NKorea - Iran

[Martin-Reza]

again martin is coming up with what's in some manual.
I dont know how to explain this, but are you saying unless soemthing fits into a template, it cannot work?
again, was there a template for 4-2-3-1 in 60's?

There were other systems invented by experts of the game back then. Before other clever experts of the game developed new ones. Like Carlos Billardo inventing the modern 3-5-2. Are you Billardo? Are you someone on his level or even close to that? No, so you have to stick with existing theory. Knowing jackshit about existing theory is no excuse to propose just anything, nor is it the fundament to invent new systems.

if in 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 flat or diamond or har kooft o zahremari, your flank players are pushed a bit to the side or to the center, that team is going to explode?

It will result in many many goals for the opponent. But just to avoid any misunderstandings about players not being exactly in position during the game. Those positions are static positions on a paper. They stand representative for roles and therefore skills players need to have for playing there, not for a fixed spot they are standing in. But the roles you put together in a team, would lead to disaster. At the same time, ignoring all existing theory, you call coaches dumb for doing clever things to avoid such catastrophies.

you can have the best formation ( read arrangement of numbers on paper ) in the world. but if your players dont do their duties properly then all ur innovation and arrangement is for naught !

But if you have the worst formation, one like you propose, even the best players can't save you. So the fact that a good system with bad players doesn't work, is no justification for using a bad system.

[Doctor DOOM]

again martin is coming up with what's in some manual.

I dont know how to explain this, but are you saying unless soemthing fits into a template, it cannot work?
again, was there a template for 4-2-3-1 in 60's?

so why are you so rigid and think ONLY these will work and NOTHING else?

if in 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 flat or diamond or har kooft o zahremari, your flank players are pushed a bit to the side or to the center, that team is going to explode?
what if one of ur central guys positions himself a bit farther back than the other? suddenly the sky will fall down?
No. it only takes a little adjustment in duties and periphery/zone of operation to make it a working formation.



if you get down to basics before numbers it is more about how hard and fast a player can run, how accurately he can pass and how he tackles or approaches his mark in defending or how he positions himself to receive passes or .... .
all BASIC stuff.

you can have the best formation ( read arrangement of numbers on paper ) in the world. but if your players dont do their duties properly then all ur innovation and arrangement is for naught !

if your central mids cant pass properly then no matter how fresh your numbers' formation looks on paper, your TEAM suffers.

if your striker cannot deal with an extra marker on him and is effectively taken out of the game, then all your modern applications of the latest magazine or coaching manual from some ultra pro league is worth not a penny!

( again, this was mentioned in MANY threads before ... sigh ! )

[persianallstars]

( and let me correct you since u tried to compare me to those iri ppl:
first of all in FARSI it is kar-shenas with an "s" not a "z". I dont know if in austria they use z but in IRAN and in FARSI, your mother tongue, it is "s"
secondly it is "persist" , not "resist".)

oha, it seems you are an all-rounder, aren't you? it's not enough that you show off your "consolidated knowledge" about coaching. You have also turned into a living dictionairy. I'm certainly impressed but thx for the correction though!

[persianallstars]

hahahahahahah at persianallstars' statemt on not coming up a something original.

amoo, you guys make up ur mind
you either want something new ( which I think the line up is NOT new at all ) , then dont come up with "it doesnt exist" !!!

nemidoonim ba kodoom sazetoon beraghseem !
hahahahahaha

it's nothing new coz it has 2 flank players, and 2 central mids, out of which one is more inclined defensively thus helping bridge the space between defense and midfield and helps the defenders, while the other , more offensively, bridging the space between midfield and forwards and helps build up attacks.
already stated many times in previous posts .... sigh !!!!!
plz read the thread and other related threads and THEN ask Q's.

tired of repeating the same stuff just becoz you guys dont like to read

the problem is I don't need to read all of them because you have always been insisting on your own theory for a long time now. You just don't come up with something new.

besides your formation and your players are ridiculous. They are either not ready for international level or they have never been international material. And your 4-4-2 is just pathetic, it's not suitable for lazy players with no spirit.

[Martin-Reza]

As long as Iran is not playing with more or less than 11 players, this is standardized. There is no chance to do anything outside these borders, unless you're a genius and a pro coach and revolutionize football.

You're not, so pick one of those systems as alternative to the 4-2-3-1 you don't like. Don't just invent a non-existant system based on your imaginations.

