|
johnszasz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
+xAlso. Right in thick of the European season is when the cup is on. No break like usual as a normal World Cup in June. Players from the top tier of football will be very fatigued. It'll be interesting in that they're reaching a high level during season but a lot of games until then. Only 7 day break before tournament so there will be sharpness but team cohesion? I think we'll see some interesting results. I can imagine the Saudis will make provisions to pause their league early. I don't even know their calendar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric 2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
This is the real, deep and bitter truth of the day.
This is the problem that must be solved before we move up in the world. We will not be competitive until we have 500 professional players. Maybe a 1000 before we win something.
Kids are still playing in backyards and parks and doing 1 v 1 stuff. They are much much better at it than all of the generations before them. They are not hamstrung by training and coaching but by opportunity. Their inspirations come from all over the planet and access to that influence is pervasive and instant.
There seems to be much confusion and obfuscation about the so called "Dutch" revolution. It was never an instruction or concept of doing nothing but pass the ball 3 feet to the nearest kid. So what is it?
Historically, Australia produced teams of athletes. Our whole approach to the game was dictated by our isolation up until the mid 1960s, modified locally after that by small coherent groups of immigrants imposing their "DNA" on their kid's development.
Until (let's pick an arbitrary but significant date) 1974, the big fast kid that was sport minded that made the school team for swimming, cricket, soccer and everything was also the star of the soccer team. This was a natural outcome. Despite the fond memories of some, the vast majority of people playing the sport here were never the children of recent immigrants. They were the same polyglot mix as the rest of country.
When television arrived new ideas flowed. Maybe we learned 442 and made the switch from 532? Scots had been talking about 443 since the 1950s at least, but nobody listened because Chelsea and Leeds and Manchester United took the ball down the wing and crossed it into the mixer.
The ideas on how to play came from watching "Match of the Day" and "The Big Match" and a few library books. It was the overwhelming influence of the "English Game" that permeated the minds and deeds and styles of Australian Soccer. The exception was the small, but powerful in terms of competition success, cultural groups forming in the east coast capitals.
All (including English) recent immigrants brought fresh playing and training ideas, but those that saw the game as a natural cultural expression worked harder than the others in demonstrating the wonders and superiority of their "style". They actively sought out and even brought out professional players from their country of origin to bring their teams to be the best they could be. The masses just played because they genuinely just loved the game and really for no other reason. In fact, to this day, that it is the driver for the majority of the million or so registered and non-registered players in this country who go to training twice a week in the dark and cold and wander about on cow paddocks.
After 1974 we all knew we had to do something. Our new heroes had travelled to Europe and in 270 minutes, probably failed to get a shot away from inside the box.
We could run fast, tackle vigorously, and even take on a single man and beat him (and then lose the ball in an isolated position). Significantly, it was a mix of both recent arrivals and multi-generational home developed players that made that squad.
So what changed after that. At first not much. Everybody argued about well, everything. We cobbled up a national league and we continued to produce players for it in exactly the same way as we had for decades. For the following 25 years (ish) we produced International teams with about the same success rate as those that had gone before.
The bright lights rising were the youth that had been plucked as teens and taken overseas to learn their craft in a fully professional environment. Those that stuck at it rose to be genuinely Internationally competitive.
In the early 80's our National Teams were crap compilations of great people who couldn't actually play beyond their natural abilities because they had never learned to play competitively in some really basic tenants of the game. We couldn't hold the ball in tight spaces. We couldn't create opportunities for players under pressure. We couldn't control the tempo of game to advantage. I would argue we couldn't do any of those things in 2006 either.
Opponents knew that to beat Australia all you had to do was press and eventually they would cough up the ball in a critical position. They were only worried about speedy wingers, 50/50 ball challenges and Kevin Muscat tackles. The really basic skills of body position, movement off the ball close to the ball carrier, one touch passing, ball retention, and the indefinable "intelligent play" were never there.
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
The dream of producing teams of the same monster athletes as before, but equipped with essential skills and game intelligence was born and might yet even be realised.
The Dutch have been doing just that for 50 years. It is a natural and attractive concept to see what they do and to copy the bits they do well and adopt them if they fit.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite. In small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
It is not the stultifying work of the devil that the armchair experts accuse it of being always without any reasons given or endings to their rants.
By the time we get to U14s those skills are utilised by the players in real intense competitive games. It is now natural for them to use the skills that have become almost innate.
The progression over the next couple of years of their development sees them translate their abilities using 433 as it is the system that allows them to express (not repress) their abilities and progress to the coaching, system and styles of professional coaches beyond. It's all clear blue skies ahead right?
No! Because it's also where we lose 95% of them BECAUSE THERE IS NOWHERE FOR THEM TO FUCKING GO!
What a fantastic post, thank you for the insight. As one of the so called "armchair critics" I cant profess to have ANY knowledge of what the mythical NC contains but what I do see week in week out is a style of play at (at least at, NPL and Socceroos level) that has not made the "leap" past the 433 safety net. Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now? Not trying to be a smartass but I dont see them anywhere? Your very last line is absolutely the truth.......... Interesting, because I've had vast coach education in the NC, but I thought it was boring the pants of posters, so I haven't mentioned it for a while! Mustapha Amini, Najjarine, Daniel Da Silva (what has happened to him in the last season?), Josh McDonald (has not kicked on after his teens), Rene Piscopo, are all creative number tens.
|
|
|
|
|
Hillbilly55
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 564,
Visits: 0
|
+xon this: how likely is it that we really do see a 2nd division the next few years? It is hard to imagine improving much until we get a full time 2nd division (I suppose though at first it will be semi-professional? Which means how many players are full time?) I am still hopeful that it'll be next year, but I suspect it'll be the year after. The FA seem to only be able to focus on one thing at once, and their hands are full with the WWC next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric 2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I'm not sure of this it was the thread where I was accused of being 'nasty to the GG', but I've found plenty of the GG in the last few days who have been quite constructive about the current cohort of Socceroos. Fair play to them!
* Tim Cahill
Has been in camp with the Socceroos in Qatar. Doing everything the can do to possibly help and support the team in the background. He isn't at all sticking the boot in about not playing highest level club football, because of all the other factors about camps, organisation, camaraderie, etc, when playing international football. Timmy has become more articulate and expanded his vocabulary since he has retired.
