Tag Archives: australia

Oman demoralised, now for the real test: Korean Republic

Posted on by
Reply

15 January 2015

13/01 Stadium Australia, Sydney: Oman 0 – Australia 4

As much as Australia dominated Tuesday night’s match against Oman to win 4-0, Oman hardly provided a stern test. While they looked dangerous early with a few counter attacks, the two quick Australian goals just before 30 minutes demoralised them, and they then went into damage control until the half time break. This was probably the plan from the start, that if going behind early, rather than compound the problem, the team would make adjustments at half time. Unfortunately, for Oman, the problem was compounded, conceding right on half time.

As much as Oman tried to make inroads in the second half, Australia were content on reversing the counter-attacking role, playing the waiting game against Oman and hitting them on the break. Despite numerous chances created, only one was converted – a lovely cross on the outside of the boot by Matthew Leckie for Tomi Juric to smash home. Most pleasing about the result was that four different players scored the goals, none of whom were Tim Cahill, and none of whom scored the four goals against Kuwait. Australia also finally kept a clean sheet, restricting Oman to barely a handful of chances.

The second goal of the night was the best Australian goal of the tournament so far. After receiving from Kruse, Massimo Luongo lovely first touch allowed him to lob the ball over for Kruse to continue his run through. He controlled nicely off the thigh then slammed the ball home on 30 minutes. Scoring was opened 3 minutes prior when Matt McKay scored at close range from a corner after a header towards goal from Trent Sainsbury, while the goal just before half time was a penalty converted by Mark Milligan after his goal in open play was ridiculously denied. The referee didn’t play advantage after Cahill was dragged down so it was fitting that Milligan was allowed to right the wrong.

Australia is through to the quarter finals regardless and only needs a draw to top the group. Coach Ange Postecoglou responded beautifully to a question whether he’d take it easy and just settle for a draw. “What do you think?”, was his riposte. We’re Australian, we go for the win. All good as long as you remain mindful of respecting the opposition, of which Ange seems sure to do. It’s already been the hallmark of his coaching and you see the response in the team that the arrogance and visible indignation seen in the team from, especially, the 2007 Asian Cup, long gone. Of course, it’s a different group of players now, a group beginning from a humble base, and now on a trajectory up.

Australia’s quarter final opponent is the runner-up from Group B. China has won the group already while Uzbekistan must beat Saudi Arabia to qualify in second. After that, it gets very interesting, with Iran (by winning its group) the likely semi final and Japan the final. If Iran finish second in their group, the clash with Australia would be in the final. If Australia finishes second in their group and Iran win theirs, it’s China in the quarter final, Japan in the semi final and Iran the final. In some ways, the latter scenario is the more enticing one. First, China might provide the sterner test than the Saudis or Uzbekistan, plus the Chinese fans will make for an amazing atmosphere. Second, it’s been 18 years since “The Iran Game” of 1997, so it would be nice for some form of redemption in a big one-off game. I guess if Australia loses to Korea, let’s be mischievous and revert to talking up the “performance”, rather than the “result”.

Full website: socceroorealm.com

Australia vs Kuwait: Satisfying result, good performance

Posted on by
Reply

10 January 2015

09/01 Melbourne Rectangular Stadium: Australia 4 – Kuwait 1

Let’s be realistic. The true measure of “performance” is the result. For all the neat inter-play and possession, it’s rubbish if you can’t defend well or create chances. Ignoring the two late goals, the first half performance was adequate at best, dire at worst, given that the Socceroos conceded too easily from a corner and didn’t create much themselves. The feeling in this lounge room last night was of anguish and frustration one minute, then jubilation and satisfaction the next. That was clearly echoed at the stadium as well, and no doubt living rooms all around the country. Why should two random events affect our senses so much? That’s because we’re not watching figure staking, where “artistic appreciation” has significant value in the performance. We’re watching a battle where skills and strategy dominates, and in that sense, the result – a dominant 4-1 win – was the metric that we judge performance, and therefore it proved a good one.

After a tough, uncompromising first 30 minutes, which included going behind so early on 8 eight minutes, Australia found the avenues to goal through quick ball movement rather than the ponderous fluffing around that has blighted the team. Kuwait easily subdued the “possession game” with two walls of defenders, and because these walls were so deep, that created huge space between the Australian last line and the Kuwaiti first wall of defence for dangerous counter-attacks. For much of the half, the strategy worked, until Australia finally worked it out by quickly getting the ball into the danger zones. Rather than trying to beat two or three opponents, just get the ball in before the defence is settled and space marked. The first goal came from a quick throw in that Massimo Luongo was able to skip between two defenders and pass to Tim Cahill, while the second was Ivan Franjic delivering a wide cross onto the head of Luongo.

With Australia leading, that really opened game in the second half, of which the Socceroos exploited. Robbie Kruse won a penalty for Mile “Mike” Jedinak to score, while James Troisi slammed home the final goal in injury time from a tight angle after bullocking work by Matthew Leckie. Between that came Leckie hitting the crossbar and Nathan Burns had two great chances: the first a skimming header that hit the bar; the second a shot straight at the goalie’s feet at close range from a Leckie cross. Leckie might have been man of the match had some of his better work had more material effect. Instead it went to Luongo, who effectively broke the game Australia’s way with the assist and then his goal. Kuwait only had two good chances in the second half: one from outside the box was touched onto the bar by Mat Ryan, while the second was easily blocked from a tight angle.

The only negative from the occasion was at 1-0 to Kuwait when one of the Kuwaiti players going down and writhing on the ground, seemingly having a seizure. Naturally, after calling on the doctors, that magical paint used for the sidelines revitalised his ravaged body and he was straight back on. While loath to accuse any such player of time wasting, surely there’s a duty of care from the sport that any player going off on a stretcher, especially one having a seizure, is given a thorough medical examination before being allowed to return to the pitch. FIFA could easily mandate such an examination, or at least a waiting period, by banning a player for 10 minutes from returning to the pitch if they call on a doctor or stretcher.

The key for Australia is to consolidate against Oman on Tuesday. While commentators cluelessly rave about the importance of getting a result in the first match, ultimately it’s menacingly if you lose the next two. There’s no double points for the first match. Even more perilous for Australia is that if both Oman and Korea beat Kuwait (accepted as the weakest team in the group), then Australia’s win is nullified, with only the goal difference having relevance. Teams mathematically can be eliminated from the group phase with two wins. Such cases see one team (ie: Kuwait) lose all their group matches, with the remaining teams recording a win and a loss against each other (ie: Oman beats Korea, Australia beats Oman, Korea beats Australia). The ideal result involving Oman and Korea today is a draw, meaning Australia beating Oman guarantees them the knockout stage. If there’s a win in the Oman-Korea game, then there’s real pressure on Australia to beat Oman, otherwise it’s do or die against Korea. Thing is, even beating Oman, Australia still might enter that Korean game with the requirement of not to lose.

Full site: socceroorealm.com

Culture is to blame for wrong offside calls, not the referees

Posted on by
Reply

06 January 2015

Sydney FC’s Marc Janko was denied “goal of the year” by a refereeing blunder according to their coach Graham Arnold in an A-League match last weekend: “They do it every week … they may as well just give the championship trophy to the referees because they decide what’s going on. They ruin games every week and today they have ruined goal of the year.” While no one disputes Janko’s goal was legal, and you need to admire Arnold’s humour of awarding the referees the championship, the fault is not with the referee, it’s with the sport’s culture.

