|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xCheers Enzo Bearzot. Thanks for you kind words. Leckie for example looks like an AFL player trying to control and dribble a round ball. As regards Mathew Leckie, it's funny you say that. I may be wrong, but I understand that he only started playing football around the age of 15. Before then he played Aussie Rules. Your description's bang on. I'll say this for him... how many people who've played in the Bundesliga only started to play football at about the age of 15? It's a mightily impressive achievement. And it comes down to his athleticism and his being a "niche" kind of footballer. Imagine if he'd played football, football, football from Day 1. Australia needs more people with Leckie's athleticism (speed, acceleration) playing football constantly (as bettega rightly points out) and with the right coaching (as you rightly point out) from the start. Shouldn’t it be started focusing on football at 15? The way it is sometimes described makes it sound like a Disney movie, Jamaican bobsled team or Eddie the Eagle. May have played most days as a kid at or after school and Aussie rules I assume. Don't know. How much did he play? I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that he played Aussie Rules competitively and didn't play football competitively until around the age of 15. By "competitively", I mean in an organised competition, rather than a professional competition. No idea whether or not Leckie played football after school. In any case, I understand "focus on", in this context, to mean that they'd already played the sport competitively, along with other sports. Then they ditched the other sports. E.g. Ricky Ponting played both cricket and Aussie Rules (in competitions) up until the age of 14. He could have gone pro in either. Then he decided to focus on cricket and basically stopped playing Aussie Rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
You need at least one bloke in your front half who doesn't mind putting an opposition centre half on his arse.
|
|
|
|
|
scott20won
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+xCheers Enzo Bearzot. Thanks for you kind words. Leckie for example looks like an AFL player trying to control and dribble a round ball. As regards Mathew Leckie, it's funny you say that. I may be wrong, but I understand that he only started playing football around the age of 15. Before then he played Aussie Rules. Your description's bang on. I'll say this for him... how many people who've played in the Bundesliga only started to play football at about the age of 15? It's a mightily impressive achievement. And it comes down to his athleticism and his being a "niche" kind of footballer. Imagine if he'd played football, football, football from Day 1. Australia needs more people with Leckie's athleticism (speed, acceleration) playing football constantly (as bettega rightly points out) and with the right coaching (as you rightly point out) from the start. Shouldn’t it be started focusing on football at 15? The way it is sometimes described makes it sound like a Disney movie, Jamaican bobsled team or Eddie the Eagle. May have played most days as a kid at or after school and Aussie rules I assume.
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options. Is that the fault of the A-League? Looking for a single fault is pointless. There is no one place the finger can be pointed. Is the A-League at fault? Partially. Just like the NPL and below are also at fault. Just like the coaching and curriculum is at fault. Any person, organisation or process that forms a part of Australian football development is likely at fault in some way. We have to remember the aleague was set up without a youth structure underneath for the first 5 years until the NYL came in and eventually when the aleague clubs started to invest in the academy space a few years later after that. Based on that we were at least 10 years behind, meanwhile the Socceroos squad had around 11 players in top 5 leagues in 2006 unlike Japan where they only around 4 and South Korea had around 2 players, fast forward to 2020 Japan have about 12 players in the top 5 leagues, South Korea have around 6 currently. These days we only got 3 and one is a regular right now in Many Ryan, unless Hrustic gets into the Frankfurt starting lineup. It shows if you leave youth development behind you will pay the price for the quality of the national team down the line, this is a failure on the FFA and the set up of the aleague as well. I'm not a coach..but you know what stands out like dogs balls for Australian players? The generally terrible first touch. Leckie for example looks like an AFL player trying to control and dribble a round ball. So my questions to you are: Do development coaches 1. believe a good first touch is a technique that can actually be taught? If so how do they teach it, because the outcomes are shit and have been for decades now. 2. Do development coaches believe that a good first touch is not a technique that can be taught but must be "acquired" by way of repetition from an early age? FWIW, I think its a technique that can be taught, and it doesn't take 15 years of repetition from the age of 3. I can pick a player who has a poor first touch just be looking at how he moves his receiving leg and foot even before he touches the ball. You kno its going to bounce back of as soon as it touches his boot. Many of my 40-something mates who played in the 80's and 90's say the same. The first touch was much better for players of that era. Its not some black magic or genetic defect Australian players have. Its poor coaching. Didnt Leckie come into football late? I agree he isn't the best technically but he's a great athlete. I think its different now that there is small sided games, SAP etc that encourages developing better technique and game sense in the right ages, that wasnt there in the past as it was quite add hoc through a different era during the NSL era. Oddly enough those players are coming through right now are the 2000 born players who were the first to go through this and are now in the aleague and NPL set ups around the country. But as Arnie pointed the biggest problem is the gap between 17-23 which will determine how many quality players Australia will develop into the future, they have to solve this with more game time, this is the key now.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Cheers Enzo Bearzot. Thanks for you kind words. Leckie for example looks like an AFL player trying to control and dribble a round ball. As regards Mathew Leckie, it's funny you say that. I may be wrong, but I understand that he only started playing football around the age of 15. Before then he played Aussie Rules. Your description's bang on. I'll say this for him... how many people who've played in the Bundesliga only started to play football at about the age of 15? It's a mightily impressive achievement. And it comes down to his athleticism and his being a "niche" kind of footballer. Imagine if he'd played football, football, football from Day 1. Australia needs more people with Leckie's athleticism (speed, acceleration) playing football constantly (as bettega rightly points out) and with the right coaching (as you rightly point out) from the start.
