Iran - Chile: Post match discussion

[shahname]

Well, I guess my expectations from a CAM is more than one good pass every one and half YEAR. I expect more running, more pace, quicker decision making, less turn overs and better shooting from such an IMPORTANT & KEY OFFENSIVE POST.

Besides he is 30-31 and by the WC he'll be 33-34. If he's this slow and error prone now, how much more slower and error prone would he be by then? So why not invest in a couple of younger players who WILL be available for the WC.

Who are the candidates for a CAM position from the younger players??

[Doctor DOOM]

A note on two sub discussion points in the thread

First to Those who think this was the typical CQ game tactics. Well it was not. Any person who's watched TM in the past few years can attest to a very different approach he took to this game. From the high press to a more positive attitude of the team from the beginning. This was by no means a typical CQ game. And given the opposition, far from it.


Secondly to those who foolishly try to attack anyone who before the game thought we'd lose. If any of you had the mental fortitude and cojones to admit, you'd confess even you wouldn't have thought in case of a win, the winner would have been Iran instead of Chile. But for this, one needs balls and honesty. Not childish ego.
I'd say 98% of the people would have picked Chile as the winner rather than Iran. So stop exposing your lack of guts and loss of touch with reality, trying to pretend as if you knew the winner would be Iran before hand. It just sinks you even lower.

[Bi-honar]

There is a logical fallacy in your argument. If it was really the case that your only problem with CQ was his allegedly defensive game plan, then why did you predict a loss EVEN under the assumption that we would play more offensively? Therein lies the problem. If the defensive game plan was your main problem, you should have concluded that with a more offensive game plan, we would stand a better chance against Chile. Instead, you argued that we would still lose 3-1 even with a change in game plan.

With regard to your first point, I have already told you that your argument was correct. Yes, we pressed much more and much earlier. I only criticized your use of "evidence". That you cannot make up by providing other types of evidence, as my point of criticism was solely focused on the first type of "evidence" you used.

Okay, I will take your advice under consideration for making or not making future predictions.

Again, just out of curiosity were you predicting a win for this game considering our previous tactics and predicted line-up? If you were, show me your prediction. If not, I don't understand the point of dragging on this issue.

Glad we agree on the 2nd paragraph.

[K. Nader]

A note on two sub discussion points in the thread

First to Those who think this was the typical CQ game tactics. Well it was not. Any person who's watched TM in the past few years can attest to a very different approach he took to this game. From the high press to a more positive attitude of the team from the beginning. This was by no means a typical CQ game. And given the opposition, far from it.


Secondly to those who foolishly try to attack anyone who before the game thought we'd lose. If any of you had the mental fortitude and cojones to admit, you'd confess even you wouldn't have thought in case of a win, the winner would have been Iran instead of Chile. But for this, one needs balls and honesty. Not childish ego.
I'd say 98% of the people would have picked Chile as the winner rather than Iran. So stop exposing your lack of guts and loss of touch with reality, trying to pretend as if you knew the winner would be Iran before hand. It just sinks you even lower.

There's a problem here and that problem lies in the irony of the situation. Had we in fact gone on to lose the match, it would have been the same people who had the fortitude to say that we'd lose who would be the first to criticize the team, the coach, and the tactics. It's easy to play the role of the unwavering critic - it puts you in a win/win situation every time and masquerades any manner of mediocrity as common wisdom.

[Bi-honar]

There's a problem here and that problem lies in the irony of the situation. Had we in fact gone on to lose the match, it would have been the same people who had the fortitude to say that we'd lose who would be the first to criticize the team, the coach, and the tactics. It's easy to play the role of the unwavering critic - it puts you in a win/win situation every time and masquerades any manner of mediocrity as common wisdom.

Honestly Nader jaan, I would love to see your prediction that we were going to win this game. Can you direct me to where I can find that?

Same goes to everyone else who's criticizing a prediction for a loss.

[K. Nader]

Honestly Nader jaan, I would love to see your prediction that we were going to win this game. Can you direct me to where I can find that?

Same goes to everyone else who's criticizing a prediction for a loss.

I rarely make predictions for national team games given the unpredictable nature of football. I think one of the few times I did predict a match in the last few years was the match against Argentina after the groups were drawn. At the time, I stated that it's unlikely that we'd win. However, I have consistently supported this group of players and the coach as I believe in the system that they've implemented. As far as I'm concerned, the Sweden game will end as a win, a draw, or a loss. We'll find out once the game is played.

I often try not to become confrontational with members here (aside from a few) so I try to keep my posts cordial and respectful. Looking back at your own prediction though, can you objectively identify how it can come off as demeaning? It wasn't a simple 'Iran is unlikely to get a response'. It was 2-3 paragraphs on how we're going to lose under any circumstance and that even through a good attacking display, we'll still lose 3-1 or something along those lines. This, coupled with a 'CQ Approval Rating Pre-Friendly Matches' feels as if a situation is being set up so that CQ will fail, and that we'll subsequently see a sharp decline in his popularity. Can you fairly say that that you would have made a 'CQ Approval Rating Post-Friendly Matches' had the results gone in our favor?

