but have some sympathy with the lead in as he clearly felt we did not owe them the ball as they just kept laying down  and did not even need treatment.

[coolhandfox]

The referee could have defused the situation by calling it back for a foul throw as soon as Nacho made the move to take a player on, no one would have questioned the call, Norwich get the throwing.

 

[Raj]

Re the incident as an L1er I could see Ineacho had to be told s fee times that it was a throw in. He didn't even know. Afraid to say today was the usual Ineacho.

[Arkie Bennett]

Iheanacho obviously got as fed up Norwich's theatrics as I was. He did nothing wrong by taking the ball forward. The Norwich players' behaviour after he was fouled was utterly disgraceful. I think it's hypocritical when players who think nothing of cheating, diving and feigning injury suddenly adopt a high moral code about giving the ball back after a trivial injury.

[HybridFox]

Massive OTT reaction. And I do hope the sub was a tactical switch than as a direct result of the situation. 

[lgfualol]

Would have preferred Nacho on the wing than Gray

[420Hashish]

Watch us beat Man City 8-0 next week.

[Tazfox]

Actually thought nacho was playing ok and feel we could have changed system and still had him on the pitch. Hopefully doesn't knock his confidence too much. 

[dynamark]

Remember Nacho was thrown the ball by our  player (not sure who)and may not have seen the previous action .Whoever took the throw may have given it back to Norwich if they felt it was a gimme situation.We didn't even get a free kick for the foul.!

[Finnegan]

I thought Rodgers over reacted today to be honest. I think the tactical change was necessary but I think hauling him off before half time after that incident gave the wrong impression. Especially given we'd just equalised. 

 

Besides, it didn't REALLY change the shape. If you're going to do that, take Praet off first and go to the 433 with Nacho pushed wide and take him off at the break when you've got a chance to talk to him. 

 

Just thought he probably needed to be calmed down more than dragged off. You've finally got the lad back in confidence and desire and then you go and do that. 

 

I mean, Rodgers has a pretty good track record in man management so **** knows, I'm probably just over thinking it but I was disappointed with how it all unfolded. 

Edited 14 December 2019 by Finnegan

[lcfcsnow]

I’ve mentioned it a few times in recent weeks but I’m getting seriously fed up with opposition sides who fancy a sit down when there is nothing wrong with them. It seems to be happening much more this season. Notice how the team needing to score never does it. I hope someone gets punished soon directly from them kicking the ball out for a break in play.

[NaijaFox]

1 hour ago, Cujek said:

I think he did absolutely the right thing, **** sportsmanship when the title is on the line. 

 

Thier player should have been sent off (**** was wearing a headband as well) and they should have had the other guy sent off. 

 

Why should we kick it out just because one of their players fancies a lie down, you telling me he couldn't have rolled off the pitch if he wanted to. 

 

It was their choice to kick it out of play therefore our ball and Kelechi had every right to do what he did. 

 

The fact they acted like pussies all game, rolling about, committing fouls like they were going out of fashion means they would have deserved to have to have lost, its just a shame we dropped 2 points on the *****. 

 

****ing bunch of 7 toed inbred bastaards, **** off back to the championship where you belong. 

Tell us how you really feel... 

[Manwell Pablo]

Hauling him off to put Grey there is perhaps an over reaction.

 

But literally ashamed so many of our fans think he was right to do that. They were right to kick the ball out with three players down, it’s an etiquette in football that has been there for years. You kick the ball out so players can get treatment you get it back on the restart. And Ricardo was one of those three players.

 

Embarrassing to think otherwise, the shoes on the other foot you’d be screaming blue murder. 

Edited 14 December 2019 by Manwell Pablo

[January47]

What treatment on the restart though

[NaijaFox]

31 minutes ago, dynamark said:

Remember Nacho was thrown the ball by our  player (not sure who)and may not have seen the previous action .Whoever took the throw may have given it back to Norwich if they felt it was a gimme situation.We didn't even get a free kick for the foul.!

Thought so too. If there was consensus they deserved the ball, it would more likely have been thrown directly to Norwich.

 

Furthermore, it would be incorrect to characterize it as “giving it back” because Norwich actually did not have possession and then voluntarily CONCEDED such possession by kicking the ball out of touch so that their player could be tended to. Rather, the ball flew out following the full-blooded challenge between Pukki and Ricardo (though it is feasible that Pukki flew into the challenge to get the ball out of bounds). Perhaps, that’s when Pukki broke his toe.

 

Nonetheless, I personally wouldn’t have had any issues if Iheanacho had voluntarily handed possession to them in that situation. But their reaction was OTT!

>

Edited 14 December 2019 by NaijaFox

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Hauling him off to put Grey there is perhaps an over reaction.

 

But literally ashamed so many of our fans think he was right to do that. They were right to kick the ball out with three players down, it’s an etiquette in football that has been there for years. You kick the ball out so players can get treatment you get it back on the restart. And Ricardo was one of those three players.

 

Embarrassing to think otherwise, the shoes on the other foot you’d be screaming blue murder. 

I expect MOTD will have a good look at cantwell’s reaction ..... should have been a red but that would have exacerbated an already difficult situation for Madley