Human Afazeli now destroys CQ

[inarsenewetrust]

I wasn't asking if you saw two favorites in the group. My question was were there two favorites in the group. If you don't recall whether most everyone was considering two favorites in the group you may use google to look the information up.
The bolded section actually answers my question in that you did not consider it a group of death but rather something close to it.

this is just trolling again. Do you want to have an open discussion or troll? We can agree to disagree on the group of death. But I also think that our group was the most difficult of the WC. I think everybody here can agree on that, do you?

[KC McElroy]

this is just trolling again. Do you want to have an open discussion or troll? We can agree to disagree on the group of death. But I also think that our group was the most difficult of the WC. I think everybody here can agree on that, do you?

Before I answer that let's conclude our previous discussion. As the group had two clear favorites, you realize it wasn't a group of death, correct? Your statement that "I think the makeup of the group made it the closest thing to a traditional group of death that can exist now" indicates that you don't think it was an actual group of death.

[inarsenewetrust]

Before I answer that let's conclude our previous discussion. As the group had two clear favorites, you realize it wasn't a group of death, correct? Your statement that "I think the makeup of the group made it the closest thing to a traditional group of death that can exist now" indicates that you don't think it was an actual group of death.

that wasnt our previous discussion, my idea of a group of death is the most competitive because there is no more group of death with 4 equally matched teams. Your idea of group of death has remained the same even though the rules have changed with seeding, making it impossible for the group of death that you envision to ever exist. As always good discussing things with you KC, thought for once you could act like a decent person and have an open discussion but once again you regressed to trolling. Expect a bit better from sharif tbh.

[KC McElroy]

that wasnt our previous discussion, my idea of a group of death is the most competitive because there is no more group of death with 4 equally matched teams. Your idea of group of death has remained the same even though the rules have changed with seeding, making it impossible for the group of death that you envision to ever exist. As always good discussing things with you KC, thought for once you could act like a decent person and have an open discussion but once again you regressed to trolling. Expect a bit better from sharif tbh.

It's not what I envision, it's how it is defined. So given that you said that "I think the makeup of the group made it the closest thing to a traditional group of death that can exist now", do you agree that it wasn't a group of death? If you did I would have expected you to say ""I think the makeup of the group made it a group of death."

[inarsenewetrust]

It's not what I envision, it's how it is defined. So given that you said that "I think the makeup of the group made it the closest thing to a traditional group of death that can exist now", do you agree that it wasn't a group of death? If you did I would have expected you to say ""I think the makeup of the group made it a group of death."

thats not ever what I meant this discussion to be. I was using group of death and most difficult group interchangably. I dont really care if it was or wasnt the group of death on paper, I dont even know why anybody would care about, as football is played on the pitch, not on paper. You sidetracked the discussion just so you dont have to say that TM was in the most difficult group of the WC. Congrats!

[KC McElroy]

thats not ever what I meant this discussion to be. I was using group of death and most difficult group interchangably. I dont really care if it was or wasnt the group of death on paper, I dont even know why anybody would care about, as football is played on the pitch, not on paper. You sidetracked the discussion just so you dont have to say that TM was in the most difficult group of the WC. Congrats!

So you agree that it wasn't the group of death but rather you considered it the most difficult group? You not considering it a group of death is further verified by your prior statement where you explicitly say there can be no group of death when you state "With the current seeding system, it is impossible to have a group of death, because any two teams from pot 3 and 4 are inferior to portugal/spain."

[inarsenewetrust]

So you agree that it wasn't the group of death but rather you considered it the most difficult group? You not considering it a group of death is further verified by your prior statement where you explicitly say there can be no group of death when you state "With the current seeding system, it is impossible to have a group of death, because any two teams from pot 3 and 4 are inferior to portugal/spain."

incorrect. I think that because it is impossible to have a group of death as maybe the term was used two or three world cups ago, the most competitive group is the group of death. And from the beginning this had the makings of the most competitive group, as echoed by many top pundits (not just the average ones that pick the two most noteworthy teams)

[KC McElroy]

incorrect. I think that because it is impossible to have a group of death as maybe the term was used two or three world cups ago, the most competitive group is the group of death. And from the beginning this had the makings of the most competitive group, as echoed by many top pundits (not just the average ones that pick the two most noteworthy teams)

So you arbitrarily changed the definition of group of death once you realized we were not in a group of death and that in your own words "With the current seeding system, it is impossible to have a group of death, because any two teams from pot 3 and 4 are inferior to portugal/spain."?