* John Aloisi
Class act. Articulate, great insights, respectful and very analytical. I've seen a lot of pundits in Europe, and John is as good as anyone, at least as good as Gianluci Viali and Vincent Kompany. Of course he is a current successful coach. Johnny gave some very good insights on Optus about Australia's current midfield.
* Scott McDonald
Similar to John A. Demonstrating profound knowledge of football and proving similar quality insights into the current midfield scenario of the Socceroos. Macca focuses on what they are doing and doing on the pitch tactically, not where they should, or shouldn't play their club football.
-Whereas Mark Schwarzer was interviewed on Optus, with Macca and Johnny A, he went on about Hrustic being on a different level to the rest of the Socceroo team, because of where he plays club football.
Undoubtedly, Hrustic is good technically and has vision, like Mark suggests, but he has had a terrible tendency to make many bad decisions in the back part of the pitch, particularly when he has played as a DM.
For instance Hrustic tackles when he should jockey, and jockeys when he should tackle, contests balls he shouldn't, passes to players under pressure, etc. IMO Hrustic has the worst game sense in our starting line up. He definitely doesn't think more quickly than other players, often the reverse.
|
|
|
|
|
Booney
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 674,
Visits: 0
|
+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
This is the real, deep and bitter truth of the day.
This is the problem that must be solved before we move up in the world. We will not be competitive until we have 500 professional players. Maybe a 1000 before we win something.
Kids are still playing in backyards and parks and doing 1 v 1 stuff. They are much much better at it than all of the generations before them. They are not hamstrung by training and coaching but by opportunity. Their inspirations come from all over the planet and access to that influence is pervasive and instant.
There seems to be much confusion and obfuscation about the so called "Dutch" revolution. It was never an instruction or concept of doing nothing but pass the ball 3 feet to the nearest kid. So what is it?
Historically, Australia produced teams of athletes. Our whole approach to the game was dictated by our isolation up until the mid 1960s, modified locally after that by small coherent groups of immigrants imposing their "DNA" on their kid's development.
Until (let's pick an arbitrary but significant date) 1974, the big fast kid that was sport minded that made the school team for swimming, cricket, soccer and everything was also the star of the soccer team. This was a natural outcome. Despite the fond memories of some, the vast majority of people playing the sport here were never the children of recent immigrants. They were the same polyglot mix as the rest of country.
When television arrived new ideas flowed. Maybe we learned 442 and made the switch from 532? Scots had been talking about 443 since the 1950s at least, but nobody listened because Chelsea and Leeds and Manchester United took the ball down the wing and crossed it into the mixer.
The ideas on how to play came from watching "Match of the Day" and "The Big Match" and a few library books. It was the overwhelming influence of the "English Game" that permeated the minds and deeds and styles of Australian Soccer. The exception was the small, but powerful in terms of competition success, cultural groups forming in the east coast capitals.
All (including English) recent immigrants brought fresh playing and training ideas, but those that saw the game as a natural cultural expression worked harder than the others in demonstrating the wonders and superiority of their "style". They actively sought out and even brought out professional players from their country of origin to bring their teams to be the best they could be. The masses just played because they genuinely just loved the game and really for no other reason. In fact, to this day, that it is the driver for the majority of the million or so registered and non-registered players in this country who go to training twice a week in the dark and cold and wander about on cow paddocks.
After 1974 we all knew we had to do something. Our new heroes had travelled to Europe and in 270 minutes, probably failed to get a shot away from inside the box.
We could run fast, tackle vigorously, and even take on a single man and beat him (and then lose the ball in an isolated position). Significantly, it was a mix of both recent arrivals and multi-generational home developed players that made that squad.
So what changed after that. At first not much. Everybody argued about well, everything. We cobbled up a national league and we continued to produce players for it in exactly the same way as we had for decades. For the following 25 years (ish) we produced International teams with about the same success rate as those that had gone before.
The bright lights rising were the youth that had been plucked as teens and taken overseas to learn their craft in a fully professional environment. Those that stuck at it rose to be genuinely Internationally competitive.
In the early 80's our National Teams were crap compilations of great people who couldn't actually play beyond their natural abilities because they had never learned to play competitively in some really basic tenants of the game. We couldn't hold the ball in tight spaces. We couldn't create opportunities for players under pressure. We couldn't control the tempo of game to advantage. I would argue we couldn't do any of those things in 2006 either.
Opponents knew that to beat Australia all you had to do was press and eventually they would cough up the ball in a critical position. They were only worried about speedy wingers, 50/50 ball challenges and Kevin Muscat tackles. The really basic skills of body position, movement off the ball close to the ball carrier, one touch passing, ball retention, and the indefinable "intelligent play" were never there.
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
The dream of producing teams of the same monster athletes as before, but equipped with essential skills and game intelligence was born and might yet even be realised.
The Dutch have been doing just that for 50 years. It is a natural and attractive concept to see what they do and to copy the bits they do well and adopt them if they fit.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite. In small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
It is not the stultifying work of the devil that the armchair experts accuse it of being always without any reasons given or endings to their rants.
By the time we get to U14s those skills are utilised by the players in real intense competitive games. It is now natural for them to use the skills that have become almost innate.
The progression over the next couple of years of their development sees them translate their abilities using 433 as it is the system that allows them to express (not repress) their abilities and progress to the coaching, system and styles of professional coaches beyond. It's all clear blue skies ahead right?
No! Because it's also where we lose 95% of them BECAUSE THERE IS NOWHERE FOR THEM TO FUCKING GO!
This is a really good post,one of the best I've seen on this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xJust realized there will be a record 6 Asian teams in Qatar - if ever there was a time an Asian team could go deep its this cup. Iran, Japan and South Korea all have genuine world stars. I think it could go ether way as all 6 nations could be knocked out at the end of the 1st week it is somewhat unlucky Japan is in the 'group of death' as i think they probably would make it to the round of 16 in any other group the other AFC nations are in....it kind of reminds me of us in 2014... Saudi, Iran, Australia - are all underdogs in their group but all of us have a 'chance' to runner-up the group as there are win-able games in them and you never how 90'' will go... Qatar are almost a certain to embarrass the confederation as they would not qualify for a WC in any other circumstances imo i can see them losing every games 3-nil I'll be supporting all the AFC teams though unlike some other retards here who support NZ i actually support my confederation and wish the sides well Also, didn't Qatar win the last Asian Cup? They must be ranked one of Asia's top teams ATM. fair enough, i reckon Senegal and Netherlands are better then any team in Asia by a fair distance but Qatar do have a home advantage i hope they can get out of the group but i'd be suprised if they got more then 3 points from the group and i honestly wouldn't be surprised if they got 1 or less Ecuador are no 'world beaters' at least on paper they don't look great but i reckon they are still better then Qatar - every team in that group would be looking at Qatar as 3-points in the bag so that also might be to their advantage.... note - interestingly Qatar won Asian cup and Senegal won AFCON and they are in the same group....probably be a good measure for this forum from the world cup to see how the AFC champions stack up against the African champions
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Bloody hell, I had forgotten that Qatar won the last Asian Cup.
