I can't say I learned anything from that response, or got any closer to understanding how you handicapped the teams in Group F, but while I will always be skeptical when it comes to the ability of a US football fan to be objective enough about Iran, I do realize that even if am more informed about Iran's team, I am nonetheless less objective about it than those who don't give us what I consider to be our due. In any case, we will see what happens in this group. If I am right, Iran will be extremely competitive against both Nigeria and Bosnia. And I give Iran better odds of finishing either 3rd or 2nd in this group than finishing 4th.
I'm trying to be respectful. I don't think there's any evidence one way or the other about Iran. It's kind of like the US in '06, most fans think we blew --- in the cup, some of us think we were incredible against Italy, and robbed against Ghana, and sucked against the Czech's, basically a mixed bag (and we also made the Czech's sitting ducks for the rest of the group when we added Koller, their go to target man and top scorer, to their injured and out for the tourney list which was getting lengthy), but most fans pay no mind to that simply seeing a butt kicking loss to the Czech's, outplayed against Ghana, and a defensive draw with Italy in a card riddled match. That is very analogous to your performance in '06, just better, you guys look at the nuances of your performance, the rest of us look at the results. So Iran is basically viewed as a team that couldn't qualify out of one of the two weakest regions in soccer (Oceania doesn't really count) in '02, or '10, and looked bad in '06, and nothing special in '98. In other words, a fitting side to put in the "punching bag" group. Is it fair and reasonable? Yes it is. At the end of the day, with 4.5 tickets for Asia, and only 3 quality teams in the region, it's kind of hard to excuse repeatedly missing out on cups. It's the same reason people think so little of Mexico this time around. It's concacaf, not Conmebol, how in hell was Mexico not good enough to trump Honduras, let alone Costa Rica, how in heck was Mexico so bad, that if not for injury time goals by the US in matchday 10 against Panama, Mexico would be watching the cup. Panama, Honduras, and Costa Rica, all sides with nowhere near Mexico's pedigree, outplayed them throughout the entire hex campaign. It took a miracle bicycle kick at home against Panama, and a helping hand from the US to pull Mexico out of the septic tank they'd fallen into. Without both of those factors, both miracles, Mexico was out. When Iran can't qualify out of an AFC that much like Concacaf, has a massive talent drop after the first two sides (and Australia's previous generation), they simply aren't going to get respect. We may be all wrong about you, but most of us tend to doubt it. The one thing you have on your side, is that if you were ever going to pull off a surprise, you needed to parlay your position in the AFC/Concacaf pot, into a group that wasn't a group of death, and you did just that, Australia, Costa Rica, and the US ended up in the death groups. If you'd had the luck of Australia or the US, I'd fear for you. I'd be thinking a GD of -10 in B, and -7 or -8 in G. In the group you landed, who knows, maybe you can pull off results. The team you drew from the Europe unseeded pot was one of the weakest, while the team you drew from the CAF+Chile+Ecuador+Italy pot was probably only the fourth-sixth toughest of what was possible. All in all that's not too bad. If you're as good as you think, 3 points, possibly 4, or a miraculous 6 could be possible. I doubt it. I expect 0, or 1 at most, but it's not like I know the squads in there inside and out. I know G a lot, lot better than I know yours.
And I will try to be respectful too. Anyone who thinks that they can properly handicap how Iran will do in 2014 merely relying on the factors you mentioned in your post, doesn't know enough about Iran to properly judge its prospects. Don't get me wrong: I actually think pedigree plays a role as well. It influences how a team views itself, and how it is viewed by others. And that then translates sometimes in a team's confidence, the mistakes it makes, the aggressiveness of passiveness it shows, and other such things. But pedigree is not going to hurt us against Bosnia, who we have beat 4 straight times! It is not even going to hurt us much against Nigeria for reasons I have alluded to in my post. Iran has a good chance in its group, but so do Nigeria and Bosnia (besides Argentina, who are obviously favored in our group). We will see which sides do better with their chances. Incidentally, while Iran would not fare well in Australia's group, and would also not do as well in the US group (much better than Australia's group nonetheless) I am not familiar with any team having such an easy time with us as your post implies. It is very rare for Iran to lose to anyone by a lopsided score.