[Sam van Dam]

If USA was in POT 3 and drawn with Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, then everyone would be calling it the Group of Death

Our group was by far the toughest. had we played in any other group, especially Japan and Saudis, we too would have advanced.

our group was so close

[Keano]

Yes we did finish on four points, but in reality this was only due to a very very lucky win against Morocco, which people seem to forget. I keep on hearing how great CQ did and how we almost qualified for the second round if it wasn't for Taremi's miss... but no one mentions that our victory over Morrocco involved a large amount of luck, without which we would have finished on 2 points. Other then the Azmoun one on one in the Morocco game, iran didn't manage to create a single goal scoring opportunity from open play (broken plays not included).

With all due respect, there is no such thing as “lucky win” you can say “lucky goal” “lucky save” etc but to play 90 minutes, yet not concede a goal and leave the pitch with a victory in hand, it’s got zero affiliation with luck factor.

Your flawed logic nullifies Greece’s Euro 2004 Championship and Portugal’s Euro 2016 title, as both teams barely advanced from their group and defensively got passed all their competitors, hence winning the final.

I think you and the likes of Afazeli are a little unfair with utterly illogical expectations from a team with literally zero decent friendlies, and no real test prior to their World Cup adventure.

Almost half of Moroccan team were born in Europe playing for European clubs. So to consider them just a mediocre Arab team is nothing short of a delusional imagination!

What counts at the end of the day is the number of points you accumulate from each and every game your team plays. We were not really short of point numbers, but rather GA. Hell we almost topped the group, atop Spain, while eliminating Portugal. Isn’t that enough to pride your team and yourself and cherish? Who are we fooling? Ourselves I guess...

[emoji1324]*♂️🤦🏻*♂️


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Babak agha]

^ no they wouldn't.

Anyone calling our group (no matter how tough it was for us and how tough it was for Spain and Portugal after the fact) either doesn't know what a group of death is or is biased....

There was a whole thread about this and discussed in detail.

If anyone in his right mind would think (before the games) that the reining European champion and an ex world and European champion would get eliminated by teams that can't even make it to semi finals in Africa cup and Asia cup.... Well they should not have voting power during elections.

Even if there was a big chance/hope that Iran or Morocco would advance instead of Spain or Portugal, that would be an upset not a group of death.

A group of death is where a minimum of 3 title contenders are in it. Unless one day an Asian and/or African and/or North American team gets to the level of Brasil/Argentina/Germany/Italy/etc we will not have a group of death anymore.

No need to identify the toughest group during each edition as the group of death unless we want to change the definition of the group of death like we changed the meaning of the world literally that note days means literally the opposite of what literally means

[Keano]

If USA was in POT 3 and drawn with Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, then everyone would be calling it the Group of Death

Our group was by far the toughest. had we played in any other group, especially Japan and Saudis, we too would have advanced.

our group was so close

I mean even though it was a friendly, but still we were beating this Russia 1-0 till 70’ just a few months prior to World Cup and in their home ground. The same Russia that almost reached the semi finals.

We have a great team and a fantastic coach. People are entitled to their own opinion. So Houman Khaan may state his mind, but it CANNOT discredit our coach and take way TM players merit!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Karimi 8]

Who is this guy and why should we care about his opinion?? Lol.

[KC McElroy]

If USA was in POT 3 and drawn with Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, then everyone would be calling it the Group of Death

Our group was by far the toughest. had we played in any other group, especially Japan and Saudis, we too would have advanced.

our group was so close

If it was USA instead of us it would be closer to a group of death due to them advancing out of their group the past 2 World Cups but it still wouldn't be a group of death due to Morocco. In the world of soccer Morocco is nothing but a team that has failed to qualify for a World Cup in 20 years even though the likes of Tunisia, Cameroon, South Africa, Togo and Angola have done so from its continent. I understand we like to hype this Moroccan team as the best African team ever (after even going as far as calling it the African champions even though they were eliminated in the quarterfinals of the latest African championship) but in reality besides their poor track record to me their performance was worse than Nigeria and Senegal and just below Egypt's.

[Sam van Dam]

If we very lucky to beat morocco then what would you say about spain? a clearance attempt hit Costa and went into our goal. atleast Boulhadouz redirected it with his head

Morocco was supposed to be the dark horse of this tournament. so you have the ex champions, european champions, the dark horse, and one of the best defensive teams in the tournament, but its not a group of death?

and morocco should have beaten Spain. watch Spains second goal, the ref signaled for the corner to be taken from the left side, but spain took it from the right and scored. Spain can thank VAR for that. CQ also said that our goal vs Spain wasn't offsides (after reviewing the tape, which is what VAR is for)

if our group wasn't the group of death on paper because USA or ivory Coast wasn't in it, then it was still the toughest of the tournament