Why do we need to play with two DMs in a must win game in Tehran?

[Doctor DOOM]

lets say my memory is failing me. fine.
yipee!
so only in the game we failed to score against a weakened korea, for 120 minutes we played 4-2-3-1 !
fine


how's that changing anything with TM's inability to score and its weak offense and inability to win games?
does that somehow make our offense incisive?

instead of saying we shd look for betterment, you guys are defending mediocrity and saying we shd settle for a half-baked system that doesnt fit our players ( but I guess makes us "look" modern ! ). this much resistance to stay static at mediocrity is just too peculiar to me.

whether I am right or wrong, the reality is our offense needs upheaval and persistence with the present trend is foolish coz it's not paying back.
it's exactly like continuing to walk into a closed door, knowing it's closed. but refusing to either try something new or different !!

if proving me wrong would help TM's performances than I'd look forward to more.
but you guys are "digging in your heels" more the more I say we need to change things.
if that's not lajbaazi, then what is?

or perhaps this ( what we see at TM ) is the ceiling of your ambition and you see no reason to change things.
in that case, I will not bother you.

[Mr.Good]

Actually in the game against SK in AC07 we played 3-5-2,
The reason we can't score is not because of the formation, it is because of our mediocre strikers.
The point is not proving you wrong, you claim that our troubles and lack of scoring is only because of the formation we are playing and if we change to 4-4-2, then magically all our problems will be solved.

TM played 4-3-3 and 3-5-2 under GN, classical 4-4-2 in WC2006, 4-2-3-1 in AC04, in WCQ06 4-4-2 diamond and 4-3-2-1

Daei used 4-3-2-1, 4-1-3-2, 4-4-2D...

Our problem is not formation.. our problem is lack of quality players,

[Doctor DOOM]

no, I disagree.
vs. SK we played 4-2-3-1.
this one was clear

GN was fond of 3-5-2 but during the AC he did not use it.

[Mr.Good]

Hate to do this, but you need to get your facts right

here is the match report of AC07 quarter final against SK
http://images.the-afc.com/Documents/...OR220707v2.pdf

we played this formation

-----Hosseini----Nosrati----Rezaei----
-------------------------------------
---------ando-----Nekou-------------
-Kia------------------------Madanchi-
--------------Karimi------------------
-------------------------------------
------Khatibi--------Hashemian------

and the subs were

Enayati for Hashemian
Zandi for Madanchi
and the most famous at minute 120: Taleblou for Roudbarian

[Martin-Reza]

no, I disagree.
vs. SK we played 4-2-3-1.
this one was clear

GN was fond of 3-5-2 but during the AC he did not use it.

It undoubtedly was a 3-5-2 against South Korea. It was in all papers and widely discussed back then.

Check this neutral source : http://www.persianfootball.com/index...244&Itemid=175

[Doctor DOOM]

last night I sat and wrote a huge post (even for me), talking about how for every half attempt at playing 2 strikers we have 10 failed attempts in 4-2-3-1 and what happened and who .... then the news came on that AN was declared victory with more than 66% in our elections !

and discovered how futile it is on my part to talk about change and the need for rethinking strategy and system and whatever crap !

re-election of a failed and problematic prez opened my eyes that we as a ppl, are just too gutless to dare to change. we'd rather persist with a failed experiment, one that everyday reminds us how wrong it is, but when the time or opportunity comes to effect a change, we lose our guts and decide on the safest & "known devil" !! and it just depressed me no end!

I knew I was just wasting my time with all these posts.

it's in our culture and we will behave like this in all matters of life ... football as no exception!!! we are a gutless nation who fears change and would rather persist on a broken down gov/system/.. than show spine and actually change!!!

to re-elect a prez who did so much harm to our dignity and int'l stature, as well as domestically take us to ruin and inflation and social misery just proved why we usually persist with the "present conditions" and not dare change, fearing the unknown! and here I was trying to change the mentality on a formation in football ! hah!

