Iran vs. UAE Game [merged]

[Amin_]

Here's the rest, it was too long for one post:

it didnt remind u of ghalenoi forcing zandi to play LB huh? did it hurt ur eyes that time too or was it only the sight of branko that burnt ur eyes rather than his ideologies?

flexibility was like ghalenoi, every game, he changed his formation in asian cup! wat did he achieve? many experts criticized him for being "flexible" because it confuses the players themselves more than the opponent and the team fails to gain any real stability and character. besides, a team needs time to get used to the formation, its strategies and duties and his teammates in a particular formation. u cant keep changing formations and think ur being flexible!

when daei was first assigned the TM coach, the TM players werent chosen yet. so its not like daei was assigned as TM coach and given a set of players and asked to form a team from only those players. daei had 70 million iranians to choose from and he chose those players based on certain criteria and ideologies not randonly. daei or rather no coach would first choose 23 players and then say, hmm..so i got these 23 players, let me see wat formation suits them best! every coach chooses his players based on certain ideologies and beliefs which means, daei and his staff for sure had certain strategies in mind and based on those ideas, chose his players. in other words, daei and his team felt that these set of players at the moment can fulfill his ideologies and carry out his plans better than anyone else in iran!
yes, if a coach is brought in the middle of the league and given a squad, then he has to see his players capabilities and try to come up the best ideologies which they can carry out but when a coach is assigned and is asked to choose his own players, for sure, he chooses the players he thinks will fit best his plans! u see this at club level as well during transfer periods. u think coaches just randonly buy players in europe and then say, ok i bought these players, now let me see wat to do with them?

aslan one more thing,
imagine this situation:
i wanna race in formula 1 with michael schumcher! i have the options of driving a porsche with no break, a toyota corolla with no gear and a peykan with no steering wheel. obviously i will lose to him no matter which car i drive, even the porsche!
so which car should i pick?? the porsche obviously even if it doesnt have breaks! yes, i know its crap and doesnt have breaks but wat can i do? the corolla and peykan are even more shit! its not like i have a perfectly working corolla or peykan at my disposal and im choosing a malfunctioning porsche! these are my options, i have to play with the cards im dealt with!

noone said the 4-2-3-1 is perfect, noone said the 4-2-3-1 is being implemented properly by the team, noone said we got the right players for 4-2-3-1 but wat makes u think we got it for 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 for example? have u thought about that side of the coin as well or u just want to make some change and hope somehow things will better? reminds me of those people specially the younger kids on the general forum who keep blaming everything on the islamic republic and any question u ask them about solving a problem in iran, their answer is all the same: Get rid of Islamic Republic! baba jan, akhe if u wanna get rid of islamic republic, who do u wanna bring instead?? have u even bothered to check wat r ur alternatives and if ur alternatives are any better than the one ur using now?? by just getting rid of a system or an idea doesnt mean u will do better. history proves that many times, people have brought about changes just because they were not satisfied with a certain sytem or idea only to regret it later cos they went from bad into a worse idea or system. we have to see both sides of the coin, rather than just immediately jumping at a certain idea and asking for a change without analysing the alternatives and making sure the alternatives are better than the current one! afterall, we wann abring about a change to PROGRESS, not just for the HECK OF IT and HOPE THINGS WILL IMPROVE COS IT CAN VERY WELL WORSEN AT THE SAME TIME!

the coaches and staff are far more experienced, knowledgeable and aware of the different players available to them, the different formations that can be played, the opponents style of play and tactics, etc.
motmaen bash if people like u or me can think of something so trivial and simple like adding a 2nd striker and removing a DM, u think a group of coaches and analysts cant think of that??


-----------

just for the record, my personal favorite formation is 4-4-2 diamond and i would actually like to see TM play it, but at the moment, i think 4-2-3-1 is more suitable, the main reason being our insecure GK, our uncordinated out of form defense and our DMs not being on top form to be able to handle the position all by themselves alone.

but i would like to give the staff the benefit of the doubt before jumping at every coach or analyst out there who thinks different than me.

.

it didnt remind u of ghalenoi forcing zandi to play LB huh? did it hurt ur eyes that time too or was it only the sight of branko that burnt ur eyes rather than his ideologies?

What kinda childish reply is this?! I just mentioned Branko using Hashemian as LW, simply because it’s his system we were talking about and how some coaches tried to force certain players to play out of position just to stick to their system.
And what has Qn have anything to do with it? Yes it was only because it was Branko, happy now??

Why do you act as if I said that in order to look flexible a coach has to make changes all the time :-/
Qn made changes when he thought was necessary and most of the time they worked in our advantage. At least he read the game well and was man enough and smart enough to see his mistakes quickly. He didn’t stick to the same crap even though it was obvious it didn’t work. But I don’t understand why you brought up Qn here anyway.
And fyi it hurt my eyes seeing Zandi there at first, but it worked out pretty well! With the problems Mr. Branko had left for our LB position, Zandi was a decent solution imo. It had its advantages and disadvantages (see my posts on this from back then), and it was risky, of course, but it worked out pretty ok at the end imo.


lol who said Daei chose his players randomly?! lol what are you talking about??
You have coaches who play the same system 90% of the time and mostly choose players who fit their systems/idea’s the best. But you also have coaches who are wimps (!) and try to force important players to play at certain positions, even though it’s not their usual positions and even though they’ve clearly said they don’t feel comfortable playing there (reminds you of someone?).

You don’t need to bring up Qn every time. Perhaps Zandi played out of position and was not happy playing there at first. So what? What’s your point? What does Qn have anything to do with this discussion and me talking about Branko. Mind you, Branko does have something to do with this whole discussion, since it’s been particularly his system that we see today, and his laj bazi to keep playing it despite not working (again, my opinion ) and despite not having the right players for it (again, MY OPINION!! YOU DON’T NEED TO TELL ME THAT IT ISN’T SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN THAT IT’S RIGHT lol ).


Like I said, no one said that another formation will work 100%. BUT when you don’t get the desired results or the satisfying game play, then you should consider other measures as well. For Daei it’s been only a couple of months and a few games, for other coaches, years. I just don’t want to regret it afterwards when we’ve been eliminated (Khoda Nakoneh) and say “what if…”.

Sometimes a coach does laj bazi and sticks to his system and certain players for years without any significant result and at some point even very bad results. He then gets fired and a new coach arrives and comes up with a new strategy with the same players and “tadaaa” the team with the same players plays beautifully and gets some good results as well.

What does that tell you? That the strategy used by the previous coach did not work for these bunch of players, simple as that! Now for a club it’s not such a big deal, but for a National Team it can be disastrous (specially at this stage)!

This might be one of the longest posts I’ve ever written in my PFDC history…now I’m off to VIP to release some stress…50 where are you????

[Amin_]

Ok before I start answering you, let me say this first:

* No one said I/we are experts and that what I say is the solution for our problems. Everyone here is just expressing their opinions on our football and post whatever they think would suit TM best.

