Category Archives: 2014 World Cup Brazil

Challenge and excitement as Australia draw Spain, Netherlands and Chile

Posted on by
Reply

07 December 2013

Group of death, group of dread or, possibly the most accurate as it initially suggested, group of suicide. Aren’t we forgetting one thing? Australians aren’t supposed to lay down in a fight. Considering yourself in a group of death is self-defeatist. To think, given Australia’s lowly position at the moment, that many suggestions were that any group would be a group of death, it’s even more self-defeatist. While there’s no reason to go with an arrogant and bullying attitude that appears in many areas of the Australian sporting psyche, our true psyche of a confidence in ability and respect of our own opponents, will only serve our nation well next year.

Group B of Spain, Netherlands and Chile will provide Australia both a challenging and an exciting time. When Australia was drawn with Spain, I gave a fist-pump. When it came to the final pot, that of the Europeans, when the Dutch emerged, it drew a wry smile. This is not a daunting moment; it tickled our intrinsic sporting values. The challenge is on. Bring it!

As I wanted new teams, I was pumped that Croatia came out first from that pot to go in Group A. Earlier, I was dreading Australia entering Group G with opponents of 2010, Germany and Ghana. Australia’s group filled nicely. If there’s a switch I could make given the choice, it would into Group D with Uruguay, England and Italy. That’s the quintessential group of rivals. Costa Rica took the spot there.

Coach Ange Postecoglou echoed the mood well, impishly rebuffing the lead question from the media about a tough draw with “No, no, it’s great” (they laughed). He’s excited, and loving the challenge. Who wouldn’t? Probably Holger Osieck and Pim Verbeek. You could imagine, especially from Verbeek, a defeatist shroud of body language coming from him. Osieck, just may not been as effusive as Ange. In fact, Ange must be pinching himself. Only a few weeks ago he’s coaching A-League; now he’s in Brazil at the World Cup Draw and preparing to lead his country into the biggest battle arena in the world on arguably the home of football. The fact he remains so composed and professional, it’s the hallmark of the man.

Being placed in slot 4 of the group, suits Australia well. Chile is the first game and if Ange has any tricks up his sleeve, that’s the match to try them and snare a win. Australia has a decent recent record against Holland, with a win and two draws, even if those were friendlies. A 2-1 in Holland and 0-0 in Australia under Verbeek, a draw under Guus Hiddinck just before the 2006 World Cup. Not to forget qualifying for the 1992 Olympics ahead of Holland. Holland are not the team of superstars like Spain or Brazil are. There are ways to exploit such teams, and a draw is certainly not beyond Australia. The final game, it may not matter for Spain, or even for Australia. Who knows?

If Australia can make the knockout phase, the cross-over group is Group A… of Brazil. Wow. Survive that and the quarter final is an opponent from Group C or D.

Schedule

Saturday 14 June – 0800 AET | Chile v Australia | Arena da Baixada – Curitiba

Thursday 19 June – 0200 AET | Australia v Netherlands | Estadio Beira-Rio – Porto Alegre

Tuesday 24 June – 0200 AET | Australia v Spain | Arena Pantanal – Cuiaba

Groups

Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Mexico, Cameroon

Group B: Spain, Netherlands, Chile, Australia

Group C: Colombia, Greece, Ivory Coast, Japan

Group D: Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy

Group E: Switzerland, Ecuador, France, Honduras

Group F: Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iran, Nigeria

Group G: Germany, Portugal, Ghana, USA

Group H: Belgium, Algeria, Russia, South Korea

It would be remiss not to slam FIFA for their unwieldy and unnecessarily complicated draw. The pot of 9 that facilitated an “X” pot for the extra European team, the pot system itself that arbitrarily segregates cross-regional teams from playing each other (for instance Asia mixed with CONCACAF means those two regions can’t play each other), plus the absurd use of FIFA’s flawed rankings system to decide seeds. Spain and Netherlands were the 2010 World Cup finalists and now face each other in a group stage? Fine if that’s the result of a true random draw. Bad if it’s a result of fiddling and coercion as it proved. FIFA obviously want some unpredictability in the group stage, whether that be some big name clashes, or even the chance of moderate teams progressing as more likely to happen in a group with a weak seed. Be transparent about it instead of making even bigger fools of yourselves and a mockery of the process. The solution is a single pot system, as detailed in the preview.

From the other groups, Brazil faces an interesting opposition in Group A. Croatia could conceivably hold them, while Mexico can’t be as bad as their fourth-placed qualifying suggests, and Cameroon are unpredictable. Then there’s the pressure of being home nation. No win against Croatia and it could be interesting.

Group C, with Greece and the enigmatic Colombians, would have been nice for Australia. Japan are good enough to progress from there. It’s one of the more even groups thanks to a weak top seed.

Group D is the truly luscious group for Australia, and they definitely would have a chance for progression. Just playing England would be enough for most Australians. To beat them, especially to deny them progression, would make the nation delirious and stoke the rivalry for eons. Remember, Uruguay qualified as fifth best South American, essentially making them sixth best with Brazil automatically qualified as hosts. It’s not difficult to hold Italy to a 0-0. It’s in their DNA. Ask New Zealand in 2010.

The chance of a weak Group E didn’t quite happen as France – one of the stronger Europeans – slotted in. Ecuador are flighty while Honduras – as have all teams outside Mexico and USA from CONCACAF – have done little on the world stage.

Iran has it interesting in Group F. That’s definitely a group in which Australia could have challenged. With Argentina likely to dominate, a team could qualify in second with one win – the team that loses least heavily to Argentina.

Group G is probably the most predictable, with Germany and Portugal the likely top two.

The dogdy seeding produced the most even group, with Group H. If Belgium’s high ranking is validated, they should sail through. They are an intriguing team and will be interesting to watch after 12 years out of the tournament. For Korea, all the opponents seem manageable.

Quotes – coach Ange Postecoglou

“No, no, it’s great. It’s a World Cup, and we’re playing against the best nations in the world, and our group will be really exciting. It’s a massive challenge, and I look forward to it. It’s going to be great.

“We’re going to see some good football in our group, that’s for sure. There’s some great footballing nations and our job is to play our part. It’s an enormous challenge for us but for a nation like ours that’s exactly what we want. We’ve got a chance to make some headlines when the World Cup comes around.

“We know what Spain are like and the Dutch have always played good football and in this qualifying campaign Chile have been outstanding. So there’s going to be some real footballing challenges ahead of us. We want to keep growing and keep getting better and that’s our measures.

“There wouldn’t be one of our players who wouldn’t be looking forward to this immensely. To play the world’s best teams that’s why you go to a World Cup. Everyone will be writing us off in this group, which is I think is logical. From our perspective we’ve some great opportunities to show the world we can play some good football against the best nations in the world. Our group looks the most difficult group but I hope it’s the group that plays the best football and we’ll play our part in that.”

Quotes – Players

Tim Cahill: SPAIN, HOLLAND AND CHILE. What an amazing group to be in. This is the beauty of WORLD CUPS

Mile Jedinak: It’s one of the toughest groups you could think of and we have been dealt a pretty tough hand. These sorts of challenges are really another level and it’s something as a player you relish and embrace.

Matthew Ryan: Spain chile and holland. Excited that we’ll get to test ourselves against some of the best players in the world!

Tom Oar: Spain Netherlands and Chile! What a group!

Jason Davidson: As a footballer you want to challenge yourself against the worlds best

Quotes – Netherland’s coach Louis van Gaal

“We have to play the world champion, we have to play Australia who we have never beaten and Chile was 3-0 up recently against Colombia before it ended 3-3, so that is not a weak team. The opponents are tough, but for the playing conditions it is not too bad.” But Van Gaal noted that if the Netherlands progress from the group stage they will have to play one of the teams from the group headed by host nation Brazil. That is a tough group and you travel north and the playing conditions get worse.”

Quotes – Chile’s coach Jorge Sampaoli

“It’s such a difficult group. We’ll try to be as competitive as possible to give us a chance to reach the knockout stages. In the career of a coach, you know this is the path that you may have to take. So we have to prepare well. After getting out of the war of the group stage, you don’t move on to an easier fate with having to face winners of Group A.”

More: socceroorealm.com

Uruguay, Cameroon and Greece the preferred World Cup draw for Australia

Posted on by
Reply

6 December 2013

Saturday morning, 3am AET, Australia will discover its opponents for next year’s World Cup in Brazil. The draw will also decide venues at which Australia will play, which could prove problematic for all those “We’re off to Rio” and “Road to Rio” slogans from media, fans and even players. Rio is just one of many cities that will host matches throughout this huge country, and most likely is a city that Australia will never visit.

The Pots

Pot 1: Brazil+, Spain, Germany, Argentina, Colombia, Belgium, Uruguay, Switzerland

Pot 2: Ivory Coast, Ghana, Algeria, Nigeria, Cameroon, Chile, Ecuador, 1 from Pot 4*

Pot 3: Japan, Iran, Korea Republic, Australia, United States, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras

Pot 4: Netherlands, Italy, England, Portugal, Greece, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Russia, France

* In a pre-draw, a team from Pot 4 will be placed in Pot 2. Upon being drawn in the main draw, this team will be placed in one of the groups of a South American team from Pot 1 – either Brazil, Argentina, Colombia or Uruguay.

+ Brazil will automatically be placed in Group A as Team 1

To no surprise, in their infinitely insane and warped wisdom, FIFA have cocked up the whole notion of a draw. First, the seeds, whereby FIFA are using their heavily flawed and useless rankings system. Forget that Australia is ranked the lowest team in the tournament at 59, just like the Socceroo Realm consistently ignores referring to FIFA rankings as some sort of meaningful analysis of Australia’s status. Look at the fact that the sixth best South American team after the qualifying phase – Uruguay – is one of the top 8 seeds. Sixth best gets you top eight. While Colombia at least finished second behind Argentina, the fact that Belgium and Switzerland reached the top 8 after merely winning their qualifying group against fellow middling European teams, is astonishing. Belgium hadn’t even qualified since 2002, so unlike Uruguay that finished third in 2010, Belgium never had a points legacy. It’s been built by beating Croatia, Serbia, Scotland and Wales. While Switzerland qualified ahead Iceland, Slovenia and Norway. What? No Italy, Germany or Netherlands to surmount on your glorious, high-ranking qualifying run?

The second flaw is the potty pot system itself that’s perpetually used. While it’s fine to separate teams based on geography, it’s not fine to avoid opponents based on geography. Grouping Asia with CONCACAF in one pot means no team from these region can play each – ie: Australia cannot be drawn against Mexico, USA, Costa Rica or Honduras. Ridiculous. A real draw would be just all teams in one pot, then pick them out one by one, filling each group as the rules allow. Say Brazil is in Group A and Spain is drawn next, they go straight in with Brazil. If Chile comes next, they can’t go with Brazil so are put into Group B. If USA comes next, they go to Group A. If it’s Mexico next, they go to Group B because they can’t be with regional rivals, Mexico. If Australia is next, into Group A. If an Asian team were already in Groups A and B, then Australia goes to Group C. This is the simplest, most effective and fairest method. All teams get a realistic chance of playing any other team from another region. See the Hypothetical Draw below for more of an idea.

Preferred Draw

Mostly, I want Australia to play new teams – teams we’ve not played recently, and especially not at a World Cup – or rivalries.

Pot 1: Avoid Brazil, Germany, Argentina; Prefer Spain, Belgium, Uruguay or Switzerland

Pot 2: Australia are in this group, so a preferred option of USA won’t happen.

Pot 3: Avoid Ghana, Chile and France; Prefer Algeria, Cameroon or Ecuador

Pot 4: Avoid Netherlands, Italy and Croatia; Prefer England, Greece, Bosnia or Russia

Obviously some of these preferences will depend on teams already selected as Australia won’t play two teams from the same region unless it’s Europe. For instant, if Australia draw Uruguay from Pot 1, they won’t play any South Americans from Pot 2. Likewise if Spain is drawn from Pot 1, the European team from Pot 2 won’t be an option.

Most Preferred Draw: Uruguay, Cameroon, Greece

With our World Cup qualifying playoffs against them in 2001 and 2005, Uruguay is an obvious pick. Of course, they are beatable. They are not a top 8 nation. While Jordan capitulated in the first leg of the playoff this time, Uruguay were held 0-0 at home. Cameroon are the most interesting and erratic of the African teams. Greece is almost a “local derby”. It’s a natural rivalry, the match would be highly interesting, and competitive.

Least Preferred Draw: Germany, Ghana, Croatia

Germany smashed us in 2010 and simply would be too clinical, not to mention boring to revisit. Ghana, again, played in 2010 to a draw. With Serbia in 2010 and Croatia in 2006, and even despite Australia’s good record against these teams, been there, done that, with these Southern Slavic teams.

Toughest Draw: Brazil, Netherlands, Italy

Brazil would be interesting if it was Australia’s first match as it would be some occasion to play the opening match of the World Cup. Only in that situation would it be appealing. Italy wavers between a rival and a boring team. That 2006 match in Germany was more an anomaly than two even teams fighting it out. Worst, they’d be a tough team. Because you have top European teams like Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and France in Pot 4, any of which could end up in Pot 2, it creates a dangerous situation for a famed “group of death”, so there’s several options of tough Europeans in a draw to avoid.

Rivalry Draw: Uruguay, England, Italy

Remember, the World Cup doesn’t end with the Group stage. If Australia reaches the second round, they could face England. While many fans want to draw England in the group, I’d prefer them in the knockout stage so to knock them out.

Hypothetical Single Pot Draw

This is based on the one pot draw as described at the top of the article. Except for the host, each team is randomly assigned these numbers as their draw position…

17 Algeria, 09 Argentina, 03 Australia, 21 Belgium, 05 Bosnia-Herzegovina, 23 Cameroon, 26 Chile, 30 Colombia, 20 Costa Rica, 11 Croatia, 08 Ecuador, 10 England, 14 France, 06 Germany, 24 Ghana, 25 Greece, 15 Honduras, 28 Iran, 13 Italy, 29 Ivory Coast, 27 Japan, 19 Korea, 01 Mexico, 18 Netherlands, 07 Nigeria, 16 Portugal, 31 Russia, 02 Spain, 04 Switzerland, 12 Uruguay, 22 USA, 00 Brazil

In other words, Algeria would be drawn 17th out of the pot, Australia third. The groups are then filled in accordance with FIFA’s rule of no more than one team from each region in a group, except for Europe which can have a maximum of two teams. Brazil is automatically set to Group A as Team 1 as FIFA has dictated…

Group A: 00 Brazil, 01 Mexico, 02 Spain, 03 Australia

Group B: 04 Switzerland, 05 Bosnia-Herzegovina, 07 Nigeria, 08 Ecuador

Group C: 06 Germany, 09 Argentina, 10 England, 15 Honduras

Group D: 11 Croatia, 12 Uruguay, 13 Italy, 17 Algeria

Group E: 14 France, 16 Portugal, 19 Korea, 20 Costa Rica

Group F: 18 Netherlands, 21 Belgium, 22 USA, 23 Cameroon

Group G: 24 Ghana, 25 Greece, 26 Chile, 27 Japan

Group H: 28 Iran, 29 Ivory Coast, 30 Colombia, 31 Russia

Wow! Australia has it tough. They’d play Spain first, Mexico second (impossible under FIFA’s system) and Brazil last. Group C is a cracker, while Group F has a great opening match. You can see with Germany as drawn sixth was shuffled into a new pot as there were already two Europeans in Group B. Nigeria came out seventh so could fill Group B, as could Ecuador in eighth. It’s a very simple and fair draw. Just place the team in the first available pot.

Hypothetical Draw Using FIFA’s Pots

Group A: Brazil, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mexico, England
Group B: Spain, Nigeria, Australia, Croatia
Group C: Switzerland, Ecuador, Honduras, Italy
Group D: Germany, Algeria, Korea, France
Group E: Argentina, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Portugal
Group F: Uruguay, Ghana, USA, Netherlands
Group G: Belgium, Ivory Coast, Japan, Greece
Group H: Colombia, Chile, Iran, Russia

Note that Bosnia was the pre-drawn European team that would go into Pot 2 and there’s no draw on the group place. Pot 1 is slot 1, pot 2 is slot 2, etc. I much prefer the single pot draw. It produced a much more interesting and fluid draw. Australia has it tough, and I especially dislike playing Croatia again. Groups A and E seem the most interesting of a fairly dull outcome. Thankfully it’s all hypothetical, so far…

Hypothetical Single Pot Draw 2

This time the groups are filled horizontally, with the first 8 teams obviously filling first position in each group…

Group A: 00 Brazil, 10 England, 16 Portugal, 24 Ghana

Group B: 01 Mexico, 08 Ecuador, 17 Algeria, 25 Greece

Group C: 02 Spain, 09 Argentina, 18 Netherlands, 27 Japan

Group D: 03 Australia, 11 Croatia, 20 Costa Rica, 26 Chile

Group E: 04 Switzerland, 12 Uruguay, 19 Korea, 29 Ivory Coast

Group F: 05 Bosnia-Herzegovina, 13 Italy, 22 USA, 28 Iran

Group G: 06 Germany, 14 France, 23 Cameroon, 30 Colombia

Group H: 07 Nigeria, 15 Honduras, 21 Belgium, 31 Russia

Wow! Look at Group A. Opening match Brazil vs England. Then there’s Portugal and Ghana as the other teams. For a true lethal, you can’t go past Group C. Group G is tough, while Australia’s group proves quite placid and would present great optimism to reach the second round.

