World Cup 2014 - Group F: Preview & Analysis

Those who have been tasked to come up with ranking of teams have given some weight to friendlies because it seems they disagree with you that friendlies tell us nothing. Of course, if you think you can come up with a better and more reliable ranking system, then by all means do so. The best one right now seems to be ELO, at least in my eyes.

 

The interesting thing about Bosnia's friendly results (they don't have any competitive matches) against AFC teams is the remarkable consistency. They have played AFC teams quite often and have almost never beat any of them, be it Qatar, China, Uzbekistan, or Iran, Japan or S.Korea, whether in Bosnia, whether elsewhere. (The only exception is beating Bahrain 1:0 in 2011, and by 2011 Bahrain had descended among the ranks of 3rd tier in the AFC). What is more, while some of the friendlies involved less than full squad matches and many of them are dated, in some of them Bosnia had what are still its best players (e.g., the 2009 loss to Iran in Bosnia, the 2010 draw against Qatar also in Bosnia).

 

Curious, considering the Iran-Nigeria match to open group play, the stupid casinos where I live don't lay odds the normal way they are done internationally with regards to matches. Instead of Winner-Draw-Winner, they do it the way all team sports are done out here, with lines. I did my 2006 world cup betting online, so I never noticed the issue until '10 came around.

The opening line in the Iran-Nigeria match probably won't be out until late May, but based on my experience viewing past lines, my guess will be that its Nigeria -1.5 or -2, 2.5 at worst.

Utilizing your expertise w/regards to Iran, what would you guys consider good and worthy bets in the Nigeria, Argentina, and Bosnia games? Lines will be adjusted for each match as the results play out, but based on what I saw four years ago, my guess would be Iran +1.5 or +2 for the Nigeria game, +2.5 or +3 for the Argentina game, and +1.5 or +2 for the Bosnia game.


What would you guys consider genuine value there?

I'm willing to lay down a few dollars on the ideas that you guys have proffered, at least in regards to Iran's history of keeping relatively tight score lines, but I'm curious how you would play it in that situation?

 

I don't know how lines would work in a sport with few goals, but I believe the odds that Iran would either draw or beat Nigeria are better than Iran losing. Basically, I see the odds as follows: Iran winning against Nigeria (20%); Iran drawing (40%); Iran losing (40%). And I don't expect Nigeria to beat Iran by more than 1 goal even if they win, although obviously anything is possible. Hence, I would take Iran in any line that straight up predicts Nigeria winning especially by more than 1 goal.

I do see Iran having around a 25% chance of drawing Argentina, but the chances we would lose would be around 70% and the chances of Iran winning less than 5%. While Iran doesn't often lose by more than 2 goals to anyone, Argentina might beat us by 3 goal or even worse. The truth is that, if clicking, a team with the likes of Messi and Di Maria can embarrass practically any side. My own prediction against Argentina is that Iran will either lose by a 3 goal margin, or by a 2 goal margin or draw 1:1. In other words, if the game is close, I think Iran might even get a draw against Argentina but if we lose, the chances that we will lose to Argentina by more than 1 goal are pretty high.

Against Bosnia? I have said it before: at this time, I say the odds are 35% Iran wins, 35% Iran draws, and 30% Iran loses. Thus, any line or bet that favors Bosnia to beat Iran is one I would take and put money on Iran.

 

Except for Brazil-Cameroon, I don't see how you can put money on any third-day match. They are all too dependent on the results in the first two match days.

 

Most likely, at least one of Iran and Bosnia will still be in contention by the time we play one another. The chances that we would both be eliminated are not that high because I don't see the differences all that significant between Nigeria, Bosnia and Iran to expect Nigeria to beat both in 2 straight games. It could happen but it would defy my odds. (I do expect Argentina to collect 6 points after playing Bosnia and Iran).

The worst case scenario for Iran is that Iran v Bosnia will be like Iran v Angola in Wc2006. That was a game where Angola would have qualified ahead of Mexico alongside Portugal if they beat Iran, while Iran was already eliminated. Anyone who saw that match, however, would not get the impression that Angola had more at stake than Iran. While Iran actually decided to give some of its subs playing time in this game, we were the better team against Angola with more possession, chances and the draw (if anything) flattered Angola. You can go and see the highlights if you didn't watch that game or look at the match report and the stats for that game.

Alternatively, if we have managed a point by the time we face Bosnia, we will be in a situation where this will be a must win game for us to advance. Bosnia, on the other hand, might be already eliminated. Unlike Iran who have a decent enough bench though, if Bosnia decides to give its bench players playing time they are almost certainly going to lose. Bosnia's bench is simply horrible. If they decide to field their typical starting 11 and go for salvaging at least some pride and points from the game, we then have the kind of match we would have if the two teams faced one another earlier. Except Iran would have more at stake. I don't think Iran would lose the match, although the added pressure is not exactly always a bonus.

