1- talking about another set of players and another coach has NO relevance at all. whether I like the coach or hate him. I dont know how difficult is that for you to see.
it would be highly irrelevant for me to tout Roma's success as much as Barca's failure, to what we are talking about : HOW IRAN'S NATIONAL TEAM HAS PERFORMED.
one can forever tout coaches who have had success with 4-2-3-1 in europe or africa or ..., while the other touts the success of 4-4-2 ( which btw, will outnumber 4-2-31's success by a power 20 or more as it's older and there are more examples to tout. so for each one of your cases, I'll have 20 in favor of 4-4-2. do you still want to look that bad ? I didnt think so
)But it just doesnt make sense.
the TOPIC is different.
and I feel you have not understood the issue here. the issues is NOT that system X is good and system Y is not. each one will have its success stories as well as failures.
the issues is how has IRANIAN NATIONAL TEAM fared with a given system. that's it and that's all you have to work with.
we also dont know how denizli would have fared at TM given TM's kind of players and not paas's or pp's. again, it make NO SENSE.
unless you put him in charge of TM for a year and observe his performance, it would be irrelevant and nonsensical to quote his name when we are talking about TM's system.
you want to defend the system of 4-2-3-1? go ahead. knock yourself out. I'm sure there are plenty of european teams and players you can bring in as evidence.
but when it comes to it being applied at TM? you have no case.
===================
btw, quoting players or coaches with "we shd have won by 5 or 6" is no supportive evidence.
coaches and players will obviously boast about how they were unlucky to do better and .... and so on !
again, unsubstantive and irrelevant.
we all saw the game and if you change the jerseys you'd be bemoaning the countless chances you got and lost and that it was YOU who deserved the win.
and mind you, uae had FAR MORE chances ( quantitatively ) and more dangerous chances as well ( qualitatively ).
they suffer from lack of a reliable striker. if they had just ONE good scorer, we'd have lost both games !
======================
now, it is up to each one to either accept the reality or deny it.
for me, the reality is what I see at TM.
- according to MY reality, OUR TM is and has been finding it very hard to score.
the score-lines of the past 4-5 years prove it.
- according to MY reality, at OUR TM no matter which unfortunate player we put as the lone striker, he fails.
and we have tried almost every tom, dick and harry there. all to the same result.
- according to MY reality, at OUR TM, the center of gravity of the team too deep into its line up with 7 defensive players that stifles our attacking nature or creative moves. which is becoz of the two def mids.
( now, if we're playing a huge european or south american team that clearly is above and beyond our category, by all means play this defensive hotch-potch , trying to avoid getting ripped to shreds ( fat load of good that did for us against mexico or portugal !!
)and I repeat, for better understanding, all the above points do not point at 4-2-3-1 formation being a bad formation. na agha jan. it's the best. in fact, I'll say it's humanity's greatest achievement in any area after discovery of freaking fire.
BUT IT'S NOT WORKING FOR US, .... meaning the IRANIAN NATIONAL TEAM.
you can quote coach X or Y, or team X or Y, or player X or Y till next thursday, and nothing will change.
ALL that, unless you are truly happy with what has been happening at TM.
meaning, strikers failures to score. and how our players look uncomfortable with the duties and fail to realize them properly , therefore the satisfaction with half-arse pretense we see at TM. and if all you want and expect from TM is not to concede against B and C grade asian teams ( coz clearly A grade asian ones can still tear us apart. and lets not even talk about europeans ).
if this is the ceiling , then you've got your wish, my friend.
vassalam, nameh tamam.


Leave a comment: