In retrospect, Ivankovic's response to the question of why he insisted on using Ickxon was blunt, saying that Ickxon is close to a full recovery. Although Iversen may not be 100% for 90 minutes, we believe that even if he plays for just 5-10 minutes, he can have a huge positive impact on the team. Given the limited number of players we have up front, Iverson's arrival will be crucial for us.
These words are certainly persuasive. What Ivankovic is suggesting is that even though Iverson's stamina is lower than it used to be, his ability to turn a game around can still be underestimated. Even if he only plays 5 to 10 minutes, he can turn the game around. In comparison, Iversen is clearly more trustworthy than other international players. In short, Ivankovic's insistence on using Ickxon is based on his bet on the latter's talent to change the course of a game.
I'm curious, in terms of the ability to change the course of a game, who else can match the homegrown striker in Ickxon? If no one can match him, then Ivankovic has certainly made a wise choice. We can't argue with his decision, we can only choose to believe in it. In comparison, former national soccer coach Jankovic's decision to discard Ickxon seems like a stark contrast between his courage and Jankovic's short-sightedness.