The simple fact is that the sport loves denying goals. If the roles were reversed, and Newcastle Jets scored a cracking goal and the player was an eyelash offside, you could bet Arnold would be going even more bonkers. Fans, also, will similarly be just as apoplectic if there’s a hint of offside. We just won’t tolerate such goals, feeling that they are the greatest injustice in the game.

As response to the outrage of close offside calls, the referees are not making mistakes, they are refereeing according to the culture that the sport demands. Facts are that it is impossible for a referee to be looking at two spots at once, so there’s always a degree of an educated guess, or a hunch, when waving offside, no matter their level of experience. Given the sport’s hatred of marginally offside goals, their inclination is to lean towards waving offside. That even includes betraying FIFA’s “favour the attackers” edict.

Football’s culture fervently ignores “favour the attacker”. You see commentators all the time debating a close call, whether a shoulder was a whisker offside or not, or the player was “level” with the last defender. Wrong. If it’s that close, the instinctive response should be “that’s good enough, play on”. You favour the attacker. That also includes the more common outcome of an incorrect offside call – that a “goal scoring opportunity” is denied. Janko’s case was more unusual in that a goal was scored, then cancelled, make it feel more egregious. Really, any wrong call, no matter the outcome, should feel egregious.

No, the referees are not destroying the sport, the culture is. Denying goals, and denying goal scoring opportunities, and loving it. Arnold’s idea of full-time referees won’t work. In my observation, 90% of close offside calls at any level of the game are incorrect. Those that are incorrect, they are close enough under the “favour attackers” edict to be deemed correct. Therefore every single close offside call in the sport is wrong.

Clearly the edict fails. The only solution is for the law to change and the culture to follow. Let’s remember, the offside law was invented to stop loitering near the goal; never for this cynical, tactical ploy of running attackers offside by a few millimetres. The offside law should be updated to read “clearly offside” and the edict to favour the attackers  should advise “up to a full bodywidth offside is acceptable”. Then we might start to favour the attackers, and start to favour football, and also make the referees’ job far more humanly possible.

Full site: Socceroo Realm

Socceroo Realm 2014 Year In Review

Posted on by
Reply

01 January 2015

With the World Cup in Brazil and some controversial issues, it was a busy year for the Socceroo Realm. It also marked the first full year the website has duplicated its content elsewhere – onto WordPress. The main site (socceroorealm.com) has been online since 1998 and in the early years was always top 5 in internet searches and one of the few opinion sites about. As the game grew, and, especially, as social media grew, the main site was swamped. The turning point was the 2010 World Cup, which received less than a quarter of the traffic of 2006. So much media was now out there that the feisty little Socceroo Realm was struggling for air.

Even though writing is purely done for the enjoyment, satisfaction comes with the feedback from readers. Even the late Johnny Warren seemed to be one, if you consider the frequency of phrases quoted almost verbatim. Most notorious was the “bad day” after the Uruguay loss in 2001 that “some media” apparently were saying. I never read “bad day” in any article, and I read everything. Only the Socceroo Realm mentioned that game as a “bad day” – using it as a theme in two posts.

Twitter was the first step outside the Socceroo Realm’s own little domain, then came WordPress. WordPress also benefits in offering friendly viewing for mobile devices, offers searching within the blog and from outside, and the ability to update away from my computer. The main Socceroo Realm website is basic HTML written when Netscape ruled, and would require a major knowledge boost and oodles of time to retro-fit it. Since WordPress is such a wonderful tool and so prolific as the host of many websites, the move made sense. Also thanks to WordPress, we get this wonderful Year In Review.

(click the image for the full report)

Top 5 Blogs

1) Reality check as Spain outclasses Australia

Not surprising that the World Cup in Brazil leads the list. After the reasonable performances in the first two games provided optimism for the final match, Australia was ultimately put into its place. The blog also reviewed the overall performance of the team, and offered predictions for the rest of the tournament. As a footnote to that blog, Eugene Galekovic should have started against Spain. Let’s face it, Matthew Ryan made mistakes against the Dutch. Galekovic was now at his second World Cup and never played a minute. In a game that was a dead rubber, he should have been rewarded. We saw the emotion all Colombians received when 43yo Faryd Mondragon was given the final few minutes against Japan to become the oldest ever player at a World Cup. Galekovic deserved the honour of lining up on the field for the national anthem.

2) Bigotry rears its ugly head – and it’s us

Football (as a community and a culture) will need to embrace the mainstream media if it really hopes to be the biggest sport in this country. Sadly, the insecure, precious nature of SBS at its worse manifested itself into ridiculous chest-thumping and outrage over a satirical cartoon about Arab money buying Melbourne City (nee Heart). Then to turn into yet another attack on the mainstream media, it was breathtaking in its hypocrisy and stupidity. Of course, on that very day in the same publication were 10 actual articles about football – all positive. Just like there’s been everyday since in the mainstream media, football has been fully and positively covered. Go to a News or Fairfax site right now and it’s oodles of stuff on the Asian Cup and A-League. Still waiting for SBS to write an article about that.

3) Shattering loss and elimination in a case of “what if”

Australia’s game against the Netherlands. Led it, then blew it.

4) Finally hope for Melbourne’s second club as Manchester City moves in

The Socceroo Realm has derided the Melbourne Heart concept since day one, and it was no surprise the entity would collapse. I metaphorically bet a friend that within 5 years they’re gone or subsumed. It took four years. The best part of the new ownership is giving the club a serious look to them – a real football club – simply by being called something sensible: Melbourne City. I’ve personally found them more attractive to support and they would be certainly my choice of the two Melbourne clubs. They still have problems with their coach, who seems one to be more interested in excuses than results. Also, there’s a growing campaign by supporters to add red into the home strip in place of the thin navy blue (the colour of Melbourne Victory). Considering the logo features red as do supporter scarves, this makes total sense and helps with the lineage between City and Heart. Then Melbourne really will have a separate and viable second football club.

5) End triple-punishment and dubious offsides, for the good of the game

These are the two issues that currently cripple the game. The first has been self-inflicted by way of an honourable idea that’s lost its originating purpose; the second is the lack of realisation that referees cannot see two places at once.

Where were the readers from?

Australia dominated (obviously), then USA, Brazil and UK. Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the most obscure from the 56 countries in total.

Japan 2 – Tim Cahill 1

Posted on by
Reply

19 November 2014

Osaka: Japan 2 – Australia 1

As much as Australia tried, they could not match it with Japan last night’s preparation match for the 2015 Asian Cup. While the performance of the opening half looked good, the second half dominance by Japan put it into context. For all the bravado of coach Ange Postecoglou stating in the press that the Socceroos will go hard from the start and will stick to the plan throughout, Japan deferred to that strategy, allowing Australia plenty of possession and to expend much energy, before reversing the strategy for the second half and over-running a tiring Australian team.

For all the good of the first half “performance”, other than Matthew Leckie having a clear header well saved, Australia’s chances were minimal. In fact, Japan eked out slighty better ones. For all the hyperventilation over the abhorrent defending of a corner that led to Japan’s first goal, Japan quite easily could have been a goal or two up at that stage. Yes, while converting chances is the primary measure of results in football, context is even more important when talking about performance. That soft goal did not obfuscate Japan’s dominance, so if we want to mark the team on performance, forget about it. Tighter marking at corners can be easily fixed. It’s elsewhere that there are still problems.

