I don't profess to know everything about tactics and strategy in football, because if I did I'd change my surname to something sounding a bit more dutch and apply for the Socceroos job.

But I do know the Socceroos played a lone striker system last game against Ghana and Harry Kewell was the lone striker.

When Ghana attacked our goal and won the penalty, that came as a result of open play and not from a set piece and Harry Kewell, our lone striker, found himself on our goal-line as our last line of defence!

What was Kewell doing there? Why was he our last line of defence?

This didn't happen with minutes to go before the final whistle when we might throw everyone behind the ball to defend a 1-0 lead.

It happened well before the end of the first half, during which time Harry was our main striking weapon and should have been up the other end of the field playing the role of the target-man.

So what is this system Pim Verbeek has Australia playing called, in which the lone striker drops back and defends his goal-line during open play so early in the game? Does this unique system have a name?

Pim plays a 10 -1 system. Keeps the game defencive and allows for counter attacks.

Starts 10-1 but usually finishes 10-0 after we lose a player.

:lol: =d>

:oops: I fail at life

No wonder Germany smashed us we were playing without a keeper:lol:

We play a 4-2-3-1 of sorts

A glorified 4-5-1. Sometimes the way we play it turns into a 6-3-1

4-2-daylight-3-1

It was from a set play the ball had been crossed in from a corner but someone headed it back out and it went straight to the Ghanaian player who took the corner, which is where all the highlights or replays start.

Was it? But even then, what's Harry doing as a last defender? How did he manage to get behind everyone else and defend the line? What sort of a system is the one we're playing? You get my point? How can Harry Kewell be our last defender one minute and our lone striker the next? Is this a new system invented by Pim Verbeek so we get the shit kicked out of us?

Everyone was back if I remember correctly, so it doesn't really matter who was on the line and who wasn't. The reality is that Kewell was six inches to the left of being a national hero, so it's silly to argue about whether he should have been there or not.

However, I'd like to know whether the ref would have given a penalty even if it hadn't hit Kewell on account of Neill pulling that bloke back as the cross comes in...

Harry ended up on the line because he left the bloke he was marking which incidently I think was the guy that took the shot that led to the goal. So if Harry hadn't left his player they might not have scored:lol: