TM Coaches vs. Public Opinion

[Martin-Reza]

I thought about how often our coaches in the past were accused of bias, or making obviously wrong decisions.

How about collecting the accusations for each of the major coaches in the last decade?

Here some alledged mistakes of coaches critisized by the public during their era:

Blazevic:
- Bringing Mirzapour instead of SS or PP goalie
- Bringing Golmohammadi back to TM ("He has failed before and is useless")
- Only playing one real striker
- Not making enough substitutions
- Not selecting Azizi

Branko:
- Playing a fourback ("Iran's natural defensive style is threeback with sweeper", "No IPL team plays a fourback").
- Leftback ("Nosrati bad, Zare bad")
- Playing Daei until World Cup
- Not bringing Mobali to WC / dropping Mobali from the squad in 2005
- Playing Hashemian on left wing
- Playing too defensively
- Not selecting Azizi most of the time

Ghalenoei:
- Not making enough changes to Branko's team ("only copying the past lineups")
- Playing Khatibi and Enayati a lot
- Playing Zandi as LB
- Not making Kazemian a starter despite great form

Daei:
- Leaving out several big names repeatedly
- Leaving out most UAE players
- Bringing back Bagheri

Feel free to add. Also new coaches.

Interesting that all coaches were such morons .

[Doctor DOOM]

who accused Ciro of bias?
Ciro was in fact praised for his insight and fair view of picking players OUTSIDE of red and blue camps like rezaei, mirza, ... .
and Golmo was playing well in Ciro's time and won the league with foolad.
nobody EVER accused CIRO of bias.

why do you cook up stuff to justify ur agenda?

[Martin-Reza]

Have you been around here in 2001? Like any coach, he was accused of loads of stuff. I gave 4 examples which were heatedly debated and were the main issues Blazevic was attacked for. The first to at the beginning of his spell (around the time of the Slovakia friendly), the final two until the end and especially after our elimination. And it weren't just a few who agreed with that.

[Martin-Reza]

Oh, and I forgot. No Azizi, also a big trouble for Blazevic and Branko.

[zzgloo]

Martin Jaan.....thanks for the insightful thread, one that we needed !......
Coaches do thier things, and fans do thier's......
Coaches have the right to do things as they see fit......&
fans have thier rights for critisize whomever,where ever,which ever ......
While these may be the facts, yet, I beleive, if one of the above, between fans and the Coaches have any limitations, ..it would not be Fans, and coaches are more obligated to act in certain way....,and fans, good or bad, are the realities of any culture !,and the real Boss,of any football.
.................................................. ..............................................
Among coaches,you have selected, I only pick " Daei ", to be out of norm, and antagonistic toward fans, and over spending his Authurities.

[Martin-Reza]

^ Aziz, I'd find it interesting to see what exactly made Daei be out of norm? Doesn't it all come down to the first point I listed under his name?

Leaving out Karimi and other "big names" and all the speculations about this?

[zzgloo]

^ Aziz, I'd find it interesting to see what exactly made Daei be out of norm?

Daei, like any other coach, had the authurity ,and the right, to do as he wished with TM,....select whom ever, play against any one, design TM as he wished, etc,etc........

What exactly " made Daei out of Norm " was :

1-Abusing his Authurities.
2-Antagonizing fans/Media.
3-Steping out of his duties,and decieding what Players of the country should do,out side of TM..( They should not play in Arab leagues..and punishing them ).
4-Insulting other coaches.
5-Not wanting assistants,and jeprodizing TM's interests.

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

No other coaches,had such illfounded audacity,with very low substance to compensate !

[Doctor DOOM]

the only issue with Ciro was his method of substitutions which was indeed a bit too late and sometimes he didnt use all 3 subs ( which was seen in branko and then daei )

there will always be someone who will shout why this or that, but the PUBLIC opinion was behind Ciro.

the rest were criticized for VALID reasons too.
you cant say why did ppl criticize branko sticking to the same 11 in each & every game, be it friendly & meaningless or official . or sticking to & persisting with zareh ( thank god Daei proved this issue wrong ) for unnecessarily long periods.

you cant say why ppl criticize GN for persisting with low performing khatibi or enayati.

same with what daei faced. you seriously cant expect ppl to clap for daei for not using his 3rd sub in a home game when fallen behind. do you?

if there IS a problem, ppl WILL talk about it.
you cant put ALL compliants or criticisms into one basket and rule them out. many of those were indeed valid.

so finally, what's the point here?
coz I think you're doing ur usual "cooking up justifications & excuses to vindicate ppl"

[Martin-Reza]

there will always be someone who will shout why this or that, but the PUBLIC opinion was behind Ciro.