Within seven minutes of the first goal, Japan scored a second with a glorious flick reminiscent of David Villa for Spain against Australia at the World Cup. In fact, there were many similarities with that game as to last night’s in terms of tempo and the ability of both Spain and Japan to effectively control the match despite being in deficit with possession in the respective early stages of their games. Possession is useless unless it’s used wisely, and that is still Australia’s greatest problem. Too many wayward passes and poor decisions going forward, even once defensive pressure eased in the second half. There’s also still the inability to punish teams with quick breaks from the midfield when they make errors. There’s no chance of being a crack international team without developing this part of the game.

On 73 minutes, 5 minutes after Japan’s second goal, on came Tim Cahill. He scored in the dying seconds with an open header. The stunned silence from the Japanese crowd really emphasised the insecurity fellow Asian teams have of stopping Cahill. The Japanese made it known in the press before the game that Cahill was such an aerial threat, and again it was that fear was validated. It was a strange goal, because Cahill was tightly marked by two defenders just before the cross Aziz Behich, and then suddenly found himself completely clear. More concern should be for Australia, who have not found any other avenues to goal. Cahill has scored 8 of Australia’s twelve goals during the Postecoglou. The remaining 4 were either from penalties or corners, from penalties, corners or set-pieces, with Mile Jedinak scoring three of them, and the other by Bailey Wright. It’s amazing that Cahill’s been so dangerous because, under previous coach Holger Osieck, he was so impotent in the striker’s role that the Socceroo Realm implored a return to this usual lurking midfield role.

Australia’s next match is scheduled to be Kuwait as the opening match on 9 January 2015 at the Asian Cup itself. No doubt there will be a warm-up match or two just prior to the competition that will be Australia’s final chance address its weaknesses. We need to end the romance about the supposed good performances at the World Cup and accept the liabilities. Conceding 3 goals in each game is not good, and the chances created, especially against the Netherlands, was more because of them opening the game up than great creativity by Australia. Kuwait and Oman won’t allow such amount of space, and are typically wily on the break. Korea Republic is the final game. Glimpses of improvement is the best that could be said about last night’s match against Japan. To excel at the Asian Cup, Australia need volumes.

Teams

Japan: Eiji Kawashima, Masato Morishige, Kosuke Ota, Maya Yoshida, Gotoku Sakai, Makoto Hasebe, Yasuhito Endo (Yasuyuki Konno 46’), Shinji Kagawa, Shinji Okazaki (Yohei Toyoda 77’), Keisuke Honda, Yoshinori Muto (Takashi Inui 57’)

Australia: Mat Ryan, Ivan Franjic, Alex Wilkinson, Trent Sainsbury, Aziz Behich, Mile Jedinak, Matt McKay (Tim Cahill 73’), Massimo Luongo (Mitch Nichols 63’), Robbie Kruse (Aaron Mooy 88’), Mathew Leckie, James Troisi (Mark Bresciano 63’)

Goals

Japan: Konno 61’, Okazaki 68’
Australia: Cahill 90+2’

Full site: socceroorealm.com

Melbourne Cup 2014 – A Double Disappointment

Posted on by
Reply

05 November 2014

Disappointing is the only way that could describe this year’s Melbourne Cup. As someone that loves the race so much and someone that loves the horses, it finished a hollow day.

In chronological order, the first disappointment was Red Cadeaux finishing second yet again. The wagering on horses is only ever side issue for me. It’s the sporting story that means far more. When he burst to the lead down the straight, I couldn’t care less about any bets on other horses, and started cheering him home wildly. Sadly, that moment was barely a few seconds, as Protectionist leaped to the front and ran away with the race. Some minor satisfaction did soon emerge, that second place was a great achievement for “Cads”. To do it now three times in four runs, it puts him in Melbourne Cup folklore.

The second disappointment was obviously the death of the favourite from Japan, Admire Rakti, and then later in the evening learning that Araldo had to be euthanised. Admire Rakti collapsed soon after the race in his stall, dying of acute heart failure. He dropped back very quickly in the race just entering the straight, so immediately something seemed odd. No one expected this. Then Araldo, who finished 7th, was spooked by a flag waved close to him as he walked back from the race, and in recoiling away, awkwardly twisted and planted his leg, smashing a pastern bone in his off rear leg. Both deaths were of such a freak and unavoidable nature, and unfortunately animal activists disgraced themselves by their ghoulish hovering over the carcasses to make their ignorant points.

Admire Rakti - before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

Admire Rakti – before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

First and foremost, the deaths were freakish and could not been prevented. Human athletes die of such heart conditions and no one calls for their sports to be banned. Admire Rakti was never “flogged to death” or forced into the barriers as was disgustingly and ignorantly claimed. Only the final stages of a race are horses asked for their effort, and he was eased up much earlier than that. Before the race, the couple of tickles on the back of his legs were just to encourage a notoriously mischievous horse to enter the barriers. Facts are that a horse cannot be forced to run if they are really stubborn about it.

As for Araldo, who could ever have foreseen such an incident like that? This has never occurred on the race track. In fact, such breaks of legs are more likely to be seen in private paddocks and stables. Is anyone calling for the horse pet industry to be dissolved?

If you want to talk about deaths, the pet industry as a whole is far, far worse. Tens of thousands of cats and dogs are euthanised each year in Australia, and that’s only the ones officially recorded. Unwanted puppies, kittens and birds, especially with regard to show animals, are wantonly destroyed by their breeders. Then there’s the unimaginable torture that exists. Kittens burnt alive, hamsters put into microwave ovens, need I go on? Let’s also not forget the 60 billion animals worldwide bred each year as sources for food and clothing. In comparison, the horse racing industry is the most heavily regulated industry involving animals on the planet and most horses lead pampered lives. If I had a choice of being a cat, a dog, chicken, cow, pig or race horse, I know which one I’d choose. It’s also a sport that involves human fatalities, so the sacrifice is diffuse. A bit of perspective, please.

Horse racing is attacked because it is high profile. Now that the Cup is over, all these big mouths will go away for another year, munching on dead animals for their lunch and dinner, thinking nothing wrong of it, in acts of total hypocrisy. Calls to ban whips and 2yo racing are also irrelevant to the events that occurred on Tuesday. If only activists were so sincere. No, that’s part of the strategy to pick away at the edges – and mostly because activists don’t like “the look” of the whip or “the idea” of a 2yo racing, not that there’s anything genuinely cruel happening. Even if these wishes were heeded, within a few years, the activists would be back again to demand the entire sport be banned.

For what it’s worth, in an ideal world, it would be great if no animals were used for anything. The world is such a long way from that, that to simply say “no animal exploitation” is unrealistic. Food and clothing substitutes need to be developed, and so too life-like robots to replace organic pets. Personally, while I’m no vegetarian, I already prefer vege hot-dogs over standard ones. It’s steps like this that will ultimately start reducing mankind’s reliance on animals, not irrational, militant and disrespectful conduct.

The Race…

Lost in the double disappointment is Protectionist’s amazing win. I was staggered to see a horse bolt away like that, and learning the times of 11.66 seconds for the final 200 metres and 22.75 for the final 400, it was ridiculous, and more typical of closing sectionals in many sprint races. That’s why you needed to be happy for Red Cadeaux as he was beaten by a almost a freak performance. You also could not help marvel at the performance of Protectionist itself.

The mood in the crowd immediately after the race says so much. While there was the isolated excited race-goer here and there, mostly it was subdued. The only post-race atmosphere more subdued in recent times was Green Moon in 2012. In that year, first, second and third were unfancied. In 2014, it’s fair to say most people were hoping for Admire Rakti, while Red Cadeaux and Who Shot Thebarman had their supporters cheering… until Protectionist’s blitzkrieg.