* You put words in my mouth and assume things I haven’t said; f.e. I did not say I necessarily want wing play in TM. Yet, you kept going on for half a page, coming up with all kinda theories to show how me “necessarily wanting wings (which I didn’t!)” is wrong since I said myself that we don’t have the right players on the wings who can cross/pass decently :-/
There are a couple more examples, but I will get to them in the post below.

this is a very subjective view. it depends how u define failure and how u define success! there is no mathematical formula which shows this formula has failed and another one has been successful.
so, lets say, in ur opinion, u think 4-2-3-1 has failed with TM. i have 2 questions for u:
1)based on wat do u say this formation has failed? define failure and success for me when it comes to TM please.
2)which formation in ur opinion has been successful, if this one has failed? again, please tell me, why u think the other formation was successful?
Im sure ur opinion and doctor dooms and everyone elses is respectable and has valid arguments too, but, we must remember, at the end of the day, there is no mathematical formula like 2+2=4 which defines wat is success and wat is failure for TM because its all subjective views!
but i would like to know the answer to ur 2 questions above anywayz.

What?! You’re kidding me? Doesn’t the fact that we’ve played horrible and have had such a goal scoring problem next to that, show you that this formula hasn’t been “successful”?!

Define failure? Failure for me is when Iran has played 3 games, 2 at home, and has gained only 3 points, with 2 of them being a goalless draw!
Failure is when I don’t see 3 consecutive passes and all we see is long balls from the back! Failure is…

Again, you seem not to understand the point. I’m not saying 4-2-3-1 is a horrible system in general, I’m saying that it hasn’t been working for TM and its selected players!

What other formations have been successful for us in the past is irrelevant, simply because we had other players playing and the situation was different! I don’t know for sure what formation will be the best, but it’s been obvious for ME that the 4-2-3-1 hasn’t, not only because of the results, but also because of the awful game play itself!

Perhaps a 4-2-3-1 system with Bagheri and Nekounam as DM’s, Hashemian upfront and and 2 in form players on the wings could be successful, we don’t know. BUT with the players we have right now and with what recent history has shown us, this system seems not to be working for us now!

wat makes u think we have players who will fit other formations? again, u say its OBVIOUS it doesnt work while i say its not as obvious as u claim it is. if ur argument is, its obvious its not working because we are not getting results or playing convincing, then i request u and others to remember there are a lot more important factors which are not helping us get the desired result or play convincingly. check out the poll i made in the football forum to see in detail wat i think are the more important factors TM is not getting results and also get a brief idea about other members opinions.
just because a team is not getting necessary results or playing convincingly doesnt mean its the formation which is not working! for example, in my opinion, our biggest problem right now is the limited time that daei and his staff were given to assemble a team and get them ready to play in these qualifiers. now, amin, i ask u, had we played another formation, wouldnt we require time as well to gel up the team? wat guarantee is there that less time would be required for the other formations? wat guarantee is there that system would work better than this one?
doctor doom claims 4-2-3-1 is too fancy for our players, so its more difficult but then, i would like to remind everyone atleast 10 of our TM players, mostly the starters that too, play the same formation in their clubs and their clubs kicked ass both inside iran and outside iran against east asian and west asian teams with different coaches and different formations!

again, i think, unless ur a real expert of formations, u cant really sit and criticize coaches and analysts who have worked with formations than any of us here. yes, we are all intelligent people with common sense and have been following football as well. as poshte kooh naymadim, i know, but those guys are also intelligent and have been following football as well. however, they are trained in such fields, specially something like formations of football which is highly technical and requires u to deeply study the different formations compared to some other discussions like player selections which is quite easier for fans to understand because it involves more of common sense and less technicality RELATIVELY!

again, u say we have players who dont fit this sytem. i ask u, which system do these players fit then? and please explain why u think they suit better in that system?
just saying, we have 2 DMs and 1 striker, so we are not offensive is too trivial and naive! im sorry, but this is a very technical subject for people like u, me, doctor doom or any fan here like i explained above. atleast thats wat i think. so in formation discussions, i find it hard to accept peoples arguments here, unless they really explain (if possible with examples) how different formations work, wat are their flaws, wat are their strong points, wat kind of players they need, etc.
just saying, 4-2-3-1 doesnt work for iran (which is even a subjective opinion not a fact) without any proper explanation, examples and theory is not really an argument, not only for me, but for most people.

Of course there are other reasons as well that have influenced our game, but this has been around TM for years and it’s not something new. We’ve never really had lots of friendlies, never has this IFF been competent in planning and organizing things, there have always been side issues around TM, there has always been hashiyeh, there has…

In fact I don’t blame Daei at all for his shortcomings! Neither did I blame Qn. I blame IFF and all the morons there who came up with the election of these 2 (potentially good, but internationally inexperienced) coaches at such crucial times!

There is no 100% guarantee that other formations will work, but what has almost become a guarantee is that this system seems not to be working, no matter how few time Daei has had to implement it (again, this is my opninion).

I’ve already given you a little explanation on why this system does not work for TM with the players in hand.
When you have 2 out of form DM’s who can’t distribute the ball and are not a good transition link from defence to offense, 2 rookies on the sides who don’t seem to be sending good passes/crosses, incompetent strikers to play as a lone striker, and you’re playing AT HOME against weaker opponents who’re there for a draw (with max. 1 striker) and you yourself are looking for a win, plus you’ve already seen in previous matches that neither the game play, nor the results have been satisfying under this system, then why try it again?!

And again, we saw that it didn’t work. And mind you, Neku has only recently returned. Might he still have been injured, I bet Daei would’ve played Ando (again, average at best) and Sadeghi (even worse than Ando, and not competent enough for such international duties yet imo)

just saying, we have 2 DMs and 1 striker, so we are not offensive is too trivial and naive!

I did not say that! Please don’t mix up things. I said that with the current players in hand, this system doesn’t seem to be contributing much in our offensive line. Simply because we didn’t have the right players who could build up an attack from the back.

I’ll get to what I believe is the best option later on.

exactly wat i have been saying! we have an insecure GK, a slow uncoordinated defense line and 2 not on top form DMs. so wat does this mean? it means our defense is vulnerable and weak!
so now inspite of all this, u wanna remove a DM and play with only 1 not on top form DM?? wouldnt that put even more pressure on our vulnerable defense and clearly on our single out of form DM??
and this now more pressurized DM who is not on top form and has to do more of running and defensive work will improve the transition from defense to offense better all alone by himself??

Just like you say that playing with 1 striker doesn’t necessarily mean “weaker offense”, playing with 1 DM doesn’t necessarily mean putting the defence under more pressure!
Yes we don’t have the best defence ever, but we should not exaggerate it either; no matter what, they’re still much better than most of the defenders in Asia, let alone these Arab teams we’re facing in our group! When other teams dare to play with 2 strikers and one DM, with all those poor players, how come we’re afraid to put “our defence under pressure” against these Arabs (who’re there with only 1 striker) and we field up 6 defensively minded players against 1-2 offensively minded opponents?!
A team like Holland usually plays 4-3-3, but there have been times that they changed this to a 3 men defence and a 5 men midfield (3-1-2-1-3, when they faced weaker opponents who’d come for a draw) – like you said, you have to see this in relative to the strength of the opponents.
So like I said, removing 1 DM doesn’t have to mean that our defence will be under more pressure. You just have to field up other players in midfield who can fill up some of the extra space (players like Madanchi, and Kazemian). Again, this insecure GK and shaky defence is still considered as one of the best in Asia!

