Branco, You Are Absolutely Pathetic!!!

Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#1
To have so much talent at your disposal and put on a show like that?!
I have seen better tactics and team work from high school teams.
And then to tell the players to blame the whole thing on the ball?!!!
How pathetic of a man are you?
I would have preferred to see a bunch of men fighting hard and losing all three points, than seeing what I saw today - absolutely nothing!
I don't know about you guys, but quite frankly, I've had it with Branco's extremely stupid conservative approach. We may have gained a valuable point, but we lost two.
We should go out there every game with the aim to win, not to look pathetic for 90 minutes.
Yes Mr. Brnaco, this was a great confience builder before the next game against Japan. Make sure you like the balls before the next game. On second though I hope you find some balls before the next game.
 
Oct 18, 2002
6,139
0
Los Angeles, CA USA
#2
Jees, where do u people come from... I swear you are like vultures... We have lost only one game in almost 2 years... Branko is a good coach, our players just didnt play well, its not always the coaches fault, and in this case, poor guy is not to blame...
 

Babak G

News Team, ISP Managers Team
Feb 13, 2003
8,923
0
Parts Unknown
#4
Branko got the result.
We played GARBAGE,but one point is a gain for us.

Did you all think Bahrain is easy?
For people who thought they are just grass-rollers,WAKE UP!
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#5
Oh yeah guys, this was an amazing game!!!
Our coach is great, our players suck?!!!
What are you guys talking about? This is by far the most talented Iran squad EVER. So, if they can't put a couple of passes together or have a couple of shots on BAHRAIN'S (not Brazil's) net, then I guess it's the balls' fault!
You guys really think it's the balls' fault?!
Babak jaan, we may have gained a point, but we lost two! That's one thing everyone forgets. The reason we didn't make it to the last WC, are the dumb points we lost in ties. Have you forgotten how happy we were with the tie against Thailand too back then? It was a good result ('cause that's what Branco's buddy told us), until S.A. kicked Thailand's ass in Bangkok. We didn't make it to the last WC, not just because we lost to Bahrain. We didn't make it, because we lost too many points getting ties in important games.
 

Babak G

News Team, ISP Managers Team
Feb 13, 2003
8,923
0
Parts Unknown
#7
Well they arent Brazil,but neither are we!

We are Iran,dont over-estimate our strengths.YES on paper we have good players,but it has never meant we had a good team on the level that the talent of our players are.Its always been the same story all our football history.

This was a decent result for us.
Remember its a 6 game tournament,its not over.
 

zoozanagheh

Bench Warmer
Feb 6, 2005
2,327
304
#9
Yes I agree, Branko is result oriented and very conservative. He does not have the guts to sub Daei and his tactics are easily countered by a good coach. He believes in certain players and is willing to play them in any role even if it is not their regular position and may not be as effective and at times counter productive (examples in past and present are: using Yahya in midfield, Hashemian in left wing, Nosrati in left back, etc).
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#10
Solaris jaan, we are refering to Daei's interview after the game where he blamed our pathetic performance on the fact that the game balls weren't good!!!
Farsi Zaban jaan, the reason they can't string a couple of passes together, is because they are all out of position, they haven't played any warm-up games, they haven't had enough practices together, and they are left on the field when they are not performing (like Daei). None of these are the balls' fault or any of the the player's fault.
This is all because BRANCO HAS NO BALLS!
 

zoozanagheh

Bench Warmer
Feb 6, 2005
2,327
304
#11
Farsi Zaban said:
If they are so incredibly talented they should be able to put a couple of passes together with or without Branco's help.
They may not be "incredible", but most of them are amongst the best we have or have had. (Of course one could argue that there are some better players - specially in defense - that are not invited).

Let's not forget couple of things: 1) Bahrain played very well 2) They had home advantage
However, I think it was our game plan and tactics that allowed them to controll the game or force us to stay in middle of the field for most of the time and not be able to get close to their box. Branko not only could not counter their defensive tatics (specially in the second half) but also could not change our tactics neither. Of course, one can not ignore players fault, but IMHO it was the way we were set to play as a team and the way Bahrain played that contributed the most. If you noticed, our playrs were playing very hard and effortless.
Nevertheless, we should give credit to Yahya, Rahman and Nekonam (and hence Branko) to keep our defense firm and solid in middle.
 
Oct 12, 2004
63
0
San Francisco
#12
It is still little early to pass judgment. I agree this was not a good game, one factor it was Zandi's first game. He did not make correct passes, I am glad he started him so he could start getting use to other players. I agree Daei should have been subed second half, he missed few passes too that could have turn to grerat scoring chance.
If we come out the second game and win, and play well it is a sign that we are on right track. Another tie or a lost will be disaster.
 

eshghi

News Team
Oct 18, 2002
8,302
0
San Diego, CA
#13
Branco got exactly what he was after: POINTS
If I were the coach, I would have done exactly as he did. A win in Bahrain
would have been nice, but we had to make absolutely sure not to lose.
That's what drove our strategy, and we achieved our goal.
 

Babak G

News Team, ISP Managers Team
Feb 13, 2003
8,923
0
Parts Unknown
#14
People are not looking at the brighter picture.

We played one of our biggest rivals in the group in their stadium and drew.
None of the Asian teams today won away from home.

