Jump to content
Melbourne Football

The road to the WC Finals - now 2022


Tesla
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, bt50 said:

So Group B for us consists of:

Australia

Japan

Saudi Arabia

Iraq

UAE

Thailand

Definitely the tougher of the two groups but should progress either way. Looking forward to more classics against Japan

Yeah our rivalry with the Blue Samurai is heading towards epic.

A positive with this group is that with no "easy wins" each team will take points off the others.  My guess is 16 points would see you through and maybe less.  (4W4D2L).  This time around "The Asian Formula" will work - win at home and draw away.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont underestimate UAE and Iraq. Saudis are not the threat they once were but Iraq and the UAE have some very well paid players in big leagues. 

Ali Adnan will molest the Aussie RB whoever he is. That Omar bloke from the UAE will skullfuck Mooy and Jedinak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Luke said:

Both groups are dead even  tbh nothing between them

Japan is  better than Korea (though we do better against Japan it seems)

UAE is way better than Qatar, not even close. 

Iraq is better than China. 

Thailand is better than Syria. 

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tesla said:

Japan is  better than Korea (though we do better against Japan it seems)

UAE is way better than Qatar, not even close. 

Iraq is better than China. 

Thailand is better than Syria. 

Hmm China could be anything though, most underperforming nation in world football imo. Syria are a bit of an unknown and Saudi away is always tricky, although like most of the middle eastern nations are nearly a guaranteed three points at home.

Slightly harder group, not much tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tesla said:

Japan is  better than Korea (though we do better against Japan it seems)

UAE is way better than Qatar, not even close. 

Iraq is better than China. 

Thailand is better than Syria. 

You're right of course, but who cares?   If we are going to do anything as a football nation we need to get past opponents like these (who are decent, but not world beaters).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Shahanga said:

You're right of course, but who cares?   If we are going to do anything as a football nation we need to get past opponents like these (who are decent, but not world beaters).

I think qualifying for the world cup will do more for us as a footballing nation than beating these teams, so obviously the preference is to have as easy a group as possible.

We should be okay, but there are  a lot of tough away trips there, and if we slip up at home things could get tricky pretty fast.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

completely disagree about how hard our group is TBH, could have been a shit load harder.  not saying we're gonna qualify easily, but glad we missed most of the better form teams from each of the 6 pots.  

aside from the FIFA ranking system (which is a complete load of shit given (a.) it rewards teams who have played more games, and (b.) gives the same amount of points for drawing 2-2 in a friendly against Germany as opposed to Cuba), you also have the ELO ranking system.  the ELO system ranks in accordance with measuring actual result against what was reasonably expected given recent form.  

admittedly most of the groups are fairly even, but all the same it is pretty interesting in terms of how the Group A teams compare to Group B.  the 6 groups go as follows in terms of their world ELO ranking (with our opponents highlighted).

Pot 1; Iran 33 v Australia 37

Pot 2: South Korea 19 v Japan 25

Pot 3: Uzbekistan 44 v Saudi Arabia 75

Pot 4: China 71 v UAE 50

Pot 5: Qatar 76 v Iraq 85

Pot 6: Syria 79 v Thailand 104

the standings are as at the end of March, when the last set of games were played.

given the travel, there are certainly risks, but thank fuck we missed both the Syrians and the Uzbeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/04/2016 at 7:51 PM, mattyh001 said:

completely disagree about how hard our group is TBH, could have been a shit load harder.  not saying we're gonna qualify easily, but glad we missed most of the better form teams from each of the 6 pots.  

aside from the FIFA ranking system (which is a complete load of shit given (a.) it rewards teams who have played more games, and (b.) gives the same amount of points for drawing 2-2 in a friendly against Germany as opposed to Cuba), you also have the ELO ranking system.  the ELO system ranks in accordance with measuring actual result against what was reasonably expected given recent form.  

admittedly most of the groups are fairly even, but all the same it is pretty interesting in terms of how the Group A teams compare to Group B.  the 6 groups go as follows in terms of their world ELO ranking (with our opponents highlighted).

Pot 1; Iran 33 v Australia 37

Pot 2: South Korea 19 v Japan 25

Pot 3: Uzbekistan 44 v Saudi Arabia 75

Pot 4: China 71 v UAE 50

Pot 5: Qatar 76 v Iraq 85

Pot 6: Syria 79 v Thailand 104

the standings are as at the end of March, when the last set of games were played.

given the travel, there are certainly risks, but thank fuck we missed both the Syrians and the Uzbeks.