Removing Protectionist from the equation, you do need to wonder about the strength of the field. It was already considered weaker than previous years, and vindicated by Red Cadeaux being a 9yo and not in the form of previous years, and Who Shot Thebarman in third being not much more than a glorified plodder. Even Precedence, in his fourth attempt and also a 9yo, achieved his best result in sixth place. Not that it all matters ultimately. It’s about the drama of the race, and this year we got a memorable winner and runner-up.

Protectionist - winner of 2014 Melbourne Cup

Protectionist – winner of the 2014 Melbourne Cup

The Favourites…

Admire Rakti’s sad demise did rob of us potentially of a monumental finish. He got a nice a drag off tearaway leader My Ambivalent and about to make his run when he faded. If you imagine Delta Blues in 2006, they raced almost identically, and most likely Admire Rakti would have skipped out by a few lengths as Delta Blues did. In 2006, Pop Rock emerged to chasing and just fail to catch Delta Blues. In 2014, Protectionist – who had to come from near the back of the field – would have been that challenger. Sadly we can only imagine.

Fawnker (10th) and Lucia Valentina (13th) didn’t run the distance. It was suspected before the race. In fact, it was proven the year before for Fawkner when finishing sixth. Still so many of us were lured into selecting them by their brilliance over shorter distances. If something is certain in this modern era with the Melbourne Cup, horses that can’t run a strong 3200 metres, avoid, avoid, avoid, avoid. It’s that simple.

Signoff (4th) just lacked that touch of class to strongly run out the race. He loomed up into the straight and seemed destined to race away with it. He may not have been seasoned enough or perhaps didn’t back up after Saturday’s race. That’s always the risk with the approach the connections took with the horse. He’ll be interesting to watch next year. Often, horses don’t back up a year later anyway. Their first shot, especially with such a light weight, is usually their best. Look at Fawkner.

Mutual Regard (14th) couldn’t accelerate. His run ended quickly so possibly he found the ground too firm. He hadn’t a lead up run in Australia so it was always a risk. Normally I follow the rule to ignore internationals that haven’t run in Australia yet. I was seduced by his Ebor win (an inconsistent form reference at best) and his relatively short odds, and Damien Oliver the jockey.

The Others…

Most couldn’t run the distance, lacked the class or were plodders. Seismos (9th) is the classic example of the latter. He’ll run forever; he’ll just do it too slowly. Willing Foe was serviceable in fifth. Araldo (7th) lacked the big acceleration -emphasised by him racing back with Protectionist and finishing lengths behind him. The outside barrier impacted here, forcing to tuck behind the field after the start. Had he been able to race on the speed, he would have battled for a few spots higher. My Ambivalent (17th) was always either a speculative hit or a probable miss. She was a miss; never settled and ran too hard early.

My Results…

Banking on Admire Rakti as I did, obviously the result was a wipeout. I had Protectionist outside my top four. After Admire Rakti, the next three of Fawkner, Signoff and Mutual Regard were tough decisions. In overall betting, Fawkner, Lucia Valentina, Protectionist and Mutual Regard were essentially equal second favourite. In hindsight (yes, it’s wonderful), I should have tossed aside Fawkner (distance doubt) and Mutual Regard (unseen international). Most likely I still go Signoff as second pick. The issue I always had with Protectionist was that Herbert Power run where he was beaten by Signoff and others. His run also seemed to end 50 metres out in this 2400 race. His overall record still suggested he’d run 3200, and his recent form was good, so the Herbert Power should have been seen as an acclimatisation exercise, not so much a form reference, as such races rarely are these days.

Protectionist - relaxing in his stall before 2014 Melbourne Cup

Protectionist – relaxing in his stall before the 2014 Melbourne Cup

Next Year…

As mentioned in the preview, all 5 panellists on Sky Racing’s “Racing Retro” picked Protectionist. Protectionist also emerged as top pick from the racing experts in Melbourne’s Herald Sun. Why do all the form crunching yourself when you can leave it up to others? Of course, if you go against your own hunch and that hunch pops up, you’ll be disgusted. Also, the experts don’t always get it right. Maybe use them as a covering bet, or to validate your own hunch.

More Photos From the Day

 

Melbourne Cup 2014 Preview

Posted on by
Reply

03 November 2014

For those new to the Socceroo Realm, the Olympic Games and the Melbourne Cup are my other two sporting passions. I’ve been to the Melbourne Cup every year since 1977, and would apparently have gone in 1976 had the weather prediction not been for heavy rain and storms.

It’s always a fascinating race, watching all these horses converge from different paths and, these days, from all over the world. While I’m no punter, I do make an exception for this great race. Because there’s 24 horses, you always get great value, even for a favourite. Since I’ve been old enough to bet, my average is a win every three years, which keeps me ahead. In the past 10 years, I’ve been hoping to land a big trifecta or first four.

Predicting the Melbourne Cup is an evolving process, with last year being a bit of a lesson. A rule I’ve followed for a long time is ignore horses that have failed in a previous Melbourne Cup. This rule is sound on the provision that “failed” truly means failed. The first three of 2013 of Fiorente, Red Cadeaux and Mount Athos were all return runners. The key is that Fiorente and Red Cadeaux did not exactly fail, with both running second in 2012 and 2011 respectively, while Mount Athos was an unlucky fifth in 2012. It could be excused to ignore Red Cadeaux as he did fail in 2012, finishing eighth.

Two other rules remain rock solid. Most of the field actually won’t run the trip, while those that can, some don’t have the class or, as with many Europeans, are plodders lacking the required acceleration. Other historical statistics can also be applied, notable age and weight. Only two 8yo horses have won, and that was so far in the past that’s irrelevant. No 9yo has won. The last horse with 58.5kg to win was Think Big in 1975. Makybe Diva in 2005 carried 58kg, which is effectively 60kg, if you consider mares typically get a 2kg allowance on the weight-for-age (WTA) scale. Since she’d won it twice prior, it was a realistic handicap.

Often there’s talk of horses “lugging weight” and that sort suggests a cruelty. Wrong. First, the days when Carbine carried over 65kg in the 1800s are long gone. Second, in handicaps, weak horses have their weight lowered, with top weights carrying their normal weight. In WTA races, older male horses carry 59kg, while mares get 57kg. In the Melbourne Cup, the top weighted horse is only 58.5, while the bottom weight is 51kg. If these respective horses raced in a Cox Plate, both would carry 59kg, meaning the bottom weight of Signoff in the Cup would simply have no chance against the top weight of Admire Rakti.

Speaking of Admire Rakti, there was some controversy that he was penalised “only” half a kilo for winning the Caulfield Cup. Again, this needs to be seen in the context of handicap allocations – to reduce weight of weaker horses, not to lug top horses with more and more. Since Admire Rakti was already top weight in the Melbourne Cup, there’s little room to assign more weight as he’d start exceeding his normal WFA weight. If he was only 53kg before the Caulfield Cup, he’d have got a penalty of 2kg most likely. Furthermore, the modern Melbourne Cup is more a “quality handicap”, with the weight range compressed, which again leaves little room to penalise heavily, and also means that any penalty given has a much greater effect.

Lead up races like the Herbert Power, the Metropolitan, Moonee Valley Cup, Geelong Cup and the Lexus Stakes – many of them are irrelevant. So, too, seems the Caulfield Cup. The last Melbourne Cup winner to come from the Caulfield Cup was Delta Blues in 2006. Many Melbourne Cup horses bypass the race for fear of a penalty, while other horses that target it do so because the Melbourne Cup is becoming so difficult to gain a start. Unless the horse was dominant in these lead-up races, don’t trust the form.