I mean seriously....
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xThe last Roos v Japan game in Sydney showed real world class quality from Japan - who would have troubled many Euro/South American sides with the skillful tactics and techniques they showed that game- so yeah not close to Europe and South American levels overall but still worthy of respect here in Asia. Roos did just defeat 5th best Sth Am side afterall 👊 We can only speculate, but where would Japan have placed in South American WCQs if they had played in them? They were much tougher opposition than 5th placed Peru. Anywhere from 3rd to 7th sounds likely to me. They were a better opposition than Peru. On the other hand, Colombia (6th place) could beat Japan. At least, the Colombians have the best individual player in their NT right now, in Luis Díaz. If we must speculate… one campaign I picture Japan finishing third in South America. Another campaign I picture them finishing sixth or seventh. Football’s a funny game. It’s not a case of x beat y and y beat z, therefore x would also beat z. One other thing to consider… the Peru you watched mightn’t have been playing in the manner of or with the skill of the Peru that won all those recent games in qualification. Maybe the play much better football in South America than in the Middle-East? Good job for us we had so many days in camp Did you actually watch all the Socceroo games in this WCQ campaign, particularly the last round? I think you're a nice person Decentric who is well-versed in FFA coaching methodology. But with all due respect, I consider you an FFA apparatchik. I cannot recall ever reading anything where you've criticised the current administration, NT manager or the playing group, as a whole. While you may have followed international/foreign football closely at some stage, my impression is that you're completely locked into the football scene here and nowhere else. You appear to regard any coaching guidance handed down by the FFA as gospel. These kind of conversations almost have shades of a discussion about "liberal democracy" with a Chinese person inculcated in "Xi Jinping Thought". We're coming at this from such different angles. I feel that coaches cop too much criticism at times, when players struggle to perform, or teams have extended periods of bad luck. Admittedly, I'm loathe to criticise coaches, as I can usually see some things that a team is doing well. Football Australia's current curriculum is European based - an amalgamation of French, Spanish, German and Dutch. Half of the coach education in Australia I've done has been conducted under Dutch staff coaches from their football federation, who've also coached pro teams. You have made a fair comment though. I have not watched much European football in recent times. I'm aware how much more dangerous around goal many European strikers, attacking midfielders and wingers are in the League Of Nations. Also, the European pitches are currently very slick and European international teams play at high tempos in cool conditions. The footage is often filmed much lower in the stadia too, which creates an impression the game is played at a quicker tempo. You know what I've wondered why the aus footballing base of mostly anglos, italians, greeks and ex-yugos are told to try and play like the dutch. im a little bit baffled It is predicated on trying to emulate the world powerhouses in football - Germany, Spain, France, Holland, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Italy. All have similar characteristics - apart from Italy. Since that criteria was formulated to determine a world powerhouse, it seems England, Portugal and Croatia, can also now be considered football powerhouses. The cornerstone of our Aussie curriculum is developing a style that wins World Cups. So what we've tried to do is similar to the European and South American powerhouses. It is going to take a long time to see the benefits, because we have to improve technically. Japan have gone for the Brazilian approach. They are starting to see the benefits of their world class development system. Watching the recent u23 for the first time Australia looked technically on par with the likes of the best teams, the technical level was quite good so it must be the NC influence as one factor.
|
|
|
|
|
SWandP
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
"Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now?"
Mostly sitting in front of a phone at the local mall laughing at cats on tik-tok.
Quite a lot are ready for transition to the professional game at 16 but the NPL is not an attraction for them and it is an even greater put-off for their parents who fear having to keep financing them until and maybe beyond their 30th birthday. NPL is not professional. It is not a career. It is very, very rarely a career starter. It is absurdly local and inward looking. Kids might get noticed in televised FA Cup games but they will still need massive work to successfully to make the leap. Cheaper and safer for the A League to recycle from the horrifyingly small pool of known professionals.
NPL Clubs in a TV final aren't fully motivated to run out the 16 year old prodigy for public viewing either. What is the incentive?
Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.)
Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you!
As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x"Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now?" Mostly sitting in front of a phone at the local mall laughing at cats on tik-tok. Quite a lot are ready for transition to the professional game at 16 but the NPL is not an attraction for them and it is an even greater put-off for their parents who fear having to keep financing them until and maybe beyond their 30th birthday. NPL is not professional. It is not a career. It is very, very rarely a career starter. It is absurdly local and inward looking. Kids might get noticed in televised FA Cup games but they will still need massive work to successfully to make the leap. Cheaper and safer for the A League to recycle from the horrifyingly small pool of known professionals. NPL Clubs in a TV final aren't fully motivated to run out the 16 year old prodigy for public viewing either. What is the incentive? Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.) Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you! As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable. But therin lies the problem... The owners of these so called clubs are only interested in being owners if the clubs are LIMITED and exclusive... They can't have their cake and eat it at the same time, something has to give. Its a mobius strip, a never ending bizarro world loop. The value of an Aleagye license to its "owners'" is the amount of revenue that can be generated through the fanbase and the value of the broadcasting deal the APL can negotiate for them..... A rare chance to sell a player overseas for some small fee is great but until those fees become significantly larger than what the perceived value of keeping the Aleague at closed shop cartel levels is, then others will change. Now we all agree that 50 more professional clubs will mean 1000 more players added to the playing ecosystem, plus coaches, admin, facilities etc etc and that will organically lead to better players who in turn can command much larger transfer fees from overseas clubs...... but, and again for the guys in the back, but that means the millions paid for a license are worthless. Do you think the Indonesian, Emirate and Chinese owners of the APL will give this cash away just because they want the Soceroos to be a powerhouse team in the region?
