before the game you said you would celebrate if there was a single clear cut chance and I said I'd hold you to that.
We produced several and converted two so we wildly exceeded your expectations yet here you are talking down the performance and talking up theres making some bizarre claims in the process

why? What motivates you?

This is something that has annoyed me for a while.
We have a totally different mind set when Timmy comes on for Tomi
When Tomi's on we move the ball around and dwell on it and when we do get wide in a good position we always turn back 
When Timmy comes on all of a sudden we want to swing the ball into the danger area for him to attack.
Tomi must get the shits watching his team mates trying to play Timmy in after he has worked is ass of with no service.

Yeah they had a couple of good chances on the counter, thanks largely to the speed of Timo Werner, but really that does not take away from our dominance in the second half. But Australia too was guilty of poor finishing and final balls in the second half, to match those of Germany in the first half. 

To say we turned the game on its head in the second half is a bit of an exaggeration.  Germany attacked less, to be sure, but hit or skimmed the post at least three times.

If Langerak didn't make that mistake in 12 seconds against Brazil i'd have confidence that he may start against Cameroon, but i have my doubts.

The simplest way I could put it for today's game is:

If Germany buried a lot more of their chances in the first half when we were simply awful, then it could have been a blow out match.

However, since they did not, the match could have, and probably should have, ended in a draw in the second half as Australia turned the match on its head and dominated in the second term.

Luongo was simply horrid in the first half, the amount of balls failing to find teammates did not make for easy viewing. But against the odds. Kruse's introduction in the second half and Mooy' move to a deeper midfield role vacated by Luongo really made a big difference to our play.

So yeah it would not have been unforeseeable to have seen Germany 4 or 5 up in the first half, but when they failed to make their dominance count, it could have easily been a draw by the end of the match given our dominance in the second half. Interesting game all round.

I saw the goal live and subsequent replays of it. I thought it would have been a hard save. When the player strikers the ball he is on the edge of the 6 yard box. Its not easy, even at the near post. 

He never closed in on the player, example look at Behich's attempted cross in the final minutes the German player closed him down and blocked the cross. The goals we conceded were due to school boy errors, as were the ones we scored which did have good build up play. I mentioned the pressing to win the ball back and the one touch football to Rogic and even with the poor keeping it was still a class shot, as was our build up play in winning the free kick for the second goal. 

We created plenty of chances after a poor start, we more than held our own which is good progress.

At first, I thought you were talking about the German keeper, the two Australian goals were definitely keeper howlers of the highest order.

One thing that worries me is that two of the shots were definitely stoppable by the keeper.

Ryan does not seem able or capable of stopping a shot from a short distance.

Their third goal had him just standing there and flapping his left arm in the hope of stopping the shot.

Surely a good shot stopper could have dealt with it.

I have to disagree with those who are saying the scoreline massively flatters us.  I haven't looked at stats yet but we had a lot of good chances. That missed header on open goal from the free kick, a few good saves of shots in the second half.  My impression is that chances were almost equal.

Which makes me think Germany were really poor in defence, not as bad as us though.

This really annoyed me last night. 
Late in the game he had several chance to have a go and I think only once tried it (and almost scraped it through to Cahill).
Maybe just out of legs but looked more to me that he didn't want to take responsibility. Didn't want to be the one who lost possession so played it safe every time.

Behich did track back, and there was no cross, it was cut-back, all the Socceroos were expecting the cross, that's the point, that's part of the overall package which puts at least that German goal at a much higher level of achievement than anything we managed to do, which were just lucky goals, pure and simple.

I mean seriously, Rogic did well to get into a position to have a shot, but then sliced it into the defender who was out of position, Rogic got a 2nd chance, and it was a pretty weak shot to be honest, and it got under the keeper who should have saved it with ease.

Unpopular opinion: Playing Kruse as an AM works quite well. He has pace and likes to make runs through the defence which means there is less pressure for Leckie to overlap so he can focus more on defence. Even though he's without a club I'd like to see Kruse start the next game at right AM with Leckie at RWB.

No one closed down the cross, no one marked an open player it was diabolical defending and the chance only came to fruition due to errors just like our goals. There goals were not due to brilliant football like Brazil's 3rd goal, but horrific defending. Funny you ignored the other goals i mentioned, or the build up to our goals but lets just ignore that because it doesn't suit your agenda.

This formation showcases our weakest position, defense. There's no point in trying to fit all your midfielders on the pitch if they're constantly out of position due to being ripped apart at the back. 

Our back three, wing backs and DMs are incapable of playing in this formation. When under pressure they collapse. Against every single opponent. 

We only got into the game once Germany got 2 up and decided to preserve energy for later in the tournament. If this were a one off match we'd have lost by 4-5.

This formation will be the death of us unless Ange can show some flexibility in his tactics. He simply doesn't have the cattle needed to play this formation, it's as simple as that.  

Well, now that you put it that way...

Actually the pass that found the Brandt was brilliant, absolutely inch perfect, perfect weight, and the cut-back caught the whole defence off guard, and the finish was pretty good too, given the amount of bodies piling up on the goal line.

So yeh, compared to our two  goals, brilliant lead-up play, left the Australians at sixes and sevens, and the finish was as well struck as anyone could ever hope to strike it, bobbling ball and all.

