Au revoir Holger after national embarrassment in Paris

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

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

Qatar not the “mistake”, negligence of other bidders the mistake

18  September 2013

FIFA president Sepp Blatter stunned the world last week by declaring Qatar as host for the 2022 World Cup that “we made a mistake at the time”. This adds to his comment in May that a summer World Cup is “not rational and reasonable”, and Executive Committee member Theo Zwanziger in July calling it a “blatant mistake”. The mistake being that the weather in Qatar’s fierce summer is just too hot and for some reason FIFA didn’t realise this at the time. Forget that the Qataris believe the can cool the stadiums; you can’t cool an entire country. The real mistake is, especially knowing the corrupt nature of FIFA, is why the other bidders didn’t twig to this reality of an impossible World Cup in Qatar’s summer and the future shenanigans that FIFA would play. Qatar was always certain to win the bid for the simple reason that if weather was the issue, FIFA would have told them much earlier not to bother bidding at all.

From the Socceroo Realm prior to the World Cup announcement:

The only real conspicuous negative for Qatar is the weather. Qatar speak of air-conditioning all venues. That’s pointless for most of the other time when fans are not at games. The heat is debilitating, and would virtually kill any outdoor activity. It’s a wonder that FIFA just didn’t tell Qatar straight out to not bother. That’s unless the World Cup will be played in January. Nowhere have FIFA ruled out a proposition of a January World Cup, only citing that it is hot in June. That doesn’t mean that there hasn’t already been some backroom deal that January is OK. It almost defies logic that Qatar would attempt a bid knowing that a June World Cup is impossible with the heat. Remember, a January World Cup is not at all impractical. Many leagues are closed for winter. Other leagues can easily adjust by suspending their league for 4 weeks and extending it into early June. It actually makes so much sense. With FIFA, nothing would surprise if they announce Qatar as a winner and the idea is to play it in January.”

The only error in that pre-announcement analysis was FIFA not immediately announcing a winter World Cup. Obviously the furore would be huge, so FIFA allowed the idea to cultivate on its own through various consorts and media to the point it became so compelling that FIFA would be seen as derelict in duty if it not propose a switch. While it was expected FIFA may wait a few more years for a regenerated Executive Committee to really propel the idea under the guise of fixing the past mistake of others, the mood is so strong and media rights both domestic and internationally need to be sorted that the time is now. Blatter will propose the move to the Executive Committee, which effectively guarantees the switch. Not so much because of Blatter’s input; the ExCo will make the change as it was always the plan and now is the perfect time to take advantage and lock it in.

Qatar is remaining silent in this controversy, as it should, as the move is always a FIFA initiative. It’s also perfectly allowable in FIFA’s agreement with the bidder to change many aspects as it wishes, including the schedule. The real issue is that such an idea was not readily known, or that bidders believed they could realistically plan their bid at a period any other than June and July and be successful. Bizarrely, only now, and on behalf of Qatar and other nations, Blatter raised the idea of discrimination if the World Cup can’t be moved…

“If we maintain, rigidly, the status quo, then a FIFA World Cup can never be played in countries that are south of the equator or indeed near the equator. We automatically discriminate against countries that have different seasons than we do in Europe and we make it impossible for all those who would love to host the world’s biggest game in a global tournament to ever get the chance to do so. I think it is high time that Europe starts to understand that we do not rule the world anymore and that some former European imperial powers can no longer impress their will on to others in far away places and we must accept that football has moved away from being a European and South American sport. It has become the world sport that billions of fans are excitedly following every week, everywhere in the world.”

Ironically, if Qatar had used this themselves as an argument they would have gained broader sympathy. More relevant would have been the consequences for Australia’s bid. Stymied by a crowded calendar of domestic football codes and a recalcitrant AFL, Australia had no hope. If it wasn’t enough the lack of unity for the bid with the AFL, much of the resources into new stadia would leave the greatest legacy for Australian Rules football, not the round ball code. Perth’s Subiaco, Adelaide Oval, Gold Coat’s Carrara and Geelong’s Kardinia Park all get upgrades, when it should have been a new stadium in Perth, with Hindmarsh, Robina and Bubble stadiums upgraded in the other cities. If renovating AFL grounds was to appease the AFL, it clearly didn’t work, and would have sent strange signals to FIFA about the organisation truly running the sport in this country. Is it the FFA or the AFL? Add to that the appalling presentation video of cartoon kangaroo and tacky and irrelevant icons of Hoges, Freeman and Thorpe, it was a disaster. Getting one vote was simply a message of thanks for participating, not an endorsement of any facet of the bid.

Consider had their been an open schedule then Australia would have suggested March, as the Socceroo Realm always proposed. Nicer weather, cricket over and domestic football yet to start. No need to appease the AFL or anyone. In hindsight, its critical benefit would have been to hold FIFA accountable to their traditional June schedule. No doubt Australia would have been knocked back on interrupting the club season. If so, then absolutely no avenue to consider Qatar then or now for a January tournament. The big problem was that Australia, as the immature amateurs stepping brazonly into the world of FIFA slime and sleaze, chose to play that game, and lost. Had it marched with integrity and a March schedule and boasted of a brilliant World Cup wrecked by a discriminatory scheduling tradition, then already FIFA could have opened the schedule or slammed it shut.

Right now FFA CEO Frank Lowy is demanding compensation for the $43 million spent on the bid. Australia’s definitely owed something in that it was forced to make a compromised bid. That won’t be money as FIFA has already snubbed the idea, reaffirming that “as part of the bidding documents all bidders accepted that the format and dates, though initially expected to be in June/July, remain subject to the final decision of FIFA”. While not compromised on a technical matter, as there’s nothing stating a World Cup must be June (it’s there as tradition), the compromise was ethically, as the scheduling flexibility was not transparent. Had it been, even Qatar would bid on a winter Cup, along with its summer Cup proposal, leaving FIFA to decide its preference.

Australia’s best case now for compensation could only be to argue for the bidding to be re-opened. Remember, this was an unusual process with two World Cups decided at once. Normally 2022 would be decided late 2014. Of course, if FIFA decided to re-open the bidding and for an openly flexible schedule, they’d probably still choose Qatar, using discrimination as Blatter just described as an advocacy tool, and also discrimination of fairness in that it’s not Qatar denying it can’t host a summer Cup or even demanding a change of schedule for the World Cup, it’s FIFA driving the change. With the 2018 (Russia) and 2022 World Cups proudly boasted as spreading the game to new territories, FIFA will just be more resilient to hold it in Qatar, especially now without high temperatures – the key flaw of Qatar’s initial bid – a problem no longer existing.

The best thing for Australia is actually Qatar does have its World Cup, and hosts it successfully. That means Australia can target a friendlier schedule itself for a future bid. Despite much criticism from clubs and commentators that domestic leagues will be ruined by two months of a shut-down and players will be burnt-out, that’s nonsense, and a World Cup easily slotted into January. First of all, it’s not much more than two weeks between the end of the domestic leagues and the World Cup starting in its traditional June slot right now, so the preparation period needs only be two weeks, and when you consider that it would start on a Monday after a weekend’s round, only one actual round is skipped pre-tournament. During the Cup itself, only four teams make the final week, so it’s no problem for the world’s leagues to resume after 3 weeks. Of course, the A-League could resume after two weeks, or not close at all if the Socceroos is primarily overseas based. The maximum season break is four weeks, and easily accomodated by extending the season by two or three weeks and adding a midweek round or two. Note, this break mid-season only applies to leagues that do play through the winter. Most have a winter break through January so a winter World Cup is zero effect.

All FIFA need to do is set the dates and let the individual leagues and competitions decide how to manage their scheduling. For only a few clubs in a few leagues to be affected, and for such a rare occasion, it really is snobbery to the highest degree that they can’t make one small sacrifice in the interests of the broader world of football. So many of these elite clubs talk about a fair go for minorities, and even FIFA has their “fair play” edict. How about acting it?