Both Thailand and Syria have very good recent record, I don't think Syria's is any more impressive. What I think is important from our perspective, when Thailand has played against good teams like South Korea and Cameroon they have only lost those games by 1 goal, whereas when Syria played against Japan twice it lost by quite a few goals. It shows Thailand can be competitive against a significantly better team like Australia, whereas Syria probably can't. Also worth noting, Syria are obviously not playing their home games in Syria at the moment, while it won't exactly be a neutral venue, it still won't be a full home advantage for the Syrians, and away games are the biggest worry. So I'd take Syria over Thailand for sure.

As I said Uzbekistan is probably better than Saudi Arabia at the moment, but since the problem is away games, Saudi Arabia could be just as hard if not harder as an away game than Uzbekistan.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tesla said:

Both Thailand and Syria have very good recent record, I don't think Syria's is any more impressive. What I think is important from our perspective, when Thailand has played against good teams like South Korea and Cameroon they have only lost those games by 1 goal, whereas when Syria played against Japan twice it lost by quite a few goals. It shows Thailand can be competitive against a significantly better team like Australia, whereas Syria probably can't. Also worth noting, Syria are obviously not playing their home games in Syria at the moment, while it won't exactly be a neutral venue, it still won't be a full home advantage for the Syrians, and away games are the biggest worry. So I'd take Syria over Thailand for sure.

As I said Uzbekistan is probably better than Saudi Arabia at the moment, but since the problem is away games, Saudi Arabia could be just as hard if not harder as an away game than Uzbekistan.

Overall where the ELO system gives it's greatest benefit is that it contextualises a teams performance / form across a range of games and locations. That is to say it helps takes out all the odd or strange events.

In other words when you look at a team like Thailand, you measure the odd decent performance against Japan with the fact that Thailand play like shit against Middle Eastern sides (both home and away). Which says to me they are no better than a Middle Eastern side, and if anything will be like those Socceroos games in the past where opponent sets out to stifle the Socceroos (which would be an underlying factor in the 'form' of Thailand against Japan).

I do agree about the fact the Syrians struggling against the bigger teams, but (and as per the same context as Thailand) Syria have proven capable against most in Asia. Where I still remain cautious against teams like Syria is for the same reasons you highlight the Socceroos difficulties in playing in the Middle East. True, Syria play their games on neutral territory. But you are forgetting the impact of representing your country on morale, having an escape, etc, when you country is in a time of conflict.  Think back to Iraq a decade ago.  Some players might have had some talent but it's not like the bulk of those Iraqi players ever went on with it to playat a higher level. Playing at an international level has an impact.

As for the Saudis and Uzbek's, we saw at the Asian Cup (not that long ago) the Uzbek's were the better side and push the Koreans hard.

I can't see the problem being home games.  Like you, the problem that I see is away. And given how inept the Saudis are overall on the bigger stage, I think the risk will be more that the Socceroos under perform (for which it doesn't really matter who you play)

Edited by mattyh001
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

After that safe to say we learnt a few more things.

  1. Risdon is as suited to international football as much as Maycon was to A-League
  2. Smith & Sainsbury are the only walk up starters in defence.
  3. Luongo is living on borrowed time, too unfit, too greedy, too many chances
  4. We lack any threat from a striker, better to stick to the 4-3-3 and use Kruse and Leckie's pace on the wings to unlock defences. The 4-4-2 Diamond gave us a lot of possession, but we didn't have a striker making clinical runs or able to hold up and lay off.
  5. Can we naturalize Bruno within the next month or so
  6. Despite the loss things look promising with Sainsbury, Leckie and Cahill to return.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we finally found a decent long-term left back in Smith, but now we're severely out of depth on the right side as Risdon was woeful, Franjic hasn't been good for a few years, McGowan is serviceable but too slow, and Degenek while promising was played out of position and seems a little raw. 

I really liked Milligan as a centre half, and I think he brings too much to the team to drop him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mus-28 said:

After that safe to say we learnt a few more things.

  1. Risdon is as suited to international football as much as Maycon was to A-League
  2. Smith & Sainsbury are the only walk up starters in defence.
  3. Luongo is living on borrowed time, too unfit, too greedy, too many chances
  4. We lack any threat from a striker, better to stick to the 4-3-3 and use Kruse and Leckie's pace on the wings to unlock defences. The 4-4-2 Diamond gave us a lot of possession, but we didn't have a striker making clinical runs or able to hold up and lay off.
  5. Can we naturalize Bruno within the next month or so
  6. Despite the loss things look promising with Sainsbury, Leckie and Cahill to return.

Goal.com doesn't agree with you...

http://m.goal.com/s/en/match/england-vs-australia/2214944/ratings?ICID=MP_MS_6&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fau.fourfourtwo.com%2Fforums%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fg%3Dposts%26t%3D114654%26p%3D26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mus-28 said:

After that safe to say we learnt a few more things.