Oh, I didn't mean to say the public wasn't behind Chiro. But like all other coaches, he faced public critisicm over some controversial decisions.

I mean not all other coaches were not backed by the public from the beginning. Some of the critisicm came at times when they overall had backup.

the rest were criticized for VALID reasons too.

Valid because you agree and think it is obvious. Just adding that. We are talking about your personal belief here. Just in order to avoid confusion over the difference of KNOWLEDGE and BELIEF again.

And I am not ruling all of those points out. I am just summing up what the main issues of critisicm were against those coaches, without saying what my personal belief about each single one is. I have to throw them in one basket, otherwise I would decide which ones were legitimate and which ones not, which is exactly the thing I am usually critisizing you for.

[Doctor DOOM]

Valid because you agree and think it is obvious. Just adding that. We are talking about your personal belief here. Just in order to avoid confusion over the difference of KNOWLEDGE and BELIEF again.

And I am not ruling all of those points out. I am just summing up what the main issues of critisicm were against those coaches, without saying what my personal belief about each single one is. I have to throw them in one basket, otherwise I would decide which ones were legitimate and which ones not, which is exactly the thing I am usually critisizing you for.

... I know.
coz we never saw many ppl speak up about barnko's irrational persistence on a set 11 in all games, or ...
or GN's persistence on enayati/khatibi or ...
or daei's .... ( this one is quite fresh in our memories ).
right?

it was only ME who talked about all that.
nobody else.
right!

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

my friend, my whole point is those coaches DID have issues that many ppl saw and pointed out.
you cant say all those objections are/were wrong. so you CANNOT throw all in one basket and then say "see , all coaches are criticized by public. so we shdnt ....(whatever you're trying to push here)"
many did make sense and were valid.

[Doctor DOOM]

I dont know what you're trying to say with this thread.

if it is bemoaning why coaches are criticized, then I say you cant generalize, coz some objections are valid.

if it is saying coaches are always having clashes with public opinion, then again, it goes back to the above: some clashes are over valid issues, while some are not.

if it is just to sympathize with coaches over their tough & impossible job of trying to win everyone's heart, then all over the world we see this and there is no single coach who's done that.
so what's new?

if it is a purely statistical enumeration of issues with each coach, then why that last sentence?
even wenger and cappello have faced such matters. so what?

so I request you to kindly state what exactly are you trying to say with this thread first?

[Martin-Reza]

^^ Many saw that and that is public opinion I am describing here.

I don't see your problem. I personally think some of the points listed are valid, some not. That is my belief and doesn't change anything.

Those were the major points those TM coaches were critisized for by many.

I DON'T SAY THEY WERE ALL WRONG.

I am just showing that every coach was more or less critisized for loads of different stuff. Some looking to be valid, some obviously were wrong and most of that being a matter of taste for everyone.

The message of this thread is not supposed to be "Don't critisize the coach". It's just interesting to review the issues of heated debates from many years ago and to realize, they have always been there.

[Martin-Reza]

some clashes are over valid issues, while some are not.

Which ones are valid and which ones not? Who is able and qualified to decide?

[Doctor DOOM]

The message of this thread is not supposed to be "Don't critisize the coach". It's just interesting to review the issues of heated debates from many years ago and to realize, they have always been there.

then, going by the above, another person could have written the very same post, but with a different headlines, like which coaches had which issues. right ?

but seriously, if this is purely statistical, then I'd delete that last sentence of the OP coz that is leading and gives a whole new meaning to the post and is contrary to what you just said above here.


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

as for which was valid, which wasnt, I can tell you MINE.
would u like that?
I think I've repeated them many times.

but which ones were valid adjudged by majority of experts , then we have to make a long list for each coach and go over each point to see which ones were discussed by those experts and were deemed problematic and which ones werent ( and count the number of experts , pluz the media coverage and the number of fans and public opinion voiced over each issue to assess and get a feel for it !!!)

[Doctor DOOM]

for example, on GN's use of enayati/khatibi.

you'd find some ppl actually defending it, while some who'd oppose it.
some experts who'd agree, some who dont.
same thing with media and fans.

so how do you say whether this is a valid criticism or not?
if you want irrefutable proof, then you gotta take a head count. but is that possible?
not always.

but you can get a feel of it from the amount of "pro"s and "con"s seen/read about this issue and understand this IS a valid criticism.

right?