3 at the back was an abject failure. Cut up time and time again through wing play from the Iraq's.

This "Angeball" doesn't work - we simply aren't good enough to pass it through the midfield without making mistakes and coughing it up. Every time we do, we give the ball up and the Iraq's broke. If they were a bit more dangerous we'd be looking at a loss. Someone said it in the match thread - Ange's idealism (forcing us to play from the back) puts us in danger time and time again.

We haven't scored from open play (no set pieces) in 3 games. We looked second best in Thailand, and we looked second best here. This isn't good enough from the best in the region.

We continue to select players who don't play (Kruse, Smith), while players who are in good form (Troisi, Behich, Goodwin) hardly get a run.

Ange out.

haha. Ange responsible for every skewed pass and cheap turnover... or for missing point blank. Goodluck replacing him. FFA broke remember.

Why do you have an incessant need to turn every thread into a FFA bashing, it get's a bit boring mate.

He just pointed out a cost factor in  a "Sack Ange" discussion

But now you've bought up the subject, FFA are all    - oops, I just ate my own poop...s

honestly I think it is too late for a change now.  Ange is going to have to deliver or fail in this world cup qualification and then, if he fails, the knives will be out.

deary me talk about going over the top here....

The thing with playing 3-4-3 is you need highly technical players that won't give up the ball in the wrong areas. We don't have that. Add on top of that the difficulty of holding possession on that pitch and it's a recipe for disaster. Luckily enough we scraped a draw but it could very well have been.

I'd argue you need even more highly technical (and athletic) footballers to play 4-3-3 the way Ange wants them to play it.

Imo, they abused this formation by having the wingbacks act more like wingers. They should have acted like the aggressive fullbacks in Ange's 4-3-3.

Either we need a (basically) flat back four or we need three central defenders with the wingbacks acting dropping back a long way. That's the only way they'll be competent enough to handle the space.

Only that we werent playing a 3-4-3 we were playing a 3-2-4-1

I think it is a 3-2-2-2-1 or 3-6 1.

Yeh lets sack the coach that still has us undefeated with 3 home games to come. 

They played badly but so has every Aus team in Asia. I still think they will win all there home games and get through.

This! Ange probably has one of the worst gen of Socceroos in a very long time and he can do so much.

Hopefully we can still qualify for the World Cup with the home games coming up.

Yup, he only has the same resources he had to pick from when we won the Asian cup

Played at home in front of home crowds.

We haven't been beaten away from home yet and have won all our games at home.

Pim's teams were much more solid in away games.

He played for draws, and a win was a bonus.

Pim qualified us as one of the first three teams for SA.

Ange is deploying an unfamiliar formation, 3-6-1.  This is not a conventional 3-4-3, with with a flat midfield, or diamond shaped midfield. He has little time to work with players on the training ground.

I'm old enough to remember people complaining that we were being outplayed in the middle east under pim and in particular when we lost to china and iraq

Also we have draw or won all our away games so far except Kyrgyzstan

Sack Ange for having one of the worst Socceroo sides to hit the park since the late 70's.

He just needs to realise we aren't that good, and he should use appropriate tactics to suit that fact. Play four-four-fooking-two next time Ange, or sit back and hang onto a lead for once.

If Ange went with a 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 diamond we would have probably got the same result, complaints would be flying in complaining that Ange didn't change nothing and stuck to the same old plan.

I think it takes some real balls to play 3 at the back when you don't really have the quality to do it....were not chelsea... in saying that. Kruse last night was very very poor when he did track back he really didn't do enough and their left sided attack was causing us really problems. 

I think the formation can definately work, it has to be Smith and Leckie as the wide players, then fit Rogic in there somewhere and replace Wright for Sains... also Bailey I thought was pretty decent defensively you could see all game that playing out from the back he was seriously struggling. 

I really lost a lot of confidence in him with his subs - Smith who hasn't played in ages and Cahill who slows up things in the last third so much.

A team with a World Cup quality front line would've scored 3-4 against us.

..and if it was world cup quality I would think he'd play a back four.

My patience is growing thin with Ange.

Ange-ball was never going to work on that cow paddock.  Possession football was not going to work.

Iraq were pressing all game knowing that balls would bobble and we would give up possession.

Just praying that we play better at home and smash the other teams, get our mojo back and nick a point in Japan.  That should be enough for 2nd.

If we drop any points at home, we can kiss direct qualification good-bye.

Russia's gonna be fun

Ange won't be sacked but it is time to really start putting the blowtorch on him. you can argue about the cattle til the cows come home, but you still have to question why he continues to change the formation. he needs to choose one and stick with it (or choose one and keep a second up his sleeve as a backup plan).

The big problem for Ange and Australia,is that possession based attacking football is old news.The most successful teams aren't playing that way.
Strong defence and counterattack os the winning way at the moment.
In the HAL teams like Brisbane,WSW and AU are struggling and all have similar weaknesses to the Socceroos.The all look like scoring ,but rarely do and when they score their weak defences always crumble.