Punching bag is a little much. I don't understand where the likelihood of a -8 GD comes from comes from when we have never actually lost to Portugal or Germany by more than two goals.(One of Portugal's goals a penalty resulting from a dive). We are no Tahiti or North Korea to be taken lightly. Of course, you can believe what you want, but this is Iran's best defensive unit ever. I do believe that Argentina will pick up 9 points in this group, but that we will concede less than Nigeria and/or Bosnia in that game. What I have learned from watching Iranian football, is that we are an incredibly frustrating side to play. This is why I'm convinced that the Iran-Nigeria game will end 0-0 if both sides play well or 1-0 to either team. When we are 1-0 up we tend to kill the game, taking all pace/strength, passing flow out of it and making it very scrappy. I fully respect Nigeria and Bosnia as a team and believe they have the potential to do great things, but they are 2/3rd of the weakest world cup group we have ever had in history. Nowhere near as strong as Portugal/Mexico of '06 and Yugoslavia and Germany of '98. Our team will have the confidence that they are not giants and play accordingly. Pedigree matters to a certain degree, but once the games are over all the claims of "well these players played in Europe so I thought they must be better" will sound quite foolish. Personally I believe the winner of Nigeria and Iran will advance with Argentina and I give both sides a 50/50 at it.
I'm just throwing numbers out there, and the Ronaldo factor (7-0 over N. Korea when he finally got a little loose late, and his threat sent N. Korea into hysterics), the Germany is much better than '98 factor, and the Ghana factor. Only Portugal has a weak attack among the 3, and Portugal balances that out by the threat of Ronaldo which could cause a team to implode at any time. I don't have a hard time imaging those 3 sides combining for anywhere from 9-12 goals against you (and btw, it's not difficult for me to picture the US giving up 7-9 goals either). At the end of the day, I expect both Bosnia and Nigeria to beat you guys (although the Nigeria 0-0 scoreline is an interesting, and plausible scenario). Most Persian posters have looked at their friendly wins, and assumed a victory over Bosnia. I look at Bosnia and see a 2nd place finish in '10 qualifying in a group that included Spain, Turkey and Belgium (6-1-3), a '11 qualifying campaign 2nd place finish, 1 point behind France (6-2-2), in the first 3 of their 4 home and home's for World Cup '10 and Euro '12, and ahead of Romania (in the two playoffs against Portugal, the aggregate was only 0-2 for Portugal after 3 games combined (that 4th game was an epic debacle), and a '13 World Cup campaign in which they finished in 1st ahead of Greece, and Slovakia (8-1-1). All in, that 20-4-6 record in their past 3 qualifications campaigns is pretty darn impressive. I take that a lot more seriously than friendly results, even the US win over in Bosnia this past summer, friendlies are friendlies, tons of subs, not the first choice players etc. The 20-4-6 record in three qualification group stage campaigns is just pretty darn good, 2nd best record in ''14 qualifying, 14th in Euro '12 qualifying, and 15th in World Cup '10. Not bad at all considering the strength and depth of Europe.
How often does Iran play a team the caliber of this German, this Portugal, or this Ghana squad from G, or this Spain, this Dutch, or this Chilean team from B? I think the answer is probably never other than Portugal, the '06 Portugal was probably better than this one (although this one is probably close). I don't think Iran has ever really played anybody on the level of those teams. I know that you probably don't rate the US, so I won't trouble you with them, but this Chilean team is the best one I've probably ever seen, this Spain team has been called the best international side ever (at least in terms of unparalleled accomplishments), Netherlands is Netherlands, this Ghana side is the most accomplished in African history not named '90 Cameroon, this German side is probably the best Germany since '86-'90, maybe better. That's how I come up with it. Iran hasn't really played anyone on this level at all in, perhaps decades, other than Portugal in '06, and that Portugal side wasn't a prolific attack. Ghana, Chile, Germany, Spain, and Netherlands are all capable of annihilating good teams, and even sometimes elite teams. That's pretty much where it comes from. Maybe Iran proves me wrong, it would make for a really interesting collection of group games, though I'm hoping Argentina finally puts it all together (it might have happened in '06 if not for a goalie injury in that Germany-Argentina quarterfinal-Peckerman is a fantastic coach, and Argentina was probably the best side in the group stage in '06 along with Spain), and I enjoy watching Bosnia and Nigeria play.
The teams that Bosnia has defeated to finish 2nd in UEFA are the kind of teams Iran has shown it can beat too. Its the kind of teams that have defeated Bosnia (the likes of Spain and Portugal) which Iran has lost to in the past. Otherwise, the same Bosnia side that went to the playoffs in the 2010 qualifiers lost to Iran 3:2 in Sarejevo. The Bosnia team that went to the UEFA playoffs in 2006 lost to iran 5:2 in Tehran! As for North Korea, they have a record of a zillion losses to Iran, including at home, some with lopsided scores, and 1 draw at home. Even in 2010 when they qualified ahead of Iran, they nonetheless lost to us in the qualifiers. Anything is possible when people are dreaming, but given that Iran has never lost by more than 2 goals to any team in any competitive match since 1996, and considering that we have only 3 losses (all friendlies) in more than a 160 matches since the 1998 World Cup and never lost to anyone by more than 2 goals otherwise, I tend to think those dreams are simply to mask something else.
basically Iran is an unknown factor, coming from a weak confederation. I don't see why anybody should be expecting anything other than a first round exit for them. Perhaps if they played more quality opposition, we could all make a better judgement. They play Guinea March 5, but I suspect that match wont really tell us much. Guinea isn't a top 10 African side, they were at one point but not now. A slim victory over Guinea at home will tell us nothing. Should they draw with Guinea or lose, it will be bad for Iran. If they thump Guinea, a few brows may be raised, but still there will be skepticism as thrashing Guinea in Iran will still not tell us much. I think Iran will be extremely competitive in all their matches (Argentina included), but if I were to bet I will say they come last. Again it comes down to WHAT HAVE THEY DONE for us to think otherwise. They beat Korea twice. Its very impressive but still not enough to change the majority of people who will give African champions and a team with a strong reputation in various FIFA tournaments the edge, as well as a team littered with stars in top UEFA clubsides in Bosnia. It is just sound logic, and again Iran hasn't really done anything outstanding to counter that. The same could be said of any team coming out of concacaf not named US or Mexico. Just like Iran beat Korea, Costa Rica beat the US and Mexico, yet they still don't get that kind of top quality respect. Now if Iran, Costa Rica, or Honduras start beating quality sides from other confederations in friendlies on the regular, people would take more notice. Anyways good luck to you guys, I will try and watch that Guinea match.
Leaving aside the fact that we have actually played both Germany and Portugal at the World Cup, see if these count?
hmmm? Mask? Ughhh the friendlies are irrelevant, and Bosnia ended up in reasonably difficult groups in every cycle to boot. The one advantage they had was getting Slovakia, Slovakia appears to have been a one off, and plays more like a 25th-30th in Europe side than a top 10 side, but other than that, the caliber of opponents was reasonably difficult. Again, who are those 160 results against? It's like the US playing in concacaf. The sides in the AFC are basically a step below Mexico, and US, or a step below Panama, Honduras, and Costa Rica, or god awful. So the results aren't there, the games aren't there. There's no real evidence to really support any argument one way or another, so what I rely on is what these big sides in G, and B tend to do to what are perceived as the minnows of a given cup. I don't think a 0-3 scoreline to Germany, or a 0-3 scoreline to Chile, or a 1-4 scoreline to Ghana, if theyd drawn other sides would surprise anyone. I imagine in casino's, if you wanted to lay a bet, inserting Iran for Australia or US, the line would probably be +2 or 2.5 for Iran. As it is, you could make some decent money in a casino with your confidence, betting all 3 lines on Iran. If you're right, you'll clean up. My guess is that Iran would be a +2.5 dog against Argentina, and +1 or 1.5 against Bosnia and Nigeria.