[Doctor DOOM]

a bit about why those mags dont EXPLAIN our reality in Iran and are irrelevant.

ideally, one can speak of an athlete shd be able to run X kilometers in X minutes.

but one's specific situation is : he's not a standardized athlete and he doesnt have proper shoes and is wearing tennis shoes , nor a proper running track and is running on a mud strip.

so when he makes a mistake during his trials, it is useless to go to the standardized manual and see why our fellow failed.
you come to specific issues and see if his shoes are the right ones or if the track is the right one or if ... .

so going to him and saying Mr A with his addidas running shoes in germany's olympic team, running in munich stadium runs it this way and uses the slope or curve this way ... doesnt EXPLAIN why our chap is faltering with his tennis shoes on the mud strip!
it just tells him what shd be the ideal situation!

you first go get him the proper running shoes.
then take him to a proper running track and THEN test him. and se how he does there.

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

hahahahahahah at persianallstars' statemt on not coming up a something original.

amoo, you guys make up ur mind
you either want something new ( which I think the line up is NOT new at all ) , then dont come up with "it doesnt exist" !!!

nemidoonim ba kodoom sazetoon beraghseem !
hahahahahaha

it's nothing new coz it has 2 flank players, and 2 central mids, out of which one is more inclined defensively thus helping bridge the space between defense and midfield and helps the defenders, while the other , more offensively, bridging the space between midfield and forwards and helps build up attacks.
already stated many times in previous posts .... sigh !!!!!
plz read the thread and other related threads and THEN ask Q's.

tired of repeating the same stuff just becoz you guys dont like to read


----
secondly, why is it "too late"?
it's not as if our players are playing the 4-2-3-1 to the tee that it makes it hard for them to try a new system ?
if they were, then we wouldnt be having this discussion now, would we?
it is quite simple actually.
take out a DM and bring ur OM a bit closer to the middle and add a second forward, who assists the center and provides an option to him and the rest of mids. he also aids in puling the defenders off the back of VH.
( already gone over in previous posts !!!!! )


( and let me correct you since u tried to compare me to those iri ppl:
first of all in FARSI it is kar-shenas with an "s" not a "z". I dont know if in austria they use z but in IRAN and in FARSI, your mother tongue, it is "s"
secondly it is "persist" , not "resist".)

[Martin-Reza]

It's not about the 4-2-3-1 or 2 DMs. Hate it, love it, I don't mind.

But don't propose made up systems which no coach in the world uses (for good reasons) as alternative.

For fourback, chose either 4-2-3-1, 4-3-2-1, 4-4-2 flat (no central offensive playmaker!!!), 4-4-2 square (or 4-2-2-2, also con central offensive playmaker!!!) 4-4-2 diamond (no side midfielders!!!) or 4-3-3 (no central offensive playmaker AND no side midfielders, instead two central midfielders ahead of the DM and 3 strikers).

Basically you can chose from the formations some Italian dude drew for wikipedia (with a sole exception, the diamond is drawn, or rather labeled, incorrectly in midfield, explanation below): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formati...ern_formations

As far as I know after reading football magazines and listening to experts on TV and talking to Human, the 4-4-2 diamond's midfielders ahead of the DM are not side midfielders, but centre midfielders, like for example in the 4-3-3. The midfield formation of a 4-4-2 diamond is almost exactly like the midfield formation in a 4-3-3 plus a COM. And the 4-4-2 diamond is something widely discussed in German football media some 2 or 3 years back, so I read much about it and am 100% sure about this one. Also if you look at the graph and read the short explanation to this in wikipedia, is suggests the author only has been a bit sloppy in labelling here.

[persianallstars]

agha DD, for some reason i compare you with our beloved pseudo karshenaz guys on irib. They always critisize and they question nearly everything, but they don't come up with something original, an idea or a way to solve problems.

Instead they resist on their own opinion and give a damn !"S*A about other opinions which could be more realistic than their own point of view.

I'm not satisfied with Martin's 4-2-3-1 suggestion, I would rather prefer a 4-4-2 diamond with that kind of lazy players. But I admit that it's to late to implement an other formation, if you've left the harbour with a crappy ship which obviously doesn't work correctly and you are aware of this trouble but you continue moving forward, you can't return in the middle of the open sea. You have to wait till help is coming, but first you must try to get a long with your crappy ship until it's over.

[Doctor DOOM]

instead of repeating, let me make it as short and telegraphic as possible.
ALL the answers are there in my previous posts.

1- on my formation :
I have explained it and wont do it again.
in one sentence: it gives me what I need from a game I want to WIN.
and if it works for you, use it. doesnt matter how the numbers are arranged or if it exists in some manual.
ur 4-2-3-1 also didnt exist in 1960's.
so what?
who cares if it is there in the manual or not?
I've said all this before.

2- good for argentina or whoever .
TM's heart WHILE USING TWO DM's is also exposed.
so it's not as if we "lose" something. but we sure gain some offensive muscle.
again, I've explained all this before.