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
This is the real, deep and bitter truth of the day.
This is the problem that must be solved before we move up in the world. We will not be competitive until we have 500 professional players. Maybe a 1000 before we win something.
Kids are still playing in backyards and parks and doing 1 v 1 stuff. They are much much better at it than all of the generations before them. They are not hamstrung by training and coaching but by opportunity. Their inspirations come from all over the planet and access to that influence is pervasive and instant.
There seems to be much confusion and obfuscation about the so called "Dutch" revolution. It was never an instruction or concept of doing nothing but pass the ball 3 feet to the nearest kid. So what is it?
Historically, Australia produced teams of athletes. Our whole approach to the game was dictated by our isolation up until the mid 1960s, modified locally after that by small coherent groups of immigrants imposing their "DNA" on their kid's development.
Until (let's pick an arbitrary but significant date) 1974, the big fast kid that was sport minded that made the school team for swimming, cricket, soccer and everything was also the star of the soccer team. This was a natural outcome. Despite the fond memories of some, the vast majority of people playing the sport here were never the children of recent immigrants. They were the same polyglot mix as the rest of country.
When television arrived new ideas flowed. Maybe we learned 442 and made the switch from 532? Scots had been talking about 443 since the 1950s at least, but nobody listened because Chelsea and Leeds and Manchester United took the ball down the wing and crossed it into the mixer.
The ideas on how to play came from watching "Match of the Day" and "The Big Match" and a few library books. It was the overwhelming influence of the "English Game" that permeated the minds and deeds and styles of Australian Soccer. The exception was the small, but powerful in terms of competition success, cultural groups forming in the east coast capitals.
All (including English) recent immigrants brought fresh playing and training ideas, but those that saw the game as a natural cultural expression worked harder than the others in demonstrating the wonders and superiority of their "style". They actively sought out and even brought out professional players from their country of origin to bring their teams to be the best they could be. The masses just played because they genuinely just loved the game and really for no other reason. In fact, to this day, that it is the driver for the majority of the million or so registered and non-registered players in this country who go to training twice a week in the dark and cold and wander about on cow paddocks.
After 1974 we all knew we had to do something. Our new heroes had travelled to Europe and in 270 minutes, probably failed to get a shot away from inside the box.
We could run fast, tackle vigorously, and even take on a single man and beat him (and then lose the ball in an isolated position). Significantly, it was a mix of both recent arrivals and multi-generational home developed players that made that squad.
So what changed after that. At first not much. Everybody argued about well, everything. We cobbled up a national league and we continued to produce players for it in exactly the same way as we had for decades. For the following 25 years (ish) we produced International teams with about the same success rate as those that had gone before.
The bright lights rising were the youth that had been plucked as teens and taken overseas to learn their craft in a fully professional environment. Those that stuck at it rose to be genuinely Internationally competitive.
In the early 80's our National Teams were crap compilations of great people who couldn't actually play beyond their natural abilities because they had never learned to play competitively in some really basic tenants of the game. We couldn't hold the ball in tight spaces. We couldn't create opportunities for players under pressure. We couldn't control the tempo of game to advantage. I would argue we couldn't do any of those things in 2006 either.
Opponents knew that to beat Australia all you had to do was press and eventually they would cough up the ball in a critical position. They were only worried about speedy wingers, 50/50 ball challenges and Kevin Muscat tackles. The really basic skills of body position, movement off the ball close to the ball carrier, one touch passing, ball retention, and the indefinable "intelligent play" were never there.
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
The dream of producing teams of the same monster athletes as before, but equipped with essential skills and game intelligence was born and might yet even be realised.
The Dutch have been doing just that for 50 years. It is a natural and attractive concept to see what they do and to copy the bits they do well and adopt them if they fit.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite. In small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
It is not the stultifying work of the devil that the armchair experts accuse it of being always without any reasons given or endings to their rants.
By the time we get to U14s those skills are utilised by the players in real intense competitive games. It is now natural for them to use the skills that have become almost innate.
The progression over the next couple of years of their development sees them translate their abilities using 433 as it is the system that allows them to express (not repress) their abilities and progress to the coaching, system and styles of professional coaches beyond. It's all clear blue skies ahead right?
No! Because it's also where we lose 95% of them BECAUSE THERE IS NOWHERE FOR THEM TO FUCKING GO!
What a fantastic post, thank you for the insight. As one of the so called "armchair critics" I cant profess to have ANY knowledge of what the mythical NC contains but what I do see week in week out is a style of play at (at least at, NPL and Socceroos level) that has not made the "leap" past the 433 safety net. Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now? Not trying to be a smartass but I dont see them anywhere? Your very last line is absolutely the truth.......... Interesting, because I've had vas coach education in the NC, but I thought it was boring the pants of posters, so I haven't mentioned it for a while! Mustapha Amini, Najjarine, Daniel Da Silva (what has happened to him in the last season?), Josh McDonald (has not kicked on after his teens), Rene Piscopo, are all creative number tens. Who? Is this a pisstake? Sorry but if Piscopo, Amini and De Silva are the "results" of your NC coaching education discerning creative #10 s then ....... I guess this explains some of you player evaluations recently......
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x"Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now?" Mostly sitting in front of a phone at the local mall laughing at cats on tik-tok. Quite a lot are ready for transition to the professional game at 16 but the NPL is not an attraction for them and it is an even greater put-off for their parents who fear having to keep financing them until and maybe beyond their 30th birthday. NPL is not professional. It is not a career. It is very, very rarely a career starter. It is absurdly local and inward looking. Kids might get noticed in televised FA Cup games but they will still need massive work to successfully to make the leap. Cheaper and safer for the A League to recycle from the horrifyingly small pool of known professionals. NPL Clubs in a TV final aren't fully motivated to run out the 16 year old prodigy for public viewing either. What is the incentive? Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.) Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you! As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable. Really good post!!
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric 2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.1K,
Visits: 0
|
After Quickflick elucidated some of the European WCQ scenarios, I checked a lot of the UEFA World Cup Qualifying results. QF is definitely correct. UEFA has phenomenal depth compared to ALL other continents.
UEFA have 10 qualification groups with 5-6 teams in them. Surprisingly, the results are a lot closer between the powerhouses and the ones who rarely qualify, than we would like to think.