[Martin-Reza]

It can only be a joke comparing the 4-2-3-1, introduced by a Croat coach to our football by the way as a big CHANGE to the 3-5-2 we only knew to play before, to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It's your mistake that you pinpoint to a widely adopted system as the main source of our failures, for pretty ackward reasons.

Branko helped us to the 4-2-3-1 over a 3-3-3-1, and also used other systems like 4-4-2 diamond, 3-4-3 and even 4-1-3-2 (against pushovers like Laos). Now the coaches after him decided to go with this system mainly. An open person would try to accept that when several independent persons in charge make similar decisions (preferring the 4-2-3-1, not using Mobali, etc.) there might be good reasons for that, which are beyond his understandings.

Your character, however, doesn't allow such a conclusion. Rather you prefer to think every better educated and more experienced person is making the same stupid mistakes, loudly crying about this daily.

[Doctor DOOM]

if anyone of you come and explain how this has WORKED for IRAN , then it'd be easier to arrive at a conclusion.

But as usual you run away with your "widely adopted .." reference which points NOT AT IRAN, but as what some magazine or some european clubs or teams show. nothing new though !

[Martin-Reza]

No, you don't get it that way. If someone refuses to accept that 2+2 = 4, then I will stop explaining addition at some point and refer to experts who use 4 as the result of 2+2.

You don't understand plenty of stuff and you refuse to learn. What else can I do but pointing my finger at experts doing all differently than what you demand?

You are asking completely wrong questions. How has the 4-2-3-1 worked? That's like asking, how has fielding 11 players worked for the UAE? Acocording to your logic, it hasn't, therefore the UAE should try "something else".

[Doctor DOOM]

^ funny how you think YOU are saying 2+2=4 .
I guess each side will have that view.

and as for how it has worked or not, ... well for one thing we have our abysmal, incoherent, deimi offense and lack of scoring by the strikers and ... etc etc etc as proof.
and it's inefficiency is not restricted to our offense ( which is the most vivid reason ), it is also in our defensive game too.

it hasnt worked for us when we have a south korea that comes TO AZADI and dominates us, runs through our defenses with ease, attacks and threatens rahmati's goal at whim and basically be unlucky not to convert their numerous chances becoz we have rahmati and a few bad final touches by koreans.

it hasnt worked coz the bottom team in the group, has the opportunity to score 4-5 goals against us and the ONLY reason it doesnt is our goal keeper ONLY.

it hasnt worked coz a depleted and weakened ksa comes to AZADI, and defeats us in front of 100K fans!

and many other REAL examples . not those that are written in ur mags and theoretical articles. and YOU come and talk about 2+2=4 !!!!

an intelligent person will not persist on repeating the same mistake & walk into a closed door again and again. he will try to change things and try another door.
is there a guarantee that the next door is the real solution? no, there's no guarantee.
but it is a sign of intelligence to show one's attempt to rectify the problem.

clear example is your LB post which for a long time was never looked into and zareh was tolerated. hardly anyone in real official games tried "opening another door" until daei actually did and ... what do you know, the new door resulted in far better quality than the one we kept persisting with.


LOL ...so be it.

like I said, it runs deeper than what we'd like to admit, sadly.

[Martin-Reza]

^ funny how you think YOU are saying 2+2=4 .
I guess each side will have that view.

True, but only the side which is right will be able to refer to experts doing and having done the same which they propose.

I have three of the past 4 TM coaches having used that system, the fourth, having used a similar one, 4-3-3. So where are your references?

