Wednesday, June 17th 2009 Time 20.00 Local Time 15.30 Tehran Time 15.00 Dubai Time 13.00 CET (Berlin, Amsterdam, Stockholm) 12.00 London Time 07.00 AM Eastern 06.00 AM Central 04.00 AM Pacific 21.00 Melbourne Time Source: PFDC
Ajjt guys, the last FINAL match. Any pre-match thoughts? Was dissapointed in our players performance against UAE. The movement was pretty bad. Our right side of the midfield in form of Mahdavikia, the first half, was dead. He didn't challenge, nothing. Pretty certain though that he will start in Seoul, as experience weighs heavily according to Ghotbi. I agree but to me, Kia doesn't show that leadership and experience that I was expecting from him. Will we use 2 DMs in this game, or do you think Ghotbi will "risk" it a bit by only playing Nekounam? As I see it, we have to win. We can certainly draw and still have a theoretic chance to grab the play-off spot. But imo the win should be our primary aim from the start! Favourite lineup: Rahmati Kaebi.....Hosseini....Nosrati.....Hajsafi Nekounam Heydari...............................Khalatbari Karimi.......Zandi Hashemian Predicted lineup:Rahmati Kaebi......Aghili.....Hosseini......Nouri Ando....Nekounam Mahdavikia.........................Shojaei Karimi Hashemian I hope to see more dynamic movement without the ball from the players. I think Uae match was rather boring and static. And frankly, this wont work if we want to beat or even draw SK. Prediction: Call me a dreamer or optimistic but I predict a 2-1 win for Iran
Personal line-up: ---------------Rahmati------------------ --Kaebi-----Aghili----Hosseini-----Nouri-- ------------Ando----Neko--------------- ----Heydari---------------Khalatbari----- ---------------Karimi-------------------- ---------------Borhani------------------ I don't think we can afford to play with only one DM against S.Korea. Yes, we should shoot for the win, but if we overshoot all it takes is one, simple goal from S.Korea and then we have a mountain to climb (at least 2 goals) in order to secure the victory. Not so wise when playing away from home. All we need is 1 goal, anyways. The 4-2-3-1 can obviously achieve that, so long as our players step-up. Predicted line-up: ---------------Rahmati------------------ --Kaebi-----Aghili----Hosseini-----Nouri-- ------------Ando----Neko--------------- -------M'kia----Karimi----Shojaei-------- ----------------Hash------------------- I don't expect Ghotbi to make any changes ahead of the S.Korea match. It's possible, however, that Shojaei will be replaced by either Zandi or Khalatbari in the line-up, and that Mahdavikia will be replaced by either Khalatbari or Heydari. I say this because 1) Masoud has played terribly recently and Ghotbi looked furious when he messed up that golden opportunity with Borhani, and 2) Mahdavikia played poorly and was subbed out at the half yesterday. I think either Ghotbi doesn't like the way Kia plays in the 4-2-3-1, or he's had enough of his slow pace.
I hear what you're saying but dont you think the quality in Nekounam should be sufficient enough? Ando certainly wasn't fantastic last game, as a matter of fact he was close invincible. But then again, Nekounam has underperformed a bit so it would be a bit risky with only one defensive midfielder. I guess, after second thought, I would also play with two DMs, but take one out (depending on the state of the match) and add an attacking midfielder instead. Aghili in your personal line-up?? Do you have him there because you think we shouldn't undergo any major change in the line-up? I'm terrified of Aghili playing. He has been so shaky I wouldn't mind him being replaced with Nosrati. I mean seriosly, do these two complement each other well at all from the obviously catastrophic sorry excuse of a defence?
I don't think this is matter of Neko's quality. One DM of any quality (I don't care if it's Neko or Mascherano) is just not enough against a strong team, particularly when you're playing away from home. We simply need another body to cover space alongside Neko, and Ando can do that just fine. He didn't play very well against UAE, but we just need a mediocre game from him in order for us to win, to be honest. Of course, we should (and we will, without a shadow of a doubt) replace one DM (Ando) with a more attacking player if we go down a goal. As for Aghili... yes, I just included him because I'd rather not make any changes to the core of our defense. Nosrati didn't impress me at all with his defensive abilities against N.Korea. While Aghili's lack of pace really scares me, I'm more afraid of Nosrati's inability to properly mark players. Hosseini and Nosrati are similar types of defenders, anyways, and it's always good to have a different type of player to complement your CB. I don't feel comfortable with Aghili, but I just don't think we have a better option. Might as well pair him with Hosseini and hope that they've reviewed the tapes!
Well I'm sure with his state the of art video system and amazing analysis skill, Ghotbi will definately come up with something
Its do or die for Iran. Watching the SK vs Saudi game, its evident that SK is arguably the best team in Asia at the moment. They are deadly on the flanks and if I were to pick one area of weakness, would be a striker (ironic how we both lack a good striker). The key for Iran will be to somehow find a striker and to control SK's fast flank game. The game shall be more open, so fitness will play a critical role.
Thought you guys would be interested in this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_(AFC) I worked out all the scenarios for the group and updated the page--to make a long and complicated story short, Iran definitely survives with a win, but a draw doesn't necessarily eliminate them. A loss would eliminate them. Any word on whether South Korea is resting any top players? It would seem likely, but I'm not following them. Good luck--I certainly enjoyed attending the US-Iran game in LA after the '98 World Cup.
While I always thought Korea's area of weakness was up front, I must say Lee Keun Ho (I think it was him?) was quite strong against KSA the other day. He applied a lot of pressure to the KSA defense and he can definitely create problems for us. I'm not entirely impressed by their CBs, and I think their ability to concede few goals is due to their dominance in the midfield, both offensively and defensively. Korea might dominate this game by possession, but we just need a second to grab a goal and hopefully leave Seol with 3 points. As for our strikers... I still prefer Borhani to Hashemian... He can apply pressure far more effectively than Hash. Of course, Hash remains the likely starter.
Is it? As I explained earlier, I'd rather have a Borhani that wastes chances over a Hash that doesn't even have any chances to waste. At least Borhani scores once for every eight chances he misses. Hash just doesn't score... Each and every time Borhani plays he gets involved in our attacks far more than Hash does. If nothing else, at least he has the slightest bit of speed, as opposed to Hash. At this point, Borhani is just as effective as Hash in the air, which is obviously Hash's strong point. I can find absolutely no reason to start Hash over Borhani. He consistently loses balls, and he still hasn't proven to have any sort of chemistry with our midfield (really?). How can Borhani be any worse? By wasting golden opportunities? Hash hasn't seen a golden chance in God knows how long. The fact that Borhani consistently finds himself with golden chances is not due to coincidence... He does something right that Hash doesn't...
If thats the case, then Shojaie, Karimi, or even Zandi would make a better forward than Borhani. On precision final touches, we have no one near as good as Hashemian. Perhaps he is older and slower, but lone strikers dont need to run back to get the ball (which Hash does), they should be fed the ball in the box, something that he doesnt get very much.
Shojaei, Karimi, Zandi? A midfielder that gets opportunities to score would not necessarily get those same chances as a forward (very unlikely, in fact). Hash had one decent chance against N.Korea which he missed. He had a perfect header-opportunity which he completely missed. He had a great shooting-opportunity on UAE which he wasted by kicking directly at the goalie. While these were his best chances in ages, he definitely didn't exhibit a precise final touch. As for getting fed the ball in the box... I'm shocked that you say he hasn't been fed the ball. I lost count of how many crosses were sent into the box and wasted. He can't win aerial battles anymore! He's ineffective as a lone-striker. As for through-balls/ground-passes, Hash never anticipates such plays (it was never his forte, in the first place).
My point was that, if youre gonna be ineffective as a striker (as Borhani clearly is), why not just use someone like Zandi who can actually shoot and score, every now and then. I mean, seriously, I think Borhani is the worst striker, ever. Points taken Hashemian.
Borhani is not ineffective. Leading the league in scoring is not ineffective. He simply has a terrible finishing touch and a low-rate of conversion. He makes up for those deficiencies with his ability to be in the right place at the right time (something you can't teach). How you can call him the "worst striker, ever" is beyond me... Like I said earlier... At least he scores, which is the primary duty of a forward. He misses far too many chances to be considered a great forward, but who are we to be greedy about our forwards... We can debate all day and night... You still prefer Hash, I think Borhani can only be an improvement to Hash... Agree to disagree .
