From what I see from the discussion here, the two camps argument is centered around Iran's level of football class before CQ joined us.
Those, who rate him favorably, say and think Iran's level was not the top of Asia when CQ joined us, and he made us the number 1 Asian team, with the best defense on the whole continent (something that has been Iran's weak point since a long time).
Those, who don't rate him favorably, say and think Iran was already the best of Asia before CQ and therefor after 8 years he should have brought us to
second round of WC.
So, really I think the question should be, do you think Iran was the best Asian team before CQ or not?!
I think based on the answer to this question, we can understand the other side better.
I am just trying to connect our thoughts and find a middle ground!
What you guys think? Is it the right way to put it?
Lets discuss this maturely here:
http://www.persianfootball.com/forum...82#post2714282
Those, who rate him favorably, say and think Iran's level was not the top of Asia when CQ joined us, and he made us the number 1 Asian team, with the best defense on the whole continent (something that has been Iran's weak point since a long time).
Those, who don't rate him favorably, say and think Iran was already the best of Asia before CQ and therefor after 8 years he should have brought us to
second round of WC.
So, really I think the question should be, do you think Iran was the best Asian team before CQ or not?!
I think based on the answer to this question, we can understand the other side better.
I am just trying to connect our thoughts and find a middle ground!
What you guys think? Is it the right way to put it?
Lets discuss this maturely here:
http://www.persianfootball.com/forum...82#post2714282
Comment