I understand where you come from. You only know Asian teams basically from the World Cup and S.Korea have done better than Iran in that tournament. However, there is a difference between Iran v South Korea, as opposed to Costa Rica v Mexico and the US. The best short hand for the difference is captured in the following contrasts which are based on our results in the same confederation: 1) Iran ranks above South Korea according to both FIFA and ELO, while Costa Rica don't rank above US or Mexico, not according to FIFA nor according to ELO. 2) Iran have a better historical record against S.Korea; I don't think that is the case with Costa Rica against either the US or Mexico. In Iran's case, in just our last 6 meetings, S.Korea has managed to beat us once in extra time, while we have defeated them 3 times with the other 2 matches ending in draws. 3) We have ranked just above South Korea historically on average as well, ranking #30 in the world on average while S.Korea has ranked #31 on average. Costa Rica cannot claim the same thing compared to either the US or Mexico. Mexico's average is #15 while Costa Rica is #48, with even the US (relative new comers) averaging #46. 4) Iran has more Asian Cup titles (1968, 1972, 1976) and Asian Games titles (1974, 1990, 1998, 2002) than S.Korea which has 2 Asian Cup titles that are even more dated (last one in 1960) and fewer Asian Games titles too (until 2002, Asian Games being counted as continental championships but since 2002, the Asian Games have become age restricted following the Olympics format of U23 plus 3 overage players). Costa Rica don't have more Gold Cup titles than either the US or Mexico. 5) In terms of talent, until very recently, no team in Asia boasted the talent that Iran boasted. We used to have the most famous players in Asia. That has changed recently and both S.Korea and Japan have more recognized talent right now.
Putting aside political factors for why we lack friendlies against European sides, I see your point. Historically, however games that include Iran are rarely high scoring except for when we play Asian minnows. We are like the USA in the way that against quality opposition we hold our own but at times struggle against lower teams. Implosions dont happen. I'll give you the fact that we dont have a profile makes people think lowly of us, but that same low profile is our biggest weapon in the group Anyone can analyze Nigeria's legionnaires, but Quieroz is seeking to see who Keshi adds to his squad from home. I also question how much better..if at all... Lithuania, Liechtenstein, Latvia are compared to Asian opposition.
Then you're not gauging the US correctly. The US periodically gets obliterated in games. Really ugly like: 2005: 0-3 defeat at Costa Rica (they always kick are rears in down there, especially at Saprissa) 2006: 1-4 defeat at Germany 2006: 0-3 defeat against Czech Republic 2007: I don't count the Copa results because it wasn't even a B squad. 2009: 0-3 loss to Brazil in Confed Cup 2009: 0-5 loss to Mexico in Gold Cup Final (a b side due to the Confed Cup scheduling issues) 2011: 0-4 loss to Spain in friendly 2012: 1-4 loss to Brazil in friendly So we've had some really hideous, really god awful losses, no doubt about it. You guys apparently do a much better job of not getting your arses handed to you in friendlies, oddly, we never got rolled in any match between 2000 and 2004 by more than 2 goals (unless I missed one), but since '05, it's happened 8 or 9 times, admittedly most of them we're with B or C sides against B squads from power houses like Germany, and Brazil and Spain, but the 0-3 loss at Costa Rica, the 0-3 loss against the Czech's, the 0-3 loss to Brazil in the Confed cup (and the 0-3 second half against them in the final after taking a 2-0 lead) were all A versus A debacles. We have an odd habit of not being really consistent in how and when we lose. It's kind of unpredictable, although in the World Cup we have a nice trend of playing our best game against the best side in the group in every single World Cup we've played in since 1990, other than the Germany debacle in '98. 0-1 to Italy in an actual even match in '90, 2-1 win over Colombia in '94, 3-2 win over Portugal, and 0-1 should have been a draw or better loss against Germany in '02, 1-1 draw with Italy in '06, and 1-1 draw with England in '10, and with Ghana in regulation as well. The ugly games were against the Czech's in '90, Romania in '94, Germany in '98, Poland in '02, Czech's again in '06, and Slovenia in '10 (although that was another game where the result should have been different if not for a major screw up by the ref). Anyway, it's just impossible to predict, and I'm hoping to avoid an '06 repeat of uneven play. Hoping for great play from start to finish, and some good fortune with the refs, and the posts/crossbar.
I did mean A squads, a lot of the games the US lost big in friendlies were because of experimental lineups to find a new defensive line. Anyway, back on topic I would say that most of the African teams have an even chance of getting second place in their group except for Ghana, however their recent form coupled with their squad on paper, one would say they are more likely to qualify than Algeria for example. Key matchups: Cameroon vs. Mexico. Cote d'Ivoire vs. Japan Ghana vs. USA Nigeria vs. Iran Algeria vs. Russia
Just out of curiosity? What did a Cameroonian ever do to u? I have this feeling that every time I see a post from u, some kind of Cameroon bashing is included. Any who, hate all you want: My view is - I'll be extremely glad to see all 5 African reps make atleast the 2nd round.
Probably coz of experience... though as an African I really really hope Keshi & Nigeria do not take Iran laying down. Middle Eastern nations usually trouble African teams & half the times coz the African teams go into those games undermining those opponents. Nigeria had better not make that mistake (especially knowing that Iran will be their opening game), else they'll live to regret it for a long time!
So would I, so would I. My problem with Cameroon is simply down to the fact that over the last few years they have underachieved due to disorganisation, internal squabbling and general poor management. They provide a poor advertisement for African football - yet because they are 'Cameroon', they are still seen as one of the continent's top teams. It looks bad when they go to WC 2010 and lose every game. It looks bad when you have FECAFOOT banning players, refusing to pay bonuses etc. It looks bad when the team's main star is constantly retiring from international football. All this when they're still somehow considered a top African team. They aren't. They've been poor for a long time.
Mind you, it helps when you lose 2-nil and get awarded a 3-nil victory because the opposition fielded an ineligible player.
Well... I must say they are on an up. But they did get a relatively easy playoff draw (and BocaFan did mention the 2:0 loss). I would think Egypt, Senegal and Burkina Faso are safer bets than Cameroon. But honestly... with this new coach (very good so far) and all the talent the team has I have no idea how well / poorly they will do.
All of that may be true but something must be said about going out there in a do or die playoff situation and getting the job done against a Team like Tunisia. Who by the way has been pretty good going back to 1998.
I said it before: The playoff games vs Tunisia (both games - the 0:0 draw as well) were tactically and teamwise the best showing by Cameroon in years. The 0:0 away draw was a defensive masterpiece, whilst the 4:1 win - you always knew there would be only one winner. If Cameroon play this well in the upcoming World Cup they may turn a lot of heads. That said... they may revert back to the old ways
1) Korea has qualified to 9 World Cup's. (8th straight) 2) Korea's average team age is 24. Iran's is 28, yet we have more experience playing in major tournaments. 3) Everyone's argument against Iran is that they are currently not as good as Korea. Bringing up results from the 70's won't change anyone's opinions on Iran and Korea right now. 4) Its good that you realize the bolded part. The Korean squad right now is probably just as good if not a tad better than Iran's most talented team from the late 90's to early 00's. Australia's 06 team was probably just as good as well. Japan's squad right now probably has more talent than that "Golden Generation" squad. (You guys won ONE game in the 98' WC and didn't even qualify to 02' despite the fact that Korea and Japan didn't even take part in qualification) 5) On paper, Iran's the weakest team in their group, THEREFORE, people aren't going to rate them. I thought you would have gotten used to it by now.
LOL I guess it was this "current" Korean team that qualified to all these past World Cups! Do you even see how inconsistent you are with your arguments, leaving aside the fact that they don't have much merit anyway? Anyway, right now, Iran has qualifed to this World Cup after defeating S.Korea twice in a row and finishing ahead of S.Korea in the same group, beating S.Korea once with 10 men at home and another time in Korea (in a game where we might have been fully boring but you weren't doing much either until late in the game when you were looking for an equalizer). What's more, in the past 6 matches since 2009 (not 1970s), S.Korea has managed to beat Iran only once, even then in extra time after we were tied in regulation. Iran have won 3 times in that period, all in regulation, 2 of the 3 games we won against S.Korea were in Korea. We have 2 other draws, both times Iran leading, with S.Korea equalizing late in the match (both in Tehran and even in Korea). If S.Korea is better than Iran, it definitely is NOT because of its current results. Besides our head to head record, S.Korea simply ranks way behind Iran, not just by FIFA, but also ELO (which doesn't have some of the methodological flaws that exist in FIFA's ranking system). We rank above you simply because our current results are much better. As simple as that. All that said, if you want to say S.Korea are better than Iran, be my guest. I don't mind because frankly no matter how many times we beat you in Asia, what matters is for Iran to do something at the World Cup. If we don't, people won't care. Besides, while we definitely have better current results than S.Korea, I am not someone who rates teams just on results. I look at the totality of the picture and I can see an argument being made that S.Korea aren't worse than Iran right now, even if they certainly were before 2009.