Sack him now.

Easily the worst Socceroos coach Australia has had, dump him now.

Send him to New Zealand. He's Oceania standard FFS.

Who do we replace him with at this stage. 

Turn an aleague club upside down a month before the aleague. I'm sure the clubs are lining up for that one.

Gombau would be an option, or another foreign coach. There would be options.

What's Guus up to these days?

He has retired

We still have time to sack him before he retires.

Sack Guus?

I thought we were talking about Ange. Don't sack Guus.

Hiddink
Arnold
Verbeek
Osieck
Postecoglue

Mmmm.....bring back Venables please

Aurelio

we actually only just beat Thailand. That is crazy.  barely beat a team ranked 130, below St. Kitts and Nevis, Ethiopia

:laugh::laugh:

He has until the morning. The Saudis don't win and he keeps his job. The actual performance tonight was far from our worst, but it's a results game and if it doesn't end up being enough for automatic qualification then he needs to go.

If he does go the replacement can't be an Aussie or someone who is in the current setup, we must go abroad with someone fresh.

And pay them peanuts as the FFA is broke.

Ange isn't going anywhere unless he decides to leave himself.

I actually didn't mind the way we played last night in terms of the way we setup to play. We hit the post 3 times ffs and had over 30 shots on goal. It's the players that are the problem here. So many c grade players. 

In saying that, the way Ange approached the Japan game and the previous matches abroad is the main issue. We ALWAYS struggle against teams that play a defensive game as we dont have the talent to penetrate in tight spaces, hence why he should used different tactics in those games. But when we play against offensive opposition we always perform well. See us in the last world cup as well as against Chile in the confed cup. I actually think had we played Japan of old (ie when they were more attack minded) I reckon it would have worked well for us as we would have had more space up front.

4-3 on aggregate and they had a clear pen not given. haha

With 40 odd shots on goal and nothing really to show for it would tell yu it's the cattle that's the problem not necessarily the coach. The tactics used lastnight were fine. It was for the other two games that we setup badly.

Ange was not at fault last night.

The attacking cattle were because they did not have their shooting boots on.

Their attacking interplay and movement off the ball  was excellent though.

I think a bit of luck was astray too ... let's face it not very often does a team hit the post three times and have two or three last minute tackles / off the lines to stop a certain goal. As an international coach you plan to create chances, as you hope the individuals have the skills to finish (as an international coach can't teach them to a player in the week or so he has them before a game). I think too many rushed their shot ... the pressure got to them??? This is where Ange probably had to tell them to settle, take their time and make sure of their shots. The goals would come, if they had composed themselves on the shot a bit more.

Ange set the team up to attack and create chances, which they did. It was down to some luck and individuals that they didn't score more.

In regards to the lack of crosses in the first half, again that they started to do it more in the second half suggests that Ange had instructed them to do this in the first place but the team hadn't followed through with it in the first half.

The only thing that Ange really got wrong last night was the subs. Again not necessarily his fault ... as they were probably the right choices, but all three had little to no effect on the game. Kruse's first touch almost resulted in a goal, but he didn't look likely for the rest of the game. Troisi's passing was wayward and Maclaren was invisible. Where was Mabil??? Leckie and Gersbach running at the Thai wing backs caused troubles all night, not sure why you wouldn't have introduced someone like Mabil to run at them when they were obviously tired late in the second half.

But literally 90% of our chances the first half came from corners, it wasn't amazing passing breaking them down but as per usual asian teams unable to deal with set pieces. The second half we actually utilised our aerial dominance by pumping them with crosses and we looked far more dangerous in doing so, which goes against his philosophy but it sure works effectively.

i'd have to watch again but I remember about half a dozen cutbacks, rogic beating a player to shoot, players being alone in the box to shoot about half a dozen times and of course a bunch of set pieces. It looked like a pretty varied range of chances to me. Bad luck does explain some of it….

We had some cutbacks but most were just cleared for a corner and plenty of Rogic's chances and others were from the second phases of a set piece where they struggled to clear it effectively. 90% may be a bit dramatic as we did have a very strong first 15 minutes but after that we really relied on set pieces to create our chances till the second half.

Mooy's shot off the post came from a Leckie cutback. Cahill's shot came from open play that hit the post. Rogic's pile driver (at least two) that forced good saves from the keeper came from open play (one was the nice subtle run off Mooy's shoulder). The last gasp tackle on Juric with the chest down came from open play.  Mooy had that delicious ball across the front of goal, that no one attacked (just needed a tap in). All this was in the first half.

I personally thought our corners were pretty poor over the night, they rarely got the ball into dangerous spots (other than the one that had to be cleared off the line). Especially given how poor the keeper handled high balls, it was probably something Australia had to use more to their advantage.

Forget last night.  There was some weird voodoo force field shit around the goal.  Ange lost us automatic qualification games ago when he stubbornly persisted with his 3 at the back rubbish in games where we had a lead away.