Teams like Poland, Turkey, Ireland, Scotland, Austria, Georgia, Israel, Bosnia, Greece, Norway, Slovenia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary, et al, might not qualify for World Cups and European Championships much. However, if they were familiar with the conditions in any other continental football federation around the world, they would be serious World Cup qualifying contenders.
Even worse, Qatar appeared to play in UEFA Group A, for match practice. Of course Qatar would qualify anyway, but when other teams played them it was probably a friendly for them too.
In Group A, Qatar was up against Serbia, Portugal, Ireland, Azerbaijan and Luxembourg. I'm assuming Qatar played home games in Qatar?
There was a table for matches Qatar played home and awa.They finished 5th in a table of 6 for UEFA Group A.
Serbia
Portugal
Ireland
Azerbaijan
Qatar
Luxembourg
This only two games Qatar won, were against Azerbaijan and Luxembourg at home. Serbia pumped Qatar 4-0 in one game.
If Qatar had the same playing personnel that won them the Asian Cup in 2019, it does not show the Asian Confed in a good light relative to Europe.
However, the strength of the Asian Confederation compared to the rest of the world football federations, and South America in particular, still stands, with Australia prevailing over Peru.
As I closely scrutinised all South American results, it was pretty even outside Argentina and Brazil, from teams ranked 3 -8. The bottom two dropping off a bit who ranked at 9 and 10 in the WCQ table. I know there are two South A teams who play home games at ridiculously high altitude, which negates most visiting teams. Is it Bolivia, Paraguay or Ecuador who comprise the two?
There are also quite a few teams who play under UEFA's jurisdiction, who are geographically situated in Asia - Israel, Turkey ( most of it), Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Georgia. It would be harder to qualify through Asia if these teams were in the Asian Confederation. I suppose it enables them to play Champions' League and Europe League intercontinental club football.
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x"Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now?" Mostly sitting in front of a phone at the local mall laughing at cats on tik-tok. Quite a lot are ready for transition to the professional game at 16 but the NPL is not an attraction for them and it is an even greater put-off for their parents who fear having to keep financing them until and maybe beyond their 30th birthday. NPL is not professional. It is not a career. It is very, very rarely a career starter. It is absurdly local and inward looking. Kids might get noticed in televised FA Cup games but they will still need massive work to successfully to make the leap. Cheaper and safer for the A League to recycle from the horrifyingly small pool of known professionals. NPL Clubs in a TV final aren't fully motivated to run out the 16 year old prodigy for public viewing either. What is the incentive? Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.) Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you! As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable. But therin lies the problem... for the guys in the back, but that means the millions paid for a license are worthless. Well that is the 'real' issue the AL model is and always has been an absolutely crap model old Frank and co set this up so billionaires could own a club and have there financial investment protected the original 8 clubs were told the AL would be a 'profitable' investment within 5 years... It is 100% the wrong mentality and the wrong attitude and goes to show how 'rubbish' our governing body is, the fact is in a 'fairly' woke world the 'old Ethnics' would be cleaning up with whole 'diversity' push we have in society. I have said it once ill say it again the AL model isn't about building up Australian football it is very much about 'protecting' rich ppls investment into football at the cost of 'bettering' football itself. The fact we are almost 2 decades in and we dont have P/R is testiment to how much 'self interest' is allowed to be built into the current model...
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThere are also quite a few teams who play under UEFA's jurisdiction, who are geographically situated in Asia - Israel, Turkey ( most of it), Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Georgia. It would be harder to qualify through Asia if these teams were in the Asian Confederation. I suppose it enables them to play Champions' League and Europe League intercontinental club football. It would be 'good' for both Turkey/Russia (not withstanding the war in Ukraine issues) and AFC is if the Turks/Russians joined Asia they would make more world cups and be a 'power' houses in the confed due to their leagues being 'fairly' strong by world standards however i think missing out on UCL and Europa league probably would hurt financially too much also take some magic away A similar but less extent Israel as their league isn't 'very good' but i think a few clubs are 'decent' i think the whole confederation system is incredibility outdated the world is a much smaller place then it was 50 years ago (sure COVID has been a 'set back') but football could easily be a global sport now with clubs and national football played across the whole planet opposed to certain regions.
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric 2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xThere are also quite a few teams who play under UEFA's jurisdiction, who are geographically situated in Asia - Israel, Turkey ( most of it), Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Georgia. It would be harder to qualify through Asia if these teams were in the Asian Confederation. I suppose it enables them to play Champions' League and Europe League intercontinental club football. It would be 'good' for both Turkey/Russia (not withstanding the war in Ukraine issues) and AFC is if the Turks/Russians joined Asia they would make more world cups and be a 'power' houses in the confed due to their leagues being 'fairly' strong by world standards however i think missing out on UCL and Europa league probably would hurt financially too much also take some magic away But they would qualify for a lot more world cups.... A similar but less extent Israel as their league isn't 'very good' i think the whole confederation system is incredibility outdated the world is a much smaller place then it was 50 years ago (sure COVID has been a 'set back') but football could easily be a global sport now with clubs and national football played across the whole planet opposed to certain regions. Good point about Russia! Of course most of that country is in Asia too. I've just read a good article on Inside Sport by Adrian Deans, mooting that Asia be split into two - West Asia and East Asia ( including Oceania) - particularly in light of the new 48 team WCQ format in 2026. I think he suggested East A would have 5.5 WCQing spots (including Oceania) and West A would have about 3.5. It would certainly cut down on travel. Also, he argues there is still animosity from some countries in the Middle East towards Aus being a member of in the Asian Confed, whereas the East Asians apparently love us being a member. Asia as a whole, would also like us, an Asian team, knocking off a South American opponent for WC qualification in an Intercontinental play off! Moreover, Adrian contends West Asian teams would have a chance for teams outside Iran and Saudi A to qualify for WCs. I think Iraq may have qualified once since we've been a member of Asian Confed?
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x"Where are the creative AMs and clinical #9s we should be seeing by now?" Mostly sitting in front of a phone at the local mall laughing at cats on tik-tok. Quite a lot are ready for transition to the professional game at 16 but the NPL is not an attraction for them and it is an even greater put-off for their parents who fear having to keep financing them until and maybe beyond their 30th birthday. NPL is not professional. It is not a career. It is very, very rarely a career starter. It is absurdly local and inward looking. Kids might get noticed in televised FA Cup games but they will still need massive work to successfully to make the leap. Cheaper and safer for the A League to recycle from the horrifyingly small pool of known professionals. NPL Clubs in a TV final aren't fully motivated to run out the 16 year old prodigy for public viewing either. What is the incentive? Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.) Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you! As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable. But therin lies the problem... for the guys in the back, but that means the millions paid for a license are worthless. Well that is the 'real' issue the AL model is and always has been an absolutely crap model old Frank and co set this up so billionaires could own a club and have there financial investment protected the original 8 clubs were told the AL would be a 'profitable' investment within 5 years... It is 100% the wrong mentality and the wrong attitude and goes to show how 'rubbish' our governing body is, the fact is in a 'fairly' woke world the 'old Ethnics' would be cleaning up with whole 'diversity' push we have in society. I have said it once ill say it again the AL model isn't about building up Australian football it is very much about 'protecting' rich ppls investment into football at the cost of 'bettering' football itself. The fact we are almost 2 decades in and we dont have P/R is testiment to how much 'self interest' is allowed to be built into the current model... correct buddy and the whirlpool we're in that I don't understand how the devoted ALM supporter cannot see or more so turn a blind eye about it all defending the current closed system (not wishing to offend fellas But I'm coming from whats best for our game here period top to bottom).......... Welcome rich owners for any Club as long as we had a OPEN competition. SWamP keep up your valued input, your comments I feel like you have been watching over my shoulder what I see/live and breath over so soso many seasons from grass roots up - wish Arthur and the many others of the past would still be around contributing more but they have got sick of it all banging brick walls. From SWamP's post above is soso spot on ! "Orderly transition to professional football is non-existent here. You have to be lucky, driven, or sponsored to get a contract. If you're a fanatically driven individual you could keep trying until you're recognised as a professional player, maybe, somewhere on the other side of the planet and perhaps represent Scotland as a striker! (Strikers taken care of.) Kids as well as older players develop at different rates and they need to be matched up and patched up accordingly. Try telling a 15 year old (and parents) that there is no official pathway from here to where you want to be in 5 years. There is no way to naturally progress and get the coaching and competition that bridges the huge divide between recreational and professional football. If you fail at first attempt it is over, but you probably won't get a first attempt. It usually ends right there and your wonder-kid's aspirations end right there. No number 10 for you! As soon as the owners of our limited number of professional clubs learn that there is a shit-ton of easy to make money by having a development league bridging the kids across for them, we will rocket away. If there is a greatly increased number of clubs spread across the geography of the country doing this for our future then we will become unstoppable." The above is so spot on its not funny, its so bloody wrong. NSD can't come soon enough just for one step in the right direction.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
razor7
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 191,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xJust realized there will be a record 6 Asian teams in Qatar - if ever there was a time an Asian team could go deep its this cup. Iran, Japan and South Korea all have genuine world stars. I think it could go ether way as all 6 nations could be knocked out at the end of the 1st week it is somewhat unlucky Japan is in the 'group of death' as i think they probably would make it to the round of 16 in any other group the other AFC nations are in....it kind of reminds me of us in 2014... Saudi, Iran, Australia - are all underdogs in their group but all of us have a 'chance' to runner-up the group as there are win-able games in them and you never how 90'' will go... Qatar are almost a certain to embarrass the confederation as they would not qualify for a WC in any other circumstances imo i can see them losing every games 3-nil I'll be supporting all the AFC teams though unlike some other retards here who support NZ i actually support my confederation and wish the sides well I know it is a big if, but if we could find a big target striker, who is a clinical scorer against quality opposition, I think we could progress past the group by beating or drawing with Denmark, and by beating Tunisia. ATM we don't have that player though. Also, didn't Qatar win the last Asian Cup? They must be ranked one of Asia's top teams ATM. Wouldn’t say. , a Josh Kennedy be handy now. Fits your description perfectly. You know this squad isn’t too bad but the lack of a striker makes every game a struggle
|
|
|
|
|
Decentric 2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xJust realized there will be a record 6 Asian teams in Qatar - if ever there was a time an Asian team could go deep its this cup. Iran, Japan and South Korea all have genuine world stars. I think it could go ether way as all 6 nations could be knocked out at the end of the 1st week it is somewhat unlucky Japan is in the 'group of death' as i think they probably would make it to the round of 16 in any other group the other AFC nations are in....it kind of reminds me of us in 2014... Saudi, Iran, Australia - are all underdogs in their group but all of us have a 'chance' to runner-up the group as there are win-able games in them and you never how 90'' will go... Qatar are almost a certain to embarrass the confederation as they would not qualify for a WC in any other circumstances imo i can see them losing every games 3-nil I'll be supporting all the AFC teams though unlike some other retards here who support NZ i actually support my confederation and wish the sides well I know it is a big if, but if we could find a big target striker, who is a clinical scorer against quality opposition, I think we could progress past the group by beating or drawing with Denmark, and by beating Tunisia. ATM we don't have that player though. Also, didn't Qatar win the last Asian Cup? They must be ranked one of Asia's top teams ATM. Wouldn’t say. , a Josh Kennedy be handy now. Fits your description perfectly. You know this squad isn’t too bad but the lack of a striker makes every game a struggle Josh would be wonderful with his aerial prowess! If we have problems with strikers scoring goals, spare a thought for Italy? They've just failed to qualify for a WC for the second successive time in a row. They also missed out on qualifying for Russia 2018. I couldn't find many analytical articles on the 2022 Italian WCQing failure. Nevertheless, one bemoaned their three main Italian strikers, who had all scored at a decent rate in Serie A - one only scoring 15 goals from 45 appearances, another 12 from 30, the third 13 from 44 caps - for the Italian national team ! Italy just won the European Championship in 2021 too. Leckie has 13 goals from 72 Socceroo caps! Matt's low goal scoring conversion rate is hard to beat! We have struggled to have any forward with a decent goal scoring conversion rate since Timmy and Josh quit international football, but we can qualify for WCs - just!
|
|
|
|
|
Johns
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 129,
Visits: 0
|
Let’s wait for the 2022 WC in which 6 Asian teams will compete
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running?