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
I've said this many times.
First, I'll start with a question: how much in terms of development coaching does your average Brazilian kid get? I'm guessing for the vast majority, it's next to nothing.
What does this tell us?
That that touch and feel for the game doesn't come from development coaching, it comes from playing, playing, playing, 24/7, until your feet hurt. All day, most of the night, all week, all year round, never stop playing.
That's what's missing in Australia (and that's probably what the golden generation had in their favour, being children of immigrants, born into the game, and they just grew up playing the game non-stop).
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options. Is that the fault of the A-League? Looking for a single fault is pointless. There is no one place the finger can be pointed. Is the A-League at fault? Partially. Just like the NPL and below are also at fault. Just like the coaching and curriculum is at fault. Any person, organisation or process that forms a part of Australian football development is likely at fault in some way. We have to remember the aleague was set up without a youth structure underneath for the first 5 years until the NYL came in and eventually when the aleague clubs started to invest in the academy space a few years later after that. Based on that we were at least 10 years behind, meanwhile the Socceroos squad had around 11 players in top 5 leagues in 2006 unlike Japan where they only around 4 and South Korea had around 2 players, fast forward to 2020 Japan have about 12 players in the top 5 leagues, South Korea have around 6 currently. These days we only got 3 and one is a regular right now in Many Ryan, unless Hrustic gets into the Frankfurt starting lineup. It shows if you leave youth development behind you will pay the price for the quality of the national team down the line, this is a failure on the FFA and the set up of the aleague as well. I'm not a coach..but you know what stands out like dogs balls for Australian players? The generally terrible first touch. Leckie for example looks like an AFL player trying to control and dribble a round ball. So my questions to you are: Do development coaches 1. believe a good first touch is a technique that can actually be taught? If so how do they teach it, because the outcomes are shit and have been for decades now. 2. Do development coaches believe that a good first touch is not a technique that can be taught but must be "acquired" by way of repetition from an early age? FWIW, I think its a technique that can be taught, and it doesn't take 15 years of repetition from the age of 3. I can pick a player who has a poor first touch just be looking at how he moves his receiving leg and foot even before he touches the ball. You kno its going to bounce back of as soon as it touches his boot. Many of my 40-something mates who played in the 80's and 90's say the same. The first touch was much better for players of that era. Its not some black magic or genetic defect Australian players have. Its poor coaching.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
@ quickflick.
thank you for your well-considered and respectful comments. I agree with much of what you say.
You may dismiss this as simplistic but I believe the difference between the 2006 and 2018 squads is Tim Cahill,
BvM erred in not selecting Cahill, even with his lack of game time, and I'll never forgive Warren Joyce for wanting to stamp his philosophy of "hard work and graft" that sidelined Tim and left him not match fit.
The difference from 2006 is not as big as people think. Put a fit Tim Cahill with a Leckie free header in the box and you can chalk a win against the Danes.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options.Is that the fault of the A-League? It's a recurring a problem though. Is it the fault of the A-League? To a point. Is it the fault of the development system and football coaching as a whole? To a greater extent. I think that too many footballers have been developed according to some misguided philosophy that: (a) Sideways passing and winning the possession stats = emulating Andres Iniesta and Xavi Hernandez (b) Barcelona was an XI of only Xavi- and Iniesta-type footballers (c) You can win matches by having only these type of footballers. Any individualism, "athletic" football or counter-attacking football is to be discouraged
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it The trouble is that before Daniel Arzani was subbed on, we looked innocuous. Midfield- and attack-wise we were a shadow of the 2006 team (until Arzani came on). Basically, you aren't going to make it out of the group stage of the WC without at least one Arzani-type player on the pitch for the majority each game (in addition to other types of players). It doesn't matter how much possession you have. None of this is Bert van Marwijk's fault. It's a credit to him that he made our defence shipshape with so few months of prep. He can't be expected to work miracles with mostly mediocre midfielders and attackers. Arzani has shown phenomenal promise. He definitely is the exception to the rule with the A-League thus far. He also appears to be a one-off (in terms of style) compared to all the Aussie footballers born in the 90s. The question is... is Arzani the exception to the rule for players born after that? Let's hope not. Will footballers developed entirely under the NC have been taught and encouraged to show individual skill and 1 vs 1 ability?
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI don't recall Kewell actually playing a single minute in the NSL. Milligan's, Jedinak and Mooy's careers were going nowhere prior to the A-League. Their careers were on the scrap heap Mooy-the best player we've had since the 2006 and a certain starter in that team was another Euro wannbe failure until Melb City bought him. Milligans career did kind of go no where but that was his fault had the chance to sign for Arsenal or Werder bremen but went to some pub club in Asia for the money this isnt exclusive to the AL or Australia happens all the time money talks just look at Oscar going from Chelsea to some pub CSL team Mooy was developed by Bolton but being at City helped his career. Jedi, Kruse, Leckie and Ryan are the exports we can be proud of but we need more - we need to be shipping off at least 3-4 players ever year to the top 5 leagues in Europe in the hope at least one of them succeeds I give the AL a lot of shit but dont get it twisted i want it and Australian football to succeed - we need to accept 60-70% of the players we send to Europe top level will 'fail' but there is always Asia or returning to the AL if that happens ie Yeboah. The main reason I want a 2nd division and the old NSL teams to be incorporated is it simply gives more opportunities to put players in the shop window. Im a MU Fan i was the PL most weekends i want more Aussies in the competition!
