What do you prefer? [Old Thread Revisited]

[Doctor DOOM]

LOL.
whatever that justifies daei's peculiar words/deeds, eh?

[Mr.Good]

And of course Daei is saying nice things about him, is he supposed to say, "holy shit, this man has declined in recent years" to the media or what?

I think this is the whole point. Martin-Reza nailed it here.
when Karimi was excluded from the squad in the first round of WCQ, on a TV interview, Daei also said that Karimi was one of the best Irannian footballers ever, and still he excluded him from the squad.

[Martin-Reza]

You're always taking out a small part of the whole picture. The reasoning was Kia didn't fit into the tactical plan against KSA. His form was just part of the picture as it, in my opinion, did not force the coach to adapt the system in order to fit Kia in.

The keyplayers and other circumstances determine the system, the rest is then fit in afterwards. Kia's form didn't make him a keyplayer and a tactical plan not suiting him was selected for the game in Riyadh. Now a tactical plan was probably again chosen without Kia playing a role in dtermining it, but this time he fit in, probably because of the difference in opposition or whatever tactical plans the coaching stuff developed specifically for DPR.

And of course Daei is saying nice things about him, is he supposed to say, "holy shit, this man has declined in recent years" to the media or what?

[Doctor DOOM]

daei has said "kia is one of the best" in today's training and peykan game.
ok.
here's the point that many of us were making in the last months when kia wasnt called:
nothing has changed in kia's situation at frankfurt. he's still a sub there. and he's recuperated from his injury a long time ago.
so daei not calling him based on "him being a sub, therefore he's not in form" was wrong and was proven wrong when kia arrived and showed he's still useful at TM.

I am sure had kia been called for ksa game, while he was a sub at frankfurt much like present time, he'd have still showed good form at TM camp and would have helped TM in that game.

so you see, that obscure reasoning by daei & his excuse of "sub = no good" is and was wrong to begin with.
I hope daei's learnt something from all this.

[Doctor DOOM]

1- As afshin said, kaabi's best performances are mostly when he has played with kia. which means having an experienced player whp can take care of half the duties of attacking and defending on the right side, thus not forcing kaabi to over-compensate for the shortcomings of the player in front of him.

Kia has always done well in both offense and defense, which allows kaabi to flourish and play with a certain confidence and insurance.

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

2- kaabi has never played in an organized, structured pro league for us to measure him against kia.
as Ali said, kia belongs to that category of players who are versatile and can adapt to the coach's tactics well. and if the coach tells him to play conservatively and not to take risks ... well that's what he'll do.

kaabi has always played in inorganized football leagues, hence not much structure or organization. to play whatever and however you feel like is much easier in such environment.

if kaabi had played in a euro league, then we'd have seen how he adapts or can satisfy the duties required of him.
the closest thing we have of him in an organized atmosphere is that he didnt cut it ! and was sent back home. that shd answer any doubts we have about the two.

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

and frankly I dont see this constant groping for any reason to justify kia's absence at TM.
there's absolutely no reason whatsoever.
we dont have his type of players at TM. his replacements are failing.
he has said it many times he's ready to come and help TM.

any sane person can put 2 and 2 together and say everything is ready for kia's return.
if he's not called, then the problem does NOT lie in anything technical or tactical.
it's all personal.

[Martin-Reza]

Thanks to all who responded.

This is not just about Kia vs. Kaebi which seems to be loaded with personal feelings for many.

Kia is overall playing more conservatively these days. Less risks, less mistakes. You could also take a rightwing position and compare Kia to Shojaei, the letter surely going into one-on-one duels more often but surely causing more turnovers.

What is interesting is that we have a bit of a contradiction here. It is mentioned Kia has more quality than Kaebi, Kaebi taking much more risks (or at least being a more risky player) and taking less risks is better in defense. Now one would expect that Kia should then be prefered over Kaebi and especially for the rightback post. However, there seems to be consent that Kaebi is the better RB choice. Interesting.

And to Ali jan ^.

I don't think the coach can exactly tell the player how much risk to take. Of course in the defending third there is no risk wanted, but the coach expects a player to decide on his own when he takes risks and when he doesn't and to be successful with that. While he won't be happy with a player trying to dribble or going for a risky throughball every single time he is in possession, he certainly will also not be impressed by a player who almost exclusively plays square- or backpasses.

[Ali Chicago]

Been following the thread and tried to keep my mouth shut, but to be honest this whole point is mute (Kaabi comparison with Kia) based on the game Martin watched.


To me there are two factors one needs to consider in order to do this comparison that Martin is talking about, I try to list them here. The two are somewhat interrelated.
1-Duties assigned to the player by coach in a game
2- The so called Tacticpaziri of the player who plays based on what he was wanted from him by the coach.

First of all, whether Kia took chances or not, that to a high degree depends on the what was the duties that was assigned to him by the coach. As a defender in an organized league, you are not supposed to take any risk whatsoever in your own defensive third or middle third and since he was a defender, I can see why he wouldn't' take any risk (risk isn't just dribbling the opponents, a bad tackle and giving up a free kick close to the goal or getting yellows is a risk as well).

Kaabi never played at such a high level, so until Kaabi plays at a similar level (same pace, same tactical complexity) one can't compare these two.

There is a second element here that is the major difference between the IPL and Iranian players who play in Iran in general and a player who plays in the Bundesliga which is the following:

One of the key missing elements in our player's arsenal is their lack of following the team tactic and coach's plan. To a large degree this isn't their fault because most of them haven't come through an organized professional soccer program, so improvising is a big element in our player arsenal. This improvisation at times is good and adds an elements of surprise to our team but in large part ties the coaches hand. Coach wants something and tell the player something but players (sub consciously) does something else that he is used to.

[Hajagha]

I can read between the lines that Martin wonders why Daei excluded Kia from the squad. As I watched him before, he is the old dude we knew, nothing special.

Back the question, in your defense line, you don't want any uncertainty, any offensive attitude is a plus then.

Cheers

[kaz]

But Kaebi is a player taking more risks these days. Over the whole 80 minutes Kia played, he actively went into an offensive duel one single time. When was the last time Kaebi, as a rightback, only tried to dribble or get past an opponent only once within 80 minutes?

On the other hand Kia had about 2 or 3 turnovers (including crosses being headed out by defenders) over the whole match, I guess noone would argue Kaebi would not be able to do that.

Yes, but how do you know his coach wanted him to get high more often? These things have to be taken into account.

Anyway, I understand your general question and I think a team has to have about 6-7 consistent players where you know what you are going to get from them and a few players that are capable of being unpredictable and making things happen.

You can't have all predictable players IMO, it is too easy to play against and you definitely can't have all unpredictable players because frankly it will be a disorganised mess. You also can't have more unpredictable players because at this level too many mistakes will cost you eventually.

All Consistent XI > All Inconsistent XI
All Consistent XI = Partial Inconsistent XI
Partial Consistent XI > All Consistent XI

[purple_haze]

Kaebi had the best time of his career in TM when playing together with Kia. He hasn't been anything to brag about since. Aside from his temper issue, technically, he's shown a clear regression.
The noticable pattern that is repeated over and over again in his games in the past 2 years is:
- Defense: Making way too many fouls and ending up in no man's land far too often, having to compensate for it with even more fouls and dangerous, risky tackles!
- Offense: Running headlessly with the ball and more than often towards the middle instead of along the lines, either giving turn-overs or if not already having lost the ball, just taking a dive after getting passed a couple of players.

I can't comment about Kia, not having seen his games recently but if you say he's at least solid without being flashy, then I'd take him over Kaebi any day of the week, since Kaebi is not even doing the flashy part well enough to be of any benefit for the team.

[RaginG Inferno]

???

Of course in professional football it is important to take risks on the field sometimes, to make a difference, to win the one-on-one. If you only play safe, you will make no difference, but this is what coaches want.

Of course you then could also make the difference negatively with a bad turnover or so (which the coaches don't want ), and that was the main question, not directly a duel between Kaebi and Kia, but what is better, a player with many ups and downs or a player with no mistake but nothing special upfront.

I didn't know it was blasphemy to compare Kia to Kaebi. No wonder people are going mad when Kia is excluded, when you can't even compare him to one of his successor in TM without being attacked for that, lol.

lol at the last line.

It's an interesting point you raise. For teams with poor counter-attacking skills and of a lower quality, Kaebi would perhaps be more beneficial with his incisive runs. However, against a quality team that punishes mistakes, I would take Mahdavikia.

[maij]

The only time I managed to watch Kia this season , was the friendly against Real Madrid. Unfortunately most of the Frankfurt matches televised in this neck of the wood , Kia was on the bench.

Kaebi , however is on a slow downward slide in performance and attitude. I have not seen anything special of him lately which is quite disappointing.

Anyway , any comparison of mine will be flawed since I only seen one side only.

[Doctor DOOM]

I'd take the solid player over the erratic one who still hasnt got the grip on his temper.

I also would say kaabi is best for RB, while Kia can play any formation's right flank or arm. so we can use BOTH of them together ... as has been done on quite a few successful occasions before.

perhaps, kaabi's temper can be tampered with and .... well, "tempered" by kia's experienced presence and guidance. and the two can tremendously trounce and trample on the troubled opponents who will tremble with trepidations in their tummies and call for their mommies, for being targeted and tarnished by the terrible-twin of kia-kaabi.


I'd rather see kaabi-kia duo on the right , than the inexperienced and erratic gholamnejad-kaabi duo ( both of whom do get a lot of yellows and reds )


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

btw, where in the world do ppl count crosses getting headed off as "turn-overs" ?
now, come on mate. how many did he REALLY have ... EXCLUDING the crossing ?

[BehzadB]

???

Of course in professional football it is important to take risks on the field sometimes, to make a difference, to win the one-on-one. If you only play safe, you will make no difference, but this is what coaches want.

I would understand taking chances in a desperate situations like when a coach pulls a defender out and sends in a third striker.. or when a coach asks one or tow of the defenders to move forward because they have to score..

but to use "taking chances" as bench mark, I don't know about that. as you said yourself, taking chances is only good when it works and it costs the team when it doesn't and in my opinion at the end of the day (or season) it's a wash. some go for you and some go against you.

A calculated risk (which is coordinated) is fine, but an individual chance taker, I am not sure how that can help a team in a long run. I rather have sound and solid plan and players and only take chances in desperate situation (i.e Saipa today)...

about comparing Kaabi and Kia.. I didnt' attack you. You are free to have your opinion and I just expressed mine..

comparing Kia to Kaabi is like comparing Ali Parvin and Mohamad Parvin...

I think we got lucky he was suspended for KSA game.. I like Gholamnezjad better .. but then again, I like any player better than Kaabi..

[Martin-Reza]

I didn't watch Kia's game so I can't comment on it, but I am curious, what does "kaabi is taking more chances these days" have to do with professional football?

???

Of course in professional football it is important to take risks on the field sometimes, to make a difference, to win the one-on-one. If you only play safe, you will make no difference, but this is what coaches want.

Of course you then could also make the difference negatively with a bad turnover or so (which the coaches don't want ), and that was the main question, not directly a duel between Kaebi and Kia, but what is better, a player with many ups and downs or a player with no mistake but nothing special upfront.

I didn't know it was blasphemy to compare Kia to Kaebi. No wonder people are going mad when Kia is excluded, when you can't even compare him to one of his successor in TM without being attacked for that, lol.