again i ask u, wat formation do u recomment then? u think by reducing it to 1 out of form DM who has to now carry the burden of 2 DMs all by himself, our transition from defense to offense will be better??? and hence, our wingplay will improve???

infact, before we even talk about wingplay, first u tell me wat type of formation u looking for cos some of the formations are even weaker than the 4-2-3-1 when it comes to wingplay!

agian transition from defense to offense, refer to my quesiton above: how do u expect to IMPROVE our transition from defense to offense by REDUCING the DMs to 1 out of form DM??? shojaei was not forced to the sides until the end of second half when meydavoudi came in. he was mostly in the center and thats where he played his best. if u noticed, he disappaeraed only towards the end of the game when meydavoudi came in, but he was still the best player of TM in many's opinion!

but that doesnt mean, shojaei wont move to the sides. u cant expect any player in any team in any formation to always stay in the same position and just move up and down the field in a coloumn wise direction!

in the 4-2-3-1, the 2 side midfielders are to move diagonally inwards during attack, and frankly, they did. didnt nikbakht and rezaei move in many times? nikbakht even had a chance to score a goal but headed it over the bar and he was right infront of the goal!

to make clear, i will give u the example of portugal. nikbakht was playing the role christiano ronaldo, quaresma and earlier luis figo play in portugal. they dont play as strikers. they dont play as only midfielders only either. they play inbetween and with their running help in offense and defense.

now i know nikbakht is nowhere near figo or ronaldo but at the same time, figo and ronaldo play and have to score against the likes of canavaro and terry and puyol while nikbakht has to play against UAE. so its relative!

u can have another formation like 4-4-2 diamond but that will kill our wing play even more cos the 4 midfielders are not wingers but central midfielders, so its only upto the 2 fullbacks to cover the whole sideline and do the whole offense and defense all by themselves, each on one side. so this formation requires ideal full backs who are good in offense and defense like philip lahm or roberto carlos!
so dont for a second think our wing play will improve if we switch to 4-4-2 diamond specially with players like zare and nosrati who are quite weak offensively and mostly do defense work as fullbacks! atleast in the 4-2-3-1, the likes of nikbakht can utilize some space along the lines and give some more width and wingplay to the team rather than the 4-4-2 diamond.

the 4-4-2 box again, is even worse than 4-4-2 diamond when it comes to width and wingplay because the 4 midfielders are central midfielders plus they are mostly playing in the center of the field trying to congest the field in the middle and hence there is no width for the team at all except for the 2 fullbacks again which means the need for very fast, technical, fit and both offensively and defensively good fullbacks to do both attacking and defending! our fullbacks have a hard time defending itself, now imagine them wanting to attack aswell! they will screw up real bad! but with 4-2-3-1, our 2 fullbacks can concentrate mostly on defense but our 2 midfielders on 2 sides like nikbakht and gholam reza rezaei doing the attacking part from the 2 sides.

we can play 4-4-2 line and that has good width and wing play but then, that requires 2 very fit central midfielders in the middle because the 2 midfielders have to participate in attack and defense both together. players like ballack and gerrard type who run 90 minutes up and down participating in offense and defense. we dont hae any player who can even do half the things necessary for this position. clearly, 1 of them has to be a defensive midfielder. assuming nekounam, the other can be either ando or shojaei but whoever it is, they have to continuously run with nekounam up and down participating in attack and defense which clearly, none of them can! besides, none of them can do both offense and attack. they are either good in attack or defense. like ando who is good in destruction but sux bad in offensive moves.

the formation which uses the wings the most is 3-5-2 but first, the 2 wings really need to be able to run up an ddown for 90 minutes again cos they signle handedly have the cover the whole line, both in offense and defense which clearly we dont have again. zare, nosrati, not even kaabi or an aging slower and not on top form kia can do it! besides, 3-5-2 leaves huge gaps behind the wingers during turnovers and one through pass or long pass behind our winger and we are screwed cos that will force our 3 defenders to spread up as the closest one has to approach the ball and try to clear it leaving only 2 defenders in the entire defense line! basically, screwed!

we got other formations like 3-4-3, 4-3-2-1, etc but they are not that prominently used and unless u have some other formation in mind, i think i explained to u, why, IN MY OPINION, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, 4-2-3-1 is most suited for TM.

again, i repeat, just because u play with 2 DMs and 1 forward doesnt mean ur team cant be offensive enough, score goals and win games!

Again, reducing 1 DM doesn’t necessarily mean more pressure on defence! It’s just how you implement the new formation and what other players you field up!

I believe having 1 clear playmaker behind the 2 strikers, and 3 men behind him in midfield with Neku in the middle might actually do the work, something like this:


--------------------Rahmati------------------
-----------Hosseini---------Nosrati----------
--Kaabi--------------------------------Zareh-
------Kazemian--Nekounam---Madanchi---
-----------------Karimi/Jabbari-------------
--------Meydavoodi--------Enayati---------


Players like Kazemian and Madanchi have played this position before (Kazemian even this season at his club, where he sometimes even played as a RB). We know these players can cover the distance on the sides and do their defensive duties as well if necessary. Of course if Kia was available it would’ve been perfect, but still I believe Kazemian could fulfil this duty as well.
I believe the playmaker position is the most important job and that all players’ duties must be to transfer the ball as soon as possible to this man (being it Jabbari or Karimi). So you’d have to have players behind him who can give decent passes over a distance of 10-15 meters. Ando is not one. His ball control and passes are too awful which takes away all the speed and messes up this transition!
Once this playmaker has reached the ball, the players on the sides should add up and the strikers have to position themselves well (an Enayati type of player whould make space for a quick 2nd striker like Meydavoodi, like by making a 1-2 with the playmaker). This way the playmaker has the time (and we do have players in this position who can hold on to the ball for a second) to choose between a depth pass, or one of the 2 players on the sides, with the 2nd striker (this case Enayati) adding up if the ball goes to either of the 2 sides).

This is what I meant in my beginning paragraph: You keep going on about wing play and how some formations lack them, but I did not say I necessarily want to see that! When you don’t have the right tools, don’t force yourself! In 4-4-2 the wings are not the most important aspect. The most important thing is to transfer the ball to the playmaker, who then has 2-3 options to distribute the ball further to the offensive line/sides (like I tried to explain above). With a quick techniqual player, you could play in depth balls, and with the other type of striker (the Khalili/Enayati), one could make 1-2’s and open up spaces on the sides.
This way you’ll have many options, whether the in depth pass to the fast striker, the pass to one of the sides for a cross to the Khalili/Enayati type of striker, the strikers creating space for the playmaker or one of the players on the sides who can add up and who can dribble and create chances for themselves etc.
It’s kinda hard to precisely explain what I mean with my limited English though…

u were complaining above that we dont have wing play, which means u want wing play.

now u are saying our players cant make decent crosses! so if they cant make decent crosses, why do u want more wing play?? to make more crap crosses and waste more chances????

i think ur confusing 2 things here. just because u play 4-2-3-1 doesnt mean u have to play high balls. u can play 4-2-3-1 and play on ground and focus on central attack and focus on the depth of the opponents defense.
its not like, if u play 4-2-3-1, u have to play high balls and crosses. or if u want to play high balls and crosses, then u have to play 4-2-3-1!
u can play a different formation and still focus on crosses and high balls! but wats the use, as long as the crosses are shit like u mentioned, wat difference does it make??

daei adopted 4-2-3-1 system and also wanted high balls. u can play 3-5-2 and 4-4-2 and still play high balls and focus on crossings all of which will turn shit because of the shit crosses!