For a full chronicle of events surrounding Australia’s World Cup bid:
socceroorealm.com

So much hysteria from losing to Brazil… in Brazil?

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

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

Young Socceroos make turkey of both performance and result

29 Saturday 2013

Four years ago, at the U20 World Cup in Egypt, the Young Socceroos returned one of their worse results at any World Cup – losing all three games. The tournament was noted more for SBS’s bizarre response to it as a success because of “performance”, rather the appraising by conventional barometer of results. Stranger than that, the performance was weak anyway – with SBS seeming to have an agenda to support the newly installed Dutch coaching structure right through the game regardless of a results and to vindicate its long established railing against coaches of Australian or British origin. Read more at the website, under “Action > Egypt 2009”

Turkey 2013 was similar. While the Dutch influence has faded thanks to a German (Holger Osieck) now coaching the Socceroos and an Australian (Paul Okon) now coaching the Young Socceroos, it’s still present at a “technical” level and obviously needs to endorsed. Whether your mantra is “results are secondary to performance” or “results are primary to performance”, the Socceroo Realm examines both via posts made to SBS’s own theworldgame.com.au website.

Australia vs Colombia – 1-1

A match in three phases: Colombia started strongly, Australian dominated much of the middle, Colombia the end when chasing a result. Against the South American champions, it was a bright start, and the team looked really good. That got both the fans and Craig Foster in lathers of drool.

The result…

Can we actually reach the group phase before hyperventilating? Remember, 24 teams at this tournament, so knockout phase includes four best third placed teams, so making it is actually minimum standard. If we beat El Salvador then that’s enough for qualification. We want to then win one knockout and see quarter final at least.

The one issue of this match was towards the end. When the match really counted and Colombians applied pressure, we weren’t that good. Before that, the Colombians were lazy (or arrogant), not really closing us down, then they were chasing the game. Colombia’s goal came from appalling defensive organisation too. The match against Turkey will be our real test.

The performance…

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. It was one match, at a YOUTH World Cup, against a lazy opposition that didn’t quickly close us down. In the latter stages of the second half, when they did, the boys ran out of options, playing too cute at times, and constantly losing possession, much like the senior team does. In all due respect, that 2009 team was a farce. They played a few patches of nice passing (mostly in the defensive half) and then were hammered. Most of the guys there haven’t progressed, so a lot of good it did them. Fozzie made an embarrassment of himself congratulating a team that displayed little and produced even less.

The U20 WC is also one tournament and is merely the terminal point of a short international youth career of a player’s total career. Players return to their clubs, and that’s where the real development takes place. Still the single biggest factor affecting results at any Youth World Cup is the talent itself, and that’s the area this team seems to have great potential. Of course, we won’t know until the knockout phase or really know for 4 or 5 years, not whether they can knock a few balls around in group matches of this tournament.

Australia vs El Salvador – 1-2

A cracking early goal from Joshua Brillante seemed to portend the win that most expensive against apparently the weakest team in the group. That wasn’t the case. Australia was lethargic and let down by poor concentration to go behind and then lacking any inspiration going forward. Did they believe their own press? Attitude seemed a problem, not paying enough respect to the opposition, as is often the fault of the Australian “bully” sporting psyche when supremacy gathers air. To compound that, Okon waited far too long to make substitutions. It was El Salvador’s first win at any World Cup. Congratulations to them.

The result…

Now, let’s not write off the team. With Colombia beating Turkey in the other match (after Turkey beat El Salvador 3-0 in the first game), that suggests not only is Australia at least equal chance to beat Turkey too, it also confirms the vagaries of the sport. Anything can happen. If Australia win, that then means the next phase as this tournament is 24 teams so the 4 best third placed teams go through.

