13 June 2014
On paper, Australia’s team is rubbish and they have no hope in this World Cup. Compare to 2006 when the attack was comprised of Viduka, Kewell and Emerton, with Cahill in support out of midfield, in 2014 it’s Leckie, Vidosic and Oar, with Cahill thrown out of position to lead the line. The defence was tight in 2006 with Neill and Moore at their peak. Now it’s the unconvincing Spiranovic, with either novices Wilkinson or McGowan as his partner. Midfield has only seen a minor decline, with Jedinak and Milligan as serviceable as Grella and Culina, and probably a tad better creatively, while Bresciano is still around, albeit in a greatly reduced capacity. Australia was always a defensive liability out wide with its converted midfielders of Chipperfield and Wilkshire. Davidson and Franjic are on par, at least defensively, and that’s where it will really count in Brazil. Other than the retirement of Viduka, the squad largely remained for 2010 in South Africa, and accrued the same number of points in their three games as they did in Germany.
Since Ange Postecoglou took over as coach, Australia has shown little to suggest the heavy defeats against Brazil and France that saw Holger Osieck sacked won’t be totally avoided. While 6-0 losses are unlikely, the team has still looked vulnerable in defence against the moderate opposition it has played so far. A 1-0 home win over an under-strength Costa Rica was put into context by a 4-3 loss to Ecuador in London. The four goals all coming in the second half after Ecuador made a raft of changes, including the replacement of their experimental defence with their first team regulars. Most recent results has been the uninspiring 1-1 draw at home against South Africa (again, defence easily breached for the goal conceded) and a 1-0 loss to Croatia in Brazil.
The issue with this team will be largely psychological: are the scars of those two thrashings healed? While the old guard of Neill and Ognenovski are gone, the replacements have never hinted at being superior. Like most of the team, they’ve been picked as part of a rejuvenation philosophy, not that they’ve usurped the incumbents. The pessimistic hue over this team remains, especially that once the defence is breached, it could be a goal avalanche. The novice defence just doesn’t inspire confidence against the calibre of teams that Australia will face. Not that much is expected of them either. Ange’s big challenge will be to inspire them. Even if he masters that, then there’s the problem of goals. Cahill is a poacher more than anything. The lack of creativity and individual brilliance, the lack of a lethal edge anywhere in front of goal, and even the lack of a dedicated out and out striker in the team (Kennedy’s omission was shocking), will make scoring difficult. As much as Australia’s opponents are tough going forward, they are just as tough at stopping, and are unlikely to be troubled by the moderate opposition.
The one salvation for Australia is the group composition itself. If Spain can dominate as expected and win all three games, that makes the spot for second much more open. If Netherlands and Chile draw their match, then Australia could advance with just two draws. It would come down to the team pushing Spain the closest. Winning a match would obviously make the second phase more attainable, especially if Australia’s other two matches are narrow losses, or even a draw could be gained. Facing Spain last could be advantage if they are already qualified and potentially relaxed. Also, given the tightness of the group and the low regard of Australia, Chile (especially) and Netherlands (especially if they are belted by Spain in the first game) will have all the pressure on them. If Australia snag a goal, they could indeed surprise. It’s just a shame that these peripheral issues will be the dominant force for Australia to advance, and not sheer footballing ability. Unfortunately, that is the reality of it.
Full site: socceroorealm.com