I didn't do any stats on those games. It takes about 8-10 hours per game. I don't have the same insight into the under 20s or under 17s as I do when the senior Socceroos play.

When one looks at a game for the second time, assiduously recording all the stats, one sees considerable detail one misses from a live viewing.

In one age group, didn't Versleijen's team win the Asian Cup? The way an opposing team plays determines a team's performance. As is so often the case, Australia struggled to play well under intensive full pressing. Versleijen's plans and designated style for his teams may well have been more effective against weaker teams in qualifying for the WCs. External pundits claim Australians have expectations which exceed the ability of our teams/players.

Ok, then why we saw from the under 20s, they lacked the movement and proper ball circulation, is it to say that the players didnt play to the game plan accordingly to JV, or the coach JV didnt coach them properly???

In the match Holland had 219 passes in the attacking half of the pitch. Uruguay had 113 passes in the attacking half of the pitch.

Holland had 167 passes in the defensive half of the pitch. Uruguay had 103 passes in the defensive half.

One erudite commentator said Holland counterattacked in this game. Nothing was further from the truth. Holland had a lot more possession, circulation football, in both parts of the pitch, whilst Uruguay played it forward much more quickly.

There was a reversal of these stats in the final.

Trends emerge in stats over time. The same person recording and analysing stats can see trends.

Really??? why does that statistic indicate attacking play??

When I read Les's article he appears to confuse movement with rotation of players.

That is also Fozzie's take. Yet the Dutch place great emphasis on movement when a team is in possession of the ball in their coaching courses. One has to look very carefully at who writes what in the football media, and what insights they have into coaching. At the same time I can usually see sound rationale in what Fozzie elucidates in his analyses.

I would like to see Fozzie explain in detail what he means by the Dutch emphasising positional play to play out from the back compared to the Spanish relying on movement.

If one watched the Dutch national team before/during the last World Cup and in friendlies prior, they played with a lot more attacking intent against mediocre teams. They adopted a conservative strategy against Spain in the WC final.
Against Uruguay in the WC semi-final they had 62% possession. This indicates attacking football was played.

Holland also alternated Robben and Kuyt on the wings , even in the WC final. Holland also thought Kuyt was a better defensive player to nullify Ramos' attacking verve on the left. They generally attacked through Robben against Capdevila on the right. When Robben cut in, he also frequently beat Xabi Alonso. He dribbled around Spanish players, mainly Capdevila, Alonso and Busquets, on 14 occasions in the final. This is a high number for just one player.

In the last WC Holland wanted to win the tournament, rather than show how good they were, which was the case in most previous World Cups.

If one saw Holland play against Australia in Sydney they absolutely dominated the game playing attacking football throughout. Van Marwijk was the coach too.

Van Marwiijk wanted to instil unity of purpose in his team. An ingredient missing from previous WC and Euro tournaments. He did. He used his son in law, the tough Bayern captain, Van Bommel, and De Jong, to really knock the stuffing out of other teams' creative attacking players. Many Dutch long term fans were disgusted.

Edited by Decentric: 13/8/2011 08:53:16 PM

Umm just on your comparison ... regardless of how they play, the Dutch NT were good enough to make the WC final - not a bad effort hey.

Whereas Straya u17 & u20 were for the most part disorganised, unbalanced and thoroughly slaughtered.

Bit of a difference, no?

The Dutch national team and our current under 17s/20s playing a similar style of football, they dont create alot of movement, and dont interchange positions compared to Spanish, i wonder why the dutch dont play that type of 4-3-3?
Maybe Decentric might know this answer?
Because that was evidently clear from the watching the world cups so far.

Av a go at this Decentric, RE: Italy 2-1 Spain ...




Hmmm I reckon there might be a lesson in that for Straya?

Nah rigid is good.

Poor old Foz is really clutching at straws now isnt he. As if the Dutch don't place emphasis on movement. :oops:

Seriously if I actually didn't see Foz play football with my own eyes, I'd have him pegged as someone who's never kicked a ball in his life.

They have the ability to play it until the opposition is too tough.

Craig Foster said that the Spanish use 'movement' to play out from the back in a 1-4-3-3, as opposed to the Dutch utilising 'positional' play to play out from the back in 1-4-3-3.

I'm not sure what he meant? Movement was pretty important in KNVB.

Ron or Gregory any ideas?

Sounds like a fucking dope from where I'm sittin'.

Kimon just reads off Fosters script.

After the defeat by Spain the commentator on SBS said
“Have we got the players with the technical ability to play at this level,if so were they selected if not who is responsible?"
Very smart bloke in my opinion.