The performance…

How the tide turns. After Colombia, the tone is hyperbolic and Fozz couldn’t wait to post his blog about all the footballing misconceptions (maybe this was written before even the team played?), and now it’s all doom and gloom. Facts are that Colombia were so lazy in closing us down. Only at the end, with the game on the line, did they bother. Maybe they were pacing themselves, as they then went on to beat Turkey. El Salvador, on the other hand, gave us nothing. Even Fozz admitted this post match in the studio. It was worse than that, as ES had most of the better chances and far more dangerous. Australia were totally useless going forward, and for all the talk of ES’s “cheap” goals, ours was just as cheap – being a long, speculative shot that was helped with the goalie obscured.

Australia vs Turkey – 1-2

This was the quintessential tight, World Cup match. Both teams had chances to win. The problem was that with all teams in the group already having a win, Australia had to win to ensure the next phase. Turkey only needed a draw, or even a loss could suffice. Australia scored first – at the start of the second half – only to be promptly snuffed with a cracking shot from outside the box. Turkey finished it off with an even better effort – a long range chip into the top, left corner of the net.

The result…

A bit of an embarrassment. Australia couldn’t even get the basics rights. They led all three games and finished with one draw. Who cares if you can knock the ball around a bit? Now we know that those bright moments against Colombia were definitely because Colombia allowed it. We get all hyperbolic about, two matches later, Colombia tops the group and Australia the bottom.

Les Murray tweeted: “Young Socceroos outplayed Colombia, copped El Salvador on a very good day and outplayed themselves v Turkey. Overall some very good signs.” It could just as easily be seen as Colombia had an off day or took Australia too lightly, Australia did likewise against El Salvador, and didn’t have the polish of Turkey. What does “outplayed themselves” mean anyway? If they had played a normal, conventional game, they would have won? If that’s the case, yes please.

Thankfully the team did not listen to this SBS nonsense of “results secondary to performance”. It’s a World Cup. If you don’t go for results there, where will you get them? These players now return to their clubs where the true development takes place. Both them and the coach were rightfully shattered. For all the hopes we had with this team, you simply must be critical of the final result. Let’s also remember, it is about the final result. The sport is a game of vagaries of nuances: not just within the game itself, also within a succession of a few games. Analyse tournaments at the end.

Overall, Australia were competitive in all games; they just lacked the killer punch forward (too much messing around as seems to be the hallmark of Australian national teams these days), and lacked in defence. While Australia were unlucky to score more, they were also lucky not to concede more. With some defensive stout, this team could have topped the group. It was that even.

We also need to end this nonsense of slamming opposition goals as “cheap” or “gifted” as coach Paul Okon often did. That’s poor sportsmanship. Most goals in football games are cheap if you analyse them. Of Australia’s goals through the tournament, the first should have been saved, the second was the type from long range that 90% of the time will end in the stands, and the third was a technically tough mid-range volley at pace – again, more often miss than hit. Most of the goals we conceded also could be considered as low percentage chances or could be defended better. That’s football. Don’t whinge. Just get on scoring the next one, or do better stopping them in the first place.

The performance…

Emulate Spain and Barcelona? All great in theory, totally unrealistic in practice. We are not Spain. Not even far more pedigreed and established teams like the Netherlands are Spain. We just don’t have the players. While we can do it in spurts, and usually against opposition of less credentials or against teams that allow us (like Colombia at this WC), when it comes to the crunch, we don’t have the ability – and we are decades away from it. Our players are so sporadic in ability that our national teams should adapt to them for the time. If we have two gun strikers, we play them. If our midfielders are strong, we go heavy there.

This is not club football where you can pick a squad and develop it over years. They are representative teams. You pick your best, and play them in their best positions. We learnt that through the senior team’s qualifying phase. At a World Cup, it’s even more important is it’s the summit of the campaign, so you want the best possible results. The mantra of “results are secondary to performance” is utter nonsense. Maybe it is in warm-up games, it’s not in the real thing. No nation would even contemplating going to a World Cup to disrespect the opposition and the integrity of the competition itself just to experiment with a playing style that they’re ill-equipped to perform. For Australia, it’s even more than that. It’s un-Australian not to fight.

