Team Melli future coach

[Martin-Reza]

^ actually I dont know what you have counted.
you have merely written numbers and not the teams. and one doesnt know if these are against all oppositions, or selected asian oppositions, or selected big oppositions ( including europeans and SA's ) or .... .
so .... cant answer you on this one until .....

Man, GN has 0 losses in competitive games. So, since AC games are competitive games, it couldn't be I counted this game as loss.

[Doctor DOOM]

^ actually I dont know what you have counted.
you have merely written numbers and not the teams. and one doesnt know if these are against all oppositions, or selected asian oppositions, or selected big oppositions ( including europeans and SA's ) or .... .
so .... cant answer you on this one until .....

[Martin-Reza]

Ok, and what about GN? It was very clear from the start I didn't count his draw as loss.

I mean I also don't always read the full postings with concentration, but at least when I want to complain about sth, I carefully check if that was even said.

[Doctor DOOM]

oh, I just read that last part on legionnaires.
I had missed the 1997 part.
sorry.

but going though with past record of ppl excusing "travel for legionnaires" as a negative I wrote my reply without reading the rest.
I blame it on the "sugar rush" ( wolfing on a dark choclt !!! )
my bad

[Martin-Reza]

^
1- I thought we already discarded the results of minnows in those stats u brought up

You again brought them up claiming MK's wins would have been with more "authority". That's why I targeted this issue again.

2- now, who is one sided?
MK enjoyed AFC's "different system of using minnows"?
and branko didnt?
what about tajikistan, guam, ... ???

Branko's TM never took on Tajikistan. He had two 7-0 wins against Guam and one win vs. Chinese Taipeh. The four matches against minnows (2x Guam, 1x Chinese Taipeh, and even the 1x against New Zealand) were excluded as well in the final version.

Yes, MK benefited more from such groupings than any other coach past him. This is an undeniable fact.

3- if GN's draw with SKorea in AC07 is considered as a loss, why arent we counting branko's loss to china in 04 as a loss?

This is one of the issues really making me wonder if you are discussing seriously here. GN's AC result against South Korea has been counted as draw. This is very obvious, as he has 0 losses in competitive games. Branko's result (interestingly called a loss by you while GN's result is referred to as draw, saying much about your intentions) as well as MK's AC results in semifinal and 3rd place playoff, are also counted as draws.

4- I like the use of "strongest in 15 years" this & that to excuse a loss here and there ... but I dont see praise for the absolute BEST result in our HISTORY against the perennial asian powerhouses SKOREA ( and even ksa ) !!! and "I" am one sided ?

2004 Germany, 2006 Portugal and 2006 Mexico are different teams than 1996 Korea. Did the 1996 Korea even have a single legionnaire?

5- plz tell me u brought up the exhuastion of players as a negative for branko, as a JOKE .... coz THAT really takes the cake!

Are you able to read? I was talking about the 1997 campaign. Didn't know Branko was coach then. You just want to complain sometimes.

An interesting issue would have been a look at the cleaned final stats now, checking if MK or Branko did significally better or had significally stronger opposition in the competitive games without the pushover games.

But I am not wasting my time on someone only targeting twisting facts, like claiming I would have counted GN's draw as a loss, despite this very obviously never was the case.

[Doctor DOOM]

Well, good points, but again a bit one-sided Dr. Doom jan.

Back then the difference between the pushovers and the better teams was of course bigger than it is today.

Also, as I already pointed out, none of MK's successors even had half the games against such minnows as MK's 8 matches in qualification.

I generally agree there are differences in Iran's quality and the quality of the opposition. But it would be wrong to say MK had a much weaker team, especially compared to the standard of other teams (eg. Korea of 1996 to Korea of 2004).

Those factors are numerous and hardly objectively judgeable.

Fact is that all of the TM coaches in the past 15 years (didn't check the stats of all, Blazevic, Pourheydari and Talebi would be interesting as well) had rather similar stats.

However, MK's quali coming at a time in which AFC still had a different system and forced us playing 4 absolute pushovers in quali (2 games each), something never occuring afterwards again for a coach and undoubtedly making his stat look much more positive.