1 Admire Rakti (JPN) (Tomoyuki Umeda) 58.5 Z Purton 

Weight seems the only issue. Also, the Caulfield/Melbourne Cup double is difficult to achieve, and usually is done by a horse that won at Caulfield with a light weight so could cope with the penalty into the Melbourne Cup. Since Admire Rakti was not penalised heavily, he remains a great chance.

2 Cavalryman (GB) (Saeed bin Suroor) 57 C Williams

Was here in 2012 and failed. Even if overseas form is better, age now a problem.

3 Fawkner (Robert Hickmott) 57 N Hall

Didn’t quite run it out last year when sixth. Seems to have improved has been trained specifically for it. It’s a weaker field too, it could all add up.

4 Red Cadeaux (GB) (Ed Dunlop) 57 G Mosse

Age against him. His form overseas is well down compared to previous year.

5 Protectionist (Ger) (Andreas Wohler) 56.5 R Moore

Every single one of the 5 panelists on Sky’s Racing Retro show has picked this. The rare time German horses come to Australia they generally perform quite well. The main problem was the run in the Herbert Power. That race is never a guide and he was still beaten by average horses. Signoff was ahead of him and is in the Cup with 5kg less. As much as the Sky team were dubious of the Lexus form (Signoff’s win on Saturday), then you must be even more dubious of the Herbert Power. All that race proved is that the horse had acclimatised. Distance also a query. The track will be firm, which could be another problem.

6 Sea Moon (GB) (Robert Hickmott) 56.5 T Berry

It would have been treated as a scratching had it not been scratched

7 Seismos (IRE) (Marco Botti) 56 C Newitt

Too slow. The only positive is the stable has done well with Dandino last year and the unfancied Jackalberry (third in 2012).

8 Junoob (GB) (Chris Waller) 55.5 H Bowman

The Metropolitan is traditionally a rubbish guide. Didn’t do enough in the Caulfield Cup either.

9 Royal Diamond (IRE) (Johnny Murtagh) 55.5 S Arnold

Stablemate of Mutual Regard. It’s here for the sight-seeing.

10 Gatewood (GB) (John Gosden) 55 W Buick

Didn’t exactly fire in Australia 2 years ago. Form dubious, a distance query and track will be firm.

11 Mutual Regard (IRE) (Johnny Murtagh) 55 D Oliver

Won the Ebor (UK’s “Melbourne Cup”) well, which can be a guide (Purple Moon 2nd in 2007). Damien Oliver on board is a good sign. Only issue is acclimatisation. Generally it’s best to see them run in Australia first.

12 Who Shot The Barman (NZ) (Chris Waller) 55 G Boss

Under the odds because of its name. Caulfield Cup was poor. Seems to lack the class.

13 Willing Foe (USA) (Saeed Bin Suroor) 55 J McDonald

Lightly raced recently and difficult to line-up the form. Seems to be a plodder. Has it acclimatised? So many questions.

14 My Ambivalent (IRE) (Roger Varian) 54.5 A Atenzi

“Mathematically”, should win by four lengths. Has the class, with form around Admire Rakti, maybe even surpassing him, and she has 4kg less too. Injury concerns (scratched from the Caulfield Cup and training affected) and is flighty – even for a mare. That’s doubly bad for an international mare, as they have never fired, and are rarely brought out. Overall, mares have a poor record in the Melbourne Cup unless they have some robustness to them.

15 Precedence (NZ) (Bart and James Cummings) 54.5 M Rodd

Failed all previous three attempts, likely to do so again, especially with his age

16 Brambles (NZ) (Peter Moody) 54 L Nolen

Lacks the class and probably the speed

17 Mr O’ Ceirin (NZ) (Ciaron Maher) 54 M Zahra

Really lacks the class

18 Au Revoir (IRE) (Andre Fabre) 53.5 G Schofield

They ran past him in the Moonee Valley Cup

19 Lidari (FR) (Peter Moody) 53.5 B Melham

Lacks the class and a distance concern

20 Opinion (IRE) (Chris Waller) 53.5 T Angland

Form suggests too slow

21 Araldo (GB) (Michael Moroney) 53 D Dunn

More than anything, probably lacks the speed

22 Lucia Valentina (NZ) (Kris Lees) 53 K McEvoy

A 4yo lightly framed mare. That spells danger. There’s also the distance. Distance was a concern in the Caulfield Cup. She was targeted for that race and ran into third thanks to a slow pace. Now she’s tossed into a fast Melbourne Cup over an extra 800m and expected to win? There’s a big spruik about her because of her brilliance.

23 Unchain My Heart (Hayes and Dabernig) 51.5 D Yendall

Out of form and too slow

24 Signoff (IRE) (Darren Weir) 51 J Moriera

Ran away with the Lexus Stakes – reminiscent of Shocking in 2009, which then won the Melbourne Cup. Malucky Day ran second in 2010 after a similar performance in the Lexus. The light weight makes the horse so appetising. The issue is the class. The Lexus field was even less worse than the average fields of its other lead-ups. The stable says the horse has been trained specifically for a Lexus and then a tilt at the Cup. We’ll see if this meticulous planning has worked.

Summary

I can’t go past Admire Rakti. Only historical statistics surrounding weight is against him. Even then, it’s not of great relevance given only in 2005 Makybe Diva won with arguably a greater imposition and over a field with a less compressed weight range, and he’s only carrying 58.5. He’s world class, he runs the distance and he’s Japanese. Those three factors stand alone.

From there, almost every horse has a reason that they cannot win. The two with the least negatives are Fawkner and Signoff. The most likely of the Europeans seems to be Mutual Regard, while I’ll certainly throw a twenty on My Ambivalent.

1 Admire Rakti
2 Signoff
3 Fawkner
4 Mutual Regard

Outsider: My Ambivalent

I’ll place a big win bet on Admire Rakti, smaller bets on Fawkner (I always bet the greys) and My Ambivalent. The first four will go into a boxed trifecta and a boxed first four. A special trifecta will include Admire Rakti to win, with either Signoff and Fawkner second, and the field in the third.

Remember: Enjoy the race first, and only bet as much as you want to lose!

Uzbekistan and Qatar hit Australia with a double shirt-front

Posted on by
Reply

15 October 2014

A woeful night for Australian football last night. First, the Young Socceroos were shirt-fronted out of the U19 Asian Championships in Myanmar at the group stage. Needing to beat Uzbekistan after a loss to UAE and a narrow win against Indonesia in their earlier games, their hard fought 1-0 lead vanished in the final 10 minutes when Uzbekistan equalised to secure a draw. In truth, Uzbekistan were the better team and deserved to progress with the UAE. Later, another shirt-front, this time on the senior team, which lost 1-0 in Qatar. This result came after a 0-0 draw in the UAE Friday night.

In a way, the youth team’s elimination might do some good. Asia was never meant to be a walkover. Moving there from Oceania was to be mutually beneficial. Australia would be challenged while the challenge of Australia would help the other Asian teams. Missing the occasional World Cup will be part of this process. Given the volatile nature of talent at this level, it’s also difficult to be hyper critical of the team. The elimination could just be symptomatic of Australia being down while the UAE and Uzbekistan are up. Where Oceania never exposed these flaws until actual World Cups, Asia exposes them much earlier. We know we must improve. It’s been 20 years since the country had a decent youth team. The famed “Dutch experiment”, now going almost 8 years in this country, so far has not produced anything and is almost at a point of examination.

