Why did he take off Iheanacho

[foxfan92]

Only thing I can think of was Perez and Vardy were supposed to be front 2 and give Youri licence to get further forward.

 

I thought straight away it was a bizarre sub though.

 

I was screaming for Brendan to be brave and put Gray on after Cags got sent off when it was 2-1.

 

We needed a win, draw at the very worst. 

 

But even before the first goal we seemed somehow devoid of ideas in the second half. Like we'd found 11 doppelgangers and told the real first team to take the rest of the night off.

 

Not seen the players look so uninterested in going for a second goal before.

 

Yes the Kasper mistake changed the whole game, but even before that we looked less than half the team we were in the first half, and that first half display needed more goals.

 

Luckily, (and I realise Cags missing the games is a huge loss), everything is still in our own hands (even if CAS side with Man City's appeal).

 

It'd be just like Leicester City to lose one of their better performers. Lose to the team everyone else beats. Then beat the harder opposition in the next few games.

 

Keep the faith. Just hope Rodgers learns from his mistakes.

 

 

[Chrysalis]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

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

Umm I am trying to wonder if you been serious here?

 

It has everything to do with it.

 

I know what you trying to do, blame a player for the manager ****ing it up.

[TheUltimateWinner]

3 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

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

 

Forgot about that!

 

that was really weird... Brendan’s subs are awful when you look back on reflection and may have been for a while.

[Guest Papasmurf]

17 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

The worst managerial decision I've seen in a long time. He should apologise, if he doesn't I doubt I'll ever forgive him. 

Rubbish. Leaving him on the bench for the whole game in the cup against Chelsea was worse. 

[Clt1900]

Iheanacho has been one of our best players this season. Even in preseason he was firing goals. Why is Iheanacho always the first to be subbed off?

[Webbo]

Just now, Chrysalis said:

Umm I am trying to wonder if you been serious here?

 

It has everything to do with it.

So our mental strength relies on Ihenacho playing?

[CosbehFox]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

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.

What it did mean was a huge gap between midfield and the strikers. Perez was stuck trying to play two roles and Vardy forever isolated. Therefore when we wanted to clear or play an out ball, rather than three options, of which two were in the channels. We had two options playing centrally and no one to battle for a second ball (which Perez did very well first half) 

[Farrington fox]

Caglar has a lot to learn 

[Chrysalis]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

So our mental strength relies on Ihenacho playing?

Ok I will explain the basics.

 

If you setup a team defensively, then it gives the other team attacking momentum, do you understand?

If you take of one of your most effective attacking players, it reduces your ability to score, understand?

If you swap an attacker for a midfielder, it sends a message to your players, you think the game is done, understand?

 

Rodgers essentially considered the game won, this led to bournemouth gaining the attacking momentum, which eventually led to the kasper error.

 

He has been our manager for over 12 months now, and in the past 7 months its been very evident, we are incapable mentally of playing defensively for long periods of the game.

 

Even if we did win 1-0 holding on, it was still a bad half time from him.  It just would have been masked.

[Guest ttfn]

1 minute ago, Clt1900 said:

Iheanacho has been one of our best players this season. Even in preseason he was firing goals. Why is Iheanacho always the first to be subbed off?

@Finnegan wrote a good post the other day about the good stuff Rodgers has done for Iheanacho but he’s still way too quick to bring him off. He’s a good player and has been more important to us than Vardy over the last six months. Continually he is sacrificed and I suspect that the main reason is that he’s an easy target. Generally the fans and Iheanacho himself don’t tend to get too wound up by him

being taken off no matter how integral he is to our play.

[Heart-Shaped Fox]

He just said on RL he did it tactically and Kel wasn't having his best game. Absurd. The bloke assisted a goal and did ok.

 

 

[Chrysalis]

Just now, peterborofox said:

He just said on RL he did it tactically and Kel wasn't having his best game. Absurd. The bloke assisted a goal and did ok.

 

 

Nacho was playing alright, I dont know what game rodgers was watching.

[Ric Flair]

6 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

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

Its what single handedly mixed up the tired football we'd been playing before and gave us a new zip about our game. We were still quite workmanlike elsewhere but being direct and quick helped us open up the game and Tielemans has improved too. As soon as Iheanacho was off, that 2nd half was like we'd been seeing before. Slow possession and Vardy looking isolated, I'm so angry. This was footballing suicide. We have bottled it, probably more so than any other team I can think of in recent years.

 

Soft underbelly and experienced players like Schmeichel and Evans absolutely abysmal that 2nd half, i'm disgusted. They ought to apologise, this fcukin hurts.

[Leicester_Loyal]

8 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

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

 

I'm glad you remembered that. I remember saying 3 or 4 times now his subs absolutely baffle me, but I couldn't be arsed to trawl through the net to find the exact games and subs. When we need more goals, he seems to sub strikers off or just put more midfielders on, rather than sticking 2 or 3 strikers onto the pitch.