Mostly these single pot draws show that simplicity and a true democratic draw works best. FIFA trying to fix seeds and segregate teams is foolish. If the issue is that you can’t have the bevy of former players on the stage helping with the draw, that could be fixed by teams randomly split into separate pots for each player to be used and they take it in turns drawing a ball from their pot.

Positions

With the exception of Brazil as Team 1 in Group A, the draw also decides position in the group. Most likely Australia will face one super tough team, and many theories abound about best time to play them. Mark Milligan, earlier in the week, suggested it’s best to play them first: “Many times the big teams do not get into the swing of things so early in the tournament. They usually build into a tournament so playing them in the first match might give us an advantage and the best opportunity to get a result. People might say that facing Germany in the first game of South Africa 2010 did not quite help us (losing 4-0). The way I look at it is that the Australian team learned a lot from that bad defeat and went on to have two very strong games against Ghana and Serbia on the back of that game.”

Playing the top team first up, you might catch them by surprise. More likely they are primed, then you’re in the mindset of needing to win the final two matches (even if not in actual position as mathematically a team can progress with as low as 2 points), plus there’s the sapping of confidence. Australia just didn’t recover in 2010. If you win or draw, you could also become complacent. How often has Australia excelled against a top team only to bomb out against a lower side in the next match? Too often.

Playing them second up, if you’ve won your first game, you go in confident while still guarded because it is the top team. You also have the comfort of the third game in case the result doesn’t go well. If you’ve lost the first game, you go into the second game really alert, and with Australia’s famed fighting spirit, it’s perfect chance to snatch an unlikely win.

Meeting the top team third up they could be qualified, or they could be desperate. Of course, you could already be qualified yourself, then the match matters even less. If not, as in the case of second-up after a loss, Australia’s fighting spirit comes to the fore, and you also have nothing to lose. If the top team needs to win, the pressure is actually all on them.

Personally I favour the second match to face the top team, with third-up the next preference. There’s less psychological involvement with second-up, and historically it seems to just have the edge. In 2006, the scenario of second-up played out perfectly. Won against Japan, lost to Brazil without losing confidence, primed for the qualification passed Croatia. In Confederations Cups and Youth World Cups, when Australia excelled against the top teams, it’s been second or third match.

Even if Australia draws a top team first, there’s no reason to be anxious about it. No one can predict the mindset of teams, whether or not they’ve already qualified for the next phase, or know the mindset of Australia. There’s scenarios justifying any position to play the top team. If the team is coached well, especially psychologically, it just doesn’t matter at which stage points are accrued. As long as they are accrued, that’s all that matters.

Australia 1 – Lucas Neill 0. Ange wins on debut, Neill oversteps the mark.

Posted on by
Reply

20 November 2013, 1930 AET

Sydney, 19 Nov: Australia 1 – Costa Rica 0

After the 6-0 debacles against Brazil and France, new Socceroos coach Ange Postecoglou brought balance to the force with a determined 1-0 win over Costa Rica last night. It wasn’t so much that Ange gained a much deserved win on his debut, especially against a weakened opposition that barely troubled the Australian goal, it was the he addressed key problems identified within the team over as much as eight years ago. Namely, the team using players out of position, which was brought to its abrupt head with some ridiculous placements by Holger Osieck in those aforementioned games. Second, newer players in the team were given a chance. A real chance.

It’s been a constant bugbear of the Socceroo Realm that players are made to fit into unnatural positions. It might be fine for nations like Spain or Brazil who can slot a midfielder as right back or striker and get away with it due to the natural supremacy of the team and players; it’s not for Australia and its weak pool of quality players that are diminished further if not allowed to play to their strengths.

Ange’s first step was to put legitimate wide backs like Ivan Franjic and Jason Davidson in those slots, not the likes of Wilkshire, Carney, McKay and, even as far back, as Chipperfield. Defence is the priority in these slots, with attack the bonus. Not vice versa. The goals Australia has conceded over the years has come from these wide positions being exploited. Then there was the absurd habit of not playing actual strikers, which started with Pim Verbeek playing Tim Cahill forward away to Japan in a qualifier, then manifested into the debacle against Germany in South Africa, and finally Holger’s stagnant attacking plans. It was so pleasing to see the likes of Leckie, Kruse and Vidosic leading the line, not the likes of Cahill and Holman befuddled in a state of flux between their instinctive midfield mindset and the need to pressure the last line and create goals.

Just as pleasing was seeing the new players get a real chance. They weren’t thrown on at the end for a few cheap minutes with the game in disarray as it usually is given the spate of substitutions in these practice games; Leckie, Vidosic, McGowan, Davidson and Franjic were there from the start. It was especially noticeable when seeing on the bench were the likes of Cahill, Kennedy, McKay and Oar. They all came on later in the second half, with Cahill scoring the winning goal from a corner on 69 minutes. The net result of players in position and players allowed a chance to play was a sound defensive display and a competent passing game. While it’s difficult to rate the game much more than a reasonable effort, to be factored in is the legacy of the old era. There was still a bit too much stuffing around, plenty of poor decisions with passing options, and final balls were often woeful. This will improve.

Much of the spotlight after the game was taken by Lucas Neill’s reaction to the crowd booing him whenever he got a touch, to which he snapped later in the game and seemed to yell “why the f**k are you booing”. In post-match comments he was aggrieved at the lack of respect for the national team and anyone playing it…

“I’m an Australian, playing in Australia for Australia, getting booed by an Australian. There’s no place for that. I think it was a case of maybe a bit too much courage juice towards the end of the game. It was just isolated moments – every time I touched the ball, so I knew it was directed at me. It’s detrimental to the team. But let’s just focus on the more positives, and that was we were one-nil up, we were having a fantastic game, we were winning the game, we were playing really well for Australia and Ange Postecoglou gets off to a great start. So that .01 per cent has just tarnished it slightly.”

While he might have a point in a broader sense, there’s no doubt the actions were personally motivated. He’s been subjected to speculated for the entire week in camp, and unfairly so, as he’s also contended. If there’s one mistake that Ange has made is that he didn’t quash all the innuendo. First, he should have said the captaincy is vacant and will always be vacant before each match or tournament. He picks the team, then the captain, the captaincy is a temporary honour, not a permanent title. Second, he should have reiterated to the fans that all spots within the team are vacant and he’ll pick players on merit and that if he decides to pick Neill, the invective towards Neill should be thrown aside, and the team and all players allowed the dignity and respect to play their best for Australia.

Neill’s problem is that his reaction was daft and excessive. No one in Australian national colours should be swearing at anyone, much less the crowd. He should have blown a kiss or grinned or done something jovial, or even ignore it, not fuel their intent and satiate their feral instinct. The crowd pay their money and have every right to boo or hiss, so expecting them to adhere to a player’s wishes of behaviour is nonsense. Sport is also theatre and even pantomime, so crowd interaction is integral. All Neill needs to do is do his job. Brett Holman was maligned far worse than Neill and after a couple of goals at the World Cup becomes a national darling. Fans are notoriously fickle. A goal saving tackle that sees Australia win a match in Brazil and suddenly he’s a national hero.

Neill tweeted: “Thanks for all your support. We are all proud Aussies so let’s enjoy the ride together!! #GoSocceroos”. It is time we started to rally behind the team. The coach has been changed, and we’re now on the final trajectory towards Brazil that will not be altered. We either have faith, or just don’t bother being interested.

Result

AUSTRALIA 1 (Tim Cahill 69m) – COSTA RICA 0 at Sydney Football Stadium. Crowd: 20,165. Referee: Hiroyoshi Takayama of Japan.

Starting XI

Matthew Ryan, Lucas Neill, Rhys Williams, Jason Davidson, Ivan Franjic, Mark Milligan, Robbie Kruse, Mile Jedinak, Mark Bresciano, Dario Vidosic, Matthew Leckie

Substitutions

Ryan McGowan for Rhys Williams (48′), Tim Cahill for Matthew Leckie (52′), Thomas Oar for Dario Vidosic (61′), Tomas Rogic for Mark Bresciano (61′), Matt McKay for Mark Milligan (77′), Joshua Kennedy for Robbie Kruse (77′)

http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/socceroos/matchcentre/Socceroos-v-Costa-Rica-Intl-Friendly-(M)/3632

Ange making the right moves with first squad

Posted on by
Reply

2013/11/07 1230 AET

Schwarzer also quits. A dummy spit?

Holman, Wilkshire, Carney, Thompson, Ognenovski out. Neill remains. Schwarzer retires. Did he have a dummy spit? All good decisions so far. The much anticipated first squad by Ange Postecoglou, to play Costa Rica in Sydney on 19 November, mostly confirmed the one key reality that blocked Holger Osieck’s attempts to rejuvenate the squad: the cupboard is bare. While on face value Ange has been bolder with selections like Bozanic, Franjic and Wilkinson, he’s not dealing with crucial World Cup qualifiers. Still, the signs are good, especially the theme among the discards of them being from lowly clubs in the Middle East or simply players passed their expiration date. Only Mark Bresciano survives as a player from the Middle East, and that’s most likely experience. Likewise Lucas Neill, the much maligned target of the fans’ furore at the plodding status of the team, experience is vital. He’s become the target of a bigger problem, not the problem himself. There’s still none coming through to push him out and with Ognenovski gone and Ange looking to try other options at right-back – preferably an actual defender, not a midfielder a likely Wilkshire – some experience will be needed. As the new players are integrated, Neill can be eased out or even moved to right-back. Players like Archie Thompson and David Carney, they simply are passed their expiration and are squad players at best. Surely these are the spots to be reserved for integrating the emerging players.

The major shock with the squad was Mark Schwarzer retiring from the team upon the announcement. It’s a very dubious way for such a most venerated player to leave the team, especially after all his comments of wanting Brazil to be his swansong. It reeks of a dummy spit after he didn’t play in the recent matches against Canada and France, and Ange has not guaranteed Schwarzer would return as number one choice – and rightfully so – under Ange’s regime. Even as second or third choice, his experience would be invaluable, not to mention the spirit of the team coming before the individual. Some of this individualism was exposed prior to the 2010 World Cup, as evidenced by the saga of Tim Cahill ejected from a Sydney bar and then an anonymous player emailing a Sydney newspaper to complain about prima donnas within the team, and the drama over Harry Kewell “will he or won’t he” play at the Cup itself. Cahill still shows spurts of petulance, while Neill did himself no favours recently with some of his comments criticising younger teammates for lack of hunger. Ange’s first challenge is restoring the Australian pride and fighting mentality into this team, which he wonderfully exudes himself. Then there’s matters like ending this “no striker” system of playing Cahill as a striker. He’s not a striker. His goal-rate has dried up since this move. He’s most dangerous as a lurking midfielder. Put him there. Ange seems on foot with this notion of playing players in their right positions. Again, good decisions so far.

Oliver BOZANIC FC Luzern, SWITZERLAND
Mark BRESCIANO Al Gharafa, QATAR
Tim CAHILL New York Red Bulls, USA
Jason DAVIDSON SC Heracles Almelo, NETHERLANDS
Ivan FRANJIC Brisbane Roar, AUSTRALIA
James HOLLAND FK Austria Vienna, AUSTRIA
Mile JEDINAK Crystal Palace FC, ENGLAND
Josh KENNEDY Nagoya Grampus, JAPAN
Robbie KRUSE TSV Bayer 04 Leverkusen, GERMANY
Mitchell LANGERAK (gk) B.V. Borussia 09 Dortmund, GERMANY
Matthew LECKIE FSV Frankfurt 1899, GERMANY
Ryan McGOWAN Shandong Luneng Taishan FC, CHINA PR
Matthew McKAY Brisbane Roar, AUSTRALIA
Mark MILLIGAN Melbourne Victory, AUSTRALIA
Lucas NEILL Omiya Ardija, JAPAN
Tommy OAR FC Utrecht, NETHERLANDS
Tom ROGIC Celtic FC, SCOTLAND
Mat RYAN (gk) Club Brugge KV, BELGIUM
Dario VIDOSIC FC Sion, SWITZERLAND
Rhys WILLIAMS Middlesbrough FC, ENGLAND
Alex WILKINSON Jeonbuk Hyundai FC, KOREA REPUBLIC
Michael ZULLO Adelaide United, AUSTRALIA

Some atonement against Canada as Lowy backs a local coach and Neill backs himself

Posted on by
Reply

Craven Cottage, Fulham, 15/10/2013: Australia 3 – Canada 0

17 October 2013

A 3-0 win over lowly Canada at least brought smiles to the face. The serious “in-arms” attention to the national anthem proved portentous as the first goal came on 26 seconds when Mark Bresciano pounced on a loose ball to lob it to Joshua Kennedy for a trademark header. Two goals came in the second half. The first by Dario Vidosic nodding in a lame shot on goal, while Matthew Leckie headed nicely from a David Carney cross to score his first goal for Australia. While Vidosic was slightly offside, it was close enough that the referee should allow it given the “favour the attackers when in doubt” FIFA edict. It’s a pity more referees don’t follow it. Despite the dominance of the scoreline, if was often scrappy game, with Australia still needlessly losing possession at times and Canada having two great chances to equalise in the first half. Australia looked more tidy in the second half, applying more consistent pressure, including the third goal that was preceded by a chain of 14 passes.

Aurelio Vidmar was interim coach and made some pleasing decisions, notably playing a striker as a striker and a defender at right-back. He might have done similar at left-back if not for a depleted squad, so he “had to” pick Carney there. Vidmar also gave more time to younger players like Leckie and, in goal, Matt Ryan, while giving debuts to Jackson Irvine and Oliver Bozanic. They handled themselves well.

In the lead-up to the match, Lucas Neill was hammered by many sections of the media for questioning the hunger and passion of younger players while defending his own. He also resisted calls, from friend Mark Bosnich, to quit.

“In the three qualifiers in June, which were the most important we have played in the last four years, I think my form was very good and led to us reaching the World Cup. Mark Bosnich is entitled to his opinion but I would expect better from people who have played the game and certainly from those who call themselves my friend People who know football know games are won and lost by a team and it’s not about one person. I am committed to remaining captain for as long as the people in charge give me that status. I add value to the team and I bring a lot of good attributes but I am the victim, the same as everybody in this team, of a side which has lost two games in a row 6-0.

“When I was young I had to fight like cat and dog to even get a chance of being selected. Nobody gives you that for free – you have to earn it. For me, the biggest problem in Australia right now is not the older guys who have been doing it for a long time. I still have as much passion now as I had when I was 17. But my question to the younger guys who dream of playing for Australia is: ‘do you really dream of playing for Australia?’ If you do, then show me the hunger and desire. That’s where we are lacking. It’s all in our attitude towards the national team.”

The media response has portrayed him as selfish and disrespectful – understandable if you want Neill gone. Hearing Neill’s comments at the time, they seemed quite harmless. The hunger he mentioned was more about the younger players stepping up and claiming a spot in the team rather than it gifted to them. Other than Kruse and Oar, and potentially Rogic and Duke, none have. If the new coach does keep Neill, the coach needs to spell out clearly the qualities Neill has that keeps him in the team. Fans should accept this in move on, allowing the coach and team to prepare for the World Cup without all the whiny criticism. The real issue about dumping Neill is finding a replacement. Thwaite, North, Kisnorbo, Spiranovic? They don’t bring a compelling case for selection. If you’re dumping Ognenovski as well, that’s two spots to fill.

The appointment of a new coach has taken a turn with FFA chairman Frank Lowy stating he wants a local. The “review” that was mentioned upon Osieck’s sacking has obviously been in the process for months, given the fact FFA were so swift to act on Holger. Those decisions are not made so abruptly. The action might be, the decision not. The timing is also right for a local coach. While Australia has been more in mercenary mode with their past few coaches, if there’s to be a move towards giving younger players experience, it makes just as much sense as doing similar with a local coach. While Ange Postecoglou is the glamour choice, Graham Arnold could be more likely given his international experience as both interim and assistant coach, his proven ability of integrating new players and melding a team, and seems itching to jump from his A-League role if a better offer came elsewhere. Brazil 2014 could be the making of both the new coach and the newer players. Despite all the recent turmoil and melodrama, it’s actually an exciting time.