I think at the moment there is no right choice about who should start. I'm starting to understand why Branko under his era, invited Daei for every single match. In the current state, we just dont produce any dangerous strikers, which is a bitter problem. We dont have a proper system or youth program in general to allow us to find these. The reason we're so good in midfield is because of the creativity and the talent. And I'm sorry txtriatlete, but I agree with Vippe in this aspect: Moving Shojaei, Zandi etc up to the forward wont make much of a difference at all. Because they are not strikers. I dont think they would know how create the chances or how to "behave" to create those chances, in the same degree as Borhani for example. Have you seen Shojaeis matches for Osasuna? The times he is used as a second striker next to Pandiani, he always moves down the pitch and starts his play from the there. He acts as a midfielder and thus why we haven't seen so many goals from him this season. Frankly he's not as good creating chanses for himself ala Borhani as he is using his creativity to create chances for others. Therefore moving him up to the forward position would be pointless imho. Although an attacking midfielder which on the other hand also may be perceived as a striker, would be the ideal position for him. I sincerely think Ghotbi is using this player very unwisely playing him at the left midfield. Anyway, staring Borhani in this particular match is also close to pointless! And I dont know what you're definition of "ineffective" is Vippe jan, but Borhani is the very equivalance to that when it comes to the national team. Nevermind that he scored some goals in a shitty league we all know as the IPL. The league shouldn't be compared to the international stage. This is a fact that none of us can escape. Whether or not you think he is more effective than Hashemian is besides the point. He doesn't nail the chances he gets. He doesn't score. PERIOD. Per definition he is an ineffective striker! Watching him lately I would say he is useless and ineffective in the same degree as I would be trying to sexually satisfy King Kong the giant gorilla. lol How many chances do you think we are going to create in Seoul? My ideal choice would be Kazemian. But since there's practically no chance for him starting, I will go with Hashemian. Again, I'm not necessarily this is a wiser choice. But in my opinion, the chances Hashemian DO get, he would be more likely to score than Borhani. Hope I'm not sounding like a broken stereo saying this but Hashemina imo is more beneficial for us for his ability in the air. This is my take on it
With all due respect, that is a jaded argument that is simply untrue. According to Teammelli.com, Arash Borhani has scored 9 times in 29 appearances for the national team. I see different numbers from different sources, but all sources suggest the same rough ratio; 1 goal to 3 matches. That's not great, but it's definitely not ineffective. The fact is he rarely gets a chance in big games, and no one can deny that. Hashemian always gets the nod. I can't debate this point any further. As I always said, Borhani is not a great forward, and I definitely don't like him as a player. However, he can be no worse than Hashemian. Why? Because over, and over, and over, and over again, Hashemian has failed to score, create any great chances, or do anything productive for us. How can anyone defend that against Borhani? I don't understand. Borhani has scored for us recently. And yes, he has missed a million golden chances. It's worth noting that Borhani was easily one of our best players when Iran played Galicia, one of the toughest opponents we've played in recent history. In all honesty, he's the same Arash for Iran that he is for Esteghlal. Millions of chances to score, capitalizes on just a few of them. The difference, of course, is that he plays constantly for his club and very rarely for the national team. When Borhani barely missed that chance with Masoud against UAE, could you imagine Hashemian making that run along with Masoud? Honestly? I certainly cannot. Arash probably would've scored had Masoud given him a decent pass. Even if he missed the chance, though, at least he was there, despite the fact that he had only been in the match for a few minutes. Hash doesn't fit into our system. Borhani constantly finds himself in opportunities to score, Hash doesn't. By the way... I know this debate is going nowhere, but I guess we might as well continue it since no one else has anything to say .
No my friend, the argument is not at all jaded or untrue just because you dont happen to agree with me. I think you and I must have a very different perception of what ineffective indeed is. And if I didn't make my self perfectly clear, I appologize. With all due respect I think you're really forcing your point rather than anything else about Borhani not being ineffective for the national team, by bringing up those meaningless statistics. Yes meaningless! Why? I dont care about the statistics because this is so far from my point about Arash being ineffective for team melli. Aziz look at the Malaysia U-23 for heavens sake. You think Borhani in general was effective in that match for scoring that goal, but at the same time missed some 100 % chanses? If that horrendous match by him is not an indication of ineffectiviness, I dont know what is. Yes he creates chanses for himself (but to be frank, against weak teams) but he nearly misses them all! While you recognize that he misses many chanses, you dont at all seem to take them in to your equation. And if your definition of ineffective is solely based on how many goals you score, you and I can end this argument right now. And I'm not just talking about that match but others as well. Not to mention the chance he missed against UAE. Yes the pass was not optimal, but had he been a more proper striker of course he would have scored that! Answer me this, you think Arash will be able to create chances the same way in Seoul and MAYBE score? Anyway, does this mean I think Hashemian is more effective than Borhani at our current system? NO! As I have repeatadly stressed earlier, Hashemian cant handle to be alone. He doesn't have the proper support because of the the fact that he's alone obviously, and nor does he get it from our midfield. Do you agree with me on this? That's why I always opted for Shojaei as an attacking midfielder ("2nd striker"). I agree that the argument is going no where, but it's still interesting to debate
I would like to add, that my perception of Arash Borhani being ineffective for team melli is not only based on recent matches. But I also remember seeing him in U-23 where he was absolutley terrible! Why do I apply those matches to my argument here? Because he hasn't changed! He doesn't score 100 % goal chances when he obviously should. That to me is the definition of an ineffective forward. I mean can we really rely on Borhani creating several chances against South Korea in Seoul, and then cling to the slightest hope that he will eventually score one? hmm...