Again, you’re making assumptions! I did not say I necessarily want to see wingplay, in fact I don’t, simply because we don’t have the right tools at this moment!
Of course one can play all kinda strategies with every formation, but what Daei wants is to make use of the wings a lot, but it’s obvious with the tools in hand that that does not work. With the lack of a playmaker and strikers like Khalili/Enayati it’s difficult to play depth balls and players like Nikbakht don’t have it in them to make depth runs or to come up with decent crosses for most parts of the game (at least from what I’ve seen).
With the lack of movement from our wingers in the depth and with the lack of them adding up in the box and with our player’s lack of ability to give decent crosses/passes, Daei’s “adoption of 4-2-3-1 system and also wanting high balls” (like you mentioned yourself) doesn’t seem to be working!

no, the results and performances havent proven this. this is urs and some others personal opinions and views only! there are many more important and crucial reasons that TM hasnt been performing well! formation isnt the main reason! and this is my opinion.

besides, please tell me which formation has proven to be successful with its performance and results and an explanation as to how it was successful (with examples if possible) before u make such claims

Yes and that’s why I have been saying it!! Is what I’m saying right? Doesn’t have to.
When you’ve seen that neither the game play nor the results have been satisfying for a long time under this system, then for me that is proven not to be working!

Like I said, it does not matter what formations and systems have proven for us in the past, simply because other players/opponents were involved. This formation could've worked in other situations, but again, performances and results have shown that it does not! This is a personal view and opinion, and for me it's obvious, so I can make such claims whenever and how much I want!! I don't need to prove what system has worked for us in the past to make claims that the current system does not!!

And no one said it's only the formation that's hold us back from decent game play and decent results. I’m the last person you need to tell that to, as I’m aware of most the things that occur around the team and in its management. BUT next to all those side issues, the most important thing when you're actually on the pitch, is the system and players you've selected and that is what this discussion is about, whether the system works for us or not.

With all the sh!t going on, Iran still has one of the best players to choose from in whole Asia. Iran's B team without any friendlies, with a coach they didn't know and with all those new faces, beat the Asian Champion's A team and became the champions in that little Arab tournament. So yeah, even though the side issues play a major part, still when on the pitch, the system and players selection is very crucial!

u say u dont care how many playesr have played under this system at their clubs but on top u say daei should come up with a formation the players are comfortable with??

so let me get this straight, u think the players will be more comfortable playing a formation different from the ones they play daily in ther clubs??
u think its easier for them to start playing a new formation and new position from today with those new players and can still miraculously get better performance and results 2 days from now with just 2 days of practice under their new formations, positions and tactics???
u seriously believe in this or is it that u just wanna make a point no matter wat??

those set of players btw u mentioned, are ATLEAST 10 of our TM players, if not more (cos i havent followed all their teams) and most of them are starters. so now, these 10 players should all play in new formations, with new positions, duties, ideas and within 2 days, be able to have a better performance and result than the ones they had last game??

like i said, failure or success of a formation is a very subjective opinion and very technical at the same time. it is not proven scientifically!
and most important of all, TMs formation isnt anywhere close to the main reason why we ahvent got the desired result of performance, atleats, thats how i see it. u might see it differently and i respect that, but please understand that there is no hard or fast rule which says ur view is the right way and any other view is wrong simply because its not a simple mathematical 2+2 = 4 formula!

YES indeed, I DON’T CARE HOW MANY PLAYERS PLAY UNDER THIS SYSTEM AT THEIR CLUBS! I did not say that we have “ghaavs” playing in TM who need 10 years to get to know this system. Yes, they might be familiar with the system at their clubs, but that is their club, with other players, other coaches, other opponents, other level, other…

Ok let’s say Daei had 18 player in its squad that played a 2-7-1 formation in their clubs (lol), should he have used that for TM as well?! Let’s say he’d tried this strange formation for the sake of the players, “who’re already familiar with the formation” and he did neither get the desired results, nor satisfying game play…what then? Should he try it again the next time, and the time after that, and after that and…?!?!?
It’s not like a 4-4-2 system takes 2 years to understand either. Many players are familiar with it already and have played it somewhere in their career before! Seems like it is you who needs to exaggerate things to make an argument, not me!
The UAE doesn’t play 4-2-3-1 either normally, but you saw that their coach implemented this formation with great success against us, in AZADI, and that without having working on it for a year

And please, you don’t need to say how my theory isn’t “scientifically proven” or whatever, it’s just an online forum and whatever everyone says is based on their own interpretation of the game, how they see things and it’s all their own personal opinion. I never claimed my theory is the right one and I'm not forcing it down Daei's throath either, it’s just how I see things!

[The-Red]

damn... you guys really got into this....I enjoy reading these comments
wish I didn't have this damn bar exam coming up so I could read them all and learn something here .

[yashar_fasihnia]

i really dont know wanna start this discussion again but since i havent had it with u, im giving it a try again.

Baba we're not saying that 4-2-3-1 system is a bad one in general; no, many big teams and coaches make use of it, so it does have good futures, agreed.
BUT, what I/we am/are saying i that this system has proven not to be working for us in TM!!

1)
this is a very subjective view. it depends how u define failure and how u define success! there is no mathematical formula which shows this formula has failed and another one has been successful. ITs ur opinion and some others, not a fact. so, that makes it only an opinion, not a proven fact. many others believe otherwise and share a view different from urs. some might even argue that TM played best and got the best or atleast very good results with the same formation. but that is just their opinion as well. so both sides have their view points and their own arguments, but neither side can actually claim their view is a "PROVEN FACT" simple because its not provable! its a matter of perspective and in some cases, different understanding of football! (and the inside happenings of iranian football that doesnt come out that easily)

so, lets say, in ur opinion, u think 4-2-3-1 has failed with TM. i have 2 questions for u:
1)based on wat do u say this formation has failed? define failure and success for me when it comes to TM please.
2)which formation in ur opinion has been successful, if this one has failed? again, please tell me, why u think the other formation was successful?

Im sure ur opinion and doctor dooms and everyone elses is respectable and has valid arguments too, but, we must remember, at the end of the day, there is no mathematical formula like 2+2=4 which defines wat is success and wat is failure in a formation because its all subjective views!

