Why did he take off Iheanacho

[Samilktray]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Brendan knew Bournemouth would throw everything at us second half so he shored up the midfield. If Kasper doesn't fck up nobody would have complained.

This post is genuinely mental 

[Dames]

Just now, Leicester_Loyal said:

This, I've never been so angry at a managerial decision, clueless.

 

The players don't get off scott free either btw, they were ****ing pathetic the 2nd half too. Even in a shit system you should have a bit of pride, they just gave up.

I have a little bit of sympathy for them. For a long while now the manager has made decisions that signal he does not have the confidence in his team or players to perform against teams that are below us in the league. 

[StanSP]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Brendan knew Bournemouth would throw everything at us second half so he shored up the midfield. If Kasper doesn't fck up nobody would have complained.

I'd agree with this if we were more than 1 goal up. 

[Tom12345]

13 minutes ago, TheUltimateWinner said:

Send me your potential reasons please. More amusing the better 

Also change of tactics with one less striker and change to a more defensive formation.

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 minute ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

It didn't cost us the game, but it hugely contributed to it.

 

We were so comfortable at the end of the first half, the sub completely changed the game, completely!

Bournemouth came out with more vigour. They’re fighting for their lives, we should’ve expected more fight. It was natural. The substitution did not weaken the side in terms of quality. The players on the pitch did. If we had let Kelechi stay on, the nerves of these players came on. Again, I’ll say it. It’s a mental thing. These players know deep down they are mixing with bigger better players and clubs and they can’t take it.

[Leicester_Loyal]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Brendan knew Bournemouth would throw everything at us second half so he shored up the midfield. If Kasper doesn't fck up nobody would have complained.

Sorry Webbo but that's bollocks. Even before the mistake they were all over us. There best defender had just limped off the pitch for **** sake.

 

Mind blowing that anyone can defend that substitution.

Edited 12 July 2020 by Leicester_Loyal

[Lcfc-1992]

Resting him for the Europa League

[Webbo]

Just now, StanSP said:

I'd agree with this if we were more than 1 goal up. 

You can argue that the tactic didn't work, we conceded 4 goals so obviously it wasn't a great success, but it's pretty standard procedure. anyone can be clever with hindsight.

[Gary Eatfood]

3 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

The substitution nor the change in system didn’t lose us that game. We took off a £25 million player for an £18 million player. We were playing the side bottom of the league who just had their best player stretched off. Let’s be frank, the side, on the pitch got nervous, made a mistake after mistake and then gave it in. It’s the players the staff the lot of them. The defining moment cannot be attributed to one sub. That collapse was Taylor esque - there is something very wrong with the mentality.

So why didn't they play like that for the first 45? I get that one sub shouldn't make a that much of a difference but it was certainly negative change, and it swung the momentum to Bournemouth when they were at their lowest ebb as you say. It's baffling whichever way you look at it.

[TeamRocket]

Its cos he left the tap on at home so had to run home 

[Leicester_Loyal]

Just now, Mickyblueeyes said:

Bournemouth came out with more vigour. They’re fighting for their lives, we should’ve expected more fight. It was natural. The substitution did not weaken the side in terms of quality. The players on the pitch did. If we had let Kelechi stay on, the nerves of these players came on. Again, I’ll say it. It’s a mental thing. These players know deep down they are mixing with bigger better players and clubs and they can’t take it.

Definitely mate, I've said for a while mentality these players aren't right, you could see it in the Villa games.

[lee7]

I thought Iheanacho would be the player to depart but not at half time. I would've given him longer then swapped like for like. 

Absolutely no excuse for bringing on a Midfielder after Bournemouth had lost their best centre half your literally handing the initiative to them on a plate. 

Huge game against sheffield united now. If the players don't turn up for that then I'll find it hard to defend Rodgers.

The way we have set up against teams lower in the league is baffling. We look so toothless. 

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

You can argue that the tactic didn't work, we conceded 4 goals so obviously it wasn't a great success, but it's pretty standard procedure. anyone can be clever with hindsight.

But to rest on a 1-0 lead, go defensive against a side that looked shot of confidence, take off a striker, invite pressure on is just asking to lose the game. Playing the hand so early to 'shore up the defence' just because they'll come out and attack just sends out the wrong message to our own side and the right one to our opponents. It's nothing to do with hindsight. It's just a very bad decision he made. There was no need to make the sub at 1-0 at half-time. Keep Iheanacho on and give their defence something to do because they clearly struggled when we had 2 up top. Perez looked comfortably first half and looked lost in the second. 

 

We had the opportunity (in the first half) to kill the game off, and shouldn't have come out so cautiously in the second half without having to look for the second goal. Even if they did come back and score to equalise, at least we'd have had 2 strikers on the pitch to go looking for the win.

 

[That_Dude]

9 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

The substitution nor the change in system didn’t lose us that game. We took off a £25 million player for an £18 million player. We were playing the side bottom of the league who just had their best player stretched off. Let’s be frank, the side, on the pitch got nervous, made a mistake after mistake and then gave it in. It’s the players the staff the lot of them. The defining moment cannot be attributed to one sub. That collapse was Taylor esque - there is something very wrong with the mentality.

Sorry mate, but you give every reason to put it (rightly) on that disastrous sub and then say, "well it's not".

[Mickyblueeyes]

Just now, Gary Eatfood said:

So why didn't they play like that for the first 45? I get that one sub shouldn't make a that much of a difference but it was certainly negative change, and it swung the momentum to Bournemouth when they were at their lowest ebb as you say. It's baffling whichever way you look at it.

A mental thing again. Nerves take over, a few poor passes and heads down - that was bournemouth first half. We dropped because we couldn’t take the pressure of seeing the game through. Now it’s worse on our side because they’re fighting for their lives we are trying to get into champions league - that cannot happen. I’m not trying to say Brendan is blameless but this side, the staff etc. Are weak individually and collectively. 

[Ian Nacho]

I was really liking the Kelechi, Perez and Vardy trio too  

[nnfox]

I think part of it was second guessing that Bournemouth would bring on an extra midfielder so Praet would help bolster the middle.  Also, I honestly believe that he treated it as a training session.  We were the better team, Bournemouth were distinctly average and he saw this as an opportunity to absorb pressure and see out a game, control it.  There will be sterner tests to come in the next three games.

 

Both ridiculous decisions.  We needed the second goal and we should have given it 5-10 minutes to see how they set up in the second half.  Then, if necessary take Kelechi off and give yourself an option between Praet or Barnes.

 

[Ian Nacho]

Rodgers always takes Nacho off. Cannot remember when Nacho started and completed the full 90. Remember even when Nacho was subbed off tactically at home to Norwich

 

[Mythyaar]

Same reason he took him off v Palace when he was most dangerous player on the pitch. No reason.

[Ian Nacho]

I saw at the time why he might have done it, as Bournemouth may have come out a bit more, but surely you give it 10 minutes first? 

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 minute ago, That_Dude said:

Sorry mate, but you give every reason to put it (rightly) on that disastrous sub and then say, "well it's not".

 But it wasn’t. Switching from 352 to 41411 or whatever doesn’t mean Bournemouth immediately get on the front foot nor was the sub ultra defensive. Had he brought on choudhury, I would maybe agree but it was praet still an apparent forward thinking playing. The fact is, either formation/ side should not have been destroyed in that manner. The squad lacks mental strength. No matter who we play or play against, they will come unstuck when a little bit of pressure is applied.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

But to rest on a 1-0 lead, go defensive against a side that looked shot of confidence, take off a striker, invite pressure on is just asking to lose the game. Playing the hand so early to 'shore up the defence' just because they'll come out and attack just sends out the wrong message to our own side and the right one to our opponents. It's nothing to do with hindsight. It's just a very bad decision he made. There was no need to make the sub at 1-0 at half-time. Keep Iheanacho on and give their defence something to do because they clearly struggled when we had 2 up top. Perez looked comfortably first half and looked lost in the second. 

 

We had the opportunity (in the first half) to kill the game off, and shouldn't have come out so cautiously in the second half without having to look for the second goal. Even if they did come back and score to equalise, at least we'd have had 2 strikers on the pitch to go looking for the win.

 

Taking off a striker shouldn't mean that we can no longer string 3 passes together, not every one of those passes would have been aimed at him. We were sloppy second half, it had been a bit too easy first half and we thought we had it won. again if kasper hadn't messed up I think we would have, Bournemouth never looked like scoring.

[Chrysalis]

17 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Brendan knew Bournemouth would throw everything at us second half so he shored up the midfield. If Kasper doesn't fck up nobody would have complained.

You seriously think with our weak mentality and inability to hold on when facing waves of attacks we would have held on to a 1-0 for 50 mins?

 

No chance.

 

The only logical tactic was to make the game out of their reach, another 2 goals.

 

Of course the other problem he created was if they did score, he hindered our ability to score again, as without nacho we do struggle in forward play now.

Edited 12 July 2020 by Chrysalis

[Gary Eatfood]

1 minute ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

A mental thing again. Nerves take over, a few poor passes and heads down - that was bournemouth first half. We dropped because we couldn’t take the pressure of seeing the game through. Now it’s worse on our side because they’re fighting for their lives we are trying to get into champions league - that cannot happen. I’m not trying to say Brendan is blameless but this side, the staff etc. Are weak individually and collectively. 

That may be the case but the change in mentality comes from the substitution at HT. 10 shots first half and only three in the second. We made poor passes in the first half but the difference was we were still looking be on the front foot. The substitution changed all of that and it was evident within the first 5 minutes of the second half.

[Webbo]

Just now, Chrysalis said:

You seriously think with our weak mentality and inability to hold on when facing waves of attacks we would have held on to a 1-0 for 50 mins?

 

No chance.

What's that got to do with taking Ihenacho off?