|
|
|
|
|
SWandP
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? "Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability?" Nobody has claimed anywhere that we have produced that person/s at a senior professional level. Read it again. That is the aim, not the reality. We won't do it until we have a lot more bodies playing at the highest levels we can produce. You are probably unintentionally creating a strawman but the argument you are knocking down is one you made and nobody else. Leckie and Duke and Rukavytsa are what we have always produced in the past and what we are trying to change. Luongo is a product of the past and Arzani is one of the very first from the new training regime. Think about that, then review what you are trying to imply. It is only now in the last 2 years that the kids arriving at the Professional level have come through the system "all the way". Your Tilios and Atkinsons etc. Compare them to the Leckie Duke and Rukavytsa that came from the old. The apocryphal rubbish stories that abound about coaching the individualism out of players. Sheesh. Forever there have been hogs. Kids that run with the ball until they lose it. Totally ignore the whole team about them as they run head down and headlong, keeping the ball 8 metres in front of them, as they high speed leg it down the pitch. Still happens. Still drives coaches and fans nuts when there is a totally open player standing clear in front of goal and he never gets a pass. We still see it at the national level. Do you think it doesn't happen in the U16s? The field sizes now increase incrementally as the kids grow. This is meant to compress the size of the field so that they are "forced" into ball control situations where beating a player or making a quick accurate pass is necessary. Tired of all this ignorant shit sprayed about by people who have never spent a Saturday morning doing so much as cutting oranges and watermelon for the kids. FFS go find a club that needs some help. They all do. Warning: Those 14 year olds that have come through the system and particularly those that play futsal at school, will run so many rings around you while you play chasey you will fall down laughing and crying.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xTired of all this ignorant shit sprayed about by people who have never spent a Saturday morning doing so much as cutting oranges and watermelon for the kids.
FFS go find a club that needs some help. They all do. Bang on.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Cleansheets
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 944,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xThere are also quite a few teams who play under UEFA's jurisdiction, who are geographically situated in Asia - Israel, Turkey ( most of it), Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Georgia. It would be harder to qualify through Asia if these teams were in the Asian Confederation. I suppose it enables them to play Champions' League and Europe League intercontinental club football. It would be 'good' for both Turkey/Russia (not withstanding the war in Ukraine issues) and AFC is if the Turks/Russians joined Asia they would make more world cups and be a 'power' houses in the confed due to their leagues being 'fairly' strong by world standards however i think missing out on UCL and Europa league probably would hurt financially too much also take some magic away But they would qualify for a lot more world cups.... A similar but less extent Israel as their league isn't 'very good' i think the whole confederation system is incredibility outdated the world is a much smaller place then it was 50 years ago (sure COVID has been a 'set back') but football could easily be a global sport now with clubs and national football played across the whole planet opposed to certain regions. I've just read a good article on Inside Sport by Adrian Deans, mooting that Asia be split into two - West Asia and East Asia ( including Oceania) - particularly in light of the new 48 team WCQ format in 2026. I think he suggested East A would have 5.5 WCQing spots (including Oceania) and West A would have about 3.5. The article said West Asia 4 and East Asia 5. The West would never agree to 3.5. however deserved. Unlikely to happen soon but maybe one day...
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? "Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability?" Nobody has claimed anywhere that we have produced that person/s at a senior professional level. Read it again. That is the aim, not the reality. We won't do it until we have a lot more bodies playing at the highest levels we can produce. You are probably unintentionally creating a strawman but the argument you are knocking down is one you made and nobody else. My point is simply this... Arzani aside and since the GG, Australia hasn't sent the fast, athletic types of players with the necessary skillset to the WC. In fairness to you, you didn't say we had. Just that we still send athletic types to the WC. I think it's worth adding the qualification that the athletic types we've been sending, largely, aren't really technically gifted. +x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? Leckie and Duke and Rukavytsa are what we have always produced in the past and what we are trying to change. Luongo is a product of the past and Arzani is one of the very first from the new training regime. Think about that, then review what you are trying to imply. It is only now in the last 2 years that the kids arriving at the Professional level have come through the system "all the way". Your Tilios and Atkinsons etc. Compare them to the Leckie Duke and Rukavytsa that came from the old. I'm aware that Arzani is the only one who may be considered a product of the new regime. I wouldn't bet on his "individual skills" characteristics coming as a product of the system. My impression of him is that he's rather stubborn (for better and worse). I don't discount the possibility that he has his skills in spite of what he has been coached, not because of it. But other people are better-placed to comment on that. Tilio and Atkinson are very good technically and in terms of football IQ, from what I've watched. But I'm not sure of the extent to which they may be considered athletic (especially Atkinson). +x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? The apocryphal rubbish stories that abound about coaching the individualism out of players. Sheesh. Forever there have been hogs. Kids that run with the ball until they lose it. Totally ignore the whole team about them as they run head down and headlong, keeping the ball 8 metres in front of them, as they high speed leg it down the pitch. Still happens. Still drives coaches and fans nuts when there is a totally open player standing clear in front of goal and he never gets a pass. We still see it at the national level. Do you think it doesn't happen in the U16s? The field sizes now increase incrementally as the kids grow. This is meant to compress the size of the field so that they are "forced" into ball control situations where beating a player or making a quick accurate pass is necessary. Are you so sure it is rubbish? Consider what LFC has said in this very thread.  I certainly think there are ball hogs at U16 level. The concern is how coaches and teammates respond. With all due respect, even your exasperated tone in describing the ballhogs, while quite understandable, is somewhat telling. It's not unknown in Australian society to give somebody a bollocking if they get too big for their boots. +x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? The field sizes now increase incrementally as the kids grow. This is meant to compress the size of the field so that they are "forced" into ball control situations where beating a player or making a quick accurate pass is necessary. That's good but it's only one facet of a match situation. Making a quick decision to beat the opponent with control or pass the ball accurately, because of lack of space, is crucial. But the speed (and difficulty controlling the ball at speed) doesn't represent a situation where a player drifts in from the wing (in space), gathering speed with the ball at their feet, and then takes on an opponent at pace. +x+x+xMate the amount of talented kids is brilliant/technical and all compared to my days in Prem leagues, trouble is there is not enough spaces for them to move UP
Despite the current narrative as to otherwise, we still send teams of really fast running explosive athletic types to World Cups. Today though, most of them are able to pass accurately and receive a ball to advantage. Our number 9 hunts for the ball all the time instead of wandering about lost waiting for the chip over the top or the high cross from the wing. We are evolving. We are just now, after 140 years, equipping our players with the very basic tools of coordinated team play.
