Editorial: Ali Daei's Blueprint

What is Ali Daei's sporting and tactical philosophy?

What has he changed?

What has he built on from the past and what has he learned from previous national team coaches?

There are many who think that a good coach means a successful coach. But when a country selects a new coach, it wants the new coach to have a coaching philosophy that is similar to that of other coaches in the country; it wants the new coach to share local beliefs about whether to be offensive or defensive; it wants the coach to understand the country's football culture; and one of the most important questions for many countries (especially Iran), is that it wants to know how the defence will be organized. Will it be a 3 man defence? Will it be zonal? Will it be man marking? Will it have a sweeper?

Miroslav Blazevic improved Iranian football's traditional strengths. He implemented an offensive style with a 3 man defence and allowed the players to express themselves.

Branco Ivankovic changed many things even though he started with a playing style that was similar to Blazevic's. Ivankovic wanted to combine Blazevic's offensive game with a more secure defensive style and he wanted to play with a zonal system. Consequently, he switched to a 4 man defence and implemented a zonal system.

At the beginning, Iran's players looked very confused on the field, but after the Asian Cup in 2004, Ivankovic wanted to have more stability on the pitch and he sacrificed good football for a more cynical approach. This was sign of thing to come as he became a more results oriented coach after the Asian Cup rather than trying to play good football.

Another hallmark of Ivankovic's early period was that he consistently called up a small group of players because he believed in giving that small group confidence and allowing them time to become familiar with his system. This belief instigated a negative response from all sides towards Ivankovic.

After seeing that pure zonal play did not work, he switched to a zonal marking system. The team became excellent at set plays but he picked fewer attacking players and the players lost creative freedom. Some players like Karimi still had free roles, but the team only played for results.

Eventually it became Ali Daei's turn to take over. Daei has called up many players and this initially created a good competitive environment. Daei first elected to play a creative game, with two free roles behind the strikers. This decision created a system with an advanced orientation even though he continued with Ivankovic's 4 man defence and zonal man marking.

With time though, Daei has made some changes. He has switched to a more 4-4-2 oriented system with very little creative freedom for the players. The system is very tight and does not have positions created for players to express their skills. It means that players have to now adjust, more than ever, to tactical requirements and play in different positions.

Some of the improvements Daie has made are:

1) He has built on Iran's strength at set plays and the team still scores quite a few goals from set plays.

2) The team has also improved its ability to win the ball back in good positions and subsequently launch direct counter attacks.

Notwithstanding Daie's improvements, there are still many problems and the team is noticeably lacking in the attack and the defence.

One problem is that because of the large amount of players that have been called up, the first 11 has changed many times. Also, he has instilled strict systems and discipline on the field. Both factors have meant that the team's abilities are not optimized. With so many players called up, the first 11 has not been stable and players are not yet confident with the system he demands. Furthermore, the strict discipline he requires is foreign to Iranian football and this requirement not only creates insecurity with the players, but it takes a long time to properly implement his philosophy.

Both problems noticeably affect Iran's performances. The team usually plays poorly in the first half of games. The team moves slowly and struggles to develop a rhythm and effective passing; it is especially poor in attack. Moreover, Daie's team struggles to control matches. Iran does not seem to be able to control matches and kill off teams when they are ahead. This leads to the team setting the defensive line very deep and relying heavily on counter attacks to move the ball forward. Using a deep defensive line to protect a lead requires a more organized defence.

The team has two major defensive problems that need to be fixed:

1) The entire team, not just the defence, needs to find the shortest and fastest way to set up its defensive formation when it loses the ball. The team takes too long to set the defensive line and this creates an imbalance throughout the team. Specifically, the players seem unsure of who should pressure when the opposition is in possession.

2) The team lacks an experienced leader in defence who can organize the line, calm players when necessary, and control its shape.

When Iran plays against teams like Singapore, these two problems are evident. The team struggles to control the game and move the ball quickly. Opponents like Singapore easily organize their defensive formation because Iran does not distribute the ball quickly enough in defence.

Aghili and Hosseini stand 5 metres away from each other and pass to each other rather than immediately passing to the full backs who can speed up the movement up the ball and create some width. This problem is magnified by the huge amount of space between the full backs and center backs. This 5 metre passing prevents the potential for creating effective attacks. The reality is that Aghili is simply not good enough and not focused enough when Iran is in possession. However, the question is: Does Iran have anyone better than him today? I am not sure.

If the national team's defenders can develop parts of their game or new defenders can be found, many of the team's defensive and offensive problems will be solved. It is especially important to either improve or find new central defenders.

In the final analysis, Ali Daei has set his mark on Iranian football and has introduced something new. It seems that with each new game, he strictly requires that players play the way that he wants! The only way that this will be deemed a success is if Iran qualify for the World Cup. If not, Ali Daei will be judged to have been an inexperienced coach who wanted to change football in Iran too quickly.

I believe that he has been brave in setting up a new approach in Iran. However, I hope that with time, he finds space in the team for players to express themselves more creatively and that he gives players more freedom to express themselves.