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options. Is that the fault of the A-League? Looking for a single fault is pointless. There is no one place the finger can be pointed. Is the A-League at fault? Partially. Just like the NPL and below are also at fault. Just like the coaching and curriculum is at fault. Any person, organisation or process that forms a part of Australian football development is likely at fault in some way. We have to remember the aleague was set up without a youth structure underneath for the first 5 years until the NYL came in and eventually when the aleague clubs started to invest in the academy space a few years later after that. Based on that we were at least 10 years behind, meanwhile the Socceroos squad had around 11 players in top 5 leagues in 2006 unlike Japan where they only around 4 and South Korea had around 2 players, fast forward to 2020 Japan have about 12 players in the top 5 leagues, South Korea have around 6 currently. These days we only got 3 and one is a regular right now in Many Ryan, unless Hrustic gets into the Frankfurt starting lineup. It shows if you leave youth development behind you will pay the price for the quality of the national team down the line, this is a failure on the FFA and the set up of the aleague as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhat’s our biggest problem going back to NSL HAL SOCCEROOS MATILDAS AND everything below is lack of capital and investment partners (be that media, sponsors or investors) to provide the results we desire. AL attendances are good, but not for the cost to deliver those numbers. The overheads are to high, for example stadia, players wages, backroom staff and License fees. The ROI doesn’t work. Its no wonder JJ has identified the transfer market as one area we can do significantly better. From my perspective one area we have failed in is marketing, I thought Tana at Glory did it well. He committed to a larger budget to marketing than player budgets. At the same time player bonuses were tied to attendances. Historically budgets are heavily weighted to football departments and operational fixed costs, leaving little to marketing the game. I agree but we cannot improve in the T/F market whilst there is a salary cap becuz it forces clubs to only sign plays for 1 year incase they get serious injuries it f**ks them long term.
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
What’s our biggest problem going back to NSL HAL SOCCEROOS MATILDAS AND everything below is lack of capital and investment partners (be that media, sponsors or investors) to provide the results we desire. AL attendances are good, but not for the cost to deliver those numbers. The overheads are to high, for example stadia, players wages, backroom staff and License fees. The ROI doesn’t work. Its no wonder JJ has identified the transfer market as one area we can do significantly better. From my perspective one area we have failed in is marketing, I thought Tana at Glory did it well. He committed to a larger budget to marketing than player budgets. At the same time player bonuses were tied to attendances. Historically budgets are heavily weighted to football departments and operational fixed costs, leaving little to marketing the game.
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options. Is that the fault of the A-League? Looking for a single fault is pointless. There is no one place the finger can be pointed. Is the A-League at fault? Partially. Just like the NPL and below are also at fault. Just like the coaching and curriculum is at fault. Any person, organisation or process that forms a part of Australian football development is likely at fault in some way.
|
|
|
|
|
Balin Trev
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options.Is that the fault of the A-League? I blame a brilliant French defense. And a solid Danish defense. Peru not as solid but they were damn quick and desperate to defend.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it But that's just it- shots and shots on target reflect lack of striking options.Is that the fault of the A-League?
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
I don't recall Kewell actually playing a single minute in the NSL.
Milligan's, Jedinak and Mooy's careers were going nowhere prior to the A-League. Their careers were on the scrap heap
Mooy-the best player we've had since the 2006 and a certain starter in that team was another Euro wannbe failure until Melb City bought him.