EVEN IF, EVEN IF, EVEN IF WE ASSUME 4-2-3-1 didnt work for TM under previous coaches and every fan and expert and player agrees to it, that doesnt mean it wont work under a new coach! we got a maximum of wat, 10 formations or something? so wat, every time we get a different formation, we should try a new formation cos previous one didnt work and we fired the coach?? strategies doesnt mean u just decorate the field with 11 players in different positions and then let them play for themselves. formation is only a small part of a whole plan. formation is like a platform to implement those strategies on the field! formation isnt a plan by itself! u can have 1 formation but have 10 different strategies using the same formation! some might work, some might not!

teams sack coaches and bring new coaches who use the same formation as previous one! so wat? they shouldnt use it cos it didnt work with the previous coach?
i really wonder how iranian football fans sit behind their pcs and TVs and after just 2-3 games which a coach has been the head coach for and the team has just been set up reach to the conclusion that the formation and ideas being used by the coach is wrong??!! fans! not football experts!
akhe baba jan, bezar 6 maah morabi va team ba ham bashan, team ye shaksiat begire, bad begin formation ghalate! hanuz teamemun team nashode, hanuz bazikona hamdaigaro nashnakhtan, hanuz 20 ruz nist morabi teamo be dast gerefte migan formation ghalate tacticha ghalate! and they support this claim by saying TM is not delivering results and performance is poor! OFCOURSE TEAM WONT DELIVER AND PERFORM! COS ITS ONLY BEEN 2 WEEKS SINCE THE TEAM IS FORMED! WAT DO U EXPECT? MIRACLES TO HAPPEN?? GIVE THE COACH AND THE PLAYERS TIME TO GET USED TO THE COACHS NEW IDEAS AND STARTEGIES, THEN MAKE A JUDGEMENT ABOUT THEM! DONT JUDGE HIS TACTICS SIMPLY BECAUSE AFTER 2 WEEKS, TM HASNT DELIVERED (OR IS SOME CASES, SIMPLY COS U CANT STAND THE PREVIOUS COACH WHO USED THE SAME TACTIC! )

but i would like to know ur answers to the 2 questions i asked above anywayz.

There are 2 options:
1) a coach has a system in mind and selects his players based on that system;
2) a coach selects players and comes up with a system that fits these selected players.
At this moment (and also in the past), we had players who did not fit this system but we forced them to play it, even though it was obvious it wouldn't work!

2)

wat makes u think we have players who will fit other formations? again, u say its OBVIOUS it doesnt work while i say its not as obvious as u claim it is. if ur argument is, its obvious its not working because we are not getting results or playing convincing, then i request u and others to remember there are a lot more important factors which are not helping us get the desired result or play convincingly. check out the poll i made in the football forum to see in detail wat i think are the more important factors TM is not getting results and also get a brief idea about other members opinions.
just because a team is not getting necessary results or playing convincingly doesnt mean its the formation which is not working! for example, in my opinion, our biggest problem right now is the limited time that daei and his staff were given to assemble a team and get them ready to play in these qualifiers. now, amin, i ask u, had we played another formation, wouldnt we require time as well to gel up the team? wat guarantee is there that less time would be required for the other formations? wat guarantee is there that system would work better than this one?
doctor doom claims 4-2-3-1 is too fancy for our players, so its more difficult but then, i would like to remind everyone atleast 10 of our TM players, mostly the starters that too, play the same formation in their clubs and their clubs kicked ass both inside iran and outside iran against east asian and west asian teams with different coaches and different formations!

again, i think, unless ur a real expert of formations, u cant really sit and criticize coaches and analysts who have worked with formations than any of us here. yes, we are all intelligent people with common sense and have been following football as well. as poshte kooh naymadim, i know, but those guys are also intelligent and have been following football as well. however, they are trained in such fields, specially something like formations of football which is highly technical and requires u to deeply study the different formations compared to some other discussions like player selections which is quite easier for fans to understand because it involves more of common sense and less technicality RELATIVELY!

again, u say we have players who dont fit this sytem. i ask u, which system do these players fit then? and please explain why u think they suit better in that system?
just saying, we have 2 DMs and 1 striker, so we are not offensive is too trivial and naive! im sorry, but this is a very technical subject for people like u, me, doctor doom or any fan here like i explained above. atleast thats wat i think. so in formation discussions, i find it hard to accept peoples arguments here, unless they really explain (if possible with examples) how different formations work, wat are their flaws, wat are their strong points, wat kind of players they need, etc.
just saying, 4-2-3-1 doesnt work for iran (which is even a subjective opinion not a fact) without any proper explanation, examples and theory is not really an argument, not only for me, but for most people.

We have a very slow defence, so we can't press and play far from our goal.
Now we have 2 out of form DM's, one who's average at best (Ando), who can't give decent passes even if their lifes depended on it, so the transition from defence to offense is horrible.

3)

exactly wat i have been saying! we have an insecure GK, a slow uncoordinated defense line and 2 not on top form DMs. so wat does this mean? it means our defense is vulnerable and weak!
so now inspite of all this, u wanna remove a DM and play with only 1 not on top form DM?? wouldnt that put even more pressure on our vulnerable defense and clearly on our single out of form DM??
and this now more pressurized DM who is not on top form and has to do more of running and defensive work will improve the transition from defense to offense better all alone by himself??

This totally puts our side players out of the game. We have 2 rookies on the sides, and even before, didn't have the right people on these positions (ok on the right we had Kia, but he's been declining and on the left we never really had anyone for this position).

4)

again i ask u, wat formation do u recomment then? u think by reducing it to 1 out of form DM who has to now carry the burden of 2 DMs all by himself, our transition from defense to offense will be better??? and hence, our wingplay will improve???

infact, before we even talk about wingplay, first u tell me wat type of formation u looking for cos some of the formations are even weaker than the 4-2-3-1 when it comes to wingplay!

With this formation the wingplayers are vital and there should be a playmaker who can open up spaces and add up to or close the 18 box, the transition from defence to offence is so bad that this half-playmaker (Shojaei) was forced to the sides all the time and had to do way too much.

5)

agian transition from defense to offense, refer to my quesiton above: how do u expect to IMPROVE our transition from defense to offense by REDUCING the DMs to 1 out of form DM??? shojaei was not forced to the sides until the end of second half when meydavoudi came in. he was mostly in the center and thats where he played his best. if u noticed, he disappaeraed only towards the end of the game when meydavoudi came in, but he was still the best player of TM in many's opinion!

but that doesnt mean, shojaei wont move to the sides. u cant expect any player in any team in any formation to always stay in the same position and just move up and down the field in a coloumn wise direction!

in the 4-2-3-1, the 2 side midfielders are to move diagonally inwards during attack, and frankly, they did. didnt nikbakht and rezaei move in many times? nikbakht even had a chance to score a goal but headed it over the bar and he was right infront of the goal!

to make clear, i will give u the example of portugal. nikbakht was playing the role christiano ronaldo, quaresma and earlier luis figo play in portugal. they dont play as strikers. they dont play as only midfielders only either. they play inbetween and with their running help in offense and defense.

now i know nikbakht is nowhere near figo or ronaldo but at the same time, figo and ronaldo play and have to score against the likes of canavaro and terry and puyol while nikbakht has to play against UAE. so its relative!

u can have another formation like 4-4-2 diamond but that will kill our wing play even more cos the 4 midfielders are not wingers but central midfielders, so its only upto the 2 fullbacks to cover the whole sideline and do the whole offense and defense all by themselves, each on one side. so this formation requires ideal full backs who are good in offense and defense like philip lahm or roberto carlos!
so dont for a second think our wing play will improve if we switch to 4-4-2 diamond specially with players like zare and nosrati who are quite weak offensively and mostly do defense work as fullbacks! atleast in the 4-2-3-1, the likes of nikbakht can utilize some space along the lines and give some more width and wingplay to the team rather than the 4-4-2 diamond.

