AFC Asian Cup 2019 Quarter Final: China-Iran; Info, Updates & Live Updates (24.01.19)

[Lorestani]

I'm sorry that you don't see why I am correct.

Your Sharif brothers would be ashamed.

[KC McElroy]

Your Sharif brothers would be ashamed.

Not at all. They would see how I've correctly explained a situation while others failed to understand it.

[FutbolGods]

There were only 5 teams in 1968 meaning there were no crap teams to get easy wins against but only the top teams of the continent had qualified.

There were only 5 teams in 68 because back then there simply weren't enough countries with football programs to fill the tournament. Most Arab countries either didn't have national programs or weren't even part of AFC.

We joined AFC in 1954. Kuwait which was THE Asian Arab power in the 70s didn't even join till 1964. Iraq joined in 1970. Saudis in 72. The team we consider our "classic rival" today wasn't even part of the AFC when we won our first Asian Cup!

It makes no sense to ignore all this when comparing the different eras. There is no denying we had a lot of talent, but that generation had top notch management and quality preparations off the field while most of its opponents did not. Today that equation is exactly the opposite! That generation wasn't stuck with the piss poor federation and pathetic preparations our current guys have to deal with, and never had to face teams with ten times its own budget and major connections behind the scenes in those Asian Cups.

Kuwait was the only team that resembled the kind of Arab teams we play today, and the 1976 final against them was a close 1-0 encounter despite being played in Tehran.

These are huge, huge factors that are impossible to ignore.

[KC McElroy]

There were only 5 teams in 68 because back then there simply weren't enough countries with football programs to fill the tournament. Most Arab countries either didn't have national programs or weren't even part of AFC.
We joined AFC in 1954. Kuwait which was THE Asian Arab power in the 70s didn't even join till 1964. Iraq joined in 1970. Saudis in 72. The team we consider our "classic rival" today wasn't even part of the AFC when we won our first Asian Cup!
It makes no sense to ignore all this when comparing the different eras. There is no denying we had a lot of talent, but that generation had top notch management and quality preparations off the field while most of its opponents did not. Today that equation is exactly the opposite! That generation wasn't stuck with the piss poor federation and pathetic preparations our current guys have to deal with, and never had to face teams with ten times its own budget and major connections behind the scenes in those Asian Cups.
Kuwait was the only team that resembled the kind of Arab teams we play today, and the 1976 final against them was a close 1-0 encounter despite being played in Tehran.
These are huge, huge factors that are impossible to ignore.

Our classic rival was absent due to not finishing first in its qualifying group. There were about 20 teams participating in qualification. The top 3 (plus hosts and holders) made it.
What exactly did we have back then that we are now lacking? A national pro league? Friendlies? Camps? Prior to the 1968 Asian Championship in May of 1968 our last TM game was in November of 1967.

[OFFSIDE_1]

Burma, Israel, Hong Kong, etc.

In general, it's not fair to compare teams from different eras because teams today are bigger, stronger and faster than the ones in the 70's.

But, if we take the current TM, and maybe even the dysfunctional 2006 team, they would beat the 1970's Iranian TM 9 out of 10 times. The 1970's team had Ghafhour jahani, Faraki, jabbari, Mazloumi and Roshan as attacking players. Compare that to Hashemian, Daei, Azmoun, Azizi and Gucci all of whom who actually played in europe and you clearly have a big gap in talent. Ali parvin, one of our legendary midfielders, was undersized, one dimensional midfielder who created, but never in his life defended. Compare him to Dejagah, Nekounam, Karimi and again you see the drop in talent. The 70's team still followed the same old english style of play that O'Farrell and others brought to Iran which for decades kept us down.

As for Israel, Hong Kong and Burma, neither Hong Kong or Burma were powerhouses and Israel of the 70's is very different than the Israel of 2019. Even if Israel was good, they did not compete much in the 70's due to the arab-israeli conflicts and boycotts. They withdrew in 1972 and

Yes, the 70's TM had more success in Asia, but that's only because the competition really sucked back then and it was hard not to succeed. Take out Burma and HongKong, and replace them with Japan, a WC semi final team and a saudi arabia that has qualified for the round of 16 in the WC, and you have a much tougher asia to deal with. Add in Australia with all of it's legionnaires, and again, it's a whole different story.

[KC McElroy]

In general, it's not fair to compare teams from different eras because teams today are bigger, stronger and faster than the ones in the 70's.

But, if we take the current TM, and maybe even the dysfunctional 2006 team, they would beat the 1970's Iranian TM 9 out of 10 times. The 1970's team had Ghafhour jahani, Faraki, jabbari, Mazloumi and Roshan as attacking players. Compare that to Hashemian, Daei, Azmoun, Azizi and Gucci all of whom who actually played in europe and you clearly have a big gap in talent. Ali parvin, one of our legendary midfielders, was undersized, one dimensional midfielder who created, but never in his life defended. Compare him to Dejagah, Nekounam, Karimi and again you see the drop in talent. The 70's team still followed the same old english style of play that O'Farrell and others brought to Iran which for decades kept us down.