[Chrysalis]

Just now, Ric Flair said:

Its what single handedly mixed up the tired football we'd been playing before and gave us a new zip about our game. We were still quite workmanlike elsewhere but being direct and quick helped us open up the game and Tielemans has improved too. As soon as Iheanacho was off, that 2nd half was like we'd been seeing before. Slow possession and Vardy looking isolated, I'm so angry. This was footballing suicide. We have bottled it, probably more so than any other team I can think of in recent years.

 

Soft underbelly and experienced players like Schmeichel and Evans absolutely abysmal that 2nd half, i'm disgusted. They ought to apologise, this fcukin hurts.

 

100%, I could see vardy isolated as early as the 48th minute.  We literally fell back to the old rodgers routine.  This combined with their new grit after a clearly good half time team talk from howe, I felt it was inveitable they were going to score, if kasper didnt have his brain fade, they still would have scored later.

[UniFox21]

He's taking the piss right? Brendan has to be taking the piss. Nacho assisted the goal? We looked lively and completely in charge, why the **** did he tinker with anything? 

 

[Webbo]

Just now, Chrysalis said:

Ok I will explain the basics.

 

If you setup a team defensively, then it gives the other team attacking momentum, do you understand?

If you take of one of your most effective attacking players, it reduces your ability to score, understand?

If you swap an attacker for a midfielder, it sends a message to your players, you think the game is done, understand?

 

Rodgers essentially considered the game won, this led to bournemouth gaining the attacking momentum, which eventually led to the kasper error.

So, if I understand your basics;

If Ihenacho stays on, Kasper doesn't boot that ball against NDidi's arse?

Kasper saves Solanke's shot?

Evans doesn't deflect into our net?

We don't give the ball away in our own box for the forth?

 

I understand the need to find easy answers but it's a bit more complicated than that.The buck stops with the manager but to pin it all on that decision is ridiculous.

[StanSP]

9 minutes ago, Webbo said:

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.

But it's the mentality of it all. Not the passes going straight to him bit. 

It's the mentality to take off a striker and invite pressure, inevitably so, which was a catalyst for losing this game. 

 

If we think we had the game won at 1-0 at half-time then that's very naive from him and the players, but mainly him. I'm not asking for his sacking as I think that's far too premature. I just think it's a very embarrassing, naive and totally inept decision at the time when it was not necessary.

[Chrysalis]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

So, if I understand your basics;

If Ihenacho stays on, Kasper doesn't boot that ball against NDidi's arse?

Kasper saves Solanke's shot?

Evans doesn't deflect into our net?

We don't give the ball away in our own box for the forth?

 

I understand the need to find easy answers but it's a bit more complicated than that.The buck stops with the manager but to pin it all on that decision is ridiculous.

correct, because they wouldnt have done that attacking move in the first place.

 

I am not saying kasper wasnt been stupid, but he didnt lose the game today, the manager did.

[Ric Flair]

Fcuk off Rodgers, I'm done with you. Indefensible that is, just apologise and be a man. 

[That_Dude]

6 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

 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.

I agree with the lack of mental strength and that's why, imo, he should've keep pushing until we at least got that second goal.

 

We're not a side strong enough to handle a 1-0 for 45 minutes at the moment, hence we should be the ones who put to the pressure, not the other way around.We got a scrappy goal in the first, it wasn't rosy but it worked somehow. Ake was out, they were nowhere near to be found on the pitch, just give them the killing blow and then make your subm if you want. Nacho had been a thorn in their side and was linking up with Perez and Vardy very well. Taking him off cut off Vardy from the rest of the team, we retreated to our own half and Bournemouth, who had nothing to lose, saw a ray of light. The rest is history. 

 

It's one of the most crushing defeat I've witnessed, the result of a catastrophic sub and a mental implosion of a team that's been limping for months. The only thing I'm "happy" with, is that we can stop talking about the CL, because I can't imagine how we'd look like against Münich, Madrid and the likes. Rodgers also has a crap record in Europe, with quite resounding defeats.

[The whole world smiles]

9 minutes ago, peterborofox said:

He just said on RL he did it tactically and Kel wasn't having his best game. Absurd. The bloke assisted a goal and did ok.

 

 

Absolutely fooking criminal

[Clt1900]

4 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

He's taking the piss right? Brendan has to be taking the piss. Nacho assisted the goal? We looked lively and completely in charge, why the **** did he tinker with anything? 

 

Yikes. A manager who doesn’t take responsibility is not good at all.

[kingfox]

5 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

He's taking the piss right? Brendan has to be taking the piss. Nacho assisted the goal? We looked lively and completely in charge, why the **** did he tinker with anything? 

 

That’s the worst thing I’ve ever heard a Leicester manager say.

 

That alone is sack worthy.

[Ian Nacho]

10 minutes ago, peterborofox said:

He just said on RL he did it tactically and Kel wasn't having his best game. Absurd. The bloke assisted a goal and did ok.

 

 

Clueless.