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+xEvery player that started against the eventual World Champions in 2018 WC developed their game to its highest level in the A-League before going overseas. They lost 1-2. The best the 2006 Socceroos could do against the eventual 2006 Champions was 0-1 loss against 10 men Both played against cheating World Cup Winners so this is a 100% like for like, scientifically-validate by me comparison. A-league wins player development for Socceroos. Sure they did sunshine, Kewel, Miligan and Jedinak didnt play in the NSL, Mooy never went to UK at 19. With only Ryan playing in a decent league at the moment AL is tops for development. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_squads#Australia
|
|
|
|
|
Balin Trev
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. No open-play shots on target vs France. But Denmark Rogic, Leckie, Arzani on target with only keeper stopping them. Peru it was only Rogic on target, but keeper saved it
|
|
|
|
|
melbourne_terrace
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xDoes it matter if people don't support these professional clubs in big numbers? I'm a big believer that you should support a local club and that doesn't necessarily mean supporting a professional club. I lost interest in the A-league years ago but I still support a football club in the NPL. I'll support that club no matter what division they are in. Good point. I've often asked the question on these boards: What does it mean to connect to grassroots? Why is it important for A-League clubs to connect to lower tier clubs? I ask the question because in an open pyramid, there are clubs in the lower tiers aiming to replace those clubs in the top tier, so the idea that the A-League clubs sit permanently on top of these clubs, as if they are lording it over them, is an absurd one. If your statement is true - why wasn’t the NSL popular then? I think it goes without saying that if you have a situation where clubs are getting replaced year on year, sometimes by clubs of a similar size, other times by smaller clubs, that it is impossible to predict where the metrics will be in 10 years time (in the NSL we had a team from Queanbeyan, and even a club from Morwell, a tiny country town). Yes, there is a chance that spreading the love of fans across, not 8, 9 or 10 clubs, but 50 clubs (the number who might be aiming for a top tier spot at any moment in time), will possibly dilute the level of support any one club has (but what is the overall support looking like?). This is the main argument in favour of the closed shop system we currently have, and in one sense, it did deliver what it set out to do: establish a professional league and increase metrics over and above what the NSL delivered (as a semi-pro comp). But if we take this argument to its logical conclusion, it means we must stay with the closed shop system, pick and choose the clubs to enter via a licensing system, and everyone else can go please themselves. I think many would agree with me that that's not ideal either (unfortunately, it appears to remain the FFA's preferred model). But... Here we are, professional league pretty close to rock bottom in many respects, so maybe the closed shop approach isn't everything it's cut out to be? Maybe a traditional open pyramid is worth a try afterall? 100% agree with this and is the prime reason why the AL is failing And what was the prime reason the NSL failed then? Because Lowy decided to kill it. Also 5 of 8 starting AL clubs were ex-NSL so cant say it died, Lowy just used creation of AL to get rid of the pesky effniks This is basically what happened. He was given a free reign to do whatever the hell he wanted. So in the process, a 50 year old club (the Oceania club of the century) was not permitted to join (and the club that did end up coming in from Melbourne was part owned by the FFA for the whole of the first season). Ah Lowy, the savior of Aussie Soccer.. hahahahahah He so desperately wanted the other kids to play with him he almost drove poor Hakoa Club broke Spent the equivalent of millions for the time to forge a pretty solid squad and they got results too. But he just couldn't stand that the Greek, Italian and Cro clubs where pulling in crowds and making money and poor Sydney City was a bit like Tarneit Gypsies. He certainly got his revenge on the wogs in the end though didn't he? Lowry intension were not all bad the AL has brought a friendly way for fans to engage with football i go to Victory games and 80% of the fans are wogs anyway.... But the league had no long term plan and it has got mega repetitive and boring to follow - due to previously mentioned reasons - the closed league system long term is clearly failing Lowy knew exactly what he was doing with the voluntary euthanasia of the ethnic clubs. Don't be fooled for a second mate. It was all intentional the slimy vindictive bastard. I dont doubt that rich people didnt get rich without being a c**t Look eventually a few of the old clubs will return to the top division either via a 2nd division or directly. A team like South Melbourne if you ask me would have more support then Western United maybe even City.... But it is the way that is done needs to be carefully executed the club needs to be open to all peoples and culture but is more then welcome to have a Greek flavor - ie Greek food etc But the clubs themselves cannot be 'Greek' or 'Croatian' or 'Italian' etc they need to be open to that - most of the old clubs cant wont give that up and i understand it is 50% pride and 50% tradition but the AL and the old NSL clubs need to meet in the middle if you ask me. Lowry refused to do this and it is why now he is gone many football fans he did more harm then good to the game. ' regardless of all that my Biggest issue with Frank Lowry is he had little to no 'skin in the game' he promised the AL owners the league would be profitable and this amazing competition within 5 years but he HIMSELF never invested into the sport even though the man is a Billionaire (almost) for me i dont trust anyone selling a product they dont buy into themselves and then leaving his idiot of a son in charge was icing on the shit flavored cake But they shouldn't have too if they don't want to mate. That the point. NCIP was vile. As long as a club is not breaking any Australian discrimination laws and doesn't use any controversial or offensive imagery etc I believe they should brand themselves however their voting members decide. That's the beauty of club culture which I feel we are lacking. A club Ike Hume city has the Turkish flag as it's logo this year. I'm sure that if the voting members of the club wherent happy with this they would vote to change directions and go mainstream .... it's up to them. Joe blogs down in Campbellfield who wants to follow a team in winter can either go and watch, or if he deisnt agree with the Turkish flavour he can go to another club.. I'm sure Hume would never turn away a paying customer. This cringy racism has to stop here mate. I can support Hellas Verona in Serie A but not South Melbourne Hellas? Yeah migrant clubs happen all over the world like in Sweden, Chile, the lower leagues of Germany but it's only here and Irish clubs in Scotland were it's had any sort of backlash. No one gives a shit that Audax Italiano, Unión Española and Palestino in Chile are migrant clubs, let alone have other countries in their name but in Australia all the Anglos freak out when anything in Football strays from their norm.