Au revoir Holger after national embarrassment in Paris

Posted on by
Reply

Holger Osieck sacked after Australia hammered 6-0 by France

12 October 2013

One 6-0 loss can be seen as forgivable, especially when it’s against Brazil in Brazil. A second thrashing, especially with national pride on the line, and even if it’s at the hands of one Europe’s better teams, is not. With that 6-0 loss to France, 4-0 at halftime, Socceroos coach Holger Osieck received his marching orders.

Since the mid stages of World Cup qualifiers, the football community has been simmering with a virtual ultimatum that anything less than a reasonably competitive performance against France would be terminal for Osieck. As it panned out, Football Federation Australia harboured those views too, and was swift to act, bidding adieu to Holger only hours after the match.

The Socceroo Realm has been one of the few voices defending Holger, especially with the process and mandate conferred on him. The charter was World Cup qualification. He did that, quite comfortably in the end if you note the points table that qualification came a game ahead of third place, and despite the tougher process both with the improvement of the Asian teams and the early run of away games. The fixtures in reverse would have seen Australia shooting ahead on the table with two wins and two draws from 3 home games and the away match to Japan, and it doesn’t seem so bad. Some of the perception of struggling was merely based on circumstance of the schedule.

Part of Holger’s charter was also to integrate new players into the team. He was right there that he tried this. While maybe not at the speed some wanted, he was constrained by needing to qualify for the World Cup. Those tried mostly failed. It was restoring the experienced players that saw the team qualify, especially when he was able to play them in consecutive games for the first time during the campaign. While that proved sufficient for qualifying, liabilities did emerge, and returning to some of the those older players already discarded or on the decline, was clearly a breach. On a tactical level, liabilities also emerged with the persistence of playing players out of position. To be fair to Holger, this has been intrinsic to the squad since the Hiddink era. While few media make note of it, it’s been a bugbear of this website for just as long.

Two glaring errors were made in this game against France. With Tom Oar injured, to fill the troublesome left-back role, Dave Carney was brought back from exile. Why? He’s passed his best, if his best was ever good enough. He’s been a liability in the past, and was again. He conceded the first goal by throwing his hand in the air and being called for handball. Regardless that he didn’t actually touch the ball, it was the action of an insecure player – one that’s never been a dedicated left-back either – to throw his hand up. For the sake of inches, the ball would have hit his hand. Second mistake, to strengthen the right side that France’s Franck Ribery notoriously exploits, Osieck threw James Holland at right-back and pushed Luke Wilkshire forward. Why? Holland is less of a right-back than Wilkshire is. Wilkshire’s struggling to get a game for his Russian club, so the call to persist with him at the expense of a new, dedicated right-back, made even less sense. Holland, normally a central midfielder, was thrown to the wolves. He was all at sea, and easily beaten for France’s sixth goal. A better option would be to play five at the back, three proper defenders and the two wing-backs. That gives you the cover in defence and the flexibility in attack.

Then there’s the enduring positional error: Tim Cahill as striker. He’s not a striker! He’s most dangerous as a lurking midfielder, as proven by his rush of goals with his New York club from midfiled and the fact his goal-rate has dried up with the national team. Behind Cahill was Robbie Cruse – again wasted. Frank Lebeouf, former French international, gave a commentary in coaching excellence during the broadcast. He noted Cahill needed to be in midfield where his experience could be used to provide poise during the French onslaught. Often Cahill would drop deep to find the ball, which saw the French line higher, instantly pressuring the Australians whenever they received the ball. When France had the ball, Cahill and Kruse were easily drawn forward, virtually allowing a vacant midfield with defensive midfielders Bresciano and Jedinak too deep. France’s third goal was a case in point. Collected direct from a goal-kick, passed to Ribery, a through ball, goal.

Probably the only excuse for Osieck is the calibre of opponents taken on so soon after qualifying. The team had so much time on the ball against the Arab teams, could be lazy with passing, or even expect to win a pass if tightly marked. Not here. Brazil and France stripped them easily, while any dallying on the ball was open sesame to be dispossessed. Lebeouf reiterated this point too, noting later in the game a missed opportunity to cross just “kills momentum”. Instead of immediately crossing, a few little passes were made trying to work an even better option, seemingly a guaranteed option, like you might against a glaringly inferior team. Bad. Best to get it in quickly and keep pressure on by capturing the rebound. You just never saw Brazil or France messing about it. Nor did they treat Australia with contempt by looking for guaranteed chances. They only needed a sniff.

Osieck said post match that nothing tried in training was transferred to the pitch. That’s damning against the coach, suggesting the players wanted remedial action with the coaching situation and possibly took it upon themselves. With the first goal conceded so quickly, it was easy for the team to become disheartened, with the famed Australian “spirit” dormant. When asked if the players were fully behind him, Holger’s response and body language was telling, citing that regardless of being behind the coach, national pride should keep them interested. It should. 

There were some positives from the match. It was 6-0 on 50 minutes, so the team kept France scoreless for nearly the entire second half. Mitch Langerak excelled in his debut as goal-keeper, keeping the score at 6-0 with several superb, reflex saves, and great positioning. While the cynics will say it could have been 10-0, “it could be” any number of goals in any numbers games. That’s the reason for goal-keepers and a low scoring sport. Had Langerak not saved most of those shots, they’d be classed as errors and his debut a failure. As it stood he was at no fault for any of the goals conceded and allowed the team to walk off with 0-0 draw over 40 minutes.

The FFA has wisely announced a thorough review before lurching into another appointment, with chairman Frank Lowy saying…

“The decision [to sack Osieck] is based on the longer term issues of the rejuvenation of the Socceroos team and the preparations for the World Cup and the Asian Cup. FFA has set a strategic objective of having a highly competitive team in Brazil and then handing over a team capable of winning the Asian Cup on home soil in January 2015. We have come to the conclusion that change is necessary to meet those objectives. I thank Holger for his contribution to Australian football and wish him well in his future endeavours.”

CEO David Gallop…

“I have given our new Head of National Performance Luke Casserly and the National Technical Director Han Berger the task of conducting a review of our World Cup planning. The review will include all aspects of the technical and logistical preparations, national teams unit staffing and the appointment of a new Head Coach. The World Cup kicks off in eight months and the Asian Cup is 15 months away. We are determined to make the most of the historical opportunities that these tournaments present to Australian football. FFA will give the highest priority to these projects because the Socceroos are the standard bearers for Australia on the world stage.“

In a way, Holger’s done Australia a favour. He could easily have continued with the “survivor” mentality, of which he was accused by the studio panel, and played lesser teams. He wanted to find the level of the team now and then remedy that during the preparation phase. While you can never really pass up a glamour match like Brazil in Brazil, France might have been too much. The adjustment phase from casual Asia to up-tempo Europe was too great. Again, while you can consider Brazil as forgivable for the many reasons already discussed at the time, the fact virtually nothing was done to address these concerns against France, it was self-crucifying.

Without these games against Brazil and France, possibly Australia finds out at the World Cup itself that it is out of its depth. At least now we go with the knowledge that we are off the pace, and can go with a fresh and more realistic approach. That’s the other positive. Australians too fast had inflated perceptions of our ability. You only need compare the clubs of each teams players. France read as a whose-who of major European clubs. The best Australia had was Kruse and Langerak in Germany. We’re very much third world, and will continue to produce peaks and troughs for decades to come. Mature nations like France, they’ve fallen off the pace since their World and European Cup highs of the 10 to 15 years ago. Just qualifying has become a struggle with Australia warily seen as a confidence boost. Even a middle European team like Belgium, of which we are far off in terms of national league maturity and national team pedigree, have been 12 years in the wilderness until just overnight storming into the World Cup. Remember the Romanian and Bulgarian power national teams of the 90s? Gone. Likewise Colombia, about to return after 16 years, or 3 World Cups, out. Even nations like Holland and Portugal suffer the odd dip. Why? They don’t have the level and depth of domestic leagues like the powerhouse nations of Italy, Spain, Germany and Brazil. Until the A-League reaches that level, so will our national teams be subject to “golden generations” for our international highs.

This reality check is good. The key will be the management of it. Had Osieck remained for the game against Canada on Tuesday, the curtain surely would be called on several players. Wilkshire, Carney, Bresciano – out. Wilkshire backed Holger earlier in the week – often a sign a player is worried about his future at the change of a coach, and never a good sign for a coach. Schwarzer now surely is the reserve keeper given Langerak’s performance. Why would you drop him? Jedinak needs a shake-up. Something not mentally right with him. Maybe elevated to a senior leadership role after the purging of several elder players could do wonders.

Lucas Neill, who was stoic post-match and said the training track is the answer, possibly survives simply on lack of options. If a ban is made against anyone playing in the Middle East (as there should be), Sasa Ognenovski would be out. That would mean the entire defence is out. You do need one or two old heads in the team. With that Middle Eastern ban, out goes Brett Holman, Alex Brosque and the aforementioned Marco Bresciano. It’s bad enough the national team can be bogged down with the more casual and grinding style of international matches against Arab teams, you don’t want it embedded far worse at club level. Harry Kewell, the main older player at A-League level that you’d even consider restoring, unless he really explodes, there’s no compelling reason to pick him again. Archie Thompson, never good enough at top international level, goodbye.

As to the new coach, it’s pointless if it’s someone not willing to flip players. Guus Hiddink, the immediate and nostalgic favourite, most likely would have faith in the older players he already knows. His record since Australia has been inconsistent at best. Would he stay on for the 2015 Asian Cup? He’s more mercenary than man. Is that looking forward? Nostalgia is also fleeting. Fellow Dutchman Frank Rijkaard, who failed to get Saudi Arabia to the final group phase, has been mentioned. Personally, the Dutch experiment is a failure. We don’t have the players to be played out of position. We’re not Spain, or even Holland. They’ve yet to even master their system at the highest level, with it collapsing under extreme pressure. It’s constantly caused Australia problems too. Even the famed 2006 World Cup, conceding goals was a problem. It was even worse in 2010. Holger’s basically persisted with the style deemed successful, and conceded the odd calamitous goal during the qualifiers, not to mention the horrors against Brazil and France. Argentina’s Marcelo Bielso is second favourite among bookmakers and would at least look for different qualities in the personnel and provide a new system.

Ange Postecoglou is favoured among locals. He’s better served sticking with Melbourne Victory, building up his credentials and clout. Graham Arnold, a former interim coach, said it would be an “honour” and seems ever-ready to jump from his A-League role with Central Coast if a top offer comes from anywhere. He may not have the clout, nor did he handle himself well as interim during the 2007 Asian Cup. FFA might be tentative offering anything long-term to him. There’s also a problem with the media, especially SBS, notorious for unfair treatment of Australian coaches. That could be undue extra pressure when least needed.

If FFA eventually go for a short term coach for the World Cup, then go with Ange. No point wasting huge dollars on a big name coach that will oversee a team likely to fair poorly at the World Cup. Since we want to give younger players a go, then surely give a local coach some real experience? The situation can then be reviewed after the World Cup. Until then, Ange could manage both A-League and national team concurrently. There’s only a handful of preparation games during the club season, then come April he’s all clear. If the Asian Champions League becomes an issue for Melbourne Victory, they can use their assistant coach.

These recent drubbings could be the cleansing the sport needs. Clearly there was widespread agitation among the community. Whether it’s from Osieck directly or, more likely, legacy from the Verbeek and Hiddink eras, the mood had become stale. There was more than a touch of the “same old”, almost a cry for change. Much like the recent federal election, the fans decided long ago, and it really was a case of pulling the trigger. That makes it even less logical to return to Hiddink. With the World Cup in South America, the omens suggest to look that way for a new coach, and a new style. At least it would provide fresh hope.

Match report and videos:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/socceroos/a-defiant-holger-osieck-says-he-wont-stand-down-from-job-despite-successive-6-0-defeats/story-e6frf4l3-1226738725917

Osieck slams ever increasingly irrational critics

Posted on by
Reply

10 October 2013

Holger hits back

At the press conference to announce the squad to play France and Canada over the upcoming days, Australia’s coach rebuts innuendo that he’s failing as national coach because the Socceroos don’t play nice enough, that it was too much of a grind to qualify for the World Cup, and they couldn’t compete with Brazil the “friendly” international match last month.

With France to be played Saturday morning AET, comes more innuendo that if there’s no “result” in that game, then Osieck could be heading for the door. He took the moment to slam his critics with a reality check about his appointment and mandate, answer the issue of his choice of player personnel, examine the result in Brazil, and explain the seemingly strange decision of not using Tom Rogic from the start of the game…

”It is impossible for me to respond to that question (if he’ll be sacked after the French game). I have a contract and I have fulfilled my mandate so far and now we are in the process of preparing for the finals, but if you want to put this to me I am the wrong person to talk to. I am not informed of what has been said or written about me. So far there has been no need to talk (with Football Federation Australia) about my situation. What’s the rationale behind it? We are in the early stages of preparation for Brazil. We are there while other major football nations are still struggling to qualify and some won’t even get there. To question me then is a little bit out of order. As an organisation, and the technical department is part of the organisation, we are all in the same boat and we should row in the same direction. It would be very unwise not to do so and I do not have a feeling of anything different. I know what I am doing.

”If you look at recent history when younger players were given the opportunity they found it hard to adapt to higher standards. In June during our qualifying campaign our more experienced players did well and got us through to the World Cup. I am still looking to give opportunities to other players to step up and get into the team.

“One thing we have to consider is our status when we went to Brazil. I would like to emphasise that this is an explanation not an excuse. The players from the A-League and Middle East I called in were still in pre-season and Tim Cahill and Luke Wilkshire had to pull out due to injury. When you cannot compete physically with your opponent then your whole game falls apart. I am confident that when we are at full strength and our boys are in full playing rhythm then the team’s overall performance will definitely improve. It was a bad defeat, the worst in my career, but we will not break down and will carry on and follow our plan and direction. I expect a strong reaction from the boys in Paris.

”Tom Rogic is almost an eternal topic. I know how good he is but he is not playing. He is not in Celtic’s first team and he occasionally gets on. I had him in Brazil and he came with a groin injury so he was not fit. He spent more time on the medical bench than on the training pitch. In order to give him some psychological boost I gave him a few minutes to make him feel that he is part of the group. But right now he is not fully fit so I don’t think he will start in Paris. We have to acknowledge that and it is a matter of making some diligent research and look into the position of a player. I mean, what is he doing in his home environment? Why is he not playing? Is he not as good as we expect him to be? That is the problem but I can assure you that I am on top of it because I have all he necessary information. I wish he was fit and he could play as a starter but at the moment circumstances do not permit this.”

Holger’s comments say it all. This jihad we’re on to get him sacked makes no sense.

The mandate was to qualify for the World Cup; it wasn’t to excel away to Brazil in an inconvenient and dopey farclie. Brazil recently beat Spain and France 3-0 so we really have a bloated regard for ourselves that should do better than.

He has tried many young players. Other than Robbie Kruse and Tom Oar, they haven’t stepped up. The key example is that game against Oman, escaping with a 2-2 draw after key experienced players missing. After that, they’re back, and we raved about the “performance” against Japan and ecstatic that we won last two must-win games to qualify. The recent EAFF Finals was a massive experiment, and only Mitch Duke elevated himself.

For the key personnel issue vs Brazil, Rogic, we learn he had a groin strain and he’s not even playing for his club much. It would have been derelict of Holger’s duty to start him. Then we’d be complaining about giving the kid a suicide mission.

We’re also obsessed with “performance”. This isn’t figure skating. You don’t get judged on technical merit and artistic style. The definition of “result” is results. Facts are Socceroos are at an ebb and there’s little much on the immediate horizon. We’re not a club team that can go buy and recruit players. It’s a representative team. The reservoir exists only as the rain falls. We’re also not a world power despite some of our overblown egos wanting to believe. If we want results, then expect to see it ugly. I’d rather be Greece Euro 2004 than playing cute football losing 2-0 all the time just to appease a few smug purists watching too much Barcelona.

Critics become more irrational

The squad for France and Canada does not include incumbent goal keeper Mark Schwarzer. Mitch Langerak is expected to make his debut. So here is another example of Osieck trying a new player. As he should, since Schwarzer moved to Chelsea and is spending much of the time on the bench. Osieck wants players playing regularly. He showed that with Rogic and now with Schwarzer. It doesn’t matter the level of your potential talent or your experience. You must be playing regularly with your club and in form.

In the face of this, Philip Micallef, the normally more pragmatic side of theworldgame website team, stepped up from the likes of Les Murray and the ever whiny Craig Foster with an article “D-Day in Paris will force FFA’s hand”. It’s quite amazing that earlier in the week that SBS “soc jocks”, via twitter, slammed Melbourne’s Herald Sun for “dampening” the A-League season merely by reporting an increase presence by police and clubs to stamp out troublemakers at Saturday’s Melbourne Derby. Here SBA are, on their flagship website, dampening the Socceroos World Cup preparations. Can’t we just watch the match in Paris without the ogre of the coach sacked?