Anyway, I go with what I said: if there is a line that suggests that Bosnia will beat Iran, at this point I would bet on Iran.

 

"Unlike Iran who have a decent enough bench though, if Bosnia decides to give its bench players playing time they are almost certainly going to lose. Bosnia's bench is simply horrible. "

That is a great illustration of my point. How can anyone bet on a third day game now, when they won't know what type of teams will be fielded until a couple of days before the match? Bosnia might be already out by the third match; or they might have already clinched a berth in the next round. Or, most likely, they still will have a lot to play for. In any case, you're basically betting on not just the outcome in one match, but the outcomes in the other two matches as well. To bet on Bosnia against Iran, you have to bet on them also doing well enough against Argentina and/or Nigeria to have a reason to field their best side in the third match.

I dunno, I'm not really a gambler, but that seems like making money the hard way.

 

Thanks, I think you have a similar issue to it as I did four years ago. When they finally started posting the odds in early June of '10 (Id been checking inn periodically, the US is still slowly building the sport here (way better than 10 and especially 20 and 30 years ago, but still quite a ways to go), and Reno casinos didn't post squat beyond winners odds until a few weeks before the cup opener) I was stunned to see that instead of being say, -1.10, it was instead S. Africa -.5 or whatever it was.

So essentially, instead of having to pick the winner, or that nasty draw, I had to figure out who was going to win, and by what margin.

So what it comes down to, is, is Iran a smart bet against Nigeria if they are say, +2, where I win the bet if Iran wins, ties, or loses by 1 goal, and I get a push if Nigeria wins by 2, Nigeria wins by 3 or more and I'd lose.

That's how it works. So I either put my money down on Nigeria covering that 1.5 or 2 goal margin I imagine the line will be, or I take Iran, believing that, as you guys say, Iran usually keeps defeats close, rather than gets North Korea'd (and the results in their past two world cups underline that). Just reading peoples thoughts I kind of have come to the conclusion that Cameroon, Greece (my own thoughts), Algeria, Ghana, Costa Rica, and perhaps a few others here and there like Iran, could represent value in their opening match (or more), since the oddsmakers, especially in reno, aren't especially familiar with them.

An example of this was last cup I took Honduras at +2.5 against Spain. Figured Honduras had a decent chance of keeping the loss to 1 or 2 goals, and I ended up winning that one (lost plenty of others). Anyway, that's how it works here. Stupid system, for sure, but an interesting way to bet games. It's just really, really difficult when you're used to judging games by something other than the final GD in a given match.

So basically, if the line is +2.5 or better, it seems like a good shot with Iran considering their track record, with the obligatory small sample size issues being relevant.

 

Its not in play, the casino's here don't allow it, and they've managed to ban online betting for the most part, so the best I can do is bet the games that hit the board as they do, they'll have all the match day 1 matches up by about a week before the cup, then as the match day 1 games fall off, they'll update with match day 2 games 1 set, every day adding to the list. So I wont even see match day 3 odds until basically Group E or F are playing their matchday 2 games (if not later).

I agree btw, matchday 3 games are traps.

 

Oh okay, I didn't really understand how it works. I thought you could pretty much bet on anything already scheduled.

 

Iran-Nigeria handicap is Iran + 0.5 at 1.8 odds. Nigeria's odds to win outright are 2.0, tie is 2.9 and Iran's odds to win outright are 3.0.

Iran-Argentina handicap is Iran +2 at even money.

Iran-Bosnia handicap is Iran +0.5 at even money.

 

So basically Argentina is good value on handicap against Iran at -2, while Iran offers good value on handicap or outright against the overrated Bosnia. The Nigeria-Iran odds are just about right and a realistic projection. The best bet, however, IMO, is for Iran to advance from the group at 6.0 odds. Lots of value there. Realistically, Iran's chances are 1 in 3, or 1 in 4 at worst, so 1 in 6 is very generous odds.