The Socceroos would of been better served playing a 442 diamond formation. Kruse Leckie out wide , jedinak holding, mooy CAM and have juric and Cahill up fronT. We would of been parked in there half all game, instead we lost possession out wide and were brunt on the counter.

We need to get some confidence back, we need that winning feeling but not grind out a win but dominate all game. The game against the UAE we need to win by atleast a couple goals.

Most of you won't admit it, but we all know we'd be killing it in Asia with Arnie at the helm.

We'd certainly be better off playing under a manager that didn't put his philosophy above results. 

Except ange hasnt lost..draws away from home are still results.

Are you happy with the results against Thailand and Iraq away?

He probably is happy with it.
Under Ange, has Australia won any games against an opposition ranked higher than us in 90mins?
I'm not saying sack Ange... but don't go and pretend everything is under control when we struggled against Thailand

11 games in a row undefeated with a dud generation.

That doesn't exactly sound worth firing him for.
Especially being australias most successful coach ever with silverware.

He does have a limited group of players to select from. Few quality players there. But he flat-out refuses th change his tactics even when the opposition, conditions or pitch would suggest that another approach may be more beneficial. 

How many would have been disappointed if we started playing a bit more long ball on that paddock of a pitch, cut down the errors in midifeld, and subsequently won the game? Theses are WCQ's! Now is not the time to be pedantic about performance. 

RESULTS ARE THE ONLY THINGS THAT MATTER IN THE LAST 4 GAMES. 

Moopy all sad about fact-y thing-ies. Poor lil moopy.

Some people forget FFA "took the credit" for hiring ange (for peanuts) after we'd fallen over with holger, and really had no better option. Hiddink was laughably bandied. Lol. They conveniently twisted the narrative into "we are going native with a coach- aus coaches are good enough" but we all know the truth is they didnt have the money then for a world class intl coach, and they certainly dont now. Its called reality, sorry if reality bores you, Moops i ate my i ate my own poops. Watch them spin the same narrative, with arnie or poppa, when ange leaves or becomes the fall guy (for a country with subpar player development). 

(And yes the current administration (who incidentally publicly embarrased/strong-armed ange into submission/retraction over a constructive criticism he'd made in the press) are illegitimate. You might be quite happy to turn a blind eye to gross injustice and corruption, but ill keep saying it until im blue in the face).

Lol, you do know I am unhappy with the FFA as well don't you?
There are already plenty of threads to talk about administration, just talk about the thread for gods sake.

Hypocrite.

If Pim, Holger or Arnie were at the helm we may have 1 or 2 more points, but people would be even more disheartened.

holger is possibly the worst coach to step on australian soil

Oh c'mon.  Look at the guys CV.

Slater put i best when he said the current socceroos under Postecoglou are what we get when we are happy with 3 losses at the WC.

He was fine.  He got the job done which is what he was paid to do.

He is seen as a failure, and probably rightly so, because he didn't blood any youngsters.

Having said that I'm glad he is gone.

No Schwarzer would be still in goal and we'd ship loads! For all the rubbish aimed at our defence, we have not shipped more than 2 goals for a long time. Its time to get a grip!

ANGE OUT. Where was Grant's cap?

If he wasn't at the helm we would already be out of contention, he just motivates them enough to get the job done and not lose, fast track this 4 years and it's highly likely all these away draws we have had would be losses. Worst generation of players aside...the results are about as good as you can possibly get with this lot and he is getting them.

Pleease.  He motivated them to 3 loss at he WC.  This Socceroos is playing some of the worst football we have ever played.    He is hell bent on fitting players o a system they cannot play.  The Italians play 3 at the back we are a Universe away from the way they play it.  Unless he improes they will have their arses handed to them by the Eropeans, Sth Americans and Africans

What against chile, netherlands and spain? Lol cmon. Ange is doing the business in asia with our worst talent pool ever. If he manages to extract anything more from this lot it would be a miracle.

This is the worst generation of Australian footballers in a long long time. I'd say it's the first generation since the early 80's where we have not had a genuine star in the team.

The FFA through the baby out with the bath water back in '04 and you can lay the blame squarely at them.

Ange has done a phenomenal job with a team consistently of second & third division standard players.

He put Maty back as GK so he can stay 😇

Ange has done extremely well maximising every single player in the talent pool, he has to work with one of the weakest gens in a very long time the criticism has to be justified by the lack of quality players to choose from, that hasn't changed since the 2014 world cup not the coach.

Apart from Ryan, Sainsbury, Mooy and even Rogic that's it...he working in the bare bones of australia's weak talent pool.
Hes doing the best and putting a system that would harness their strengths into his style of play, so huge kudos to Ange. 

Aside from saying that tell me waht strengths have the 3 at the back got that he is harnassing to play them as 3 at the back.  Lkewise for the midfielers who can't hold the ball.  Likewise the wingers who cannot put in a single ball to the striker?  Likewise the striker who hasn't had a shot that was remotely a chance of scoring?

Well for starters he has no decent fullbacks to choose from apart from Smith who else he can play as the fullbacks?
Also given how he likes to play a high offside line and protect the weakness in the fast counter attacks which the team often gets exposed for it makes sense to play an extra defender, and throw in that australia has more depth in the midfield area it would make sense to move across a back 3 with a midfield oriented team when in possession and have the width from the wingers.
No doubt there are tactical problems in this system but Ange is looking beyond these qualifying games, big picture thinking coach.