Remind me how often Behich hit the byline again? (and he had plenty of opportunities to do so late in the game)

Speaking of finding a player out wide, Kruse had a great opportunity to spot up Leckie running into space on his wing, and he put the ball 5 metres behind him, out of play, zero pressure!

The score was better than I could have hoped for.But player selection and formation is clearly a problem ,which Ange is too stubbon to acknowledge.
We cannot perform with Rogic,Mooy,Luongo and another slow DM playing together.The team is unbalanced,has no pace up front,no runners and is begging to be ripped apart in defence,regardless of the defenders.
Many countries have the dilemma of too many choices and having to leave good players out.Until Ange realises this from the start of the game ,nothing will change.Belting ....whatever... Kistan ..at home with these players all playing proves absolutely nothing.
At the moment our starting teams have very little to beat defences.Relying on Leckie and Behich to break the defensive line and be back in position or rely on the slow men behind them to defend fast counterattacks is dumb.
We have players who can in the right system make a good account of themselves and threaten other teams .(as we did in the AFC)But for now ,Ange is just gambling that one day against top opposition, we might score more goals than them.Because one thing is for sure we arent going to keep clean sheets.

Yes the World Cup.
I dont believe for a second we are in this predicament due to this formation change because on results alone we are 2 wins and a draw from 3 matches since this change. 

Prior to that we had 3 draws and 2 wins. The catalyst for change being the 2-2 draw with thailand and adjusting to try and fit all our personel at hand. 

Theres no doubt we want to do well in the confed cup, but the biggest prize of doing well at the confed cup is the confidence we gain from it. John Aloisi mentioned last night that their confed cup performances prior to 2005 qualifications gave them the belief that on their day they can find a way through the "superior" nations. We bring that belief back into games against Japan and co we will become better. And if we do qualify on the back of that we most certainly turn up at the world cup thinking we can make it out of the group. 

Masterful build up play? One person ran down the wing and cut it back to an unmarked player what sensational football that goal was ehh... Or the second which they completed a total of 2 passes and a sleeping Luongo allows the run of the German player and then makes an even worse tackle. Then the 3rd a ball over the top and some terrible keeping allows them to score.

Also our first goal actually had nice build up play, great pressing to win the ball back, then some one touch football allowed us to create the space for Rogic and the free kick he won on the 2nd goal was also very nice football. We had far more than 2 chances this game and if you think otherwise watch the game again.

He's decent at A-League level, but I honestly doubt that a 33 year old defender coming from the A-League is the answer against blokes playing Bundesliga, Ligue 1, etc, etc.

That backline is not good enough I am still astounded that Wilkinson is not there. Luongo took it to another level of awful. He has not taken the opportunity given to him.

Well, ignoring the multitude of good chances the Germans created, the three they took involved masterful lead up play, and the two goals we scored were out and out lucky breaks with absolutely pathetic goalkeeping.

Given the quality of the German outfield was A grade, the keeping would barely score a D.

same issue we have had the last few games... so start takes us about an hour or so then we have adjusted to the formation and we start to play.

But the first half was a tactical masterclass from Loew.. saw we were playing 3 at the back, so they spread us nice and wide... waited to overcommit a wingback and play in behind... they made us look like swiss cheese.

I get Ange's philosophy but a slightly different approach to this game and maybe we get a point

If that were true, you would have been able to express the above sentiment in much better prose than you you were able to manage.

And I say that as a friend and former celebrated 442 writer.

It was happening with 4 at the back but it was usually only in transition when both fullbacks were so high we were playing with only 2 defenders
and a long ball over the top was hurting us.
Instead of having one of the FB's be more conservative Ange still wants to go all guns blazing.
One of the problems i see is our players are all ready up in amongst the opposition not allowing them to have time on the ball when receiving it and the back three are looking at Mooy,Rogic,Milligan and Mass with German players already up their arses in a crowded midfield and they have to pick out a pass while being pressured by the German forwards.
With a back 4 the FB's drop deeper and passing triangles can be maintained along with the pockets created to play into.
What we lacked in technical ability we used to make up in use of space and movement.
It appeared that Leckie dropped back in the second half and Mooy and Milligan could play 1-2 touch passes quickly along the back line that had some space to play and that took the sting out of the German attack and allowed us to work it forward and gain confidence.

Pretty much this. They scored their second through a sloppy error by Luongo, but their other two goals were much better crafted opportunities than we put together all night and they had several other opportunities like them.

And Luongo who has been a great player for us cost us our first 2 goals by shambolic errors and the 3rd was another poor error. All could have been avoided if we were switched on at the start and end of halves.

We also created a number of chances we could have scored ourselves, like Sainsbury's missed header which was the best chance of the match, or the penalty we weren't awarded at 3-3, or when we were pressing at the end if we could have just not fucked up the final ball. Not to mention Leno made a couple nice saves and was quick off his line when we were continually breaking through their defence.

We caused them massive problems once we woke up after 30 minutes and more than matched them.

Some days

The only goals we scored last night were due to sloppy errors.

Leno is a quality keeper who should be expected to make both of those saves. First goal went right under his hands. Should have saved it. The persistence shown by Rogic has to be admired in this situation, however. Second goal, a tame shot that took a slight deflection fell straight to Leno, he had it and when he took the ball down, it bounced off his knee and fell out of his hands right to Juric. Yes, Juric was well positioned, well done to him, but you can't tell me that wasn't a bad goalkeeping error.

Their goals were down to sloppy errors too, but they could have scored plenty more if not for more composure.