On the other hand 2 of Branko's competitive losses (and 1 friendly loss) came against the far strongest teams we ever played in the past 15 years (beside the 1998 WC campaign with Talebi).

On the other hand one must also understand the exhaustment our 3 legionnaires had to experience for flying back and forth from Europe to Asia EVERY WEEK in 1997, because of the tight schedule in which the games were played. All outside the FIFA schedule and still Daei & Co. came for almost every game. Now thinking about the trio's 1997/98 Bundesliga seasons and their contributoin to the WCQ campaign, it makes this even more impressive.

^
1- I thought we already discarded the results of minnows in those stats u brought up

2- now, who is one sided?
MK enjoyed AFC's "different system of using minnows"?
and branko didnt?
what about tajikistan, guam, ... ???

3- if GN's draw with SKorea in AC07 is considered as a loss, why arent we counting branko's loss to china in 04 as a loss?

4- I like the use of "strongest in 15 years" this & that to excuse a loss here and there ... but I dont see praise for the absolute BEST result in our HISTORY against the perennial asian powerhouses SKOREA ( and even ksa ) !!! and "I" am one sided ?

5- plz tell me u brought up the exhuastion of players as a negative for branko, as a JOKE .... coz THAT really takes the cake!
coz I'd be a fool not to take the kia of 2004 over the young kia of 96, for example.

[Martin-Reza]

Well, good points, but again a bit one-sided Dr. Doom jan.

Back then the difference between the pushovers and the better teams was of course bigger than it is today.

Also, as I already pointed out, none of MK's successors even had half the games against such minnows as MK's 8 matches in qualification.

I generally agree there are differences in Iran's quality and the quality of the opposition. But it would be wrong to say MK had a much weaker team, especially compared to the standard of other teams (eg. Korea of 1996 to Korea of 2004).

Those factors are numerous and hardly objectively judgeable.

Fact is that all of the TM coaches in the past 15 years (didn't check the stats of all, Blazevic, Pourheydari and Talebi would be interesting as well) had rather similar stats.

However, MK's quali coming at a time in which AFC still had a different system and forced us playing 4 absolute pushovers in quali (2 games each), something never occuring afterwards again for a coach and undoubtedly making his stat look much more positive.

On the other hand 2 of Branko's competitive losses (and 1 friendly loss) came against the far strongest teams we ever played in the past 15 years (beside the 1998 WC campaign with Talebi).

On the other hand one must also understand the exhaustment our 3 legionnaires had to experience for flying back and forth from Europe to Asia EVERY WEEK in 1997, because of the tight schedule in which the games were played. All outside the FIFA schedule and still Daei & Co. came for almost every game. Now thinking about the trio's 1997/98 Bundesliga seasons and their contributoin to the WCQ campaign, it makes this even more impressive.

[Doctor DOOM]

now, if we are fair-minded, we can appreciate the immense work MK did for us when we see him get the same stats but with the following differences:

1-
Branko was in charge and with the TM for 5 years
MK was for 2 years

2-
Branko had the advantage of using many european legionnaires who had learned their trade in some of the top clubs , under great coaches

MK's team was totally borne out of azadegan ... not even the present PRO league !!!


3- branko was fortunate enough to use Iran's PRO league, far superior facilities , a new TM camp, great backing from IFF, much MUCH LARGER budget, ... etc

MK didnt have any of the above.

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

btw, for every maldives or malaysia that MK had, branko had guam or tajikistan or taipei
but what is the difference between the two is the AUTHORITY of MK's wins over the minnows

[Martin-Reza]

Did it for Branko as well. Here the overall summary which barely makes a difference.

Overall:

MK:
25 Wins (64.1%)
8 Draws (20.5%)
6 Losses (15.4%)

Branko:
33 Wins (63.5%)
10 Draws (19.2%)
9 Losses (17.3%)

GN:
10 Wins (58.8%)
6 Draws (35.3%)
1 Loss (5.9%)

Daei:
16 Wins (64.0%)
6 Draws (24.0%)
3 Losses (12.0%)

Now, a bit more interesting, the stats for competitive matches. To be fair, MK had a bit of advantage here, having played Maledives, Kyrgyzstan, Nepal and Sri Lanka twice each in competitive games. So almost exactly half of his competitive game wins (8 out of 17) came against real pushovers.