The senior team has bigger problems. Clearly Australia don’t have the players. The front third is a joke. The defence barely any better. UAE had the best chance of their match with a shot cleared off the line. Alex Wilkinson was the saviour after Jason Davidson was caught out of position (again) on Australia’s left flank. Qatar simply waltzed through with a slick one-two move to score that match’s winning goal. In attack, Australia was mostly impotent and could barely fashion a well constructed chance. To not score in either match seems unfathomable.

Australia has one warm-up match before the Asian Cup – against Japan in Osaka next month – and that’s it. It looks like Australia will be experimenting at the Asian Cup proper when the team should be long settled. The perplexity being faced by Coach Ange Postecoglou is this contrast between coaching a club and a national team. With a national team being a representative team, there’s neither the time or the capacity to create a “Team Australia”. You pick the best players available and then get them to play their best.

Ange is also finding, much like his predecessors, that the cupboard is bare. Would you return to the older players? Certainly not on a grand scale. Would you have one or two for experience and a tad more potency? Why not. Joshua Kennedy has always proven a handful for Asian opposition, and even the long forgotten Scott McDonald might suddenly click under the new coaching regime. Even as bench or squad players, there just needs to be other options than going to an even a less experienced player.

Full site: Socceroo Realm

Belgium and Saudi Arabia – the friendly farce continues

Posted on by
Reply

9 September 2014

Liege: Belgium 2 – Australia 0
London: Saudi Arabia 2 – Australia 3

Sometimes it makes you really wonder, why do we play these so-called “friendlies”? After a period of 10 months without a win under Ange Postecoglou, this morning’s match against Saudi Arabia was seen as one that a result must count. Ange’s one and only win came in his very first game – against Costa Rica late last year. Since then it’s been a succession of tough opponents against his mostly experimental teams. Fans have been patient.

Finally a win comes, and the stark reality is that if not for “the result”, there’s little to get excited about the game. Australia scored two goals in the first 5 minutes that any Saudi fan would label “soft” – just as we’re wont to do with most of our goals conceded. The goal first came from a break and was scrambled in at close range by Tim Cahill while the Mile Jedinak headed the second off a set piece thanks to some Saudi non-defending. Even the third goal, to restore a two goal cushion, came from a poorly defended set piece.

The Saudis could quite easily think that if not for the first 5 minutes, they won the game 2-1. The truth is Australia dominated much of the first half, even without troubling the goal-keeper that often. Problem is that with that 2-goal buffer, the natural tendency is to take fewer risks anyway, so containment became the scenario. To properly evaluate and test the team, it would have been much preferable had the score stayed 0-0 a bit longer.

In contrast to the first half, the second half was both rubbish and a showcase of when the farcical nature of these “farclies” become even more evident. The cavalcade of substitutions – by both teams – rendered the match process as almost entirely pointless. Giving players some experience is one thing; giving the team a competitive match another. The commentators even talk of a non-competitive environment when it comes refereeing decisions – that they’d be stricter if the match was a “competitive” one. How some matches will prepare Australia for the Asian Cup is a mystery. Quite simply, it wasn’t a match in any recognised form experienced at a competitive level.

This was the second farclie in 5 days, with the other against Belgium. That was a 2-0 loss in which Belgium’s class was simply too good and their defence easily contained Australia’s attack forays. Even though a little bit of slopping defending contributed to the goals, it quite easily could have been more, so a fair result.

The ever present issue – as highlighted in both games – is the defence. Australia has conceded at least two goals in their last 5 matches, and no clean sheets since Costa Rica. Plenty of new players given starts so some of this can be forgiven in these two matches. Of the new players that were given a good run, Massimo Luongo was the clear standout in midfield with his “little maestro” qualities. He was good against Ecuador before the World Cup and it was a big surprise he went unused during the Cup.

Both games also saw controversial refereeing decisions. Chris Herd’s high boot in the opening minutes nailed a Belgium player in the stomach in which no card was given. In a “competitive” match, it’s a red. In a farclie, we don’t want to make it more farcical by rendering one team a man short for almost the entire match. Except, not punishing the player does make it farcical, as the match became quite dirty with a serious of “square ups”. Mitch Langerak brought down a Saudi in his match in which he did get a yellow. Despite Andy Harper musing that the referee would have shown red had it been a “competitive” match, the foul was within the box, so no goal chance denied. In fact, a better one was awarded via the penalty kick. This is FIFA’s ridiculous “triple punishment” rule that’s been allowed to creep into the game. It will never be restored to its original purpose with muppets like Harper continuing to propagate FIFA’s folly.

With farcical refereeing and farcical conditions of these games, something must be done to classify a particular type of match outside of tournaments and qualifiers so that it be treated, and recorded, as a “competitive match”. The old days there was a reference to “A-Internationals”. For the sake of simplicity, how about Football Internationals that allow just the 3 subs and accurate refereeing. The option for the lesser match, the existing friendly or “farclie”, is an Exhibition or a Practice Match. These matches allow for the myriad of substitutions, and also, except for violent acts, allow a red-carded player to be substituted. That way you penalise the player without affecting the nature of the match.

Brazil 2014 World Cup Review

Posted on by
Reply

20 July 2014

Brazil came to the party and delivered a spectacular World Cup. It will be remembered for the exhilarating football, especially during the group phase, the people, Brazil itself and the meltdown of the Brazilian national team. Despite many accolades of a new found Germany that took the game to a new level, they will be mostly remembered as being the most polished and cohesive team of an entirely pragmatic bunch.

Pragmatism continued as a theme for the World Cup itself. Everything worked as expected. People could get around to the venues easily. No real crowd troubles. No real security lapses. No real concerns with referees. No crazy interventions by FIFA. No controversies. That’s the mark of success and, with the quality of games and football and a deserving winner, that made it one of the great World Cups. Not the greatest. One of the greatest. More on that later.

Germany

Germany’s win is still a bit perplexing. They weren’t heavily spruiked before the tournament, they remained inconspicuous throughout, and simply did enough in the final to win. If not for that 7-1 over Brazil in the semi final, the rapture over Germany’s success would be much lower. After brushing aside Portugal in the first group game, they relatively struggled against Ghana, USA, Algeria and France. Even Argentina had enough chances to win the final, and then we’re finding ways to laud another team.

It takes a moment to ponder all the other teams and realise that there was no clear stand-out. Factor in the recent form of German club football, especially having six Bayern Munich players in a starting team, then Germany begins to make sense. That still doesn’t make them exciting, nor that they delivered an exciting new brand of football that will set a trend for the world.

It seems that much of the elite football commentary are desperate to ascribe something special to Germany just so that it took something special to lift THEIR World Cup, rather than some less inspiring and perfunctory unit. The significant ground that Germany made and that the saw the heaviest investment was in talent and player development, of which there’s no dispute they had all round the most talented team on the pitch, and with plenty in reserve sitting on the bench. To describe the essence of Germany in this World Cup: clinical, professional and accomplished.

Brazil

No surprise that Brazil wouldn’t cope with the pressure in the semi final. The surprise is the magnitude of the capitulation. They were a total debacle and probably did themselves a favour. Brazil’s real problem – evident for some time now – is it needs an attitude adjustment. No team has a divine right to win. Even though this Brazilian team was quite poor in comparison to others, the lesson to learn is to get used to losing. All other nations go through phases of their national team being poor. It’s part of the journey that makes sport so intriguing.