At heart, Micallef called for Osieck to be sacked if it all goes wrong against France, using the precedence of Guus Hiddink suddenly replacing Frank Farina as coach just prior to the Uruguay game of 2005. Of course, situation is much difference as Farina had already failed in one qualifying campaign so Hiddinck was recruited to complete the job (as Osieck already has done). Second, the key criticism of a team too old would not be addressed by Hiddinck anyway. He would persist with the tried and true experienced players, not throw around youth. No serious international coach would consider such a proposal.

The real doozy from Micallef’s article was the call that, “What FFA could have done is look for a coach who was prepared to forgo qualification and personal ambition and concentrate on building a team for the future”.  Are we serious? So three years ago, FFA says forget the next World Cup, play younger players so we’re better for 2018? No serious coach would accept this. Holger already admitted that he wouldn’t in the press conference above. The FFA would be laughed into the loony bin at such a proposal. Fans would not accept it either if they applied one second of rational thought.

The sheer arrogance of the proposal defies belief. If we can’t perform well at the World Cup we don’t even want to attend? What sort of message is this. We’ll just forsake playing on the grandest stage in sport because we fear losing a few games? How weak, pathetic and insecure are we. This arrogance is something I never thought we’d see in our sport. It’s been the domain of yobbo cricketers and conceited swimmers. Now we’re even worse. We’re not the humble, proud sport anymore. We’re the arrogant, spoiled brats. If ever the day comes FFA does act so disgracefully and shunts World Cup qualifying for youth experimentation in the guise of speculative long-term, non-guaranteed and mystical success, well may we say God Save Australia, because nothing will save our reputation.

Sources:
http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/socceroos/news/1168293/Socceroos-boss-Osieck-hits-back-at-his-critics

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/philip-micallef/blog/1169435/D-day-in-Paris-will-force-FFA’s-hand

So much hysteria from losing to Brazil… in Brazil?

Posted on by
Reply

Brasilia, 07/09/13 : Brazil 6 – Australia 0

Aren’t we all being a little hysterical? We wanted to compare ourselves with best in the world, and quickly found we were too slow on the ball, poorly organised, and simply out-gunned. Instead of accepting this reality and learning from it, within hours of the 6-0 loss to Brazilthe calls are out – most notably and stridently from Les Murray at theworldgame website – to sack coach Holger Osieck. Is it only last June that Australia qualified for the World Cup with a gritty determination over two potentially sudden death games like we come to expect? What has changed since then? One “friendly”, against Brazil, played in Brazil. Wow, what a measuring stick! Forget the real accomplishment of World Cup qualification, now the barometer is a match against a super-power of the sport, in their own backyard, and of the type of match more commonly known for its farcical commitment and wanton experimentation. To Brazil’s credit, they put out a full strength team, and really made a spectacle of it on their national independence day. They’ve also come off winning the Confederations Cup that included hammering world champions Spain in the final, and other friendly matches including a 3-0 drubbing of France. Clearly approaching top gear for their home World Cup next year.

In contrast, most of Australia’s players are in off season or just emerging from it. More than that, affecting the team most, as Osieck did allude in his post-match, our team has just been playing 18 months of grinding World Cup qualifiers. Now they were hit with a culture shock. It’s totally different football from Asia where Australia were doing the pressuring and had plenty of time on the ball, to then playing Brazil and the entire situation is reversed. They didn’t cope. One more reminder: this is Brazil. Five-time world champions. They just beat Spain 3-0 in the Confederations Cup final. We’ve yet to even qualify for five World Cups, much less think about winning, or qualified for a Confederations Cup at all in our time in Asia. Who do we think we are? We’re still a third world team when it comes to the crunch, and kidding ourselves that we believe we can constantly mix it with these teams.

The more important point raised by the likes of Murray is about some of the team selections. Murray questioned why Tom Rogic didn’t start ahead of Brett Holman rather than replace him as substitute. Maybe if the entire country had not been so seduced by Holman cracking a nice goal every three years he’d not be in the team at all. His situation playing club football in the Middle East exemplifies the entire team’s problem: the football there just isn’t the right tempo. Maybe it is for playing fellow Asian teams, it’s not against crack South American and European teams. Arab nations have shown this flaw themselves on the World stage, being easily pushed around and unable to combat the speed. Now Australia is showing signs. Brazil pounced upon Holman’s lazy pass to score their second; in the Middle East it goes unpunished. It’s a dangerous trend long term if more and more players are there, that Australia could become the Saudia Arabia of the south. Robbie Slater is effusive that we don’t pick players in these leagues. Personally, no exceptions. Marco Bresciano, Alex Brosque, Holman, goodbye. Top teams from Australia’s state leagues wouldn’t be any worse than those Arab clubs, and we would never select from there.

Sacking Holger is not the answer. ALL our recent coaches, including the much vaunted Guus Hiddinck himself, were loath to scope much below the top echelon of older, experience players. So why would any other coach?  To think the FFA would even hire a coach based on  “play youth only, we don’t care if you miss the World Cup”, it’s laughable. No serious coach would accept that, nor would fans tolerate it if they just thought about it for one second instead of becoming hysterical over a loss to Brazil.

The goal still is to perform well at the World Cup and be realistic about our exceptions, not fool around trying younger players and believing that’s the magical solution. We just did an entire experiment at the EAFF Cup finals and none other than Mitchell Duke emerged. The answer now is to target high quality opponents in future international matches (no Asian opponents) and give the team its chance to adjust. Next month is France, so that will be a nice measure. Remember, Australia beat Germany in Germany not so long ago, and if there’s one thing we know about football, momentum – and attitude – can change quickly.

Play a serious team against serious teams like Brazil and France

Posted on by
Reply

It doesn’t come around often, playing Brazil, especially in Brazil, and then France in Paris in October. With the first match nearing on Sunday morning comes the usual rancour of Australia’s approach to the game. Coach Holger Osieck has selected the strongest possible team and for some reason this is a problem because the team is “old” – that we must shuffle them out and experiment with younger players.

We really must have extremely short memories. This talk of experimenting and bringing in the youth is not only tiresome, it’s ignorant. Kruse, Oar, Rogic – what do you call these players? They are young, have been given many chances, and are now integrated into the national team. Then there was the massive experiment during July at the East Asian Cup finals. The whole squad was emerging players. Guess what? Mitchell Duke emerged. He’s going to Brazil. Elsewhere, especially defence, they failed. If they are leaking so many goals against other experimental teams, imagine the outcome against Brazil and at the World Cup. You don’t sack players just because they are old. You sack them when they’re out of form. We already saw the consequences of using less experienced players with the WCQ at home against Oman.

Facts are our national team is settled. They did the job in those crucial last 3 World Cup qualifiers to get Australia to Brazil, and we must ensure they are at their best for the World Cup. These games against Brazil and France will be the first we’ve played against a serious opposition and we need to find the true status of our team right now. The grinding World Cup qualifiers and farcelies in between don’t tell us enough. Brazil won’t joke around – having chosen a full strength squad themselves – so therefore we shouldn’t. Maybe France you could contemplate a few second half changes, not so much Brazil in Brazil in a potential World Cup prelude. We should sieze the moment to be serious.

Just imagine the horror and outcry had Osieck experimented in the qualifiers and Australia failed to reach Brazil. No doubt all those advocating such experimentation would be sulking now. Let me tell you something: “the future” is unwritten. You can experiment all you like now, it won’t guarantee success in 4 or 5 years time. National teams are representative by nature. Pick your best, play your best, hone your best. Other than ensuring the back-up players can adequately fill a role, then nothing more is required of the national coach. At senior level, it’s about success. The development and experimentation goes on much earlier, or in less important games. We don’t jeopardise our present success simply for the sake that a few more players than we’d prefer have a “3” as a prefix to their age.