Branko had 2 games against Laos and 1 against Chinese Taipeh as competitive games (maybe the one against New Zealand as well), GN 1 against Chinese Taipeh (maybe another one against Malaysia in AC?) and Daei one against Singapore in his competitive game record. Counting out those games, MK's record would be much worse, with them inlcuded, it looks like this.

Interestingly MK and Branko had the exact same amount of competitive games. As said MK includes 5 pushover wins more and doesn't include a World Cup final tournament.

MK:
17 Wins (65.4%)
6 Draws (23.1%)
3 Losses (11.5%)

Branko:
17 Wins (65.4%)
5 Draws (19.2%)
4 Losses (15.4%)

GN:
5 Wins (55.6%)
4 Draws (44.4%)
0 Losses (0%)

Daei:
5 Wins (41.7%)
6 Draws (50.0%)
1 Loss (8.3%)

Just as little add on how the competitive stats would look like without competitive games against pushovers:

MK:
9 Wins (50.0%)
6 Draws (33.3%)
3 Losses (16.7%)

Branko:
13 Wins (59.1%)
5 Draws (22.7%)
4 Losses (18.2%)

GN:
3 Wins (42.9%)
4 Draws (57.1%)
0 Losses (0%)

Daei:
4 Wins (36.4%)
6 Draws (54.5%)
1 Loss (9.1%)

For fairness towards MK I, beside the mentioned real pushovers, also excluded New Zealand from Branko's and Malaysia from GN's competitive wins, although I doubt they were as weak as Nepal or Maledives.

Edit: Branko's stats do not include the Olympic team Gold medal Asian Games campaign. It includes some U23 friendlies though, which were preperations for the 2002 Asian Games, but counted as official 'A Games' by FIFA.

[Essi]

that would certainly make sense.
however, that post was to complete essi joon's incomplete signature

Goftam ke, ja nabod hameye eftezahatesho benevisam.

[Martin-Reza]

that would certainly make sense.
however, that post was to complete essi joon's incomplete signature

I'd say if we want to assess a TM's or a coach's abilities, we pick the games against the top 5-6 asian teams plus decent european, african or south american oppositions ONLY.

asians like:
japan, SKorea, KSA, Iraq, China, uzbeks

Interesting aspect and generally a nice idea. But was China really strong in 1997? When was Iraq how strong? Also, would you prefer a coach winning more often against top teams but slipping up more often against minors?

Too many issues easily abusable for each single one's agendas.

[Doctor DOOM]

................................................
better statistics, would be the results ,only with the contenders....
I very much like to see the results,against top 6 teams in Asia.,

that would certainly make sense.
however, that post was to complete essi joon's incomplete signature

I'd say if we want to assess a TM's or a coach's abilities, we pick the games against the top 5-6 asian teams plus decent european, african or south american oppositions ONLY.

asians like:
japan, SKorea, KSA, Iraq, China, uzbeks

[zzgloo]

عملکرد مایلی کهن در تیم ملی
25 برد، 8 تساوی و 6 شکست
ف

................................................


Such statistics, are misleading.......
When our country is in a continant which has more than 100 countries, and 90% hardly have any good team
when TM, chooses ,lame duck,friendly games,and mostly plays in Azadi.
when TM,is supposed to be within top 4 teams.....
such statistics, would show very little....
better statistics, would be the results ,only with the contenders....
I very much like to see the results,against top 6 teams in Asia.,

The onl firendly game TM has had, with any audacity,was the firendly game in Mexico, which we lost 4-0.........,all other firendlies, were designed so TM would not lose !

[BehzadB]

Anyway, forget about Nikbakht. MK said players plucking their eyebrows shoud play in the women's team, not TM.
So Nikbakht with his golden plucker and his bucket of gel can kiss TM bye bye forever.

LOL.. that's funny.. seriously though, I don't like Niki anyways no matter the eyebrows, but in this next game, someone like niki and his "lengesh kon" style of play might fit our strategy really well.

[Martin-Reza]

GN 10-6-1. The only loss in a friendly. Not such a high win percentage as the others I think. So probably not best record if it's about win percentage.

I'll count the Branko games tomorrow.