Now done with the World Cup, where to these players go now – A-League, lower Euro clubs, Qatar, UAE? We reap nothing in “performance”, only get embarrassment from the result. If these players infiltrate into the national team in years time, it will be on the back of development at club football, and then within the national team environment itself.

In all sport, the best indicator of performance is winning. At world level, as we’ve just seen in the senior World Cup qualifying, we need to adapt. There’ll be times of grinding out results, stout defending and swift passing. It depends on the opposition. The youth team did one of those aspects reasonably well; failed in all others.

Let’s note: they led all 3 games and left with 1 draw. That exposes glaring faults to be examined, not faux gold medals and congratulations because you liked a few passages of play – or even like the intent to play nice passages of play. At least the boys and the coach saw the importance of results. They were clearly shattered at the early elimination. That will do them far more good than a letter of congratulations from Craig Foster for the “performance” of knocking the ball around when under little pressure.

Long term, the strategy for strong national teams is developing the A-League. When it’s 14 teams with 50,000 crowds at most games, then we’re a mature football nation, and then the flow-on effects to the national teams will be automatic. No top nation has a weak national league. We’re fooling ourselves if we believe we can succeed by any other method. This is the ethos of the “I told you so” mantra by the late Johnny Warren. Too easily have we run away with the sentiment while forgetting its foundations.

GROUP C

22/06 18:00	Trabzon		Colombia	1:1 (0:0)	Australia
22/06 21:00	Trabzon		Turkey		3:0 (1:0)	El Salvador
25/06 18:00	Rize		Australia	1:2 (1:2)	El Salvador
25/06 21:00	Rize		Turkey		0:1 (0:0)	Colombia
28/06 21:00	Trabzon		Australia	1:2 (0:0)	Turkey
28/06 21:00	Gaziantep	El Salvador	0:3 (0:2)	Colombia
Team		P	W	D	L	GD	Pts
Colombia	3	2	1	0	4	7
Turkey		3	2	0	1	3	6
El Salvador	3	1	0	2	5-	3
Australia	3	0	1	2	2-	1

Full site: socceroorealm.com

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

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

Jordan gone, Iraq gone – A one-two punch and suddenly it’s easy

Melbourne: Australia 4 – Jordan 0

In just over one week Australian football fans have gone from despair about qualifying to pre-emptive celebration. The first punch was knocking out Jordan in this most defining of games – at Melbourne’s Docklands last night. It was the most pivotal and emotionally intense game probably since the Iran Game in 1997, given the high hopes and feverish anticipation of success that both games shared. The second punch came later in the night when Japan knocked out Iraq 1-0 in Doha.

Played, Points & GD
Jap 8, 17, +11
Aus 7, 10, 4
Oma 7, 9, -2
Jor 7, 7, -10
Irq 7, 5, -3

Schedule
18/06 Aus v Iraq; Jor v Oma

Next week’s equation is now simple: Australia must beat Iraq in Sydney only if Oman wins in Jordan. Any lesser result by Oman, Australia has already qualified for Brazil. Of course, with Australia playing several hours prior to Oman’s game, Australia has no choice than to seek a win. It’s just that there’s that comforting factor that a loss or draw means a late night vigil of the other game, cheering for Jordan to knock out Oman. With Jordan needing to win to make the third-placed playoff – and given their strong home form already with wins over Australia and Japan – Oman’s hopes seem low. Conversely, with Iraq knocked out from even a playoff spot and potentially coming to Australia as a totally deflated opponent, Australia’s hopes could not be higher coming into any live game.

