Jump to content
Melbourne Football

The road to the WC Finals - now 2022


Tesla
 Share

Recommended Posts

Oh last night I thought the Thais were terrible. We lacked a killer striker (please can people stop suggesting McLaren, guy is not ready for International level and may never be), but the number of balls that hit the post or had arsey saves or somehow missed- not the coaches fault that's for sure.

issue was not winning in Thailand and not being pragmatic to get the draw mid week. Basically we are not helped by our shit defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mus-28 said:

Looks like we're playing Syria, at least the away leg will be at a neutral venue. FFA will be rubbing their hands together at the extra cash they can generate with 2 more sudden death qualifiers. 

Syria have played their home games in Malaysia, if we get to play them there it will be better for us than a trip to the Middle east

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't feel confident about beating Syria over two legs at all (that's how bleak the state of our national team has become), let alone whoever we face in the CONCACAF play-off.

FWIW, Syria scored a 93rd minute equaliser away from home against table-topping Iran and were the only team to not lose to them in both home and away matches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what you get from having a manager that believes one game fits all. This is a delusion.

Without ranting and repeating what has already been said, the question to ask is whether a more competent manager would have done the same thing, and the answer is no. 

The reality is our current Ange tactics, even if we do qualify, will lead to thrashings against teams of the same or better standard. This is reality.

In case you haven't noticed Ange, your 3 back high possession system does not work, and it can't because your players make too many errors and you leave your defence too open. So your job is too instil a system that your players can perform optimally as a team, and it is not the current system you want to use.

If you want a real honest indicator of where your team is at with your game plan then our 2-0 loss against Japan is pretty accurate. 

We are off the mark Ange, way off.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, n i k o said:

Ange stormed out of the post match press conference. Can't handle the heat.

Fuk him. He is a stubborn fat qant

2 hours ago, belaguttman said:

Syria have played their home games in Malaysia, if we get to play them there it will be better for us than a trip to the Middle east

A game in the middle east would good... good to BEHEAD Ange

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about the Socceroos and Ange alot recently and my opinion has fluctuated considerably. 

At the moment the way I see it is that this current qualifying cycle and Anges development of the team is exactly what Australian soccer and the National team needs. Qualifying for the World Cup shouldn't be seen as the end result or even a great achievement more importantly what we will do when we get there. 

There are so many examples of nations dominating during qualifications and getting to World Cups and not even earning a point. Under Holger and Pim we qualified quite easily but were embarrassing when we got there (2010). 

Now I'm not saying Ange and the management team are not without fault and some decisions have been wrong but overall watching the Socceroos is a fuckload more enjoyable than before Ange (minus the 2006 unrepeatable run). So whatever happens in the playoffs and possibly Russia will be guaranteed to be entertaining. 

My concern is post Ange, what will the Socceroos look like and what will be the effect long-term.

I think Ange should have looked at a 2 World cup cycle to be able to leave a lasting legacy. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really hard not to feel bad for Ange as for years we've cried out for a better standard of football, the sort of football that can match high quality teams on the international stage and we've seen evidence of this philosophy in the World Cup, Asian Cup and the Confederations Cup. 

Regrettably, he's had the undoubtedly worst Australian talent pool to select from since I started watching football and it's sad to see that his vision probably won't see its way through to the end as a result of it. 

Yes, his tactics in certain games have been questionable but all along he's said that he doesn't just want to qualify for the World Cup, he wants to do something meaningful in the World Cup and if that means a possession-based, high-risk game so be it. But aside from Cahill we haven't had a world-class out and out finisher since Viduka, and it kills you at this level (case in point, the Thailand game).

 

TLDR: Ange isn't that bad, the players fucking suck 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There hasn't been a coach since 2006 that the supporters haven't derided. Ange is a very solid manager. It's the cattle that's the problem. Mooy and Ryan aside we're just not that good. I think by winning the Asian Cup he's overachieved if anything.