Viennese Vuck
|
|
|
|
|
df1982
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 861,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xDoes it matter if people don't support these professional clubs in big numbers? I'm a big believer that you should support a local club and that doesn't necessarily mean supporting a professional club. I lost interest in the A-league years ago but I still support a football club in the NPL. I'll support that club no matter what division they are in. Good point. I've often asked the question on these boards: What does it mean to connect to grassroots? Why is it important for A-League clubs to connect to lower tier clubs? I ask the question because in an open pyramid, there are clubs in the lower tiers aiming to replace those clubs in the top tier, so the idea that the A-League clubs sit permanently on top of these clubs, as if they are lording it over them, is an absurd one. If your statement is true - why wasn’t the NSL popular then? I think it goes without saying that if you have a situation where clubs are getting replaced year on year, sometimes by clubs of a similar size, other times by smaller clubs, that it is impossible to predict where the metrics will be in 10 years time (in the NSL we had a team from Queanbeyan, and even a club from Morwell, a tiny country town). Yes, there is a chance that spreading the love of fans across, not 8, 9 or 10 clubs, but 50 clubs (the number who might be aiming for a top tier spot at any moment in time), will possibly dilute the level of support any one club has (but what is the overall support looking like?). This is the main argument in favour of the closed shop system we currently have, and in one sense, it did deliver what it set out to do: establish a professional league and increase metrics over and above what the NSL delivered (as a semi-pro comp). But if we take this argument to its logical conclusion, it means we must stay with the closed shop system, pick and choose the clubs to enter via a licensing system, and everyone else can go please themselves. I think many would agree with me that that's not ideal either (unfortunately, it appears to remain the FFA's preferred model). But... Here we are, professional league pretty close to rock bottom in many respects, so maybe the closed shop approach isn't everything it's cut out to be? Maybe a traditional open pyramid is worth a try afterall? 100% agree with this and is the prime reason why the AL is failing And what was the prime reason the NSL failed then? Because Lowy decided to kill it. Also 5 of 8 starting AL clubs were ex-NSL so cant say it died, Lowy just used creation of AL to get rid of the pesky effniks This is basically what happened. He was given a free reign to do whatever the hell he wanted. So in the process, a 50 year old club (the Oceania club of the century) was not permitted to join (and the club that did end up coming in from Melbourne was part owned by the FFA for the whole of the first season). Ah Lowy, the savior of Aussie Soccer.. hahahahahah He so desperately wanted the other kids to play with him he almost drove poor Hakoa Club broke Spent the equivalent of millions for the time to forge a pretty solid squad and they got results too. But he just couldn't stand that the Greek, Italian and Cro clubs where pulling in crowds and making money and poor Sydney City was a bit like Tarneit Gypsies. He certainly got his revenge on the wogs in the end though didn't he? Lowry intension were not all bad the AL has brought a friendly way for fans to engage with football i go to Victory games and 80% of the fans are wogs anyway.... But the league had no long term plan and it has got mega repetitive and boring to follow - due to previously mentioned reasons - the closed league system long term is clearly failing Lowy knew exactly what he was doing with the voluntary euthanasia of the ethnic clubs. Don't be fooled for a second mate. It was all intentional the slimy vindictive bastard. I dont doubt that rich people didnt get rich without being a c**t Look eventually a few of the old clubs will return to the top division either via a 2nd division or directly. A team like South Melbourne if you ask me would have more support then Western United maybe even City.... But it is the way that is done needs to be carefully executed the club needs to be open to all peoples and culture but is more then welcome to have a Greek flavor - ie Greek food etc But the clubs themselves cannot be 'Greek' or 'Croatian' or 'Italian' etc they need to be open to that - most of the old clubs cant wont give that up and i understand it is 50% pride and 50% tradition but the AL and the old NSL clubs need to meet in the middle if you ask me. Lowry refused to do this and it is why now he is gone many football fans he did more harm then good to the game. ' regardless of all that my Biggest issue with Frank Lowry is he had little to no 'skin in the game' he promised the AL owners the league would be profitable and this amazing competition within 5 years but he HIMSELF never invested into the sport even though the man is a Billionaire (almost) for me i dont trust anyone selling a product they dont buy into themselves and then leaving his idiot of a son in charge was icing on the shit flavored cake But they shouldn't have too if they don't want to mate. That the point. NCIP was vile. As long as a club is not breaking any Australian discrimination laws and doesn't use any controversial or offensive imagery etc I believe they should brand themselves however their voting members decide. That's the beauty of club culture which I feel we are lacking. A club Ike Hume city has the Turkish flag as it's logo this year. I'm sure that if the voting members of the club wherent happy with this they would vote to change directions and go mainstream .... it's up to them. Joe blogs down in Campbellfield who wants to follow a team in winter can either go and watch, or if he deisnt agree with the Turkish flavour he can go to another club.. I'm sure Hume would never turn away a paying customer. This cringy racism has to stop here mate. I can support Hellas Verona in Serie A but not South Melbourne Hellas? I think it's fine to have these kinds of clubs in the lower divisions and agree about the NCIP. But the problem is they have an innate ceiling to their support. South Melbourne is probably the only "monoethnic" team capable of supporting a professional-level side, because of the number of Greeks in Melbourne (but even then their support is shared with Port Melbourne, Oakleigh, Heidelberg, etc., and even at the height of SMH's success they only averaged crowds of 5-6k per game). None of the other clubs are capable of getting more than a couple of thousand fans week-in, week-out. You need broadbased clubs at the top level of the game if you want to have 10,000+ fans at games, with the potential of more in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
df1982