The key to next week’s game will be an early goal. Arab teams seem to be weak mentally against non-Arab teams, easily capitulating if the game doesn’t go their way, just as Jordan fell apart last night. Hoping for a draw, they left the half time break at 1-0 and putting Australia under extreme pressure. To say there was a deja vu of that Iran Game is not an understatement. The entire stadium grew restless, frustrated at the reverse in dominance and also of so many missed chances had left the game finely balanced at 1-0. Unlike Terry Venables, coach in 1997, Holger Osieck did react to the parlous state of play, bringing on an actual striker, Archie Thompson. Within 30 seconds, he picked up the ball, charged the defence, passed off, dragged two defenders towards his run, and next thing you know the ball is in the net. Robbie Kruse was able to find Tim Cahill in plenty of space for a headed goal. From there, Kruse scored himself after a neat turn, while Lucas Neill scored his first Socceroos goal after heading from a corner scramble. It was his 91st game. All that Jordan could manage was substituting their goalkeeper late in the game, fearing another yellow card against him, as he constantly berated the referee in frustration. To say he was throwing in the towel, he literally did as he exited the field straight to the dressing room.

This was the first time this campaign that Osieck named the same team for successive matches. While it seems unwise to deviate for Iraq, it’s total negligence not to note the immediate transformation in lethality and energy when Thompson arrived. Cahill is not a striker and doesn’t behave like one. Too often he was in his own half retrieving balls. Again, often on breaks, no one was forward, meaning attacks broke down. In contrast, with an actual striker menacing the last line and pushing the defence back, suddenly there was all this space for attacking midfielders to exploit. The result was astounding. It’s not the first time either. Australia recovered late to beat Iraq earlier in the campaign. Finally: Brett Holman. The seduction is over. Can’t pass, runs erratically, shoots wildly and impetuous with decisions. While some of it can be forgiven for his energy and rare cracking goal and whatever else the coaches see, it was his inability to hit simple, short passes that really frustrated. In the interim between qualifiers and the World Cup, someone like Tomas Rogic – who replaced Holman during the game – must be tried. Better still, drop Cahill back to his customary and more dangerous role as lurking attacking midfielder and play a striker up front.

How times have changed with female sports journalists and specifically Fox Sports’ Melanie McLaughlin. Tim Cahill delivered his own knock-out by kissing her after the post-match interview – somewhat surprising her. This was the same player incredibly rude and disrespectful to her post-match Japan, MCG, 2009. It was some petulant protest about other sections of the media reporting alleged unruly behaviour at a Sydney bar by Cahill – something nothing to do with Fox Sports. It only hurt Cahill and the team’s image as fans deserved to hear answers to the excellent questions about the match. McLaughlin deserved an apology back then. Whether she received one, that determines the interpretation of the kiss. The original incident was covered in the page for South Africa 2010 qualifying on the website.

* Apologies for the abridged and late update. A broken collarbone from a bike crash meant another hospital visit and typing limited to just the left hand.

Photos: http://fb.me/M4yqNFZp 

Full site: socceroorealm.com

Holger gets it right in an epic draw against Japan

Saitama: Japan 1 – Australia 1

For all the furore of an aging team, and most particularly against Lucas Neill, coach Holger Osieck’s decision to restore the key central pairing of Neill and Sasa Ognenovski in defence paid off after Australia left Saitama with a 1-1 draw. They were maestros, reading every attack, and timing their tackling and lunges perfectly. It was a master class. While the result doesn’t change too much the requirements for Australia’s remaining games, it proved a fillip for a maligned team looking to rejuvenate both pride in themselves and hope in the fans to believe that qualification remains very much alive.

Played, Points & GD
Jap 7, 14, +10
Oma 7, 9, -2
Aus 6, 7, 0
Jor 6, 7, -6
Irq 6, 5, -2

Schedule
11/06 Aus v Jor; Irq v Jap
18/06 Aus v Iraq; Jor v Oma

Australia enters their final two games, both at home, needing to win to seal a direct place. Just as was the equation before last night’s match. The difference the draw makes is that Australia could survive a loss in one of those games, depending on results of other matches. The other game in the group saw Oman step into second place, albeit with an extra game played. Worse would have been Iraq winning as they are Australia’s opponents in two weeks, really making for a tingly finale. As it stands, Japan could knock them out next week. Oman’s final game is in two weeks in Jordan. So, you see that Australia beating Jordan next week is so defining. That would mean a draw between Jordan and Oman allows Australia the luxury to lose against Iraq if Iraq don’t beat Japan.