As for Israel, Hong Kong and Burma, neither Hong Kong or Burma were powerhouses and Israel of the 70's is very different than the Israel of 2019. Even if Israel was good, they did not compete much in the 70's due to the arab-israeli conflicts and boycotts. They withdrew in 1972 and

Yes, the 70's TM had more success in Asia, but that's only because the competition really sucked back then and it was hard not to succeed. Take out Burma and HongKong, and replace them with Japan, a WC semi final team and a saudi arabia that has qualified for the round of 16 in the WC, and you have a much tougher asia to deal with. Add in Australia with all of it's legionnaires, and again, it's a whole different story.

Your comparison is flawed as you are missing a lot of our great players from the 70s. If you knew about our players back then you wouldn't say their is a big gap in talent. You would have said instead that there is somewhat of a gap in talent although in favor of the 70s generation. I could say the same regarding your comparison of opponents then and now.
Can I ask your age? The reason being many (young) TM fans simply discount anything prior to November 1997 as "it never happened". One cannot compare the two generations without knowing them both.

[FutbolGods]

Our classic rival was absent due to not finishing first in its qualifying group.

Our classic rival was ABSENT in 1968.

It did not take part in qualifiers.

It wasn't even a member of AFC. I actually gave you the damn dates.

What exactly did we have back then that we are now lacking? A national pro league? Friendlies? Camps? Prior to the 1968 Asian Championship in May of 1968 our last TM game was in November of 1967.

In that "golden era" we had a federation that did lots of things the current one doesn't do or did them far better. This includes everything from investing in organized youth programs to providing logistics and infrastructure beyond anything available to our rivals at the time, to organizing friendlies we can only dream about today. Right before the 78 world cup we played against Argentina and France. Compare that to the friendlies we get today! South Koreans were our main rivals in the 70s, and they were shocked when they saw Azadi stadium for the first time. They had nothing close to it in their own country.

The point is more about what our opponents DIDN'T HAVE. Our closest competitors now either didn't have professional leagues back then or weren't even organized enough to be part of AFC! Burma and India were the stronger teams then not because their football was worth a damn, but because as former British colonies they had a football culture in a continent where most countries didn't have anything resembling organized football.

I honestly can't believe things like this have to even be argued about. They should be crystal clear to anyone who has followed Iranian football for a long time.

[Under Lahaf]

Seeing Qatar's goal, I think Abdoool Aziz didn't mind the angosht, but he was telling the guy they are in the frame, cameras were on them and he didn't want it to be on public display

[milad_b]

Because I'm old enough to remember when the Asian Games were as important as the Asian Championship. Before 2002 where it switched to U23 rosters the Asian Games champion was the Asian champion.

Baba "old enough ". do you have a source to prove that it was important ? Only foreign source is accepted.

[KC McElroy]

Our classic rival was ABSENT in 1968.
It did not take part in qualifiers.
It wasn't even a member of AFC. I actually gave you the damn dates.

They were present. They finished third in their qualifying group.

In that "golden era" we had a federation that did lots of things the current one doesn't do or did them far better. This includes everything from investing in organized youth programs to providing logistics and infrastructure beyond anything available to our rivals at the time, to organizing friendlies we can only dream about today. Right before the 78 world cup we played against Argentina and France. Compare that to the friendlies we get today! South Koreans were our main rivals in the 70s, and they were shocked when they saw Azadi stadium for the first time. They had nothing close to it in their own country.
The point is more about what our opponents DIDN'T HAVE. Our closest competitors now either didn't have professional leagues back then or weren't even organized enough to be part of AFC! Burma and India were the stronger teams then not because their football was worth a damn, but because as former British colonies they had a football culture in a continent where most countries didn't have anything resembling organized football.
I honestly can't believe things like this have to even be argued about. They should be crystal clear to anyone who has followed Iranian football for a long time.

Which of the things that I questioned above did we have back then? A national pro league? Friendlies? Camps?

[KC McElroy]

Baba "old enough ". do you have a source to prove that it was important ? Only foreign source is accepted.

Absolutely.

[milad_b]

Absolutely.

post it please.

[FutbolGods]

They were present. They finished third in their qualifying group.

Is this in some parallel universe? Some alternate timeline?...

For god's sake just google the tournament. The only Arab team that took part in qualifiers for 1968 was Kuwait. And they had only been in AFC for 4 years at that point.

Which of the things that I questioned above did we have back then? A national pro league? Friendlies? Camps?

Are you just going to keep repeating yourself?

I addressed this question in length in my last post. Here's the condensed version for the last time: We had everything you mentioned, but better in both quality and quantity, and we were competing against countries with no professional leagues and much less organized national programs.

It's not too hard to win 3 cups in a row when none of the other teams have a professional league and two of the three tournaments are in your own backyard. That era was indeed golden for us, but not because our talent pool was so much better, but because our management and planning was superior to any other nation in Asia.

[KC McElroy]

post it please.

Yours has taken 9+ days so far. Mine will take just as long.

[milad_b]

Yours has taken 9+ days so far. Mine will take just as long.

I didn't say i have foreign source but you said you have one so... be man grow one and post it .