We're nothing more than a decent Asian team at the moment, need a new golden generation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

There hasn't been a coach since 2006 that the supporters haven't derided. Ange is a very solid manager. It's the cattle that's the problem. Mooy and Ryan aside we're just not that good. I think by winning the Asian Cup he's overachieved if anything.

We're nothing more than a decent Asian team at the moment, need a new golden generation.

I'd add Juric to that list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ange Postecoglou on criticism after Socceroos’ World Cup qualifying stumbles: ‘I wont be pushed into the shadows’

ANGE Postecoglou resisted the bait when asked about fierce criticism from Mark Bosnich and others in Australian football circles after the Socceroos’ World Cup qualifying stumbles.

Although Postecoglou stayed away from addressing the specific criticism, including calls from Robbie Slater that it’s time to go, he remained defiant, vowing to fight on through Australia’s qualifying pathway against the third place team in Group A, and the CONCACAF confederation.

“I don’t make anything of it,” he said.

“I think I said before the game.

“I’m not everyone’s cup of tea. What do you do, I’ll get on with life.

BOZZA: ‘He’s hanging by a thread’

SLATER: ‘Roos have lost their way’

ALOISI: ‘We have to back him’

‘GARBAGE’: Ange erupts in Roos presser

“My position’s my position. I’m coach of the national team. It’s a great honour and I took the role to do it a certain way and I’ll see it through.

“Beyond that, the judgments on me - the Australian football industry chewed me up and spat me out 10 years ago. This is nothing new. It doesn’t change my conviction about what I think is right for our country. I’ll see it through.

“(Despite last night’s frustration) I love watching my team, our team, play; if we play like that and continue to improve - people can have their judgments on me.

“I won’t be pushed into the shadows of football history like others by bowing to certain parts.

“I’ve survived much worse than this. If anything, it motivates me to make sure Australian football gets on the right path.”

Is there a risk of the outside noise hampering the players?

“That’s just part of the challenge and growth of the players,” he said. “I dare suggest every qualifying process from here onwards will be a challenging one. The more they go through these experiences they’ll grow. It won’t affect the belief of the group. That wont change. From my perspective I see a real determination to see this through the way I want them to.”

After the disappointment of the narrow win against Thailand on a night that could have yielded more in front of goal, Postecoglou fronted the press again on Wednesday morning with Australia’s third place finish confirmed.

The Socceroos scouting staff had been keeping an eye on Asia’s Group B, but will now ramp up their reconnaissance on Syria ahead of October’s ties, as well as the intel being gathered on potential CONCACAF opponents USA, Honduras and Panama.

“It’s obviously a more difficult road but it happens pretty quickly; from our perspective we switch our minds and get it prepared.

“It’s a quick turnaround to get organised logistically, get info on the opposition, but it’s a process we normally do.

“(We will) hit he ground running.”

He admitted he wasn’t optimistic when he sat down to watch Saudi Arabia’s clash with Japan, particularly after his side “walked off the pitch and knew there was not much more they could have done”.

“Unfortunately, a World Cup qualifying spot slipped through our hands,” he admitted.

He added: “You hope the football gods are smiling on you, but I kind of knew at the end of our game, with Saudi only needing a goal and being at home (it’d be hard),” he said.

“And you saw after they scored, there wasn’t much football played, it kind of fell into their lap and suited them.

“I didn’t have a great deal of hope to be honest and I’m usually pessimistic about these things anyway.

“You watch it unfold, you take your medicine and move on.”

When asked if he would reflect and look back at moments he could have done things differently, he was adamant he wouldn’t - “the style and approach is what works for us” - adding that little hurdles along the way, like missing a player like Aaron Mooy in Japan, or having players at full fitness, make a difference in the qualifying game of inches.

“People loved us against Chile, they didn’t against Japan. It’s the same approach, we’ll find the consistency within it.”

So where can the side actually improve given it was stuck in third place behind Japan and Saudi Arabia?

“I don’t think a massive improvement (is needed) - just a bit of consistency.

“(In) Japan we lacked a bit of conviction - had a lot of the ball just lacked a bit of conviction in what we wanted to do. That’s probably the hardest gap to bridge, because only the very best turn domination, possession into results. That’s the final hurdle for us and we’ll keep having a crack at it.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jovan said:

I've been thinking about the Socceroos and Ange alot recently and my opinion has fluctuated considerably. 

At the moment the way I see it is that this current qualifying cycle and Anges development of the team is exactly what Australian soccer and the National team needs. Qualifying for the World Cup shouldn't be seen as the end result or even a great achievement more importantly what we will do when we get there. 

There are so many examples of nations dominating during qualifications and getting to World Cups and not even earning a point. Under Holger and Pim we qualified quite easily but were embarrassing when we got there (2010). 

Now I'm not saying Ange and the management team are not without fault and some decisions have been wrong but overall watching the Socceroos is a fuckload more enjoyable than before Ange (minus the 2006 unrepeatable run). So whatever happens in the playoffs and possibly Russia will be guaranteed to be entertaining. 

My concern is post Ange, what will the Socceroos look like and what will be the effect long-term.

I think Ange should have looked at a 2 World cup cycle to be able to leave a lasting legacy. 

 

I agree, his misfortune is to be trying to teach a legacy culture with a group of players that are less talented on the whole, probably only Mooy would have made the team on 2006 for example. I think that under a Holger type coach we would have finished lower than third, Ange has done a good job. It isn't without errors or shortcomings but he's the best coach we've had since Hiddinck.

Every country has WC cycles where they struggle to qualify, even Germany and Spain and now even Argentina, why should we be any different?

Edited by belaguttman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with most sentiments here. I have been grumpy with Ange but he has been very good for us. 

The playing stocks are very very poor though.

Even so, my worry is that Ange rates them more highly than he should. 

Despite our very large patches of poor form, you hear players and Ange talking as if we have dominated all matches. 

I was very very scared when they were talking about "winning in Japan". That one tactical blunder has cost us. Why not go to Japan, sit back and play on the counter and get a draw? 

We were always going to beat Thailand at home, just not guaranteed of beating them by plenty. So you get a cynical point away in Japan and destiny is on your own hands.  

Misty-eyed schoolboy optimism and a basic inability to tailor tactics JUST ONCE to suit the circumstances cost us.  

 

Edited by dr lime
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dr lime said:

I was very very scared when they were talking about "winning in Japan". That one tactical blunder has cost us. Why not go to Japan, sit back and play on the counter and get a draw? 

We were always going to beat Thailand at home, just not guaranteed of beating them by plenty.

Exactly. This is what separates a good manager from a poor one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't commented on this thread before but watching the game last night at AAMI, I couldn't fault Ange. Hitting the woodwork, Juric taking the kick and competing with David Williams for hitting row ZZ. But for me the worst player was Rogic - he gave the Thais no respect, thought that he was better than the rest of the team and was made to pay - almost cost us a goal. The captain should have given him an ear bashing. He improved in the second half but still did not make up for that first half.

The talent pool is shallow, and the skill levels are not up to Japanese standard, but that comes down to the player and their clubs to improve. I think that the team is fitter than ever but fitness is not everything.

Will another coach do better? Only if he took the national squad on a daily basis for about six months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with a lot of the sentiments above. Ange has done some great things for the national team in this country. But it's the national team! I've been happy with Ange making us more attractive in our play and also building that culture but you can't go forcing that when for example it's imperative to draw a game away against an opposition you've never beaten away! Getting a result when the odds are against you must be the priority! Anything else is nothing short of arrogance and stubbornness. Like Bozza and Slater said last night you don't fuck around with a system that hasn't worked when you need a result. Ange has persisted with 3 at the back for a long time now which has brought us barely any success. It's football suicide.

For this qualifying campaign it's certainly not the players 'shortcomings' that have put us in this position. These are the same players that won the Asian Cup and the same players that pushed both the Netherlands and Chile. It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest now that the players are not good enough. If anything we should be even better now with all those players having so much exposure at NT level. 

IMO Ange doesn't warrant some of the criticism he's getting. But he undoubtedly deserves a good chunk of it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night the team was setup to deliver results and arguably the coach's role in that was successful, we were dominant and controlled the game largely and created enough chances to win 4 or 5 games. You can't blame the coach when the ball hits the woodwork. you can blame him for our defensive frailties but not for the result against the Thais.

It was only 3 or 4 years ago when we'd travel to Japan and spend most of the game defending, instead we had the Japanese playing counter-attack football against us at home. Granted it was an effective way to counter us as the result shows but only a few years ago they would have backed their natural game against ours anytime. This shows progress even if we have not achieved the desired result yet. The system does need tinkering, we are very vulnerable in defensive transition and concede too much space before challenging for the ball.

As I said before Ange is a good tournament coach, only an average qualification coach. The difference is that tournaments encourage risk taking to a greater extent and opponents are more likely to come and take the game to us, we perform much better in those situations. Like City, the national team struggles against well organised defences and we lack the creative players but this would be the case with any coach or tactical style with the present generation of players

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, belaguttman said:

Last night the team was setup to deliver results and arguably the coach's role in that was successful, we were dominant and controlled the game largely and created enough chances to win 4 or 5 games. You can't blame the coach when the ball hits the woodwork. you can blame him for our defensive frailties but not for the result against the Thais.

It was only 3 or 4 years ago when we'd travel to Japan and spend most of the game defending, instead we had the Japanese playing counter-attack football against us at home. Granted it was an effective way to counter us as the result shows but only a few years ago they would have backed their natural game against ours anytime. This shows progress even if we have not achieved the desired result yet. The system does need tinkering, we are very vulnerable in defensive transition and concede too much space before challenging for the ball.

As I said before Ange is a good tournament coach, only an average qualification coach. The difference is that tournaments encourage risk taking to a greater extent and opponents are more likely to come and take the game to us, we perform much better in those situations. Like City, the national team struggles against well organised defences and we lack the creative players but this would be the case with any coach or tactical style with the present generation of players

I'm not arguing your points cause on one hand I agree with them. But 'we had' the Japanese playing counter attacking football, why? Not out of fear. But out of pragmatism. Out of having a manager that decided to choose the appropriate system to win the game with the players he had (the majority of regulars not being part of the squad). Welcome to international football Ange! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, n i k o said:

I'm not arguing your points cause on one hand I agree with them. But 'we had' the Japanese playing counter attacking football, why? Not out of fear. But out of pragmatism. Out of having a manager that decided to choose the appropriate system to win the game with the players he had (the majority of regulars not being part of the squad). Welcome to international football Ange! 

Yes, it was the appropritate way to play against us and clearly successful, but it was appropriate because it did successfully exploit our vulnerabilities with this system but also because they were much less likely to get a result playing a possession based game against us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, belaguttman said:

Yes, it was the appropritate way to play against us and clearly successful, but it was appropriate because it did successfully exploit our vulnerabilities with this system but also because they were much less likely to get a result playing a possession based game against us

On the flip side, if what you are saying holds true,  then we are far less likely to get a favourable result playing the Ange way. IMO the Japan game was the measuring stick. From what I saw, the players executed the game plan the best they could but the game plan was flawed for the players he selected. Also the way we were beaten in all key areas was all to do with Ange than the players.

For a manager not to have a backup plan so we can compete in such an important game is very bad management, and would raise serious concerns about his competency. Unfortunately you can't make these mistakes at this level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that it depends on the context of the game and that's why I said that he's a better tournament coach. If it's a round robin format game then teams can afford to sit back and counter, if it's a sudden death game or a tournament then teams have to come at us and his tactics are more suited. If we score first then the rest of the game will be more suitable for us, if we concede first we are in trouble. Every team selection and tactics and style though has its advantages and disadvantages, if we'd played the Osiek way we would have conceded less but scored a lot less

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, belaguttman said:

I think that it depends on the context of the game and that's why I said that he's a better tournament coach. If it's a round robin format game then teams can afford to sit back and counter, if it's a sudden death game or a tournament then teams have to come at us and his tactics are more suited. If we score first then the rest of the game will be more suitable for us, if we concede first we are in trouble. Every team selection and tactics and style though has its advantages and disadvantages, if we'd played the Osiek way we would have conceded less but scored a lot less

Yeah I understand, but you can't expect this 'one game plan fits all' philosophy to be optimal in any scenario, a manager needs to change his tactics when appropriate and after studying the opposition's strengths and weaknesses. Surely he would have seen how ineffective we were in the 1st half against Japan and had another tactic to go to.

TBH I don't know how these one dimensional managers get to where they are with this type of philosophy, JVS, Ange and even Pep to a point. All have success when their list is above the norm but become mediocre when it's a level playing field OR when their tactics have been countered by a better manager with a poorer list.

I don't really agree with the Osiek comments as he did very well with our list and was tactically far superior to Ange. If I recall correctly he subbed off Timmy for Kennedy and changed tactics to win the spot in the world cup. But I will leave that alone as it's a whole other discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Squad to face Syria:

Mat Ryan, Mitch Langerak, Danny Vukovic
Aziz Behich, Milos Degenek, Mathew Jurman, Josh Risdon, Trent Sainsbury, Brad Smith, Bailey Wright
Mustafa Amini, Craig Goodwin, Jackson Irvine, Massimo Luongo, Mark Milligan, Aaron Mooy, Tom Rogic, James Troisi
Tim Cahill, Tomi Juric, Robbie Kruse, Mathew Leckie, Nikita Rukavytsya

Jurman finally gives Ange a left footed centre back who'll be comfortable playing on the left side of a back 3, but Mooy, Rogic, Leckie, Kruse and Juric have all been doing well at club level playing in systems that play a back 4. Hopefully it will see us reverting to the 4-2-3-1 with Behich and Risdon at full back, only question is who partners Sainsbury at centre back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was really surprised Spiranovic got the flick. Close to first bloke picked if I was the gaffer. Degenek and Wright both have a poor touch, classic lower league defenders, so I'm shocked they are preferred.

On the flip side don't mind Ruka coming in. Maclaren had to go and Ruka's shear pace just gives us something different- an option off the bench if the gaffer needs to shake things up out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bailey Wright's apparently suspended for the away leg, so it will be interesting if Ange plays a back 4 or not.

Would hope Ange partners Milligan with Sainsbury as part of a back 4, with a midfield 3 of Mooy, Luongo and Irvine. Save Rogic for later in the game / second leg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By and large I love what Ange has done for our team. Brought in the new generation, played beautiful football and taken it to some of the best teams in the world, whilst encouraging our players to be better than they thought they could be.

His refusal to ever be pragmatic is incredibly frustrating though. Tonight we play on a cow paddock in the heat and humidity in a game we simply can't afford to lose.

Strikes me that a boring lower tempo game looking to counterattack with pace would suit the conditions, so I'm confident we'll attempt a high possession high tempo game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shahanga said:

By and large I love what Ange has done for our team. Brought in the new generation, played beautiful football and taken it to some of the best teams in the world, whilst encouraging our players to be better than they thought they could be.

His refusal to ever be pragmatic is incredibly frustrating though. Tonight we play on a cow paddock in the heat and humidity in a game we simply can't afford to lose.

Strikes me that a boring lower tempo game looking to counterattack with pace would suit the conditions, so I'm confident we'll attempt a high possession high tempo game. 

Ange is not for turning. At times it seems that he admires the style of play above winning. An away draw followed by a heart stopping win at home will do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...