[Lorestani]

Okay, I will take your advice under consideration for making or not making future predictions.
Again, just out of curiosity were you predicting a win for this game considering our previous tactics and predicted line-up? If you were, show me your prediction. If not, I don't understand the point of dragging on this issue.
Glad we agree on the 2nd paragraph.

For the record, I didn't predict a win and was pleasantly surprised. That, however, is not the point. Again, as I said before, predictions can be wrong and there is no problem with that. What is interesting and important is rather what those predictions are predicated upon. If there are predicated upon the game plan, as you purportedly argued, then your prediction should be in line with that source of prediction. That is not the case if you say, as you did, that we would still lose even if the game plan would be changed. I did not predict a win, simply because Chile is on paper much stronger than Iran.

I am glad you agree with me on this point now.

[OFFSIDE_1]

A note on two sub discussion points in the thread
First to Those who think this was the typical CQ game tactics. Well it was not. Any person who's watched TM in the past few years can attest to a very different approach he took to this game. From the high press to a more positive attitude of the team from the beginning. This was by no means a typical CQ game. And given the opposition, far from it.
Secondly to those who foolishly try to attack anyone who before the game thought we'd lose. If any of you had the mental fortitude and cojones to admit, you'd confess even you wouldn't have thought in case of a win, the winner would have been Iran instead of Chile. But for this, one needs balls and honesty. Not childish ego.
I'd say 98% of the people would have picked Chile as the winner rather than Iran. So stop exposing your lack of guts and loss of touch with reality, trying to pretend as if you knew the winner would be Iran before hand. It just sinks you even lower.

ofcourse, given that we were missing players, were ranked much lower than Chile and just a few days before saw our coach stopped at the airport by IR, ....... most people including myself would have difficulty predicting an Iran win, particularly such a decisive win.

but, that's not the point ....... After such a promising win, and I'll borrow one of your own phrases, "one needs balls and honesty" and not "childish ego" to come out and admit they were wrong and not hide behind comments such as "well, I am disappointed the Chilean coach did not take us seriously, and had their B team in the game" or "well, this was not a typical CQ game".

[O-ZoNe]

majority of these so called adults think, me, you or any one critical to CQ wants to see him or team melli fail, simply its lack of intuition on their part not being able to identify criticism from ill will
just ignore them like I do, they are bunch of low lives that never hacked any thing in the real world, their only achievement in life is to get members banned by ganging up on them, or try to portray anyone against their herd of sheep mentality as the evil one, dragging threads into mud page after page with nonsense
the good thing is, many members by now, know who they are, and are aware of their sick sadistic behavior
again and again it all goes back to their lack of intuition my friend, dont get upset over bunch of losers turning into keyboard champion in a football thread , your input is always valuable to all of us, always looking forward to read your posts

Wow, I am surprised that we are on the same page about something. I also do not think being critical of CQ means wanting TM or even CQ to fail. However, I wonder if you could have rephrased (e.g., the bolded part) without insulting anyone? Respect begets respect...I don't think they or anyone is wrong in their criticism or approval, everyone has an opinion. If we are going to call them out, let's not give ammno to be called out...particularly since kindness is the best weapon. Ps. Glad you are back even if we didn't get along in the gen forum

I rarely make predictions for national team games given the unpredictable nature of football.
This, coupled with a 'CQ Approval Rating Pre-Friendly Matches' feels as if a situation is being set up so that CQ will fail, and that we'll subsequently see a sharp decline in his popularity. Can you fairly say that that you would have made a 'CQ Approval Rating Post-Friendly Matches' had the results gone in our favor?

I also like to go a step further. I dislike making assumptions about someones thoughts or behaviours as people can also be very hard to predict, and as far as I know, mind-reading hasn't been invented yet. Maybe you and I wouldn't have made such a thread, but do we really know what his motives are?

[Bi-honar]

I rarely make predictions for national team games given the unpredictable nature of football. I think one of the few times I did predict a match in the last few years was the match against Argentina after the groups were drawn. At the time, I stated that it's unlikely that we'd win. However, I have consistently supported this group of players and the coach as I believe in the system that they've implemented. As far as I'm concerned, the Sweden game will end as a win, a draw, or a loss. We'll find out once the game is played.

I often try not to become confrontational with members here (aside from a few) so I try to keep my posts cordial and respectful. Looking back at your own prediction though, can you objectively identify how it can come off as demeaning? It wasn't a simple 'Iran is unlikely to get a response'. It was 2-3 paragraphs on how we're going to lose under any circumstance and that even through a good attacking display, we'll still lose 3-1 or something along those lines. This, coupled with a 'CQ Approval Rating Pre-Friendly Matches' feels as if a situation is being set up so that CQ will fail, and that we'll subsequently see a sharp decline in his popularity. Can you fairly say that that you would have made a 'CQ Approval Rating Post-Friendly Matches' had the results gone in our favor?

Of course I have noticed you being cordial and aside from appreciating it, I have complimented you before in a post to Ozone and why I do enjoy engaging you in conversations.