Its not easy winning away.Fine,the performance was far from satisfying but the result was reasonable and the fact that we played "so badly" and got a point,is even better!
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#15
Eshghi jaan, Branco did not obtain "POINTS", he obtained a "POINT".
And what that means is that he lost 2 points. Even if we had gained a point in Manama 5 years ago, instead of losing all 3 points, it would have made absolutely no difference to anyone!
Not losing 2 points is a lot more important than winning one! As such, no proper coach in the world goes into a crucial game aiming to lose two points - especially against a team that is weaker, at least on paper.
If Branco's objective was to lose two points from this game today, then he would have at least put together a nice defensive formation with counter-attacking capabilities. We certainly did not have a solid defence today, nor did we have any attacking capabilities. What we did have, was a bunch of guys just hanging out in the middle of the field, waiting for some miracle to happen. Why, because that's what they are told - not just today, every game. I know that, because if that's not what they were told and Branco was a good coach, then he would have pulled every single one of them out of TM.
For those of you who refuse to accept, Branco should have proved to you today that he doesn't know shit about soccer - that's if you have been convincing yourself up until now that our wins against Jordan and Qatar were not lucky.
With these players, we should have no problems making it to the 2nd round of the WC in Germany. But with this coach, we should have gone out in the last round (which we almost did twice).
When are we Iranians going to learn to be a little more pro-active instead of reactive.
Get Rid of the loser. I said that about Blazevich and I've been saying it about his Shaagerd since they were both hired. Last time we waited until it was too late. Now?!
 

backechap

Senior Member
Nov 22, 2002
1,096
15
#16
Bi H, there is a big difference between this round and 4 years ago. This time, if we end up second in our group we make it straight to the world cup. Last time, we wouldn't. Don't you think our strategy should be different this time around?

Yes, we played poorly. Yes, we should have been more aggressive in trying to win. But we should be all happy that we got the away point, and more important be happy that we took away 2 points from an important opponent. It doesn't matter what that opponent's name is, as much as we all hate to admit it, they are a main opponent.

BTW, if any of the other 3 teams comes to Tehran and manages to take away 2 or 3 points away from us, their going to be happy too, and we're going to be even more sad, don't you think?
 

Bauvafa

Bench Warmer
Oct 26, 2004
1,987
1
#17
I am sorry but some people think that the second place is solely reserved for us, and regardless of how we play, we will get enough points to fill that second spot.

After today's performance, I am more convinced that we are gonna have to fight a lot harder. I really could care less about tactics and all that, Branco has been with TM for 4 yrs., we know him and he knows TM. He won't do a miracle in the span of 45 days, just as he hasn't in 4 yrs., so it comes down to each & every player to pour their guts out, just like the game against S. Korea, Oman...., Jordan, Qatar.
We need our big stars to have a huge day each & every game. Branco's line up & tactics are static and never change, don't look for him to change.
 

Bong

Elite Member
Oct 18, 2002
5,518
45
#18
Bi-honar said:
Oh yeah guys, this was an amazing game!!!
Our coach is great, our players suck?!!!
What are you guys talking about? This is by far the most talented Iran squad EVER. So, if they can't put a couple of passes together or have a couple of shots on BAHRAIN'S (not Brazil's) net, then I guess it's the balls' fault!
You guys really think it's the balls' fault?!
Babak jaan, we may have gained a point, but we lost two! That's one thing everyone forgets. The reason we didn't make it to the last WC, are the dumb points we lost in ties. Have you forgotten how happy we were with the tie against Thailand too back then? It was a good result ('cause that's what Branco's buddy told us), until S.A. kicked Thailand's ass in Bangkok. We didn't make it to the last WC, not just because we lost to Bahrain. We didn't make it, because we lost too many points getting ties in important games.
great point about losing 2 points. Plus, we didnt get away goal...if God Forbid we draw 1-1 with Bahrain at Azadi...then the away goal can potentially ruin us. But, I hope Japan has a hard time in Bahrain too...
 
Oct 18, 2002
3,411
1
Los LAshkhores, Casifornia
#19
Bi-honar said:
... If Branco's objective was to lose two points from this game today, then he would have at least put together a nice defensive formation with counter-attacking capabilities. We certainly did not have a solid defence today, nor did we have any attacking capabilities. What we did have, was a bunch of guys just hanging out in the middle of the field, waiting for some miracle to happen.
Well said. This part, I certainly agree with.
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#20
Backechap jaan, I agree with you 100%.
The only thing you're forgetting is that if Germany treated Lichtenstein like an "opponent" and was happy to lose two points every time they tied Lichtenstein away from home, they would never make it to the world cup. The reason Bahrain is our opponent, is because we treat them as such. If we played against Maldives or Laos, the way we played today, they would be our opponents too. Saudi Arabia went to Uzbekistan to win and they almost did. I'll bet you anything that Japan will go to Bahrain and N. Korea for wins, not for ties.
The truth of the matter is that Iran and Bahrain are no where near the same cateogry (at least on paper) and Branko is obviously not able to make anything of that. If we had PLAYED an excellent game against Japan (a real opponent) and tied them in Tokyo, I'd be happy, but let's face it, I don't think there is one person on this forum who could have done worse than Branco coaching TM.