I personally don't like the formation for Australia ... but it just seems that we don't have the defenders at the moment to defend a lead (or at least I would argue that Ange is NOT selecting the appropriate defenders for the NT). We look like conceding nearly every time a team attacks us ... this is definitely an area he needs to solidify for Syria.

Sainsbury needs game time, as he is by far our best CB, but he really needs to be playing regularly. Wright is OK in 4 at the back as a CB, but is lost in the three at the back formation. Degenek had one of his better games last night. But again he doesn't look comfortable in a 3 at the back. I'd be tempted to almost pick an actual LB or RB to fill out the roles in Australia's back 3 besides Sainsbury (assuming Ange will continue with that formation).

Milligan has to be the screen for Australia. Not always pretty but does the job (and with only three at the back a lot better than Jedinak as cover).

At Iraq away in the stands you could see the back 3 was a disaster and the amount of space and danger it was presenting. We literally said 'They will be in in the next 5 minutes' and then right before the long ball you could see the stars align for them. He had ample warning to prevent that goal. 

He did not want to do anything about it in that match because he always think he's right and the world is against his misunderstood genius. 

That Iraqi game was probably one of the most disappointing results ... it was the wrong time to introduce a new system that the players were obviously very uncomfortable with.

This was probably the worst time for Ange to introduce it. 

The formation  is also unconventional and nothing like any of them have played at club level.

I watched a replay as I was out.

I'd forgotten Maclaren was even on the pitch!

I'll have a look at a replay for a second viewing in a few days.

Maclaren was making many great runs when he came on and constantly moving unlike Juric, problem was no one took the risks to pass it to him.

I'll have a good look at this in the replay. Maclaren might've been making effective dummy runs like Holman and McDonald used to, that the average  punter was unaware of.

Their coaches and teammates were happy though!

It might be hard to see on a replay, but at the game he was always on the last shoulder trying to make things happen, he just lacked the service he deserved.

^

THIS.

The Thai defence was set deep, crowding out Rogic and Mooy from pulling the strings, Kruse MUST start last nights game over Timmy.

But yeah, Mclaren was making fantastic runs off the shoulders of his defenders but no one played him in, I think the one time it happened was his first touch when he came on and he fluffed it but he was making the runs the entire time he was on.

Some seriously puzzling and frustrating selections and substitutions from Ange over the last 6-7 games imo.

I noticed that, same with gersbach, and wright both made some pretty dangerous runs that weren't gifted with a pass.

I recall one instant in the game where maclaren snuck behind the Thai defenceless, won the ball and set it up in a platter in side the box for juric or rogic who skyed it into row Z

i could see him stepping down if the saudi's get through

LMAO the blokes Greek you think he would walk away from a massive pay cheque by resigning you're not from Australia 

Post match interview with Ange. For some reason he hasn't quit yet.

We will see in the morning. 
Automatic qualification is a past mark. We did get 19 points. Considering we had way less the previous times we qualified shows that it was a bit of an outlier.

But Ange needs to be grilled by his tactics and picking favourites.

I think Ange is the type of person who would jump rather than be pushed.

Hopefully. Will probably mean we don't have to pay him out.

Managers always get the pay out.

Always.

They either get fired in private or in public.

:(

Bozza getting political, love it

Interesting though, if just 2 or 3 more of those multiple chances had been converted it could have been 4 or 5 goals and we'd be having a different conversation

the thais played like men possessed

its a cruel game!

Goes both ways, Australia could have been down to 10 men and a goal down, ref was Australias 12th man tonight. 

true. how the fck that was NOT a penalty. unbelievable

the ref really let it go tonight, some hometown decisions there

I also think Matt was lucky to not be sent off 

Should have been a yellow. Not a red. Being a bit dramatic.

No red for Studs up? 

That was terrible. We need Jedinak back and a new coach.

I think a lot of people on here have underestimated how much we have missed Mile these past 5 months.

Not sure what more ange could have done tbh. Their keeper pulled off some good saves and our lads are slow and unintelligent.

And yet most of them don't look slow or unintelligent when playing for their club coaches.

^^
Yeah cos they're not all playing together

https://imgur.com/a/9QgHq

- Benching Mooy
- Sticking Leckie at right back
- Starting Smith

Yeah I wonder

and playing ruka instead of someone like mabil. I would understand playing ruka if his strategy is the long ball but it is the opposite of that

And subbing Rogic off.

And omitting gersbach from the squad. We needed him today, he is the only one who can supply a good cross!

Well it was either him or cahill, so I would say that Ange made the right call there. 

rogic, kruse, cahill would have been the 3 most likely in the gun for the last sub

kruse --> cahill for the winning goal, better to  be lucky than good IMO

pfft, you're as bad as ange. Mabil? give me a break. 

how about playing someone good like maclaren/taggart/brosque/santalab. Of course whoever it is should be tried in friendly games not f--king thrown on in a do or die qualifier. Ruka hasn't played a game for Aus is what, 5 years? wtf.