  1. Risdon is as suited to international football as much as Maycon was to A-League
  2. Smith & Sainsbury are the only walk up starters in defence.
  3. Luongo is living on borrowed time, too unfit, too greedy, too many chances
  4. We lack any threat from a striker, better to stick to the 4-3-3 and use Kruse and Leckie's pace on the wings to unlock defences. The 4-4-2 Diamond gave us a lot of possession, but we didn't have a striker making clinical runs or able to hold up and lay off.
  5. Can we naturalize Bruno within the next month or so
  6. Despite the loss things look promising with Sainsbury, Leckie and Cahill to return.

Out of likes. 10/10 analysis mus.

we were the better side generally but lost because we had only 1 central defender, a right back who was light years out of his depth and no threat up front (McLaren was invisible). Luongo was poor but the other midfielders carried him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/05/2016 at 9:45 AM, Nate said:

So we finally found a decent long-term left back in Smith, but now we're severely out of depth on the right side as Risdon was woeful, Franjic hasn't been good for a few years, McGowan is serviceable but too slow, and Degenek while promising was played out of position and seems a little raw. 
 

It's been obvious for a couple years now that right back is a bigger problem than left back.

All of a sudden Davidson, Behich, and potentially Brad Smith, emerged at the same time and we went from nothing to a number of options at left back. Then it got a bit iffy with Davidson and Behich perhaps going backwards at club level, and It looked like Smith was heading to obscurity and that he was just another over-hyped youth, but Smith out of no where re-emerged and started even getting games at Liverpool, meanwhile Gersbach has also appeared on the scene and Behich is doing better at club level. It's a position we have very good depth in now, especially if Davidson moves clubs.

While right back has been quite dodgy that whole time. Franjic was the weakest first 11 player, and seemingly few other options. And no one else has come through in recent times. But there are some younger players around who could emerge in the next couple years.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Tesla said:

It's been obvious for a couple years now that right back is a bigger problem than left back.

All of a sudden Davidson, Behich, and potentially Brad Smith, emerged at the same time and we went from nothing to a number of options at left back. Then it got a bit iffy with Davidson and Behich perhaps going backwards at club level, and It looked like Smith was heading to obscurity and that he was just another over-hyped youth, but Smith out of no where re-emerged and started even getting games at Liverpool, meanwhile Gersbach has also appeared on the scene and Behich is doing better at club level. It's a position we have very good depth in now, especially if Davidson moves clubs.

While right back has been quite dodgy that whole time. Franjic was the weakest first 11 player, and seemingly few other options. And no one else has come through in recent times. But there are some younger players around who could emerge in the next couple years.

YeAh James Meredith too. Great debut but unsighted since.

Whereas right now, you are an Aussie and can spell "right back", Ange is thinking about giving you a game. I mean Risdon - he's well short of the mark.  The way things are looking right now we'll be playing a left back on the right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Shahanga said:

YeAh James Meredith too. Great debut but unsighted since.

Whereas right now, you are an Aussie and can spell "right back", Ange is thinking about giving you a game. I mean Risdon - he's well short of the mark.  The way things are looking right now we'll be playing a left back on the right.

Deploy Behich as an inverted wing back :up: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Degenek showed more in his brief cameo than any other right back has in the past 18 months. Other than moving Milligan out there we don't really have a lot with any quality or potential. The fact Geria is in the squad shows how pathetic our stocks are.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

This is an excellent move. Frankly, I am quite surprised by it. I would agree that it's most likely a move with the aim of him being a first 11 player (though the new TV deal means 6 mil pounds isnt a lot even for smaller clubs so might not be)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What happened to Australia's left back weakness?

4 Aussie leftbacks played 90 mins in Europe over the weekend, and another one is just an injury/suspension/rotation away from 90 mins in the premier league.

Perfect example of why you should never worry too much about a perceived weakness in a NT, it never lasts long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tesla said:

What happened to Australia's left back weakness?

4 Aussie leftbacks played 90 mins in Europe over the weekend, and another one is just an injury/suspension/rotation away from 90 mins in the premier league.

Perfect example of why you should never worry too much about a perceived weakness in a NT, it never lasts long.

How many quality #9 are floating about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jovan said:

How many quality #9 are floating about. 

from all reports Tomi Juric is going really well atm but yeah, other than that there isn't a great deal. 

Maclaren's got the most potential imo and maybe Taggart if he gets back into form this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Nate said:

from all reports Tomi Juric is going really well atm but yeah, other than that there isn't a great deal. 

Maclaren's got the most potential imo and maybe Taggart if he gets back into form this season.

It's been our problem for years maybe since Viduka. We have produced quality wide players,midfielders and defenders and I can't think of a time when we've had a poor keeper. (I got back to the early 80s ) but as far a genuine strikers Kosmina, Graham Arnold at a stretch but Viduka was genuine player. Having said all that our man Timmy has the all time record but for me he is not a #9. 

So really our next top class #9 is probably still in high school at the moment. 

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...