And I will now say the following about using a fourback in Team Melli:

and as for how it has worked or not, ... well for one thing we have our abysmal, incoherent, deimi offense and lack of scoring by the strikers and ... etc etc etc as proof.
and it's inefficiency is not restricted to our offense ( which is the most vivid reason ), it is also in our defensive game too.
it hasnt worked for us when we have a south korea that comes TO AZADI and dominates us, runs through our defenses with ease, attacks and threatens rahmati's goal at whim and basically be unlucky not to convert their numerous chances becoz we have rahmati and a few bad final touches by koreans.
it hasnt worked coz the bottom team in the group, has the opportunity to score 4-5 goals against us and the ONLY reason it doesnt is our goal keeper ONLY.
it hasnt worked coz a depleted and weakened ksa comes to AZADI, and defeats us in front of 100K fans!
and many other REAL examples . not those that are written in ur mags and theoretical articles. and YOU come and talk about 2+2=4 !!!!
an intelligent person will not persist on repeating the same mistake & walk into a closed door again and again. he will try to change things and try another door.
is there a guarantee that the next door is the real solution? no, there's no guarantee.
but it is a sign of intelligence to show one's attempt to rectify the problem.
clear example is your LB post which for a long time was never looked into and zareh was tolerated. hardly anyone in real official games tried "opening another door" until daei actually did and ... what do you know, the new door resulted in far better quality than the one we kept persisting with.
LOL ...so be it.
like I said, it runs deeper than what we'd like to admit, sadly.

Wow, it fits. Damn, it's all about the fourback. We must change "something", because obviously it wasn't working.

Now we can put othe stuff instead of using a 4-2-3-1 or playing fourback randomly. Using Nekounam, playing Rahmati, making three subs...

Do you notice something? You talk about shortcomings, but the reason you name for that has little connection to what you are actually talking about.

[Doctor DOOM]

btw, I forgot to add, I'd rather listen to ppl like hajrezaei, cheraghpoor, namjoo-motlagh, .... etc etc etc, football experts than some chap sitting somewhere referring to magazines .
on one side experts whose vested interest is to see IRAN be successful. on the other hand a chap whose vested interest is diluted with "trying to maintain his stance no matter what" along with wanting success for TM.
now, that impurity makes one doubt ppl.

and I, for one, think those ppl's 2+2 is far more valuable and respectable than some other chaps who havent done a fraction of what these experts have.

and LOL ... "four back"? once again, trying to distract from the main point which is directed elsewhere. it comes as no surprise to me !

but hey .... why do I bother.

[Martin-Reza]

Why is the point elsewhere? Your pamphlet is so general, it could be used to blame anything. It has barely anything to do with the 4-2-3-1 system. There are a million reasons why teams are underperforming (and I'm afraid we're not even underperforming ), it's not making sense blaming it all on one of those million issues, simply because you don't like that particular one.

[Doctor DOOM]

hah! again, repeated distortion ( which has become a trait of urs, sadly ).
yet another distortion by saying I'm picking only on one issue. whereas it is among many issues I have brought forth. but it is your denial of TM's reality ( that the formation hasnt paid us back ) and not what is seen in europe or manuals or ... that arguments on this particular subject gets prolonged. distortions, distractions, irrelevant references, ... and much more have resulted in this prolongation.

there HAVE been other issues too, which have had pros and cons.

[Martin-Reza]

Good, but you can't just use the same general explanations for all the different issues. "Playing bad" or "allowing too many chances" are so general issues, that they have no obvious direct connection to any of the issues you adress, although your main concern in recent days seems to be a 4-2-3-1.

You say the formation has not paid us back? The formation payed us back.

It won us Asian Games gold, got us bronze in Asian Cup and brought us to World Cup.

Now suddenly it's mainly responsible for the failures?

We won numerous games with it, against all kinds of opponents.

Now suddenly it's not good when we have to win games?

We scored a huge amount of goals with it.

Now suddenly it's not good for scoring goals?

We kept many clean sheets with it.

Now suddenly it's not good for a stable defense?

You never liked it, and now the results weren't good, you see your time to critisize it. There were enough games in which the system worked. We still have the players to play it. Stop your campaign.

And if you don't like it, fine. But propose realistic alternatives. 4-4-2 flat means a second striker on cost of Karimi (or playing Karimi on the side). Is that what you want? If yes, ok, but do not promote some utopia in which you can have everything upfront without paying for it in defense.

And, most important, don't call the coaches dumb for doing something different. In regards to football, you are five times dumber than any coach. So it's only ridiculous when you claim a cleverer person would be stupid.