the 4-4-2 box again, is even worse than 4-4-2 diamond when it comes to width and wingplay because the 4 midfielders are central midfielders plus they are mostly playing in the center of the field trying to congest the field in the middle and hence there is no width for the team at all except for the 2 fullbacks again which means the need for very fast, technical, fit and both offensively and defensively good fullbacks to do both attacking and defending! our fullbacks have a hard time defending itself, now imagine them wanting to attack aswell! they will screw up real bad! but with 4-2-3-1, our 2 fullbacks can concentrate mostly on defense but our 2 midfielders on 2 sides like nikbakht and gholam reza rezaei doing the attacking part from the 2 sides.

we can play 4-4-2 line and that has good width and wing play but then, that requires 2 very fit central midfielders in the middle because the 2 midfielders have to participate in attack and defense both together. players like ballack and gerrard type who run 90 minutes up and down participating in offense and defense. we dont hae any player who can even do half the things necessary for this position. clearly, 1 of them has to be a defensive midfielder. assuming nekounam, the other can be either ando or shojaei but whoever it is, they have to continuously run with nekounam up and down participating in attack and defense which clearly, none of them can! besides, none of them can do both offense and attack. they are either good in attack or defense. like ando who is good in destruction but sux bad in offensive moves.

the formation which uses the wings the most is 3-5-2 but first, the 2 wings really need to be able to run up an ddown for 90 minutes again cos they signle handedly have the cover the whole line, both in offense and defense which clearly we dont have again. zare, nosrati, not even kaabi or an aging slower and not on top form kia can do it! besides, 3-5-2 leaves huge gaps behind the wingers during turnovers and one through pass or long pass behind our winger and we are screwed cos that will force our 3 defenders to spread up as the closest one has to approach the ball and try to clear it leaving only 2 defenders in the entire defense line! basically, screwed!

we got other formations like 3-4-3, 4-3-2-1, etc but they are not that prominently used and unless u have some other formation in mind, i think i explained to u, why, IN MY OPINION, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, 4-2-3-1 is most suited for TM.

again, i repeat, just because u play with 2 DMs and 1 forward doesnt mean ur team cant be offensive enough, score goals and win games!

That brings us to the offense...when you know you're playing a weaker team who's come to defend with all they have, you don't put 1 striker inbetween 3-4 defenders, specially with players behind him who can't give one decent pass/cross!
Hell, even if Drogba was playing, still he wouldn't have been able to score with the balls he was fed (or lack of it in this case).

6)

u were complaining above that we dont have wing play, which means u want wing play.

now u are saying our players cant make decent crosses! so if they cant make decent crosses, why do u want more wing play?? to make more crap crosses and waste more chances????

i think ur confusing 2 things here. just because u play 4-2-3-1 doesnt mean u have to play high balls. u can play 4-2-3-1 and play on ground and focus on central attack and focus on the depth of the opponents defense.
its not like, if u play 4-2-3-1, u have to play high balls and crosses. or if u want to play high balls and crosses, then u have to play 4-2-3-1!
u can play a different formation and still focus on crosses and high balls! but wats the use, as long as the crosses are shit like u mentioned, wat difference does it make??

daei adopted 4-2-3-1 system and also wanted high balls. u can play 3-5-2 and 4-4-2 and still play high balls and focus on crossings all of which will turn shit because of the shit crosses!

This system does not work for us, and the results and performances have proven this! Daei should come up with a formation that the players are comfortable with and which fits this team and its players!

7)

no, the results and performances havent proven this as a fact. this is urs and some others personal opinions and views only which apparently u guys think everyone thinks the same way! there are many more important and crucial reasons that TM hasnt been performing well! formation isnt the main reason! and this is my opinion on the otherhand and some others. but i dont claim ITS A PROVEN FACT just because i see it that way and some others see it the same way i do!

besides, please tell me which formation has proven to be successful with its performance and results and an explanation as to how it was successful (with examples if possible) before u make such claims

I don't care how many of the players have played under this system at their clubs...ok perhaps the system works for those set of players...but when it's been so obvious that it simply does not work for the players who're selected in TM, then other measures have to be considered.

8)

u say u dont care how many playesr have played under this system at their clubs but on top u say daei should come up with a formation the players are comfortable with??

so let me get this straight, u think the players will be more comfortable playing a formation different from the ones they play daily in ther clubs??
u think its easier for them to start playing a new formation and new position from today with those new players and can still miraculously get better performance and results 2 days from now with just 2 days of practice under their new formations, positions and tactics???
u seriously believe in this or is it that u just wanna make a point no matter wat??

those set of players btw u mentioned, are ATLEAST 10 of our TM players, if not more (cos i havent followed all their teams) and most of them are starters. so now, these 10 players should all play in new formations, with new positions, duties, ideas and within 2 days, be able to have a better performance and result than the ones they had last game??

like i said, failure or success of a formation is a very subjective opinion and very technical at the same time. it is not proven scientifically!
and most important of all, TMs formation isnt anywhere close to the main reason why we ahvent got the desired result of performance, atleats, thats how i see it. u might see it differently and i respect that, but please understand that there is no hard or fast rule which says ur view is the right way and any other view is wrong simply because its not a simple mathematical 2+2 = 4 formula!

When I say a coach has to be flexible and look at the players he has in his squad and then find a suitable system to play, it reminds me of Branko and how he tried to force Hashemian to play on the left in order to play the 4-2-3-1 system and to have Daei upfront
It hurt my eyes seeing how VH was struggling at that position back then.

9)

it didnt remind u of ghalenoi forcing zandi to play LB huh? did it hurt ur eyes that time too or was it only the sight of branko that burnt ur eyes rather than his ideologies?

flexibility was like ghalenoi, every game, he changed his formation in asian cup! wat did he achieve? many experts criticized him for being "flexible" because it confuses the players themselves more than the opponent and the team fails to gain any real stability and character. besides, a team needs time to get used to the formation, its strategies and duties and his teammates in a particular formation. u cant keep changing formations and think ur being flexible!

when daei was first assigned the TM coach, the TM players werent chosen yet. so its not like daei was assigned as TM coach and given a set of players and asked to form a team from only those players. daei had 70 million iranians to choose from and he chose those players based on certain criteria and ideologies not randonly. daei or rather no coach would first choose 23 players and then say, hmm..so i got these 23 players, let me see wat formation suits them best! every coach chooses his players based on certain ideologies and beliefs which means, daei and his staff for sure had certain strategies in mind and based on those ideas, chose his players. in other words, daei and his team felt that these set of players at the moment can fulfill his ideologies and carry out his plans better than anyone else in iran!
yes, if a coach is brought in the middle of the league and given a squad, then he has to see his players capabilities and try to come up the best ideologies which they can carry out but when a coach is assigned and is asked to choose his own players, for sure, he chooses the players he thinks will fit best his plans! u see this at club level as well during transfer periods. u think coaches just randonly buy players in europe and then say, ok i bought these players, now let me see wat to do with them?

aslan one more thing,
imagine this situation:
i wanna race in formula 1 with michael schumcher! i have the options of driving a porsche with no break, a toyota corolla with no gear and a peykan with no steering wheel. obviously i will lose to him no matter which car i drive, even the porsche!
so which car should i pick?? the porsche obviously even if it doesnt have breaks! yes, i know its crap and doesnt have breaks but wat can i do? the corolla and peykan are even more shit! its not like i have a perfectly working corolla or peykan at my disposal and im choosing a malfunctioning porsche! these are my options, i have to play with the cards im dealt with!

