Not at all. In terms of natural strikers It's really only Babalj at the moment who seems to have the potential to become good enough to nail down the spot.
Maybe Gameiro or Tombides are on their way too.

More appropriately I can't think of one not selected in this squad or playing at the AFC U19s already.

All we have is potential, hopefully some of them realise their potential (Leckie, Babalj, Bulut).

We've got some older players in the likes of Kennedy and Macca (don't know if we will see him again), but I doubt if one of those two come in...it'd knock Archie out of the squad all together.

I can't think of an upcoming Aussie striker that seems like an Archie beater. Apparently neither can Holger. Therein lies the difficulty.

If we had one of those, their club form alone would be making the push. Can't think of an upcoming Aussie striker that seems like a world beater.

For me it is all about the number of times he misses a sitter in front ..... or is offside.

If he was a good striker he would have doubled his tally twice over.

He gets tired and he gets sloopy with his timing ............... he does well against tired legs ..... obviously he is a super sub.

I like him as an option off the bench in the last ten minutes. I don't like the fact that he is taking up a younger persons spot who might be a world beater in waiting ???????

Seems to do well for the Roos in that aspect :lol:


True, it is disappointing that in some friendlies Holger hasn't experimented.

And, when younger guys that could displace Archie have a chance, like Ruka and Troisi...they don't perform. There is a little bit of the guys not grabbing their chance and Archie working his way in with this one.

Of course, it is disappointing that Holger doesn't persist in throwing chances to some other guys along the way. Would be nice to see how Leckie goes against SK, am hoping he at least gets a run on Wednesday. Am hoping that he performs well, if given a run.

Leckie would be a good one and could play a similar role to Archie. Younger, faster, but I do question his finishing...perfect replacement :D

With the EACQ's coming up, Holger will be forced to use some different players. Best shot for some of the younger guys to grab a spot for themselves. Archie will certainly be there, so I expect to hear more complaints when that tournament comes around :lol:

But, as we come closer to the EACQs, I'm wondering what other striking options we will have for it. Maybe Kennedy, barring injury (missed Nagoya's last match).

Edited by Ali07: 8/11/2012 03:30:46 PM

To some extent i agree with what you're saying the only problem with it is that the other players arent getting their chance to displace him as holger constantly uses the tried and tested in games where we should be providing the opportunites to younger players to earn their place.

Holger knows what the likes of neill, swarz, jedinak, valeri, wilkshire, bresc, cahill, thompson etc are capable of. WHat does he gain from playing them in meaningless friendlies?

He'll be 35 in Brazil.

That's if we qualify, is Archie justifying himself to be on the field in these World Cup qualifiers? Or no he isn't because of his age?

The original question is, what would it take for you for Archie's selection in the national team (albit as a sub) to be justified?

Imo since he came back to the Socceroos against Saudi Arabia, he has been a game changer and has swung the attacking momentum in our favour every time, if he's not scoring he's creating chances for our team by moving the ball forward towards goal at full pace meanwhile some of the other players are walking around scratching their butts.

=d> =d> =d> =d> =d>

Does anyone remember his partnership with allsop against the brilliance of indonesia

FFS read my other posts where i agree that archibald has more to his game than scoring ](*,)

Edited by stfa_striker: 8/11/2012 03:05:21 PM

I cant ever remember McDonald playing poorly for australia, can you?

Archibald does get into some very good positions and he does tend to be on the end of many chances unfortunately for archibald he scores about 1 in ten of those chances. He would be absolutely deadly if he had a slightly better finishing touch and understood the offside rule :lol:

Not when 15 of those goals came against an absolute abortion of a team. Taking that one game out of the equation, how is his strike rate now?

In the lead up to him getting back into the NT, Archie couldn't hit a barn door. That hasn't changed for MV, but he is still getting into good positions to have a shot at scoring. Difference is, he seems to be putting them away for the NT right now.

So, while he is missing chances for MV...he is setting up goals. I think he'd have 3 assists to his name in his 4 MV matches, as I assume his cross that lead to Rojas' goal against the Reds wouldn't place another assist to his name. :lol:

He keeps playing his role as impact sub for the NT. I don't think that role should be expanded. If he comes off the bench and helps swing the match, then I think he should be keeping his spot. Not only is he scoring more then the current starting XI striker, Brosque, but he is also performing better then the other guys that come off the bench.

Plays his role, can't see why he shouldn't be keeping his spot. Up to another player to displace him IMO.

And if you knew anything about Archie you'd know his game isn't all about goals and that he's a very dynamic player who has a lot of qualities to bring to a side.

Yet Archie has 24 goals and McDonald has 0.

Better finisher or not it just never seems like McDonald is on the same wavelength with the rest of the team.
Archie on the other hand is great at combining with team mates and getting on the end of their chances.

Only every 3rd game.

Edited by RBB_Kopite: 8/11/2012 01:27:38 PM

Well what do you want from your striker is the question. Do you want him creating or do you want him finishing.

McDonald is quite obviously a better finisher than archibald, it could certainly be argued that archibald creates more chances as well.

I have no issue with the fact that he has scored for the national team recently. WHat i do take issue with is the fact that given his club form over the past season he did not warrant the opportunity of selection over some others

If you're over 33 I won't them out of the national team. No one over 34 (at the time of the world cup) should be in the team without exceptional curumstance.

We should be looking only to build the youth up and have them ready for the world cup or bow out trying. I'd rather not make it than go with a team that is just gonig to get embarassed by much younger and quicker opposition.

'One swallow doesn't make a spring.' Holger Osiek

I have zero problem with Archie staying in the national team till the WC in his role as the super sub. Provided ofcourse he doesn't start going too down hill with age.

I guess it's a shame that a younger developing player could use his spot in the squad but impact like he has off the bench and his effect on team morale may be pretty important for us in difficult times like these.



In answer to the original question.. If you mean 1 goal in 3 games when he's just being used as a substitute... who could say no to that?
Would be incredible statistics for a substitute.

Edited by neanderthal: 8/11/2012 12:51:18 PM

Would love to see Holger play with Cahill and Mcdonald up front. Mcdonald needs another striker next to him. The Guy has a bucket load of Talent and is never used right for Australia.

To the OP: In general, yes. The only qualifier I would put on that is if he was scoring his goals against the lowest countries, and was rubbish against any quality Asian team. Then it could be argued that he wouldn't perform at the WC, where all the teams are quality.

As long as Archie is a pinch hitter no issues with him being around while we find his replacement. This is what people overlook all the time - every player in the National Team should only be used until we find their replacement. It is not any players right to be in the National Team - especially the incumbents.

I'm with you here, i like what he offers to the side. If he can bang in a few more on the road to Rio i hope he goes.

Oh relax. :lol:

He's already 34. He'd be 36 in Brazil. We shouldn't have any outfielders of that age there. And yes, he has a few goals, credit to him, but I think that scoring (for example) in the CCC is more impressive than scoring against Jordan etc.

Surely scoring for the national team is the most relevant barometer?
Regardless, what most of the chumps on here don't want to ADMIT is Archie has more strings to his bow than a goal typical poacher.
His crosses/assists for Rojas show what a dynamic player he is (considering Rojas is incapable of doing the same)

](*,)

Are you going to try and tell me that archie played well last season and deserved his recall to the international fold?

And as far as being a scoreboard analyst that you have labelled me to be. If that were the case i wouldnt be eager to see scott mcdonal back in the side and given the opportunity to prove himself.

Ive played and coached long enough to know that there is more to a strikers game than finding the back of the net



Edited by stfa_striker: 8/11/2012 11:28:06 AM