 

i cant say i am not scared of argentina. all of their attackers are in form right now. obviously you have messi, then there is higuain and tevez who are both in top 3 of serie a scoring charts. then you have aguero who is in the form of his life with a strike rate only bettered by suarez in england. of course there is always di maria who can create opportunities for any of these players and score himself. they are all playing for the best clubs in the world and scoring a shit load of goals consistently. in 2010 their attackers were in WORSE form then now and they were BOTTLENECKED by the most horrible coach by far at the world cup, maradona, yet they embarassed south korea by scoring 4 goals on them and winning by 3 goals. the argentina we are facing is MUCH better than the 2010 version. but the world cup is a different beast. i dont care if you are messi or romario, if you play against a team who uses 11 men to eliminate all space and plays ultra defensive, it will be hard to score, although you will probably score that 1 goal that is needed to win, and maybe add a 2nd late in the game after that. however, it is not certain that that 1 goal WILL BE scored. that is why we still have a chance of drawing. we also need to be clinical in our counterattacks, as argentinas defense is not that great and we have great attackers, so we can score a goal against argentina too. plus, just because argentina has good attackers does not mean that they all link up well as a team, and not all of them can be on the pitch at the same time. the best case scenario is that we defend excellently and late in the game we score on a counterattack then play 11 man defense and argentina runs out of time to score an equalizer. its possible. anything is possible in the world cup if you play ultra determined and have decent players, as the world cup is a different beast.

 

Well... except for Messi (who is raking up his stats thanks to cascades of penalties). And Aguero who is semi-fit.

Di Maria is great, but he is hot and cold.

The problem also is that Tevez is nowhere near the World Cup.

Absolutely not true. Messi was in much better form, Aguero is in better form than now. Di Maria was way more consistent back in 2010. Only Higuain is in better form.

 

i think you are mistaken. messi cant be expected to score every time against a 10 man defense, and barcelona as a whole have been in a slump. even without penalties messi is close to being the highest scorer in spain, despite missing months due to injury, and he played good in el classico. by the world cup he will be back to full form. he has also been scoring much more for argentina in the past 2 years as opposed to 2010 time. tevez is the 2nd highest scorer in italy.. are you saying he wont be picked for the world cup? even so, he is not even needed, which attests to the wealth of attackers argentina have. aguera is having the season of his life... he is definitely better than he was in 2010. di maria was never consistent so no change. if anything, higuain is the only one who has equal form now compared to 2010.

 

one thing is Messi for Barcelona and another whole different story is Messi for Argentina... and Messi for Argentina has been very important

 

Are you saying Messi is not important for Barcelona?

 

Tevez: You obviously don't know much about the politics in the Argentina national side. Tevez's form is irrelevant as hell has not yet frozen over and he won't be playing at the World Cup.

Aguero: As good as he has been this season he has injured since Decmeber and in the games he has played he has been out of sorts. He hasn't scored or assisted since January, albeit he has hardly played since January. He is unfit.

In 2010 he was just in between his break out season.

 

Im not saying that, even though the way i wrote it it could be misinterpreted that way.
What I meant is that Messi main job in Barcelona is to score goals, everyone plays to assist Messi. In Argentina his role is totally different (and this is the main reason why he was not successful with Argentina). Even though Argentina have great strikers, they lack a good mid. Which is why Germany totally destroy them last world cup, they just eat that mid and disconnect the forwards from the rest of the team.

So going back to what I said, Messi in Barcelona is usually rated on the goals he scores, but in Argentina his goals are not needed as much as in Barcelona, what they need is what he offers in the mid (which has been great and made Argentina much better than pre Copa America Argentina ).

I was just trying to disconnect the two (Barcelona's Messi - Argentina's Messi) rather than say he is important for Argentina and for not for Barcelona.

 

Oh okay. Yes, that makes sense.

 

GHOMARBAHZ! (just kidding)

Anyway, IM jahn, my dad (an Ahwazi) is going crazy after Foolad winning the league. He thinks that CQ should use more players from Foolad.

Do you have any pics of Ahwazis celebrating Foolad's victory? I thought I saw some but I can't find them now!

 

Mani jahn, can you explain this? I have no idea how this stuff works. So des that mean that if TM and Nigeria play 8 games, TM is likely to win 3 of them, Nigeria 2 of them and a tie in 3 of them?

An against Argentina, Argentina is projected to win by 2 goals while against Bosnia, Bosnia is projected to win by .5 goals.

Motashakeram.

 

The odds mean that Nigeria has 50% chance of wining, and Iran has 33% chance of wining.

0.5 handicap means that there is a 50% chance for Bosnia to win, and there is a 50% chance for Iran win or draw.

 

You will probably need to translate all that for me.

 

pics aren't my thing so much; I specialize in long winded posts.

This is the only time I have rooted for Foolad to win the league. I have come to appreciate Hossein Faraki as a very good coach.

Btw, if you don't mind me asking, is your dad of Arab decent? I ask because as you know, many/majority of the population in Ahwaz is of Arab decent.