It’s not always about the winning. Fred and his cohorts delivered their nation a reality check. Better to be hammered in two successive games and learn your true place in the world than reach the final and lose to Argentina and proclaim it a national tragedy. Brazil would never recover from that, clouding itself in a belief the result was merely an injustice on their divine right to win. Now they know there’s no injustice. They received the right justice. They have serious footballing problems, and cultural problems. As Les Murray so eloquently observed, get back to the “jogo bonito”, and just let the results flow from there. Selling out your soul in the name of winning at all costs is not the way to guarantee true happiness for your people.

Third Place Game

It’s a farce. You’re in a knock-out tournament. When you lose, you’re knocked out, that’s it. No one cares about a dopey third-placed medal, and barely anyone remembers. All World Cup aspirations are to reach the final and then hope to win. To render another defeat on a team that’s already had their dream shattered, it’s soul destroying. Until one team makes a real issue of it, the charade of the match will continue.

Netherland’s coach Louis van Gaal mocked the play-off pre-match, then preceded to field a strong team and show joy in winning it. Maybe that’s more to do with getting in a kick on Brazil while they are down; you rarely get such opportunities to record wins over Brazil. One brave team needs to make the match a farce and treat it with disdain. Field all reserve players and just sit around the backline when in possession.

Goal Line Technology, Offsides and Referees

Great for the viewers at home to see the goal-line technology in action. In practice, it was never needed. In one match the referee might have waited for the confirmation (apparently that only takes 1 second) of a ball that was clearly over before the goalie dragged it back. There’s countless wrong offside calls that deny goals and goal chances in in every game that should be addressed, yet FIFA focuses on something that might fix a refereeing error once every 20 years?

While the referees did falsely call many plays as offside, credit actually must be give overall as countless times the line-ball decisions were allowed. Some plays might have been a whisker offside. All fine because FIFA dictates to favour the attacker. It then became depressing that even when the referees got it right, the commentators would dwell about a potential offside. Geez. Even if you want to ignore FIFA’s edict, the spirit of the law was to stop strikers loitering in front of the goal. It was never meant for the cynical and tactical device that it has become whereby anyone with a eyebrow offside must be halted for being a rampant cheat and grabbing a gargantuan advantage to score. Let it go. In fact, FIFA should amend the real that offside is only when there’s clear space between the body of the attacker and the last defender. Meaning, the attacker can be a full body-width “offside” under the current goal-denying culture of the game.

Shock, horror, Brazil 2014 really should be remembered for the excellent refereeing. That won’t happen because excellence in refereeing means they are oblivious to our senses. It’s only when they are poor that the referees are noticed. While they can never be 100% correct, even if video referral were added, they were almost as correct as they could realistically get.

The worst decision and the best decision I saw came in one match. The best being the penalty and yellow card when Arjen Robben was fouled early in the third-placed game. The commentator, as did many pundits, said it must be a red and the foul was outside the box. No. Being given a penalty actually provides a greater goal scoring chance, not removing one, while Robben fell inside the box. Let’s say you want to adjudge it as outside, then yes it would be a red because a goal chance was snuffed. So, after 3 minutes, we have no goal for the Dutch and Brazil a man down for the rest of the match, or do you want the Dutch a goal up and Brazil will a full team to try retrieve the game? I know the outcome I want: the one that is best for football.

The worst refereeing decision was when Oscar was given a yellow when it was a clear foul on him. The score was 2-0 when it potentially it’s 2-1. While the referee excelled with the Robben decision to preserve the game, he totally fluffed the one on Oscar to prevent it really coming alive.

Predictions

Since I was holiday just prior to the World Cup, my predictions were made as the group phase was well under way. The draw is always the key, and that allowed three out of the four semi finalists to be predicted. The miss was Germany, who were scheduled to meet France in the quarter final. France seemed to be the hot team of the tournament while Germany struggled after their initial 4-0 rout of Portugal, so favoured France. From there I expected France to humble Brazil and then there’d be a close final with Argentina. Initially leaving the result to fate as to whichever team was in dark blue due to a clash of strips, it was later realised there would be no clash of home strips so France would be dark blue and Argentina their light stripes. France the world champions.

In hindsight, the only change I’d have made had I predicted before the tournament was Spain to win their group and be in Netherland’s spot of the draw, so a Spain vs Argentina semi final a lock. The other side would be Brazil vs Netherlands in the R16 game, and most likely would have picked Germany to reach the semi. France struggled to qualify and would never have been on my radar. The unknown is Italy. Had they won their group they’d have faced Spain in the quarter final. Had they been second, it would have been Brazil or Netherlands in a QF. Either way, I’d have certainly expected Spain to triumph in their semi final, and most like Brazil to eke their way into theirs. While always believing Brazil will fold under the pressure somewhere (most likely the SF), that meant a Germany vs Spain final.

Best Goals

After finally seeing the entire goal from Tim Cahill, it’s number one because of the build-up from kick-off and for the purity of execution of a shot that had an ultra high difficulty level. It triumphs James Rodriguez’s for Colombia for that was more a pot-shot and only made more spectacular with the controlled juggle that preceded it. I rate it third overall. David Luiz’s stunning free kick for Brazil against Colombia is second because it’s far more deliberate and skilful, and, again, the execution was sublime for something of a really high difficulty level. Van Persie’s flying header for Netherlands against Spain in fourth.

Missing in many lists is David Villa’s goal against Australia. On top of the delightful back-heel sweep to score, the goal was preceded by a 15-pass build-up that ripped the entire Australian team apart. These expansive and elaborately constructed goals are far more satisfying than the long range pop-shots. While they are spectacular, they are largely hit or miss, with 90% of them heading into the stands.

Sweeping counter attacks are also special. France delivered a few of those, especially against Switzerland, Mexico might have delivered one against Croatia, Holland hit Chile with one, and there’s a few others I can’t remember. Either way, the onus should be more on broader footballing elements when adjudicating best goals. These top 10 lists really should have a mix of goals in them, not just the long range bombs.

Player of the Tournament

No doubt it’s Arjen Robben of Netherlands. It was the spark of that team and by far the tournament’s most dangerous player, and the tournament’s most dangerous player. The fact Argentina’s Lionel Messi actually one the “Golden Ball” is just stupid politically correctness of FIFA. The world’s best player of his generation had to be rewarded somehow if his team could not win the Cup itself. The simply fact of the matter is that when Messi had the chance to score a goal in the final and deliver Argentina the World Cup, he fluffed it. Whereas Robben delivered all the time. As did Colombia’s James Rodriguez. He really carried that team more than anyone carried a team, and was the tournament’s leading goal scorer. He’s second pick, so Messi at least third.

Moments

For all Brazil’s heartache, they did produce the most abiding moment of the World Cup: the disbelief on the faces of their fans in the crowd. As Germany piled up the goals, it really was stunned disbelief and the feeling of watching a trainwreck in slow motion. How much more could they take? Then it was just resignation to defeat, and pleas to stop the punishment. Enough damage had been done.

Second to Brazil would be the demolition of Spain by the Netherlands. While you could attribute that game as just a freak of sports, especially since many of the goals were circumstantial rather than Spain being actually dismantled or played ultra bad like Brazil did, the follow up loss of 2-0 to Chile confirmed a reign prematurely halted. That match also impacted directly on Australia, eliminating them from the competition. Up until that point, had Spain beaten Chile, Australia was still alive, needing to beat Spain in their final match.