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 861,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI think that having a stable, sustainable professional national league is just as important as national team performance, and you shouldn't romanticise the Socceroos during the NSL era. There were dark days for the national team during this time. The fact is the Socceroos NEVER qualified for the World Cup while the NSL was in existence, sometimes bowing out tragically (Iran 1997), sometimes farcically (NZ 1981). Conversely, while the A-League has existed the Socceroos haven't failed to qualify for the World Cup. Moreover, in the late 1990s and early 2000s the federation could barely get their act together to provide matches for the Socceroos, this despite having the golden generation in their prime. If it wasn't for the Lowy takeover the fruits of that talent crop would have been totally wasted. i'd argue the 2006 squad was a 'NSL' developed team I'd also argue the last 2 world cup where we basically had mostly AL developed players where terrible (we didnt win a game) Yes, the 2006 squad was initially developed by the NSL (and the AIS, don't forget) up to a certain age bracket, but almost of the players had left the NSL for Europe by the time they had hit 20. And the administration frittered away the talent through misgovernment at the top, so we didn't take properly advantage of it until after they had been shown the door. By the same token, the current poor state of the Socceroos is due to the development black hole of the 2005-2010 era, when the NSL clubs were demoted and had to rebuild in the state leagues, while the A-League clubs were mostly built from scratch, and took a long time to get properly functioning academies going. But they have these now, some of them doing very well (Wellington, City, Sydney). We just won't see the true results for another decade.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xDoes it matter if people don't support these professional clubs in big numbers? I'm a big believer that you should support a local club and that doesn't necessarily mean supporting a professional club. I lost interest in the A-league years ago but I still support a football club in the NPL. I'll support that club no matter what division they are in. Good point. I've often asked the question on these boards: What does it mean to connect to grassroots? Why is it important for A-League clubs to connect to lower tier clubs? I ask the question because in an open pyramid, there are clubs in the lower tiers aiming to replace those clubs in the top tier, so the idea that the A-League clubs sit permanently on top of these clubs, as if they are lording it over them, is an absurd one. If your statement is true - why wasn’t the NSL popular then? I think it goes without saying that if you have a situation where clubs are getting replaced year on year, sometimes by clubs of a similar size, other times by smaller clubs, that it is impossible to predict where the metrics will be in 10 years time (in the NSL we had a team from Queanbeyan, and even a club from Morwell, a tiny country town). Yes, there is a chance that spreading the love of fans across, not 8, 9 or 10 clubs, but 50 clubs (the number who might be aiming for a top tier spot at any moment in time), will possibly dilute the level of support any one club has (but what is the overall support looking like?). This is the main argument in favour of the closed shop system we currently have, and in one sense, it did deliver what it set out to do: establish a professional league and increase metrics over and above what the NSL delivered (as a semi-pro comp). But if we take this argument to its logical conclusion, it means we must stay with the closed shop system, pick and choose the clubs to enter via a licensing system, and everyone else can go please themselves. I think many would agree with me that that's not ideal either (unfortunately, it appears to remain the FFA's preferred model). But... Here we are, professional league pretty close to rock bottom in many respects, so maybe the closed shop approach isn't everything it's cut out to be? Maybe a traditional open pyramid is worth a try afterall? 100% agree with this and is the prime reason why the AL is failing And what was the prime reason the NSL failed then? Because Lowy decided to kill it. Also 5 of 8 starting AL clubs were ex-NSL so cant say it died, Lowy just used creation of AL to get rid of the pesky effniks This is basically what happened. He was given a free reign to do whatever the hell he wanted. So in the process, a 50 year old club (the Oceania club of the century) was not permitted to join (and the club that did end up coming in from Melbourne was part owned by the FFA for the whole of the first season). Ah Lowy, the savior of Aussie Soccer.. hahahahahah He so desperately wanted the other kids to play with him he almost drove poor Hakoa Club broke Spent the equivalent of millions for the time to forge a pretty solid squad and they got results too. But he just couldn't stand that the Greek, Italian and Cro clubs where pulling in crowds and making money and poor Sydney City was a bit like Tarneit Gypsies. He certainly got his revenge on the wogs in the end though didn't he? Lowry intension were not all bad the AL has brought a friendly way for fans to engage with football i go to Victory games and 80% of the fans are wogs anyway.... But the league had no long term plan and it has got mega repetitive and boring to follow - due to previously mentioned reasons - the closed league system long term is clearly failing Lowy knew exactly what he was doing with the voluntary euthanasia of the ethnic clubs. Don't be fooled for a second mate. It was all intentional the slimy vindictive bastard. I dont doubt that rich people didnt get rich without being a c**t Look eventually a few of the old clubs will return to the top division either via a 2nd division or directly. A team like South Melbourne if you ask me would have more support then Western United maybe even City.... But it is the way that is done needs to be carefully executed the club needs to be open to all peoples and culture but is more then welcome to have a Greek flavor - ie Greek food etc But the clubs themselves cannot be 'Greek' or 'Croatian' or 'Italian' etc they need to be open to that - most of the old clubs cant wont give that up and i understand it is 50% pride and 50% tradition but the AL and the old NSL clubs need to meet in the middle if you ask me. Lowry refused to do this and it is why now he is gone many football fans he did more harm then good to the game. ' regardless of all that my Biggest issue with Frank Lowry is he had little to no 'skin in the game' he promised the AL owners the league would be profitable and this amazing competition within 5 years but he HIMSELF never invested into the sport even though the man is a Billionaire (almost) for me i dont trust anyone selling a product they dont buy into themselves and then leaving his idiot of a son in charge was icing on the shit flavored cake But they shouldn't have too if they don't want to mate. That the point. NCIP was vile. As long as a club is not breaking any Australian discrimination laws and doesn't use any controversial or offensive imagery etc I believe they should brand themselves however their voting members decide. That's the beauty of club culture which I feel we are lacking. A club Ike Hume city has the Turkish flag as it's logo this year. I'm sure that if the voting members of the club wherent happy with this they would vote to change directions and go mainstream .... it's up to them. Joe blogs down in Campbellfield who wants to follow a team in winter can either go and watch, or if he deisnt agree with the Turkish flavour he can go to another club.. I'm sure Hume would never turn away a paying customer. This cringy racism has to stop here mate. I can support Hellas Verona in Serie A but not South Melbourne Hellas?