noone said the 4-2-3-1 is perfect, noone said the 4-2-3-1 is being implemented properly by the team, noone said we got the right players for 4-2-3-1 but wat makes u think we got it for 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 for example? have u thought about that side of the coin as well or u just want to make some change and hope somehow things will better? reminds me of those people specially the younger kids on the general forum who keep blaming everything on the islamic republic and any question u ask them about solving a problem in iran, their answer is all the same: Get rid of Islamic Republic! baba jan, akhe if u wanna get rid of islamic republic, who do u wanna bring instead?? have u even bothered to check wat r ur alternatives and if ur alternatives are any better than the one ur using now?? by just getting rid of a system or an idea doesnt mean u will do better. history proves that many times, people have brought about changes just because they were not satisfied with a certain sytem or idea only to regret it later cos they went from bad into a worse idea or system. we have to see both sides of the coin, rather than just immediately jumping at a certain idea and asking for a change without analysing the alternatives and making sure the alternatives are better than the current one! afterall, we wann abring about a change to PROGRESS, not just for the HECK OF IT and HOPE THINGS WILL IMPROVE COS IT CAN VERY WELL WORSEN AT THE SAME TIME!

the coaches and staff are far more experienced, knowledgeable and aware of the different players available to them, the different formations that can be played, the opponents style of play and tactics, etc.
motmaen bash if people like u or me can think of something so trivial and simple like adding a 2nd striker and removing a DM, u think a group of coaches and analysts cant think of that??


--------------------
10)

just for the record, my personal favorite formation is not 4-2-3-1 but 4-4-2 diamond and i would actually like to see TM play it, but at the moment, i think 4-2-3-1 is more suitable, the main reason being our insecure GK, our uncordinated out of form defense and our DMs not being on top form to be able to handle the position all by themselves alone.

but i would like to give the staff the benefit of the doubt before jumping at every coach or analyst out there who thinks different than me.

[Ali Chicago]

Baba we're not saying that 4-2-3-1 system is a bad one in general; no, many big teams and coaches make use of it, so it does have good futures, agreed.
BUT, what I/we am/are saying i that this system has proven not to be working for us in TM!!
There are 2 options:
1) a coach has a system in mind and selects his players based on that system;
2) a coach selects players and comes up with a system that fits these selected players.
At this moment (and also in the past), we had players who did not fit this system but we forced them to play it, even though it was obvious it wouldn't work!
We have a very slow defence, so we can't press and play far from our goal.
Now we have 2 out of form DM's, one who's average at best (Ando), who can't give decent passes even if their lifes depended on it, so the transition from defence to offense is horrible.
This totally puts our side players out of the game. We have 2 rookies on the sides, and even before, didn't have the right people on these positions (ok on the right we had Kia, but he's been declining and on the left we never really had anyone for this position).
With this formation the wingplayers are vital and there should be a playmaker who can open up spaces and add up to or close the 18 box, the transition from defence to offence is so bad that this half-playmaker (Shojaei) was forced to the sides all the time and had to do way too much.
That brings us to the offense...when you know you're playing a weaker team who's come to defend with all they have, you don't put 1 striker inbetween 3-4 defenders, specially with players behind him who can't give one decent pass/cross!
Hell, even if Drogba was playing, still he wouldn't have been able to score with the balls he was fed (or lack of it in this case).
This system does not work for us, and the results and performances have proven this! Daei should come up with a formation that the players are comfortable with and which fits this team and its players!
I don't care how many of the players have played under this system at their clubs...ok perhaps the system works for those set of players...but when it's been so obvious that it simply does not work for the players who're selected in TM, then other measures have to be considered.
When I say a coach has to be flexible and look at the players he has in his squad and then find a suitable system to play, it reminds me of Branko and how he tried to force Hashemian to play on the left in order to play the 4-2-3-1 system and to have Daei upfront
It hurt my eyes seeing how VH was struggling at that position back then.

Great Post with technical explanation of strengths/weakness of 4-2-3-1. I think Mr. Afzali himself wrote few papers about strengths and weaknesses of each system. Well actually a better way to say it would be what kind of players you need to have to play this system.

At present our two DM aren't in tip top shape and this will take fair amount of punch away from our offense.

[zzgloo]

.....
Coahes say what they want......To energize the players.....but, In Iran, all people are biteing thier nails !

And, sorry to jump in with bare feet !!!

In Shia esna ashari and Iran...when father and mother are both Seyed...the child will be called , Seyed e tabatabaee.

[maij]

Talk of the devil

Here is what UAE Team Manger said about the match on Saturday:

وحول المنافس الايراني الذي يملك فرصة اخيرة قال عبدالله حسن: المنتخب الايراني يحظى باحترام منا كمنافس مثل سائر المنتخبات الاخرى وله سمعة كبيرة ويضم لاعبين جيدين عندهم الخبرة والتمرس في البطولات الآسيوية لذلك مواجهتنا له لن تكون سهلة خاصة ان المنتخب الايراني سيتحرر من الضغوطات خارج ملعبه ويؤدي بشكل افضل، لذلك وضع الجهاز الفني هذه النقطة في اعتباره وجند نفسه لها وعمل حساباته وترتيباته للحد من خطورة المنافسس الذي يصارع من أجل البقاء في المنافسة.


in short:
The Iranian team has our respect like the other teams in the group and carries a huge reputation , they have some excellent players with international experience, hence our meeting with them will NOT be easy specially since the the Iranian team will be FREE FROM PRESSURE outside their homebase and perform better. This is a fact that the coach is well aware of and has prepared the right plans to limit the threat of the opposition (Iran) who is fighting for survival.

There you go Yashar jan....they said it themselves....

[maij]

BTW: Kuwait sacked their coach Radan...the usual emergency & standby coach Mohammed Ebrahim is taking control for the Syria match..

[maij]

majid jan, i dunno if the pressure will be more on UAE or on iran.
the reason im saying this is because UAE is leading the group with 5 points and 3 games left. metsu knowing iran is the most difficult game can very well plan to get a draw against us and then 2 victories or even 1 victory and 1 draw in the next 2 games will help him qualify.

however, us on the other hand are 3rd in the group with 3 points and we desperately need a win.

in my opinion, there is more pressure on us than them.

with 5 points , the UAE is far from assured of qualification. All the three teams can overtake them , so , there is still a lot of pressure on them and frankly and admittedly , they fear no team like Iran...You should have seen the post match celebration and interviews as if they won a trophy!!

No that there is no pressure on our boyz , but I think they will play with more freedom and enterprise ( I hope).

Of course , all this is speculation as football is a ***** of a game...

[maij]

if ur both parents and grandparents are seyeds, doesnt that make u something like tabatabaei or something, atleast in the shia belief?

I Don't know about that , but a full fledge Seyed is referred to as "Alavi" in this neck of the wood (Persian Gulf Shia)
From the Father Side is simply refered to as "Seyed"
From Mother Side only "Mirza"

I don't know if they use the same thing in Iran...I will ask , though.


Sorry to be off topic...

[Amin_]

Baba we're not saying that 4-2-3-1 system is a bad one in general; no, many big teams and coaches make use of it, so it does have good futures, agreed.