Yellow Cards and Suspensions

FIFA’s a joke. With the paucity of yellow cards, media was criticising FIFA for allowing referees to be too lenient so to prevent the stars of the sport being suspended from games. So guess who’s wiping yellow cards before the semi finals start to prevent any star players being suspended for the final on a second yellow? FIFA! This was rushed in for the last World Cup, and remains for this one. UEFA just announced a similar rule for the Champions League.

Yellow cards will always remain problematic because they are no deterrent. Clearly the powers that be also don’t like players being suspended for future – especially bigger – games. Not only are they denying the player a golden moment in life, they are rewarding a future team that was irrelevant to the game in which the suspension occurred. The answer is simple: If a red card means permanent expulsion, a yellow should be a temporary one. At least 10 minutes as a start, maybe 15 to really have the cards respected and the players curtail poor behaviour. That way the team is immediately and properly punish, while the infringed team gets the direct reward of a “power play” of sorts.

Neymar

Sad to say, that’s the culture of the sport in South America – to cheat. We hear it all the time, it’s intrinsic to South and Central American teams to beat authority, to bend rules, even break rules, all to get one up. This “assault” in the quarter final that led to a fractured vertebrae is no different. The motive was to beat authority, not to injure Neymar. It looked harmless; only the result made it problematic, hence calls for a red card or some sort of post match punishment.

Let’s look at it if it was the first minute and the foul had no consequences of injury, and the Colombian is red-carded. Suddenly we’re all hysterical that the game was ruined by the referee’s over-zealous action, and that Brazil could just breeze past Colombia. Sorry, we can’t have it both ways. It was a dirty game in which Brazil committed 31 fouls. We either disdain this culture of cheating and applaud the courage of referees to give red cards, or we continue as normal.

Asia and World Cup Qualifying

As much as Asia’s results were poor of winning no games and achieving just 3 draws, this World Cup is a reality check that Europe and South America still dominate the sport. Argentina vs Germany in the final. Yup, we’ve never see that before. Or Brazil and Netherlands in the semi finals. While it’s easy to pick on Asia’s teams in last place of their groups, let’s not forget that seven of Europe’s 13 teams failed too, as did 3 of Africa’s. The two African teams that progressed had Asian teams in their group, and were then promptly beaten in R16 by Europeans. In the test against Europe and South America, Africa failed just as much as Asia did. Then you really should exclude Algeria, because they are more an Arab team and benefiting from so many French born players. From black Africa, the region Pele famously predicted they’d win the World Cup by 2000, they went backwards.

CONCACAF continue to be just two teams: USA and Mexico. Both eliminated in R16 too. In fact, Mexico has never progressed past R16, while USA’s only success was in 2002. Of Costa Rica, the third team that reached the knockout stage, only once in 20 years you might see that happen. Then they were lucky not be bundled out by Greece.

The solution? Nothing. It’s a tournament to represent the world, not necessarily the best 32. Otherwise, you should have a world qualifying phase, rather than by confederation and the squabble for spots.

Maybe there should be a world qualifying phase? Split the world into 4 regions: Europe, Africa, Asia/Oceania, Americas. Each get four direct spots, which could be based on their continental championships. Then you have 8 world groups containing a team from each region. Play round robin home and away. The winners and best 7 second placed teams go to the World Cup. The final spot is reserved for the host. This process would do more to help the weaker regions by playing serious games and against serious opponents, rather than mostly beating up their own to qualify.

Australia – Results Matter

It is about the results. You can’t tell anyone that had Australia been hammered 5-0 in every game that we’d have learnt anything or, indeed, been happy with “the result”. The fact Australia returned acceptable losses, pushing Chile and Netherlands in the process, is a “good result”. That’s because Australia exceeded expectations. So when you say “results don’t matter”, the real implication is that “unrealistic results don’t matter”.

Reality is that if you’re not playing for results at major tournaments, then why bother to show up? As we saw from Ange Postecoglou and some of the boys and many fans like myself, the fact Australia did not get a tangible result of at least 1 point or even a win, it was very disappointing. Missed opportunities will be long rued – especially that game against the Dutch in which Australia briefly led 2-1. While such losses will be tolerated for this World Cup given the inexperience of the team, it won’t be for the next.

Media

The only flaw with the coverage was Martin Tyler in the commentary box. He saps the energy from any game with his inane waffling. He’s been poor for 20 years now and the way he drifts off, it’s now far more frequent and lengthy these days. The best case in point was Germany’s seventh goal against Brazil. Germany’s in the attacking third and Tyler is waffling on, then suddenly there’s a goal and he needs to reanimate again. He should have been already animated. SBS probably doesn’t get much choice with Tyler, as he’d be part of a generic pool of English commentators for the English speaking world.

For an area that Australia could control, Craig Foster was a trainwreck as “special comments”, or whatever you call the audible verbal spasms he makes. Especially against Spain, the jingoistic coaching and cheering on every play was a national embarrassment and a disgrace. How about a touch of professionalism? He’d probably be the first to mock the patriotic commentary that Channel 9 does for cricket, and here he is acting like an infant. With Les Murray sadly now hosting his last World Cup, let’s hope Fozz is consigned to those more static hosting duties. The bonus for Australia is that there only three games in which Australia had to tolerate Fozz whereas Tyler was up almost every match day.

Other than the commentary debacles, everything was superb. The vision, all the studio hosts and studio experts and the support shows (sad that no World Cup show on Monday to review, hum, the world cup final!) – SBS might have delivered the best coverage of any major sporting event Australia has seen. All other Australian media was brilliant too, with News Ltd and Fairfax having comprehensive coverage, not to mention pay-TV Fox Sports having daily shows. Australia was so spoiled this time. It was amazing.

The Best Ever World Cup?

Was it a great World Cup? Yes. Was it the best ever? No. I still rate USA 94 as the best ever World Cup. After a gripping group stage, the knockout stage of Brazil 2014 was riddled with boring draws and predictable results. For all the talk of unpredictable results, that was mostly in the group stage. Come the knockout stage it was situation normal. All the group winners won their R16 match – the first time that had never happened. Of the lesser lights like Costa Rica and Belgium that made quarter finals, they couldn’t progress, with the semi finals involving traditional big guns of Brazil, Argentina, Germany and Netherlands, with the final Germany vs Argentina. Hardly anything to portend a new world order in football.

In contrast, USA had an equally vibrant group stage, followed by an amazing knockout phase. Goals were as prolific with USA 94 averaging 2.6 goals per game in the round robin compared to 2.8 for Brazil 2014. That marginal difference is explained by the greater number of blow-outs in Brazil, not higher scoring competitive matches. Portugal, Spain, Cameroon, Honduras and Australia all conceded at least seven goals, while in USA only Cameroon (mostly from one game) and Greece conceded at least 7 goals.

In the knockout phase, Brazil 2014 returned a measly 2.2 goals per game (1.8 if you ignore the German whitewash of Brazil in the semi final), compared to 3 goals per game at USA 94. Even the memorable knockout matches, there were none in Brazil, compared to classics at USA 94 like Romania v Argentina, Italy v Nigeria, Netherlands v Brazil and Bulgaria v Germany. If not for the rubbish final, USA 94 would have been just about perfect. Mexico 1986 probably comes second of those World Cups I’ve seen, with Brazil 2014 in third. If I’m to factor in Australia’s involvement, Germany 2006 will always have a special place in the heart.

That was Brazil 2014 – The Twentieth World Championship of Football