Kelechi Iheanacho

[Fox92]

1 hour ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

And have literally one 33 year old striker in the squad? Makes sense...

Well obviously I meant if we'd get another one in but given when you take Vardy out our threat is limited anyway.

Edited 24 September 2020 by Fox92

[Voll Blau]

Shame he had an off-night last night and he should've stuck one away, but people must have goldfish memories if they think we should be looking to sell him right now. It's literally only a matter of weeks ago that Rodgers was rightly being derided for bringing him off too early in games we subsequently lost.

[Fox92]

59 minutes ago, Bezzanator89 said:

He is only as good as the service he was provided with, and that service was shocking. That was not Kelechi's fault. Vardy would have struggled under the same conditions.

People always bring up service. Firstly, he should have scored early on? People banged on last season about Rodgers bringing him off against Bournemouth but the chances he missed I wasn't surprised.

 

One good game every couple of months makes people change their mind again, ala Gray, but overall he doesn't offer a threat. His basics are poor. I am not convinced.

Edited 24 September 2020 by Fox92

[Gevans_97]

I don’t think Kel is an out and out striker. Plays well in a two but always looks a bit isolated on his own. he’s clearly got class though, superb first touch and a fantastic finisher. not his best performance last night.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

Not a good enough back-up striker for a side who wants to year in year out be challenging for top 6, definitely not good enough to be number 1 striker at such a club. I know finances dictate you have to persevere with him for now but I'd be planning on selling and replacing him for next summer.

[Kevin Russell]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

A back up striker who hardly ever scores is no better than playing another player out of position up front. 

Hardly ever scores? Did you watch us last season? His goals per minute was pretty good?

[drofmor55]

Should have scored last night...fantastic pass from Albrighton..a natural goalscorer ie Ings/Vardy/Kane would have been aware where the goalie was and taken it around him.  

[nnfox]

The trouble is that we have two very different strikers and one way of playing football that suits one much more than the other.

[mancunianfox]

How many teams in our league actually have good backup strikers? The only ones that really spring to my mind are Giroud, Abraham and Jesus. A lot of sides don't even have a good one starting each week.

[Fox92]

30 minutes ago, Kevin Russell said:

Hardly ever scores? Did you watch us last season? His goals per minute was pretty good?

He scored 5 in 20?

 

His goals per minute probably will be good because he rarely plays 90 mins.

[OadbyBlue]

Do people think playing Vardy would’ve made the difference last night? Even vardy would have struggled to impose himself on the game with that service

[Ian S]

28 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

He scored 5 in 20?

 

His goals per minute probably will be good because he rarely plays 90 mins.

I think that is probably the point!

[Bert]

Let’s not forget last night was his first game time of the season. 

[peach0000]

58 minutes ago, drofmor55 said:

Should have scored last night...fantastic pass from Albrighton..a natural goalscorer ie Ings/Vardy/Kane would have been aware where the goalie was and taken it around him.  

I’ve seen Vardy miss loads of chances like that. It wasn’t an easy chance at all.

[Raw Dykes]

47 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

He scored 5 in 20?

 

His goals per minute probably will be good because he rarely plays 90 mins.

That's why it would be much more helpful to look at minutes per goal, rather than goals per appearance.

[Kevin Russell]

1 hour ago, Fox92 said:

He scored 5 in 20?

 

His goals per minute probably will be good because he rarely plays 90 mins.

Correct - so if you come on and do well with the mins you have that is a good return.

 

Are you saying he didn’t play well last season? If so I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

[Kevin Russell]

33 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

That's why it would be much more helpful to look at minutes per goal, rather than goals per appearance.

I know - this is just so obvious. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

1 hour ago, OadbyBlue said:

Do people think playing Vardy would’ve made the difference last night? Even vardy would have struggled to impose himself on the game with that service

He'd have scored the very good chance Iheanacho missed, no doubt about that.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

36 minutes ago, Kevin Russell said:

Correct - so if you come on and do well with the mins you have that is a good return.

 

Are you saying he didn’t play well last season? If so I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Play Iheancho from the start for 90 mins for 10 games in the EPL and his minutes per goal would fall through the floor. It's a flawed stat in this context. It's far easier to come off the bench for 15 mins here and there and score the odd goal than it is to start every week and consistently score goals.

[Sly]

1 hour ago, Bert said:

Let’s not forget last night was his first game time of the season. 

Exactly this. 
 

People seem to forget that Vardy didn’t exactly set the world alight against WBA. He looked better against Burnley, however he didn’t score. he hasn’t scored from open play this season, so statistically, he’s as effective as KI this season during open play  

[Fox92]

48 minutes ago, Kevin Russell said:

Correct - so if you come on and do well with the mins you have that is a good return.

 

Are you saying he didn’t play well last season? If so I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Tbf I don't think he was good or bad.

 

He was sort of made the opposite of a "scapegoat" (hate that word) because, for example, apparently the reason we lost at Bournemouth was because he came off. Despite this, during the first half, I recall him missing two good chances.

 

I just think he doesn't offer enough for us. I don't think he's a bad player, and perhaps works better in a two, but basic stuff he doesn't do right at times.

[Raw Dykes]

40 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

Tbf I don't think he was good or bad.

 

He was sort of made the opposite of a "scapegoat" (hate that word) because, for example, apparently the reason we lost at Bournemouth was because he came off. Despite this, during the first half, I recall him missing two good chances.

 

I just think he doesn't offer enough for us. I don't think he's a bad player, and perhaps works better in a two, but basic stuff he doesn't do right at times.

I'm just curious as to why you hate the word scapegoat. It is a real word, btw. No need for quotation marks.

[Fox92]

5 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

I'm just curious as to why you hate the word scapegoat. It is a real word, btw. No need for quotation marks.

haha yeah I know it's an old word (Bible?) it's just that once a player gets criticism, even if it's fair, people starting saying "oh so he's the scapegoat" when in reality everybody is open to criticism.

[Raw Dykes]

17 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

haha yeah I know it's an old word (Bible?) it's just that once a player gets criticism, even if it's fair, people starting saying "oh so he's the scapegoat" when in reality everybody is open to criticism.

I don't know why - I just got the impression you might have thought it wasn't a proper word.

 

I see. Fair point. I suppose if you happen to criticise a player that everyone else is having a dig at at the same time (which is likely if they're having a bad game or games), then people might think you're just jumping on a bandwagon.

[Dan]

Iheanacho as a lone striker is a waste of time and we've seen that for over three years now. As a supporting striker though he has some use so I'd keep him, unless we could get a decent fee and fund a move for Edouard.