The most in form striker for TM has been Rezaei for some time. I am surprised that no one is even mentioning him. So far as I know he is not injured or suspended right now!!!
I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand my argument (I'm not "forcing" any points... It's my opinion, and I'm backing it with facts). I'll try to sum it up: 1) I'm not saying Borhani is a very effective striker. I'm just saying that he's not "ineffective," and he's certainly more effective than Hashemian at the moment. 2) Borhani is often in the "right place at the right time," which is something you can't teach. Borhani wastes a lot of golden opportunities, but Hashemian doesn't even get any golden opportunities. Borhani scores at a very poor conversion rate. Hashemian doesn't score. 3) You can't say Borhani is only effective against weak teams, because he never gets a decent chance against strong teams (although Galicia was very strong for Iran, and Borhani was probably our best player...). 4) Indonesia U-23 (not Malaysia...) was his worst match ever. Period... certainly not a fair match to determine his "effectiveness" as a player. 5) I don't like Borhani. In fact, I dislike him very much. Moreover, I love Hashemian. Having said that, we have absolutely no reason to believe that Hashemian will score or even do anything productive at all against South Korea. It simply cannot hurt to try something new. Starting Borhani= something new. What will we miss by taking Hashemian out of the starting line-up? I'm curious... 6) You're absolutely right that scoring is not the only factor in determining effectiveness... So tell me... What does Hashemian do that's so effective? I know you said you don't think Hash is effective in this system, but my whole argument is simply that Borhani would be better than Hash. That's all.
Damn, confused Malaysia and Indonesia again lol. But to be frank, I was typing kinda fast and didn't think about it too much 1) Yes I do understand what you are saying Vippe jan, but I am telling you that I disagree with your assesment or perception. Your facts does nothing to prove that I am wrong. Nor am I necessarily saying that I am correct either They are far from my point in this whole subject. But I guess they are important to prove your own point, according to what seems to be your own definition of "non-ineffectiviness". (I wonder if that word really exists lol) 2) What does it matter if he's in the right place at the right time, if he just cant score? I think you said it perfectly there: Borhani misses so many golden opportunities it's unbelievable. He misses a hell of a lot more chanses, than he scores on them. As you stated, he's convertion rate is piss poor, to say the least. THAT to me is the definition of an ineffective striker! Believe me, Hashemian is ineffective as well! But in a another way, in an area, whereas Borhani is good. And that is his speed, positioning and the "being in the right place"-factor. Hashemian doesn't have that to the same degree at all as Borhani. So your bias against Hashemian is not helping really, to convince me about Borhani. They are both ineffective! 3) In Galicia match he was decent. But our best player? Matter of opinion. Khalatbari gets my vote. And yes I still say, that the goalscoring only came against rather weak teams in recent times. Galicia is the exception maybe, but by no means are they THAT strong of a team either. We just sucked. (simply because we didn't win) 4) No, the Indonesia match was not his worst game ever. This is the key point. He was even worse during his time in U-23 and I think that should be considered as well. And I'm applying this fact to our discussion here, simply because the pattern hasn't changed. It's the same player that cant convert 100 % chanses majority of the time, and make some dumb mistakes. 5) I dislike Borhani extremely much, but you probably figured that out by now. Having that said, I also dislike Hashemian but not on the same level. They are both poor. Starting Borhani is not really new. He has shown over and over again that he is not good, and flat out sucks in international competition, as do Hashemian. 6) Please dont put words in my mouth, my posts are not an indication that I think Hashemian is effective. It strikes me as little strange, that first you imply that by the question, and then later on acknowledge the opposite (that I do not in fact think Hashemian is rather effective in our current system) I already suggested a system where Hash maybe could be more sufficient. Imo it comes down to support. Support from a 2nd striker/attacking midfielder and the midfield which he has not been getting. But there's a sacrifice to this. We could only use one DM in this system and I stand corrected on that part. It wouldn't be so smart. We're likely to use the the same formation, and as already mentioned, my preferred choice would be Kazemian. Now THAT is something new, in comparison to Arash. But since there's close to zero probability for him ever starting, I will go with Hashemian because I think he's stronger in the air.
Funny thing is that, the korean's arnt that impressed with the guy. They were saying he couldn't do any good in the Saudi game
lol this is funny, in reply to Nekounam's warning before 'Azadi will be hell for Koreans' , recently Ki Sung-yong said 'I guess he was refering to Iran's facilities of the stadium which was not good to talk about while Korea is heaven'