3- football was seeing solid and UN-exposed teams when there was no 2 DM system.
so why suddenly only 2 DM can save a team?
asked this in earlier posts too


4- in new zealand we deal in sheep not dollars.
and I happen to like my sheep
and find reading a german mag does NOT EXPLAIN what's happening in TM.
it just tells me what shd have happened in an ideal world! and we cant deny nothing is ideal about our football. so there's NO RELEVANCE.
again, already explained this in previous posts

I'm not a coach
those mags and manuals and ... are useful for our coaches who are responsible for training our youth and players, so perhaps the next generation can be developed based on the right standards.
only then you can come here and expect these mags to explain what's happening at TM which happens to have standardized players.
NOT. NOW. !!!
already in my previous posts

[Martin-Reza]

Iranian football is not unique. The magazines write about better worse and equally good teams. They write about top teams, shit teams, teams with similar problems, teams with worse problems.

It is also important to look out into the world of football to improve your general knowledge, before using it to judge the specific situations in our football, which, as I said, are not that special in the world of football.

Without those basics you fail to understand a lot, and, no offense, I feel you lack some of the basics. Not that those basics would make us able to understand the game like a coach.

Anyway, for the beginning, look at the lineups of successful teams. Look how Manchester, Chelsea, Barcelona and Inter play. Look how Argentina, France or England play. Also against weaker teams. How did Barca play against Osasuna? How did Inter play Anorthosis? How did Argentina play Colombia?

You will see that no team used a formation like you propose in your signature as starting lineup. It simply doesn't make sense and Ferguson, Mourinho, Maradona and Guardiola know that. And I know because I see they don't do that. So I learn it doesn't make sense. Under no circumstances (talking about starting lineups).

You ignore this, make something up, and get pissed when someone says this is not realistic.

Just 2 days ago I watched Argentina, they played with Mascherano, Gago (replaced by Zanetti at halftime) and Veron in midfield and only 3 offensive players. You might be tempted to argue with Messi, Tevez and Aguero (and later Milito instead) upfront, they are better than us there and therefore can afford that, but in the same way their defense and defensive midfield is much better than our's, so according to that logic there would be no need for 3 DMs for them.

Anyway, this is not an exception. All around the world coaches refuse to use a system exposing the heart of the midfield, like you propose in your signature. Now learn from that and draw realistic conclusions.

Buy some magazines and read them. In worst case it cost you a few New Zealand dollars and you learnt nothing, but maybe it helps you to understand coaches decisions better in the end.

Because in the end, it comes down to that. You don't understand the coaches and due to your character, you equal that with the coach making mistakes.

[Doctor DOOM]

added:

btw, do those magazines and articles and whatnots allow for the fact that OUR players cant even trap the ball properly and usually the ball falls 2-3 meters ahead of them?

do those articles mention OUR players take their time in passing the ball ?

do those articles and mags mention that OUR players cant run as hard or as fast as the model players they have based their pieces on?

do those mags allow for OUR players who cant keep up with their marks and leave them halfway through a sprint, or suddenly lose sight of them in or near the box?

do those mags base their articles on the above, and many more issues ?
I doubt it.

so stop referring to those mags and articles and face the reality of what IRANIAN players are capable of.

[Doctor DOOM]

if we are having high turn overs , could it be becoz instead of having a quality ball distributor whose passing is good, we have two defensive minded players whose forward passing are not good and therefore ending up as turn-overs?

AS SEEN IN TM GAMES ? when ando or ashoubi or nouri tried to go forward or pass forward.


unless you are happy with back passes ... which proves my point that this is good for cases where we're either ahead and dont want to score goals or when we're playing stronger teams.

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

on the contrary , ... if you read the words in my sig you'll see the sense in that.
if you are daring in attack you have more chances of winning or scoring goals.

but all this is a waste of time.

before anything else you shd understand and agree WE NEED TO WIN THESE GAMES. not draw.
do you agree or not?

coz if the answer is yes, then you gotta accept to WIN a game, you gotta score at least 1 goal MORE than the opponent.
basic , common sense.

scoring 1 more goal means you have to have an efficient forward strategy and forward-looking tactics.

when a team in the middle or the heart of it, lacks a player who can make these forward passes and create chances, then that team will not be successful in scoring goals ... unless luck and opponent mistakes come into play ( and we all know we cant rely on those elements that are NOT in our hands ).

and none of our DM's are proficient in making those passes.
yes, you'd see nekunam or kazemi or even ando make a pass here or a pass there. but that's not often/frequent enough !


which brings me to the next issue of our strikers who need FAR MORE quality balls fed to them to score a single goal, due to their horrible conversion rate.
that means the player feeding them shd be doing it even more frequently than normal. and that effectively makes the scant few passes made by nekunam or kazemi or ... INADEQUATE.


notice I'm not bothered about what some magazine says the "norm" is, or what a european club does or what some european coach thinks.
I AM REFERRING TO WHAT GOES ON AT TM , WHAT TM & IRANIAN PLAYERS DO AND THEIR PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTICS. very important.