It’s important to see these qualifying groups in context. It’s about total points in the group, not needing to beat Japan away or winning any particular game. It’s about points. It’s about winning home games too. So far Australia’s only had two of four at home compared to Japan and Oman four of four. Just because Australia’s home games fall towards the end of the campaign it doesn’t diminish the points on offer. In the group wWe should expect to win at least two home games, if we can’t, we don’t deserve qualification. So far two draws, so probability is in our favour. For advocates of “knowing the equation” when preferring home legs last in two-leg playoffs, we also have that. Except, we have two home matches last.

For all the good defending, going forward was often a mess. With the open and fluid game that Japan allowed, Australia constantly messed up breaks. Brett Holman was his usual blight of constant rash play mixed with hard running and one good pass or shot. That lovely pass allowed Robbie Kruse through for a one-on-one, only to hit straight at the goalie. Tim Cahill lacked composure when fluffing the rebound. Earlier Holman also lacked composure when shooting from a broken attack from over 40 metres out when propping and waiting for a runner would serve better. Japan had even better chances and can lament weak finishing and Mark Schwarzer in Australia’s goal.

It just makes you marvel at the vagaries of the game if Japan nailed one of their early chances, Tom Oar’s late cross had not snuck in to score or the late handball against Matt McKay that saw Japan equalise in injury time. A 0-0 and Australia would be happy; at 1-1 not so much given the circumstances. We all should remember, not least the menace of Fox Sport’s Andy Harper, this splendour of the sport, that goals and swings in momentum can come from nothing. The need to build an elaborate and often premature melodramatic narrative of the game exposes a lack of control of the mouth more commonly seen in other parts of the male anatomy. Really, give us a break. Can we just enjoy the game?

* Apologies for the abridged update. A broken collarbone from a bike crash with typing limited to one bruised left hand.

More: socceroorealm.com

Osieck backs veterans against Japan as a draw suits fine

The shaky defence of recent games will be fortified with Lucas Neill and Sasa Ognenovski returning as central pairing in a game where a draw in Saitama will see Australia climb back into second on the table. Jordan, currently in second, has the bye, while the winner of Oman v Iraq would leap-frog Australia and dump Jordan to fourth. The group is that close. Osieck’s decision makes sense as Australia then has two home games in which to simply maintain their position.

“Why Neill” as so many ask on the football forums? Plenty of chances have been given to the youngsters and they haven’t stepped up. Look against Oman where the defence was easily penetrated. Neill is still the best defender. He’s being made the scapegoat for the team’s average performances simply because of his age. As for Og, it wasn’t so long ago fans were crying for him to start for the national team. No defenders have surpassed him; he’s done little wrong either. Fans are so fickle. Remember, it’s about qualifying, not any individual game, and clearly Osieck’s thinking a draw suits fine.

More interest will be forward. Given that Japan is almost an expendable game, it would not surprise if a few surprises are sprung and maybe snag a result in Japan. Josh Kennedy’s long-awaited return will certainly offer something different. Most likely any move will come later in the game after a substitution. While early in the game would really catch the Japanese off guard, it would then leave the team open to an onslaught. If it fails, no real harm done. Holger can return to the more conservative approach for the final games and would also have a mandate to do so given the failure in Japan.

Note that this match really is almost expendable. If Australia wins their two final games – both at home – it’s almost certainly enough. Remember that in a playoff it’s so well desired to play the the home match last? Well, what’s better than one home game last? Two! This time, away-goals don’t count as double, unlike the Iran Game.

* Apologies for the abridged update. A broken collarbone from a bike crash with typing limited to one bruised left hand.

More at: socceroorealm.com