Who? Fast, running, explosive, athletic types who also have 1 vs 1 ability? Mitch Duke doesn't. He hunts the ball very well in what Decentric would term BPO. But once he has the ball, he hasn't really demonstrated the skill to own the defender on his own. Since the GG, there has been Daniel Arzani. That's it. Mathew Leckie and Nikita Rukavytsya are quick. But they lack the 1 vs 1 skill. The critical thing is for strikers/wingers to be both fast, agile, athletic and technically-strong in terms of 1 vs 1 skills. Being skillful but not athletic isn't sufficient in the wide areas/up front. Similarly, being fast but lacking the technical skills isn't sufficient. Basically, both boxes have to be ticked for the player to have that x-factor. In Europe and elsewhere, where football is the top sport, enough of the population plays the sport such that the law of averages gives the powerhouse countries enough athletic footballers who have the technical skill. Unfortunately, it's a bit trickier in AFL-saturated Australia.
There is a focus in the curriculum on the bits we haven't had in our game (ever) but there is nothing in there that says "you shall not beat your opponent".
In fact there is the exact opposite.
I don't know the NC very well, I will say. What I do appreciate is that, despite the best efforts, prescriptive guides from any given authority are often misinterpreted. Usually, such misinterpretation is partly down to ambiguous, inexplicit wording or formatting. Another possible factor is the context in which those reading the guidance are doing so. For whatever reason, it's highly plausible that many coaches have misinterpreted the NC to mean that 1 vs 1 should be avoided. Last WC, Mass Luongo made an interesting remark about Daniel Arzani. He said something along these lines - he's the only one of us who hasn't had individual ability coached out of him.
+xIn small sided games for little kids, the whole emphasis is on retaining the ball under pressure (tricky play), beating an immediate opponent and playing with the head up to make an accurate pass. Positioning to receive the ball is paramount and every kid gets a chance to score and receive the joy of having a celebration.
That's crucial but it's only one component of 1 vs 1. You want your central midfielders to be doing that through their passing, movement of the ball and maneouvring of the ball in tight spaces (imo, Mooy did this beautifully the other day). From there, in a match situation, the team can outmaneouvre their opponents and create a 2 vs 1 situation. But the reality is it won't always be possible to get those 2 vs 1 situations. Another outlet of attack is to set up an athletic and skillful player in space and, from there, that player can create a 1 vs 1. Are the smaller kids (or the older kids) encouraged to dribble the ball, at pace, from open space towards an isolated defender and to win that duel? Do they explicitly focus on feints, step-overs, turns, etc. while running? Tired of all this ignorant shit sprayed about by people who have never spent a Saturday morning doing so much as cutting oranges and watermelon for the kids. FFS go find a club that needs some help. They all do. Warning: Those 14 year olds that have come through the system and particularly those that play futsal at school, will run so many rings around you while you play chasey you will fall down laughing and crying. I'm one of the people at fault, here. An "armchair expert" so I'm just as bad, whether or not this is "ignorant shit". I must say that your last sentence is very encouraging. Bring on those rings!
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x
I would actually rate Asia and CAF ahead of CONCACAF who apart from Mexico are extremely poor. Oceania of course brings up the rear.
I thought this about CONCACAF. But if you look at results at the WC, they've actually done a fair bit better than Asia. And based on the transformation of the Canadian team, this trend may continue. I guess it depends how you look at it. If you ask, which confederation has had a team progress the furthest in recent(ish) years, then it's Asia. South Korea made the semi-finals of the 2002 WC. But that's where it stops. AFC gets 4.5 spots, while CONCACAF gets 3.5 spots. Despite that... Mexico has the record, alongside Brazil, for most Rounds of 16 reached. Costa Rica reached the quarter-finals in 2014, while the USMNT nearly took Belgium to penalties at the Round of 16 of that WC. So you have: Mexico - super consistent USA - whose team contains players the calibre of our GG Costa Rica - hit-and-miss but have gone further than us and now a Canadian team that looks this...  I wouldn't call that an overrated confederation. If anything, it's marginally stronger than Asia.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Cleansheets
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 944,
Visits: 0
|
Atkinson athletic?
He's a beast. Reminds me a little of Muscat without the death tackle urge.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xAtkinson athletic? He's a beast. Reminds me a little of Muscat without the death tackle urge. Not especially quick, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Cleansheets
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 944,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xAtkinson athletic? He's a beast. Reminds me a little of Muscat without the death tackle urge. Not especially quick, though. Very intelligent and technically gifted footballer.
|
|
|
|
|
Davstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x
I would actually rate Asia and CAF ahead of CONCACAF who apart from Mexico are extremely poor. Oceania of course brings up the rear.
I thought this about CONCACAF. But if you look at results at the WC, they've actually done a fair bit better than Asia. And based on the transformation of the Canadian team, this trend may continue. I guess it depends how you look at it. If you ask, which confederation has had a team progress the furthest in recent(ish) years, then it's Asia. South Korea made the semi-finals of the 2002 WC. But that's where it stops. AFC gets 4.5 spots, while CONCACAF gets 3.5 spots. Despite that... Mexico has the record, alongside Brazil, for most Rounds of 16 reached. Costa Rica reached the quarter-finals in 2014, while the USMNT nearly took Belgium to penalties at the Round of 16 of that WC. So you have: Mexico - super consistent USA - whose team contains players the calibre of our GG Costa Rica - hit-and-miss but have gone further than us and now a Canadian team that looks this... I wouldn't call that an overrated confederation. If anything, it's marginally stronger than Asia. USA and Canada have actually come a LONG way as the MLS is a 'fairly' decent now it has 28 sides - 3 from Canada which are well supported unlike our NZ based team who are useless, it actually hosts a lot of international players including some Socceroos ie Brad Smith. The league has the same glaring issues the AL has no promotion/Relegation, Salary Cap and is the 4-5th tier sport - however the USA has the benefit of a population of 350m plus 50m Canadians to 'draw support from' and being roughly a 6 hour flight to Europe helps. They also have 'actual' marquees that have helped the profile of the league Henry, Ibra, Beckham, Villa, Lampard etc all played in the MLS whilst 'still' good enough to play in Europes top leagues.
these Kangaroos can play football -
Ange P. (Intercontinental WC Play-offs 2017)
KEEP POLITICS OUT OF FOOTBALL
|
|
|
|