Please, please, I'm begging you to stop the stupid childish comparisons of previous coaches to make a point.
It's so stupid that it hurts my eyes seeing some of us arguing like little kids, coming up with only results, while forgetting ALL OTHER FACTORS/CIRCUMSTANCES these results were achieved in, to "prove" that f.e. Branko was better than MK
I do not need to say this to F+ members, but just saying "Branko won this and that match, but MK lost to x and y, hence Branko > MK", or "Branko's team scored an average of ... and MK's team ..., so Branko is better" is just laughable.
Comparing previous coaches with the present ones (specally coaches from 15 years ago to the current one) is just insanely wrong!
There are soo mny factors that have to be taken into consideration that it just is not possible to make these comparisons; I'll name just a few:
* state of football Iran was in in that era; f.e. MK had to take over TM at its worst possible state...our football was at its lowest in our history.
* state of the league; we didn't even have a professional league back then and it was much worse than it is nowadays.
* state of the players; we did not have many nameworthy players, let alone legionaires. It was MK who got the guts to take a risk, throw some of the oldies out and start off with a new generation, hereby introducing players like Daei and Azizi (and many more) to our football.
* the way the team played, only results don't show everything.
* the opponents a team had to face and the state they were in.
* the time a coach is given; some coaches are given only 1 year, while others can work up to a major tournament for 4-5 years...
etc. etc. (I don't want to go through all of them)
======
The point is that there are soo many factors at hand, that it just isn't possible to make such comparisons between previous and present coaches. Soo many things have changed in the meantime, so many new players have risen up and fallen down, so much has happened to our other Asian rivals, so many..., that just coming up with some results to prove how one coach is supposed to be superior is unlogical and wrong!
Please forget about Branko, Qn, ..., they are all gone and it won't benefit us if we keep concentrating on the past and how "well or bad" they did compared to other coaches. I am getting tired of all the comparisons once a coach is being selected.
It was the same between Qn and Branko after the WC; it was the same between Qn and Daei after the AC; now it's between MK, Branko and Daei
We are not gaining anything putting our energy into these lame comparisons, just because we idolize one and hate the other. Please guys, stop this bad habit.
Ghorbanetoon,
Amin
It's so stupid that it hurts my eyes seeing some of us arguing like little kids, coming up with only results, while forgetting ALL OTHER FACTORS/CIRCUMSTANCES these results were achieved in, to "prove" that f.e. Branko was better than MK
I do not need to say this to F+ members, but just saying "Branko won this and that match, but MK lost to x and y, hence Branko > MK", or "Branko's team scored an average of ... and MK's team ..., so Branko is better" is just laughable.
Comparing previous coaches with the present ones (specally coaches from 15 years ago to the current one) is just insanely wrong!
There are soo mny factors that have to be taken into consideration that it just is not possible to make these comparisons; I'll name just a few:
* state of football Iran was in in that era; f.e. MK had to take over TM at its worst possible state...our football was at its lowest in our history.
* state of the league; we didn't even have a professional league back then and it was much worse than it is nowadays.
* state of the players; we did not have many nameworthy players, let alone legionaires. It was MK who got the guts to take a risk, throw some of the oldies out and start off with a new generation, hereby introducing players like Daei and Azizi (and many more) to our football.
* the way the team played, only results don't show everything.
* the opponents a team had to face and the state they were in.
* the time a coach is given; some coaches are given only 1 year, while others can work up to a major tournament for 4-5 years...
etc. etc. (I don't want to go through all of them)
======
The point is that there are soo many factors at hand, that it just isn't possible to make such comparisons between previous and present coaches. Soo many things have changed in the meantime, so many new players have risen up and fallen down, so much has happened to our other Asian rivals, so many..., that just coming up with some results to prove how one coach is supposed to be superior is unlogical and wrong!
Please forget about Branko, Qn, ..., they are all gone and it won't benefit us if we keep concentrating on the past and how "well or bad" they did compared to other coaches. I am getting tired of all the comparisons once a coach is being selected.
It was the same between Qn and Branko after the WC; it was the same between Qn and Daei after the AC; now it's between MK, Branko and Daei
We are not gaining anything putting our energy into these lame comparisons, just because we idolize one and hate the other. Please guys, stop this bad habit.
Ghorbanetoon,
Amin
Comment