He was 17 in 2010....

Yes fair enough, he has scored a few worldies, I'll admit defeat there. Though ages ago!

But my opinion, you get picked on current merit. The guy hasn't played a full 90min in over 6 months, and on current form and minutes, shouldnt go ahead of someone playing regularly.

FWIW The much maligned Ryan McGowan was the man with the beautiful assist there

We shouldn't forget this one on the half-volley 18 months ago



Also worth mentioning it was his first A-league game back in Australia and first Melb Derby - More evidence of big game ability.

The guy just shows up literally every time. We do still need him, and i'm sure as hell he'll being trying his little heart out in Russia like he always does. The difference between him and lesser players is that he always comes through with the goods when needed. 

Side note: I also wish he was Thomas Broich personality wise. He's not though.
He's from a legitimately low SES, working class background, and thus has spent his time off the pitch making sure his family are financially secure.
Sure he's a bit cringy at times,
But I seriously can't see how people can doubt his continuing use to the national team or begrudge his right to make money off his image and achievements.

Cahill was scoring most of his goals against the footballing powerhouses of Tajikistan and Bangladesh. In the third round of qualifying (against the likes of Japan and Saudi Arabia), Cahill scored ONE goal out of the 16 Australia did. To act like he was our main attacking threat in qualifying is disingenuous.

Depends on how you define merit. Are we going to pick our entire squad based on minutes played or are we going to pick guys who offer us something we don't have (a late on, goal scoring threat) and are going to help us win games of football. There are lots of Aussie guys getting minutes in shit leagues around the world, should they be called up too? Giancarlo Gallifuoco has started every game for Dover Athletic this year, if minutes is the the only reason for omitting our greatest ever Socceroo out of the squad then does the same logic apply across the board? 

This whole deluded concept of him somehow being undeserving of a spot due to game time is perplexing. If our top scorer in qualifying, a guy who without his goals to get us out of the shit against Syria we would not being even going to Russia is not deserving, than who the fuck is? How is it that National Team form counts for so little in these people's minds when we are selecting... a National Team?

 Given that he played a grand total of 45 minutes in the 4 fixtures against the teams you mentioned above, I find your cherry picking of statistics disingenuous. 

TC only started in one of, and featured off the bench in 7 of the 10 games in that round. We struggled immensely in the 3rd round of qualifying with the general gripe being that for all the impressive build up - our conversion to goals was terrible. 

Yes? And we found a way to score without him so he's really not needed?

Jesus, is that genuinely the best response you could throw back me? So you have a crack at his round 3 qualifying record and fail miserably and now you want to try and say that ‘we have found a way to score’ therefore we don’t need the one guy who has proven time and time again that he is the only one able to come off the bench and change a game for us? Did you watch the qualifiers? Our finishing was abhorrent. 16 goals sounds great doesn’t it? What you fail to mention is that in every game we completely dominated possession and chances made with our failure to convert in front of goal the main reason why we finished 3rd in our group. So I ask you this, something all the Cahill doubters have failed to be able to answer, your coach, 20 mins to go, we need a goal to make the 2nd round, who comes on?

The argument over 'playing time' is ridiculous. Germany just named Neur in their squad and he hasn't played since September. Why? because the manager doesn't care about being fair, he cares about putting the keeper who is most likely to keep the ball out of the back of the net on the pitch. BVM has decided Cahill is an option he'd like to have to call on. He doesn't care about minutes played or who it's for, he cares about who he thinks can deliver what he wants. 

In the box or out of the box every goal is spectacular. 2nd is probably my favourite

Says the bloke suggesting we should pick a guy who hasn't scored at club level since April of last year because of his goalscoring exploits against Bangladesh, Tajikistan and Krygystan LMAO

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you? You have been completely unable to respond to the myriad of facts/statistics and logic thrown at you so you revert back to... "he only sores against Bangladesh, Tajikistan and Krygystan...." .

- You have conveniently ignored my point about his goals to minutes record in round 3 of the AFC qualification (perhaps it was too much for you to compute?)
- You have conveniently ignored the argument that National Team form should hold as much, if not more weight when picking a National Team. 
- You have conveniently ignored TC's record of scoring big goals when it matters most over the past 13 years - including his last start for the NT against Syria where he scored TWO goals to once again get us out of the shit. 
- You have conveniently ignored the fact that the other forward options in the initial 32 are either unproven or have failed at international level and our coaching staff (what would they know, right?) may believe a proven/experienced player whose experience both at club and international is vital to our squad. 
- You still, even after being specifically asked to, responded to my question - 20 to go, we need a goal, progression to the last 16 on the line, what striker do you put on instead?? 

You'll likely not address any of these points (because you can't) and instead throw some pointless comment about club football in a desperate attempt to cover up the stupidity of your argument and your inability to respond to facts and logic. 

Laugh. My. Arse. Off. 

> Just wondering who was our top scorer in qualifying (despite being resigned to the bench for most of the 2nd round fixtures)? How many other nations would have complete moron fans losing their nut because their top scorer in qualifying WAS included in their WC squad.

So yes, your argument was ostensibly that he should be included because of the fact that he was our top goalscorer against the footballing powerhouses of Bangladesh and Tajikistan. 

To respond to your final question (because all of your other points are irrelevant), Arzani and Maclaren would be superior choices off the bench in my opinion. 

I get it, I understand, you've backed your moronic arguments in the face of logic and facts to such an extent that you can't back out now. You've now resorted to an abysmal attempt to try paraphrase and simplify my argument down to an idiotic comment you made (scoring against lower tier teams), which was compressively responded to with facts regarding minutes/goals several posts back. Once again, you didn't have the capacity to respond to my other points so just panicked and claimed them to be irrelevant. LMAO.

So recent, match winning form for our National Team is irrelevant when picking a National Team?

So his goal scorer record in Rd 3 of the qualifiers (despite barely playing) is relevant but his record of 2 goals in one start in Rd 4, in a knockout scenario (which is more indicative of a WC situation) is apparently irrelevant? 

So TC's big game tournament record and experience amongst a largely inexperienced group is somehow irrelevant? (Funny that players who are currently in the squad have said as much, but what would they know, right?)

So the fact that other options in the initial squad, those in direct competition for a spot with TC have not performed at international level and our coaching staff see the need for a proven match winner at the world cup are apparently irrelevant too?

But... but... club minutes....

shhh is ok bb

The response of a desperate and embarrassed imbecile who utterly failed in their pathetic attempt to respond to clear logic and facts. Instead we are left with an incoherent 4 worded drivel that has provided us with a fitting insight into your contributions in this thread to date.