For the record, I predicted a 1-0 win against Argentina and wins for every other TM game (except Nigeria tie and this particular game against Chile) so this is not an issue of not having supported CQ or the team or not believing in their abilities.

It was a mere extrapolation of the fact that Chile had scored 3 or more goals in 3 of their last 5 games with an average of 2.8 goals / game (1 goal against). We had been scored on 3 goals per game in both of our last games in the Asian Cup and the World Cup against decent opposition playing a very attacking style of football.

So, yes I do understand it may have come across as demeaning reading some of the reactions, but considering our injury vows and that CQ was leaving and the players may not have been motivated because of it, or that we could have started the game in the same manner as we played in the last 30 minutes and considering the reasons in the above paragraph, I don't think it was that far fetched or demeaning.

IMHO is was a more realistic result than having expected a 3-1 defeat to Bosnia in the WC. But it didn't turn out that was (and I'm very happy about that) and as they say hindsight is 20/20.

[rugs]

Not sure if I should mention a pathological liar who made up an imaginary resume and became a laughing stock behind the scenes on another board.

I actually felt bad for him when he came over here thinking that I$P stole his money like they did so many others that eventually switched to PFDC.

Then I saw the way he acted and debated and knew it had to be something else.

[rugs]

Wow, I am surprised that we are on the same page about something. I also do not think being critical of CQ means wanting TM or even CQ to fail. However, I wonder if you could have rephrased (e.g., the bolded part) without insulting anyone? Respect begets respect...I don't think they or anyone is wrong in their criticism or approval, everyone has an opinion. If we are going to call them out, let's not give ammno to be called out...particularly since kindness is the best weapon. Ps. Glad you are back even if we didn't get along in the gen forum
I also like to go a step further. I dislike making assumptions about someones thoughts or behaviours as people can also be very hard to predict, and as far as I know, mind-reading hasn't been invented yet. Maybe you and I wouldn't have made such a thread, but do we really know what his motives are?

I wouldn't worry about him. He's been banned before for insulting people. He is known to for his rudeness here, that's just the way he is.

I'm surprised he didn't insult anyone's "jadd" as he so often does.

[Doctor DOOM]

There's a problem here and that problem lies in the irony of the situation. Had we in fact gone on to lose the match, it would have been the same people who had the fortitude to say that we'd lose who would be the first to criticize the team, the coach, and the tactics. It's easy to play the role of the unwavering critic - it puts you in a win/win situation every time and masquerades any manner of mediocrity as common wisdom.

Well I don't know who you're trying to talk about.
Yes, I assume there would be some who'd so that. Also there'd be some who'd behave differently. Some of us, when it comes to friendlies against such big teams put less emphasis on the scorelines and more on how the team approached the game and what tactics we used ... even if it came second best to the opponents' tactics.

So take your grievances to the right people and don't paint everyone with the same brush

[rugs]

There's a problem here and that problem lies in the irony of the situation. Had we in fact gone on to lose the match, it would have been the same people who had the fortitude to say that we'd lose who would be the first to criticize the team, the coach, and the tactics. It's easy to play the role of the unwavering critic - it puts you in a win/win situation every time and masquerades any manner of mediocrity as common wisdom.

I would only add:

There is nothing wrong with making predictions or expressing opinions, it's acting like you already know the outcome that is problematic and as Lorestani said "bad faith".

There is a point when it's not an opinion any longer and is spoken with a "matter of fact" lahn that is insulting to the rest of us. As if we're all idiots to think anything positive can come from TM under CQ.

Criticize, express your opinion, predict outcomes all you like. Last I checked there were no arguments in the "Prediction" thread over what people predicted.

But don't come here and tell a bunch of avid TM fans that you know better than the manager and know what the outcome will be.

[Bi-honar]

I did not predict a win, simply because Chile is on paper much stronger than Iran.

You're so funny bro, you make it sound I predicted a 3-1 loss to the Maldives! Of course the fact that Chile was much stronger on paper played a major part of it as did many other factors (see my response to Nader above).

That is not the case if you say, as you did, that we would still lose even if the game plan would be changed.

I don't agree with that part and we can agree to disagree on this point. The way I see it, the game plan was significantly different than our previous games in that we pressed more and set the tempo for the game from the very start - we already agreed on this part.

I did not predict at all that we would play like that (even on a more offensive scenario) and I don't think anyone else did either, because we never played like that against decent teams. Yes, it was a pleasant surprise, because I've always wanted us to play that way and ALWAYS have said that if we play(ed) that way, the results would be very different.

Like I said to Nader, my prediction in the Bosnia game was a win (not a 3-1 loss) even though we were weaker on paper, but that's because I thought we were going to play the pressing style in that game that we played in our friendlies before the WC or against Chile yesterday.

Having predicted a 3-1 loss to Bosnia would not have been stupid or demeaning in hindsight. That's the nature of the game and its unpredictability as Nader said or the reason they say the ball is round and anything can happen.

At any rate, I'll just refrain from making any other predictions about TM as to not cause so much heartache and stress for fellow TM fans!