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xBack in the 70s/80s many of my mates wouldn’t have been seen dead at a Marconi vs Sydney United wog-ball game. But the thing most ALeague fans want is atmosphere just like those efnik fixtures. Wasnt much difference down here mate. Monday morning at school was all the Greek, Italian and Yugo kids giving each other shit over the weekends results and the Skip kids yelling at us to get the f**ck off the footy oval so they could kick they egg ball around, you know a real man's game.. Then all of a sudden in 2005 these same Neanderthals are walking around with Melbourne Victorious tops and telling us it's not called Soccer anymore and when they light flares and punch on.at the soccer it's not as bad as when the ethnics did it.... hahahah f*ck me no wonder the A league fans think we are bitter... wouldn't you be? I think the old hatreds are starting to simmer down a little as both camps realise that we sort of need each other to have any hope of this bloody ridiculous game of ours having any hope in hell of being popular let alone Aussies ever being any good at it... live in hope. To answer the kid who asked how long before a club stops being plastic.... I think a club should at least have the right to choose it's own name colours and identity and not have their whole persona and ip dictated to them by the FFA. A license to participate in a competition ,owned by some rich wanker, does not make a club, it makes a franchise... The old Soccer clubs are just like the old milk bars and fish and chip shops in the burbs.. cast away in favour of another shiny Westfield... But a lot of these old traditional places are still thriving and a lot have gentrified and improved the way they do things and the clientele they target. I hope the Westfield stores survive the coming changes as well. the problem with the ethnic clubs is that they saw themselves as de facto national teams They even NAMED themselves as such. Melbourne/Sydney Croatia? Sth Melb Hellas. Preston Makedonia. How is that in any shape or form inclusive? Yeah that's fair... I'll pay that. There where some pretty ugly times especially in the late 90s... Greaous fun though. Lol. And also yes in a way I suppose there was a huge amount of Nationalism and I do get that a lot of non ethnics might have felt a little intimidated. My serious question to you though is why do you think these clubs owe anything to you to be inclusive? There is a lot of talk about clubs representing their community and to some that means geographic. But you realise that the Greek community, the Croatian community etc etc are all just as valid in Australia. Some if these clubs bent over backwards with the limited resources they had to try and appeal to mainstream Australia. Some never bothered and probably never want to. If you don't like Greek food or Chinese food or Italian food then you either open your own restaurant or you eat at home..... This Aussie Xenophobia has to end sometime. Some of us are 4th generation Australians.... In the end their inability to broaden their appeal beyond their nationalism was not financially viable. Its nice romanticise about money not mattering, but it does. If you don't have fans, you don't get ticket sales, sponsors TV deals. If that's what you want then fine, back to the future, but won't last. Ah so it was financial viability NOT racism that has excluded these 50 plus year old clubs for 16 years and counting now???? Broaden their appeal??? Hahaha your right maybe they won't last.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really. Agree re infuriation with Ange’s lack of pragmatism. Re the foul or non-foul on Schwarzer... if a penalty ought to have been awarded against Cahill, then the Japanese goal ought to have been disallowed for the Japanese player holding the Australian goalkeeper. You can’t have it both ways. Same as Harry’s offside goal vs Croatia. If that’s disallowed, then you gotta call out Graham Poll for not giving Viduka a penalty when he was rugby tackled in the box. Again, you can’t have it both ways. What chances did we have against France and Denmark? Against the French we didn’t get a shot on target in open play. You can’t win a group stage match if you don’t get any shots away. As for the Culina, Bresc and Grella vs Mooy, Rogic and Jedinak. The first three win by a country mile.
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Only losers talk like that, the what's IFs, the could have's etc, winners set high standards and get the job done.