I have repeated the above about a 1000 times.
and if you guys havent understood my point, then I guess if I repeat this another 1000 times it wont change a thing.
you'll go on referring to some article in some bloody mag or what some coach said about his EPL or bundesliga club or ... and think yeah, iranian players can do the same !!!!!

I hope our friend persianallstars got the message now.

[Martin-Reza]

there wont be any difference if we played with ONE DM instead of two.

and do YOU read what I write ( so I dont have to repeat this again & again ):
but if we have a better offense, we wont see the opponent defenders freely coming forward and joining the attack and INCREASING the pressure on our weak defense.

That is an absolute flaw in your logic. There would be a huge difference (about 1-3 more goals conceded per match). What do you think? With one offensive player more we can have 80% possession, in best case mostly near the opponent's box?

We are famous for turnover rates higher than any European amateur team. We will be punished badly with one DM.

Less defensive players would:
- heavily destabilize our already unstable defense heavily
- slightly decrease our posession as less players would be available in the build-up
- force the offensive to participate in defense much more
- increase our chances to score when in the attacking third

We have two problems. Unstable defense and uninspired attack. You don't solve both of those by adding an additional player to one on cost of the other. If we had a great functioning defense and an unispired attack, I would agree we would need more risk. On the other hand if we had a sparkling offense but a swiss cheese defense, we would need another defensive player.

But with problems on both ends, it's a problem of teamwork and player material, not of having too many player in a not functioning defense.

[Doctor DOOM]

Now guess what happens when you take off a DM or a defender. You think it's some computer game in which a goalie can save everything?

there wont be any difference if we played with ONE DM instead of two.

and do YOU read what I write ( so I dont have to repeat this again & again ):
but if we have a better offense, we wont see the opponent defenders freely coming forward and joining the attack and INCREASING the pressure on our weak defense.


using two DM's have NEVER consolidated our defense . if you guys deny this then you gotta get a check up done.
but the damage done in our offense has been also as vivid and apparent. we've never looked like scoring anything with this formation.

so for IRANIAN football and its particular players ( not those in ur magazines that u want me to read !! as if me reading them would somehow transform our players into xavi and pierlo or eto'o .. !!!! ridiculous ) will never prosper offensively with this formation.

for IRANIAN players it's like using ur fork to have ur soup.
no matter how many times you try, you're not going to be successful having ur soup properly.
just as much as we havent been successful in our offense when using this


--------------
as I told our friend earlier, each thing has its own place.
this is a pretty good formation when we want to play stronger teams or are not in dire need of winning a game.
then knock urself out, have 6 DMs in there.

but get it through ur head: WE NEED TO WIN THESE GAMES.
like we need to finish the soup.
and using this formation, we havent been able to do so.
like we cant finish the soup with a fork.
how difficult is this to understand?

now, go back and read 10 more magazines and watch 20 more EPL and la liga games.
none of that is going to change the way Iranian players play.
hala khdet ro bezan be dar o deevar ke in this magazine or that manual 4-2-3-1 is successful !!

it only goes to show how removed your views are from TM's reality !!!

get ur head out of those mags and start observing TM games.

[Martin-Reza]

REPEATEDLY , time and again and did whatever they felt like doing. so much that we were lucky we didnt finish that game 4-0 behind .... only saving grace : our goal keeper.
not the two DMs.
not the defenders.
but the goal keeper !!!!!

Are you even reading what you write? You think our goalkeeper is defending most of the attacks and therefore the defense is not working?

Now guess what happens when you take off a DM or a defender. You think it's some computer game in which a goalie can save everything?

About 99% of the opponents' attacks are stopped by our defensive midfield or the defense. The 1% they let through are fortunately saved by our good keeper mostly. Now you think after weakening the defense and then eg. 5 % of the attacks coming through, means Rahmati will simply save 5 times the shots he did in the past and we wil get away with this?

Even if the 1% is too high, destabilizing the defense and thinking our keeper will save everything anyway is...can't find any word not insulting.

GET YOURSELF SOME FOOTBALL MAGAZINES. LISTEN TO SOME REAL INTERNATIONAL KARSHENAZ and then talk again.