BUT, what I/we am/are saying i that this system has proven not to be working for us in TM!!


There are 2 options:

1) a coach has a system in mind and selects his players based on that system;

2) a coach selects players and comes up with a system that fits these selected players.

At this moment (and also in the past), we had players who did not fit this system but we forced them to play it, even though it was obvious it wouldn't work!


We have a very slow defence, so we can't press and play far from our goal.
Now we have 2 out of form DM's, one who's average at best (Ando), who can't give decent passes even if their lifes depended on it, so the transition from defence to offense is horrible.

This totally puts our side players out of the game. We have 2 rookies on the sides, and even before, didn't have the right people on these positions (ok on the right we had Kia, but he's been declining and on the left we never really had anyone for this position).

With this formation the wingplayers are vital and there should be a playmaker who can open up spaces and add up to or close the 18 box, the transition from defence to offence is so bad that this half-playmaker (Shojaei) was forced to the sides all the time and had to do way too much.

That brings us to the offense...when you know you're playing a weaker team who's come to defend with all they have, you don't put 1 striker inbetween 3-4 defenders, specially with players behind him who can't give one decent pass/cross!

Hell, even if Drogba was playing, still he wouldn't have been able to score with the balls he was fed (or lack of it in this case).


This system does not work for us, and the results and performances have proven this! Daei should come up with a formation that the players are comfortable with and which fits this team and its players!

I don't care how many of the players have played under this system at their clubs...ok perhaps the system works for those set of players...but when it's been so obvious that it simply does not work for the players who're selected in TM, then other measures have to be considered.


When I say a coach has to be flexible and look at the players he has in his squad and then find a suitable system to play, it reminds me of Branko and how he tried to force Hashemian to play on the left in order to play the 4-2-3-1 system and to have Daei upfront
It hurt my eyes seeing how VH was struggling at that position back then.

[zzgloo]

there are only TWO rules to follow when we face arabs:

1- SCORE early
2- Control your temper and dont give in to their tendency to start fights

Exactly Payman jaan.........this is a strategy not many even good coaches have understood.....it may sound simple, but behind what your stateing, there is lot of experince to support that.............

One may say, that is nothing new, and everybody would like to score early....but what they do not realize ,is the level of commitment to this strategy................

Just imagin the last 5 minutes of the game between Sepahan and perspolise !
and how PP was playing.................playing like that in first 10 minutes, is how a team can beat the negative defensive of this arab teams..............
Once, you score !......thier hard practice ,and well thought of game plans are out of the door..as they have to adjust and try to score and not lose the game..................as long as the game is 0-0 , everything is according to thier game plan......and once, they are scored opon, they have to play with a new game plan that they did not practice for !, hence, they will be forced to adjust to us, and not we, adjust to them.

This plan,
will take the opponanat out of what they practiced for.
Will take the crowd out of the game.
will give better psycology to our players.
will set up situation that is more suitable to our style of play.
will give the opponanat a havey dose of thier own medicin.

[Doctor DOOM]

If I was the UAE coach...I would select to use the exact same tactics...with the addition of some better counter attacing routs...................
I would pay more attention to the UAE's left side deffense......and try to frustrate Iranians even more...................
And if I was Ali Daei.........the first 15 minutes of the game is where I have the most chances.......I would prepare attacking set ups, with over wheling numbers...and involve defenders in the attack as well.........I would not care if we got scored on in early stages as much, as any score will change the charactore of the game, and take UAE out of its comfort zone.

SPOT ON, bahram jan.

knowing our history and how our players react and get emotional and lose control as time wears off, it is wrong to approach this game as a game of chess.

at the moment, where we are in the group, given the games left and all the rest of issues related to these games and points , TM has no other way but to attack from minute 1.

and I'm with bahram here.
it doesnt matter if we concede a goal ( more on this later ), but as long as we SCORE more goals, which we ARE capable of with a little tweak and shuffle here & there.
as we say : balatar az siyahi digeh rangi neest.

the next 2 games are do or die games.
if we're not going to tear our arses in these 2 games, then when and what are we preserving it for? the inconsequential egypt game?

that's why in such circumstances we see GK's come forward to score off freekicks or corners at the dying moments of a game where the team needs a goal. the team is already losing. how does it matter if they lose by one more goal? but the key is ADDING to the number of choices and options for ur team to score a goal.

we are in the same place now.
no point looking at this game and wanting to play it cautious to settle in and maybe do something in second half.
we know as time wears off, they get bolder and more comfortable, and we get more emotional and less productive.

we have the BETTER players.
we HAVE TO attack from the get go, with an ATTACKING formation and tactic.
again, caution will never get us the goals. neither do cautious formations ( even if we somehow convince ourselves that the players are playing this formation correctly ).

-------------------


now, why attack?
as I said, we have the better players.
and not only that. by attacking we push & box the home team in their half, which means they will attack us in lesser numbers. that's a given fact in sports.
that shd satisfy the cautious crowd here.

there is truth to the saying : the best defense is a good offense.

( mind you, some also believe in "defense wins games" but they usually are looking at teams & players like Italy and Italians . not our amateurs )

============

now, given the arab mentality and style of play, I have always said, the rules of the game shd be changed when we face arab teams.
if you're playing japan or korea , you play by the regular rules of wait and observe first and then lay strategy or counter.

with arabs, knowing their genetic code, it is usually unproductive to apply the "wait & observe" strategy, coz they start falling with regularity of dung off a diarrheatic cow.
and trust me, you WILL see a lot of that in our next 2 games in uae and syria.
but if you manage to SCORE the first goal in the first 20-25 minutes, you have a totally new game at hand.
they will be transformed into a team 180 opposite and that opens up more venues for our players.

there are only TWO rules to follow when we face arabs:

1- SCORE early
2- Control your temper and dont give in to their tendency to start fights

that's all.

it is that rule #1 that daei didnt follow and his crappy formation didnt allow ... until it was too late ( minute 75-77 of the game ) where he added to the strikers .
but by that time, as expected, we were playing like headless chickens and too emotional to make any sense !!!
we shd NOT leave it to so late in a game.


I'd say if you guys are so confident that having 2 def-mids will ensure our goal, then why not approach these games this way:
start with an attacking formation, get your goal(s) and THEN become the solid, unbreachable wall of china that this formation transforms us into.
coz when we have 2 def-mids, we shdnt worry about anyone scoring on us, right?

[The-Red]

UAE should be happy with a tie for sure on Sat and us, we should hope we come away with 3 points, no matter how, some lucky narrow margin would do, but a tie is not the end of the world either,,,with more preparation beating Syria away and Kuwait at home are not unrealistic goals at all...even tho I do agree that will put huge pressure on the boys to get 6 pts out of 2 games remaining if we tie with UAE on Sat.

[zzgloo]

If I was the UAE coach...I would select to use the exact same tactics...with the addition of some better counter attacing routs...................
I would pay more attention to the UAE's left side deffense......and try to frustrate Iranians even more...................

And if I was Ali Daei.........the first 15 minutes of the game is where I have the most chances.......I would prepare attacking set ups, with over wheling numbers...and involve defenders in the attack as well.........I would not care if we got scored on in early stages as much, as any score will change the charactore of the game, and take UAE out of its comfort zone.