Hes just adjusting the team in order to fit into his style of play. Ideally he would have a decent right back and then he might stick to his 4-3-3 but he sees the team lacking in that department otherwise Ange isnt going to change style to fit his players he goes the opposite and create a system that benefit the players he has available.

Otherwise what other system he can play its not his fault that his wingers lack productivity and a midfield missing his best passer in Mooy and best creator in Rogic. 

He has Behich available at LB who should be all rights be first pick, but he's not.  Why?

 RB is a problem, granted, but thats because Postecoglou wants to play with wing backs who run up and down the touchline all day, yet he also plays Kruse and Leckie who can't or won't defend when the full backs go forward.  That's why we got torn a new one the flanks against Iraq, with their unknowns playing on the wings.  Imagine at the world cup, we will get murdered.

What you've written in your second paragraph is arse-about as to what should be happening, and says exactly what Postecoglou is doing wrong.  What he wants to do can work in club football, not international football.  In an international football, your players are limited.  As the coach, its you job to play a system that those players can play.  Not what you want to play. What they can play.  To win.  

Verbeek knew this, and qualified in a canter, got 4 points at the WC, and was a Wilkshire one-on-one from making the second round.  

Postecoglou didn't have Mooy and Rogic and won the Asian Cup.  Don't blame the players, its Postecoglou stubborness and self-promotion, yes this is more about him, than the national team.  Ask Brisbane, Victory and Milligan how that usually pans out.

Fair comments.

ange out, no grant or vuka.

People need to understand that competitive football is swings and roundabouts.  One year you win the premier league, the next you're battling relegation.  One year you win the Asia cup, the next you're fighting to make it to the World Cup.  We should never just expect to qualify for the world cup based on historical performance, the reality is the competition is tougher and we're not as good as we used to be.

There's no comparison between Verbeek and Ange.  Verbeek had better players, EPL players, Ange squad near resembles New Zealands, just one player playing regularly in a top league.  The Socceroos have undergone a gradual decline since 2006 and if it culminates in failing to make the WC, then we need to look at factors other than just blaming the coach.

Ah yes, poor Old Ange. How can he compete with the might of Thailand, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, with their top of the world junior pathways and their host of star players playing and dominating at the top level in Europe. Maybe if, instead of the players picking the squad, Ange was allowed to pick the squad of players that play for the national team he would stand a better chance.

Wait! hang on a minute! Ange picks the players you say! And what's that? The bulk of the Iraqi, UAE and Thai squads play in their home leagues or leagues of lower quality than the leagues played in by many of the Aussie Squad. Sorry, what was that other point you made? The junior pathways in war torn Iraq, or rural Thailand aren't the best in the world and the players produced there aren't rubbing shoulders with Messi at Barca?

Well jeez. I'm shocked.

How many points is ange ahead of thailand and iraq? He hasnt lost to anyone yet lol. 

Schwarzer saved our bacon time and time again under pim..even at home against Iraq! expectations were higher back then as they should have been.a completely different class of players compared to the current lot who look like they picked up the sport 2 years ago at times.

I'm a bit lost here.  

In this thread I've read we were playing a 3-4-3, a 3-2-2-2-1 and a 3-6-1.  On other threads blokes have thrown up other formations.

Does anyone actually have a clue or is everyone just guessing?

PS With regards to the other stuff and for brevity (and to save rehashing arguments) I agree with everything Enzo has said.

vs iraq it was effectively 

2 2 3 3

vs UAE it was more of a 

3 2 4 1  or  3 4 2 1

Or 3-6-1 or a 3-4-3 or a 4-3-3 or a 3-2-2-2-1 according to some.

I'm not having a go at you IB but that's 7 sets of formations thrown up.

Clearly some haven't a clue or are guessing.

I guess the angst at our performance against Iraq and the UAE should be compared to the Victory's game against Brisbane on the weekend. We (Australia) picked up 4 points against tough opposition in a style which most of the players were not used to. We did it under tremendous pressure from Iraq in the latter parts of that game. Yet there were minimal shots on target from our opponents. Australia did both games without our most inventive player (Rogic) who would have provided a different dimension to our play. The second game also saw us without Mooy who has been on fire this season.

Compare that with the accolades which have been swooned on Muscat and the Victory for losing against a bruised and battered Brisbane team that was missing as many key players as Victory were, and lost 2 key players through injury during the game. I would hazard a guess that the fact that 47 of 48 goals have come directly or indirectly through 3 players who you knew would probably be absent together during the season suggests recruitment has not been one of the successes of Victory's management this season.

We should be giving the Australian team and coach the accolades for getting us to a position where a team of plodders have carried the flag to a place where we haven't lost a game and should qualify for the next world cup.

Yeah bringing back Troisi and Rojas was a deadset recruitment failure. Nothing at all to do with the salary cap/squad size limit.

FMD some people here are deadset retarded.  No other way to explain it.

bump for the record