No praising about effort, all about what counts which is the result and having the quality to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xCould’ve been-ism doesn’t help us improve. Most of us here aren’t from Algeria, the US or Costa Rica. Do we remember the Round of 16 in the 2014 World Cup? The USMNT outplayed Belgium for much of that match. They only lost 2-1 a.e.t. But does the rest of the world think about how they nearly won and probably should have won? Does the whole world keep going over how Algeria only lost 2-1 a.e.t to Germany? So they took the eventual champions within a whisker of a penalty shoot out. Costa Rica lost to the Netherlands on penalties in the quarter final of the 2014 World Cup. Does that somehow alter the final score? Fact is, Australia’s not the only low- to mid-ranking team to have played well against a football superpower nation. Nor is Australia the only nation which just fell short after having come close to beating them. While it’s good to be proud of the performance, it’s not good to lament the score line and to call it robbery. The other thing you need to realize is that this game is rigged at the World Cup. Wait, just hear me out... The minnows do NOT get the 50-50 calls. Do you think we get the Risdon penalty on Griezman against France if it was the other way around. No chance! FFs I reckon we don't even get the handball without VAR, the ref took his sweet time about it Do you recall Sth Korea against Germany? 97 minutes. Do you think Sth Korea gets 7 minutes extra time against Germany if they were 2-0 down? Its a joke how FIFA shafts the minnows.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xEnzo Bearzot
I agree that Pim Verbeek’s side, at least, in terms of group stage results, were comparable with Guus’ side. I also agree with you that even Bert was staggered that Australia couldn’t score in open play. He was baffled by how poor we were in front on goal (but that’s not something that can be conveniently ignored in doing a comparison). Your What Ifs are also very selective. What if Japan’s goal had been disallowed for the foul against Mark Schwarzer? What if Josip Simunic’s ‘rugby tackle’ of Mark Viduka inside the penalty box had resulted in the penalty that ought to have been given? What if Guus had used his bench properly against Italy? Australia end up very close to a quarter-final berth against Ukraine. At the end of the day, all that can be looked at are the final results and the quality on the park. Results-wise: Socceroos of 2006 did substantially better than the Socceroos of 2018 Quality-wise: Both sets of Socceroos had similar quality defences. But the 2006 Socceroos were heaps better than the 2018 Socceroos in terms of midfield and in front of goal. There was no foul on Schwarzer. Coaching mistakes don't count. As for results, Verbeek was getting them and he got crucified for being results-focused. Postecoglou wanted to "take them on" and was applauded for.... not winning. i actually blame Postecoglou for not being more pragmatic. We could have actually beaten France, and Denmark, we had enough chances. The point is, the difference in the general play between what happened in 2006 and 2018 was not as big as people imagine it. In the midfield Mooy, Jedinak and Rogic versus Culina, Bresc and Grella? Flip of the coin really.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xBack in the 70s/80s many of my mates wouldn’t have been seen dead at a Marconi vs Sydney United wog-ball game. But the thing most ALeague fans want is atmosphere just like those efnik fixtures. Wasnt much difference down here mate. Monday morning at school was all the Greek, Italian and Yugo kids giving each other shit over the weekends results and the Skip kids yelling at us to get the f**ck off the footy oval so they could kick they egg ball around, you know a real man's game.. Then all of a sudden in 2005 these same Neanderthals are walking around with Melbourne Victorious tops and telling us it's not called Soccer anymore and when they light flares and punch on.at the soccer it's not as bad as when the ethnics did it.... hahahah f*ck me no wonder the A league fans think we are bitter... wouldn't you be? I think the old hatreds are starting to simmer down a little as both camps realise that we sort of need each other to have any hope of this bloody ridiculous game of ours having any hope in hell of being popular let alone Aussies ever being any good at it... live in hope. To answer the kid who asked how long before a club stops being plastic.... I think a club should at least have the right to choose it's own name colours and identity and not have their whole persona and ip dictated to them by the FFA. A license to participate in a competition ,owned by some rich wanker, does not make a club, it makes a franchise... The old Soccer clubs are just like the old milk bars and fish and chip shops in the burbs.. cast away in favour of another shiny Westfield... But a lot of these old traditional places are still thriving and a lot have gentrified and improved the way they do things and the clientele they target. I hope the Westfield stores survive the coming changes as well. the problem with the ethnic clubs is that they saw themselves as de facto national teams They even NAMED themselves as such. Melbourne/Sydney Croatia? Sth Melb Hellas. Preston Makedonia. How is that in any shape or form inclusive? Yeah that's fair... I'll pay that. There where some pretty ugly times especially in the late 90s... Greaous fun though. Lol. And also yes in a way I suppose there was a huge amount of Nationalism and I do get that a lot of non ethnics might have felt a little intimidated. My serious question to you though is why do you think these clubs owe anything to you to be inclusive? There is a lot of talk about clubs representing their community and to some that means geographic. But you realise that the Greek community, the Croatian community etc etc are all just as valid in Australia. Some if these clubs bent over backwards with the limited resources they had to try and appeal to mainstream Australia. Some never bothered and probably never want to. If you don't like Greek food or Chinese food or Italian food then you either open your own restaurant or you eat at home..... This Aussie Xenophobia has to end sometime. Some of us are 4th generation Australians.... In the end their inability to broaden their appeal beyond their nationalism was not financially viable. Its nice romanticise about money not mattering, but it does. If you don't have fans, you don't get ticket sales, sponsors TV deals. If that's what you want then fine, back to the future, but won't last.
|
|
|
|