Mark BRESCIANO Al Gharafa, QATAR
Robert CORNTHWAITE Chunnam Dragons, KOREA REPUBLIC
Mitchell DUKE Central Coast Mariners FC, AUSTRALIA
James HOLLAND FK Austria Vienna, AUSTRIA
Brett HOLMAN Al Nasr Sports Club, UAE
Mile JEDINAK Crystal Palace FC, ENGLAND
Josh KENNEDY Nagoya Grampus, JAPAN
Robbie KRUSE TSV Bayer 04 Leverkusen, GERMANY
Mitchell LANGERAK (gk) B.V. Borussia 09 Dortmund, GERMANY
Ryan McGOWAN Shandong Luneng Taishan FC, CHINA PR
Matthew McKAY Brisbane Roar FC, AUSTRALIA
Mark MILLIGAN Melbourne Victory FC, AUSTRALIA
Lucas NEILL Omiya Ardija, JAPAN
Tommy OAR FC Utrecht, NETHERLANDS
Sasa OGNENOVSKI Umm Salal SC, QATAR
Tom ROGIC Celtic FC, SCOTLAND
Mat RYAN (gk) Club Brugge KV, BELGIUM
Mark SCHWARZER (gk) Chelsea FC, ENGLAND
Archie THOMPSON Melbourne Victory FC, AUSTRALIA
Rhys WILLIAMS Middlesbrough FC, ENGLAND

out injured
Tim CAHILL New York Red Bulls, USA
Luke WILKSHIRE FK Dinamo Moscow, RUSSIA

Kennedy’s silver goal a golden moment – Australia off to Brazil

Posted on by
Reply

Sydney: Australia 1 – Iraq 0

Remember FIFA’s silver goal system? Probably not. It was a softening of the golden goal. It was a device used that would turn extra time into sudden death. First goal scored, you win. It proved anti-climatic and – given the capricious nature of the sport – often unfair. Euro 96 was the first major tournament to use it, with Germany winning the final over the Czech Republic by such a method. Australia benefited most prominently in the Confederations Cup of 1997, beating Uruguay in the semi finals. In order to appease dissenters, FIFA tried the silver goal. A goal scored will still see the match continue until either half time or full time of extra time to allow the opposing team a chance to rescue the game. Greece was the most famous to use the rule, winning Euro 2004. Really, it was as silly a method as it sounded.

Last night’s qualification was a match over two games. Failing to beat Iraq meant Australia had to rely on Oman not winning in Jordan. Approaching half time of the affair, at the 83rd the minute of Australia’s match, up pops Josh Kennedy for the most golden of goals. It felt golden. Of course, it was silver until “half time”. Then it was truly golden and Australia was off to Brazil. For the record, Jordan, beat Oman 1-0 to have sent Australia through regardless of Iraq, potentially with just two wins from their 8 group games. While struggling to win, Australia were still difficult to defeat. It was the 5 draws in total, the two against Japan in particular, that made the difference for Australia. Whereas the remaining teams, except for Jordan at home, all lost their matches to Japan. Japan proved a great ally for Australia in the end. Jordan’s effort gets it third spot and a place in the playoffs against Uzbekistan.

Kennedy’s strike continued the trend of actual strikers, brought late onto the field, to score the goals. Yes, football is that simple. Until Kennedy was brought on, Australia played with no recognised strikers. Tim Cahill – most dangerous as a late running attacking midfield – was again marooned up front, out of his comfort zone. Outside the 15 seconds of play that brought Kennedy’s goal, Australia’s attack was woeful. While credit must be given for the tough opponent of Iraq, the bumpy pitch and Sydney’s rain, there was simply no cohesion or ideas. Too often Australia would try inter-play in cramped space along the wings. Runs were rarely made to good space in the centre of the field, something coach Holger Osieck noted after the game. Had this match ended 0-0, or heaven forbid a loss had Iraq not fluffed a very late chance, the match synopsis would be so damning. So match reviews should look at that first 75 minutes, rather than the ebullient fog of the last 10.

For all the trumpeting of the “settled starting eleven” of the last 3 games, they scored only one of the 6 goals scored in these matches. When actual strikers were brought on, the Socceroos were a different beast. It’s just the strikers’ presence that makes all the difference. Harassing the last line, which in turn creates more space. With Cahill so-called leading the line, he would drop back, allowing Iraq to play higher and compressing the space, also meaning any fast break down the wing would often see no one in the box. Let’s not forget the match that really saved Australia’s bacon in this campaign – away to Iraq. A goal down, Archie Thompson on, and Australia grab the 3 points. Had Iraq won that, they enter last night’s game a chance to qualify directly, meaning they’d not have sent a primarily U21 squad preparing for next week’s Youth World Cup in Turkey.

Credit to Osieck for making the switch to Kennedy. The Socceroo Realm expected he might use such a tactic to pinch a win in Japan had the scored remained 0-0. After Thompson’s impact last week in Melbourne, he’d have been the easy choice again. No, it was Kennedy, and off went a churlish Cahill. That Kennedy was the saviour did wonders in quelling the return of any divine right Cahill might have with his place in the team. Facts are that Cahill was mostly ineffective, so Kennedy replacing him allowed a different focal point – especially in terms of style of play. Kennedy has no interest tracking back for balls. It’s all about positioning and losing markers for potential crosses. That he was so unmarked for his goal was testament to his ability and strategy of the substitution.

Osieck was also right to persist with the older, experienced players. National teams are representative by nature, so the best players available are selected. You don’t experiment in key matches. In Osieck’s defence against criticism of not using younger players, he has tried them. They haven’t work. Dump Lucas Neill and Sasa Ognenokvsi, who replaces them? Thwaite, Spiranovic, North? No one has stepped up. Also in Osieck’s defence, Tom Oar has made his way into the team, while Tomas Rogic was brought on after 60 minutes to break open the game. Then there’s Robbie Kruse – now a permanent fixture. It’s about evolution, not revolution.

Looking to Brazil, Australia has key concerns. This penchant for midfielders as strikers must stop. Remember the outrage Australians felt when Pim Verbeek tried this away to Japan in the qualifiers for 2010 and in the disastrous World Cup match against Germany? It was felt as un-Australian. The “have a go” mentality was sacrificed for no real benefit. So what’s change? Problems are not erased by persisting with them. Two weeks ago against Japan it mostly worked, simply because Japan were on the attack and allowed Australia the space and a counter-attacking game. Against Jordan and Iraq, teams that chose to sit back, the balance then must be skewed forward. At least provide the adaptability. Remember Guus Hiddink’s early substitution of Tony Popovic, a defender, for an attacker in the Uruguay Game? This is not even astute awareness, it’s obvious. Osieck should have gone to Kennedy and co much earlier. There will be times Australia will need to take on high calibre opponents, like at the World Cup itself, even from the start of a game, when Australia would hope to reach the second phase. For Holger not to have Australia as sufficiently prepared, that would be un-German.

It would be remiss not to mention the true bonanza of this campaign – being in Asia! Even if not qualifying, it’s a success. We always wanted a fairer shot, not so much an easier one, and with the Asian teams improving and Australia slightly declining, that’s the shot we got. If the future sees us miss one out of three World Cups, that’s good. That means Asia is improving, so we must improve. I hope Australia is never like Mexico or USA dominating a weak region – then doing little at a World Cup. I want to see Asia carried forward with us. The day we beat Japan in a World Cup final, and after beating Iran in a semi, that’s the day we can say we’ve made it.

In this campaign, the loss in Jordan was pivotal. It essentially made every remaining match live. Not so much life and death, just live, as a sustenance of our life. As part of the broader a football community, it’s been pleasing to see this reality infiltrating further and further into our psyche. The idea of “we should be beating these Asian teams like this (ie: 4-0 against Jordan)” still heard on the airwaves, is evaporating. Grinding out 1-0 wins is perfectly fine, and realistic. In the past 3 games, Australia displayed the extremes of achieving results. Then there were extremes at the other end. Like the sudden 2-0 deficit to Oman that needed to be rescued, and losing in Jordan. That’s fine. We wanted exactly this from being in Asia. Fear not that the journey suddenly had great obstacles. Surmounting those obstacles made the journey all the more satisfying.

Final Table Group B

Points, GD, Record
Jap 17, +11, 5-2-1
Aus 13, +5, 3-4-1
Jor 10, -9, 3-1-4
Oma 9, -3, 2-3-3
Irq 5, -4, 1-2-5

Final Table Group A

Points, GD, Record
Irn 16, +6, 5-1-2
Kor 14, +6, 4-2-2
Uzb 14, +5 4-2-2
Qat 7, -8, 2-1-5
Leb 5, -9, 1-2-5

The final match day in Group A was a blinder. Iran needed to win in Korea, they did. Uzbekistan then needed to beat Qatar by six goals, they didn’t. They won 5-1 after conceding early at home to Qatar. Let’s hope either Jordan or Uzbekistan can get past that fifth-placed South American team and expand the Asian family in Brazil.

Full site: socceroorealm.com