From the Round of 16 to the Title

I understand why you would find Iran making the second a surprise, but while I will be quite satisfied if Iran reached the 2nd round, I just find Iran a bit too underrated in many people's comments. Besides Argentina, Iran has Nigeria and Bosnia in its group. These aren't teams to make Iran intimidated and for Iran to finish above them wouldn't be all that surprising in my book.

Sure, I can totally understand dismissing both ELO and FIFA rankings and not accepting that Iran is better than Nigeria. But to pretend that if Iran finishes above a team that ranks below it would be a huge surprise isn't exactly sensible either. Nigeria, after all, finished last in a 2010 group that was very similar to this one. Indeed, the similarity is striking in that, besides Argentina, in 2010 Nigeria had Greece (a side that finished behind Bosnia in UEFA qualifying this time around) and South Korea (a side that finished behind Iran in AFC qualifying this time around). The point isn't that Nigeria should be seen as weaker than Iran, but rather that there shouldn't be such a huge surprise if they finish behind Iran.

As for Bosnia, who at least are ranked above Iran, they no doubt have some very talented and highly rated players. Maybe Bosnia will prove to be the Uruguay of Europe, punching well above its weight by propelling itself among the elite in football. That would be an interesting story. But until they do, Bosnia is a country of a few million people in its first ever World Cup. It is a country that Iran has faced in several friendes and defeated 4 straight times, scoring 14 goals against them in these 4 games. It just doesn't make sense to me to pretend that if Iran beat them again, it would be such a huge surprise! Especially since Bosnia is, at best, a second tier UEFA side and these type of 2nd tier UEFA teams don't have a particularly notable record against Iran. They just don't.

Incidentally, your message prompted me to look behind football in other relevant statistics that might influence how people rate various teams and countries. While that exercise didn't particularly help me understand why Iran is viewed the way it is viewed, what emerged more clearly was the basis for why many Iranians might find the view taken about Iran somewhat insulting. Why, for instance, even if Honduras and Cosa Rica rate similar to Iran in football (FIFA has Costa Rica above Iran), it is still irritating to see Iran put alongside such countries? I will post the relevant data in this regard shortly. Perhaps in another thread.

 

How can Bosnia be so superior when it has lost to Iran, not once, but 4 straight times? I don't get that. Especially when we have defeated them in a time frame that is more recent than the 2006 World Cup you refer to.

As for World Cup 2006, Iran actually had a good team and ranked close to the top 20 teams in the world at the time. But sometimes teams underperform in a particular tournament, in our case mostly because of 3 things: injury to our key players; infighting in our team, and some bad luck. I can over what happened in Wc06, but I don't think its all that relevant anyway. Except, most people have opinions they want to share and if all they know is these kind of things, that still doesn't prevent them from being stubborn about it.

Incidentally, while I think Iran was a lot better than how it finished in 2006, I believe Iran will finish in 2014 better than it really is. Right now, I would rate Bosnia and Nigeria better than Iran. But I don't think either are so much better for it to be at all surprising if Iran finished above them. We are talking about what are at the end comparable teams in overall quality. Unlike Iran's 2006 teams, which relied heavily on the magic of Ali Karimi and suffered tremendouly when he wasn't fully fit at the time of the World Cup, this Iranian team is more balanced in its composition. Its pretty good across the board, but doesn't have any stand out player either.

 

Last time, we played them was in 2009 when they were making the playoffs in UEFA. We played them in Sarejevo and Bosnia had their full squad (from the current Bosnia team, they had Dzeko who scored their goals, they had Ibisevic, Sepahic and even Pjnanic). We won that match 3:2. Before that, we beat them 5:2 in 2006 when Bosnia did alright in UEFA qualifying and even then had notable players like their current captain Missimivic and Hamburg's all-time great Barbarez (they scored Bosnia's goals in that game). Before that we won 2:1 in 2005 and 4:0 in 2001.

 

Btw, while Iran has a poor record always losing to the top UEFA teams we have played (albeit very few games against them to give realiable sample size), and even though we have occasionally (though very rarely) lost to UEFA's 2nd and 3rd tier sides, the fact is that more often than not, Iran beat 2nd and 3rd tier UEFA teams even in their homes. Besides Bosnia, the list of such teams we had defeated include Ukraine (in Kiev), Slovakia (in Slovakia), Armenia (in Armenia), Russia (in UAE), while our 2:2 draw against Croatia in Croatia was actually only a draw because the referee disallowed a legitimate 3rd goal by Iran (that would have made it 3:1 in our favor around the 90th minute mark), instead allowing 6 minutes of injury time in a friendly until he gave Croatia a dubious penalty to allow them to draw the game.

Having watched Iran's games through the years, I have not seen us really weaker than these kind of UEFA teams. Not even when we have lost to them, as in Wc98 against Yugoslavia (1:0 on a late freekick) in a game that was quite even with Iran deserving better than that loss. The only teams that are obviously stronger than Iran are the top teams we play. Against these kind of teams, we lose both in competitive games and in friendlies. Our record in friendlies and competitive games, in fact, shows a perfect correlation! Teams that we have lost to in the World Cup, if we have played, we have invariably also lost to in friendlies. Teams that we have either defeated or tied in the World Cup we have also defeated or tied in friendlies.

 

Actually, Iran underperformed in Wc2006 but Wc98 was considered a success.

Realistically, Iran can go anywhere between 0 to 6 points. Neither Bosnia nor Nigeria are signficantly better than Iran and these games will be decided on the pitch. I am hoping Iran gain 4 points and on the balance of all factors, consider it a very realistic objective.

 

I don't think anyone is underrating Croatia per se. Mexico has built a tradition of getting out of the group stage in every World Cup since 1986 and that is why most people might have them advance ahead of Croatia.

In my predictions, which were entered into Benztown's spread sheet quite quickly, it happened that this tradition was maintained as Mexico, Croatia and Cameroon all ended up with exactly 2 points and -2 GD. But Mexico went through because it scored more goals (I had predicted Mexico to lose to Brazil 4:2, which inadvertently tipped the balance in goals scored in favor of Mexico).

 

Scotland used to be famous for qualifying to the World Cup all the time and never making it out of the Round of 16. But instead of learning to advance to the group stage, they have learned not to qualify to the World Cup instead! Scotland, incidentally, is the team Iran earned its first ever World Cup point against in Wc78 and contributed to making sure they keep up with their tradition of never advancing from the group stage. In 1978, Scotland boasted its "best ever" team and they actually beat Holland in the group stage.

Mexico used to have the same tradition as Scotland of repeatedly qualifying to the World Cup and never making it out of the group stage as well. That is until they hosted a couple of tournaments and built a completely different tradition. The fact that they have made the R16 every time since Wc86 is actually quite an accomplishment. In 2006, they were in Iran's group and beat us in a closely contested match which they nonetheless proved better than us.

Anyway, for me, Mexico have an edge in that group but all of the teams have a chance. Including Cameroon. But certainly Croatia, who are generally the team people pick to qualify alongside Brazil if they don't pick Mexico. Mexico, nonetheless, is a tricky team and should not be underestimated. They have a knack for beating teams they need to beat, although this time around they owe their qualication to the US more than to their own efforts.