I agree. The 4 3 3 is a problem. My son is in u16s joeys and the way they are told to play and go in tight as wingers just adds massive congestion around the box, and extreme direct play. Remember they have been playing a wide 442 their whole lives, attacking with pace as wingers and then crossing, chipping, one on one attacks.etc. the 433 is really something that all players seem to be struggling with. In an attack phasr, the right and left backs also end up so far forward that the second we lose posession (more often than not as they are new to both the in-tight congestion and “new” way of playing wing!!) and are absolutely exposed to a counter attack as soon as possession is lost as the only players in decence are centrebacks and maybe one wide back at best. How can that not cause us problems!! We saw Thailand do it to us in Canbodia, and Vietnam in Vietnam in the last qualifying game, some very close calls
One thing is for sure, they appear unable and unwilling to consider other styles so its hear to stay. Learn it whether you like it or not is what I have told my son

Edited by Garnorf: 19/10/2015 04:23:10 PM

I watched the replay and wished I could just fast forward through that first half.
Too many things wrong.Particularly the defence.
Unfortunately it seems to be a theme with our youth national teams.
And the pre game comments from Vidmar made me shudder.
I don't know how you go into a World Cup tournament concentrating on not winning .The first half was like a sunday park kick about by the Aussies.
Germans were strong ,disciplined,professional,played to a structure and plan.Very much like a senior team.The aussies ..well ..they kicked it around until they lost it or gave it away.Then that defensive structure or whatever it was.Gaps everywhere,players rushing up to get beaten and leave acres of space..Enough said.Very poor.
Second half a big improvement,but Germans relaxed a bit and aussies more partient.But the defence still ugly.The space and the chaotic structure/discipline.
In my opinion you need to learn attack and defence at the same time otherwise you just learn bad habits.You end up with a team of Patafatas,so much skill ,but useless in a team because in defence they are not up to standard and one mistake leads to a goal .
I just wonder how our youth teams would go if they had a proper coach not an intern.

Welcome to 442 Garnorf. You are making a lot of good points.

There's a bloke called Decentric that will soon be along to tell you all about the wonderful advantages of the 433 system and how you have committed FFA curriculum heresy. (Your penance is keepies up until you get 100 in a row.)

You will be exposed to BPO's, triangaling (cheer theselectfew), playing out from the back, diagonals, KNVB methodology and a plethora of other terminology.

Take it all with a grain of salt though like many do.

Great to hear from someone who is actually exposed to the inner workings of a rep team at this level.

I only used triangling as a joke haha.

This was to highlight the rubbish 'results aren't important' belief people have at this level.

My biggest problem with the 433 and junior development in general is the lack of genuine goalscorers being developed. In my time watching the game I can think of two genuine world class goalscorers for Australia, that is players who given even a sniff, get the red mist and you know they are going to take some stopping, those two players are Viduka and Cahill. In their minds they just want the goal so much that they don't even think about it, instinct takes over and the actions become automatic.

If you compare how the Germans took their chances and how we...didn't. You have a big part of the game right there, apart from that a lot of the midfield play and defense I think is something that could come with experience, because the skills are there.

Also thank you 442 for 100 pages.

My kids are watching the replay.

Slowed down the first goal to see what went wrong and besides all the obvious things such as positioning the Australian player (#20) that attempted the tackle on the German that played the last pass to their captain on the right side tried to block the pass which was heading out to the RHS of the field by coming in with his right foot and his arse to the player in question.

Bloody idiotic. A left foot challenge would have almost certainly stopped the player and blocked the pass.

What are they teaching these blokes? This is shit I was telling my under 7's 10 years ago. (Don't go in with your bum kids you'll get hurt and you won't win the ball.)

If you can't kick and tackle with both feet at this level why are you in the team?

I realise that but it was the perfect one liner and right on cue.

I'm using it whenever I can.

Triangling !

Just rolls right off the tongue.

The skills might be there but bloody hell there's some woeful technique on display.

I've given 2 examples straight off the bat and I haven't even warmed up yet.

I mean good on them and all and their parents should be very proud as I am too but if they're not being taught the simple things alongside the tactical sophistication they need at this level then something is seriously wrong.

I think the 4-3-3 they are playing now is not what they have been trained prior to when Ange made changes to our youth teams.

Most of these guys whom have come from the NTC teams and NPL teams got to trained to play in a 4-2-1-3(4-2-3-1) now its they play almost like a 4-3-2-1, different style of system.

I remember in the qualifiers last year when they played Japan they played with two wingers and two numbers 8s, they also played with more width and forward passing unlike now where they play narrow and no penetration to get behind the defences.

I dont know Ange has changed this when the team before knew their roles in the old 4-3-3 but now they look confused and lack ideas when attacking...

Any comments on the technique aspects I noted above?

I'm not looking to pick a fight. I am genuinely interested how these things can happen at this level.

Well, yeah, but they are boys largely playing in the local Canberra comp against boys who are playing in the German leagues. The whole point of the 433 is to develop the skills but clearly they also need to be getting more competitive football. At the end of the day, if the skills are there then the rest, in theory, can be taught/learnt.

I understand all of what you're saying about the games but what are the coaches doing about poor technique?

If one of my players went in arse first I'd explain to him how he's meant to tackle, show him the correct technique and get him to practice it in training and then I'd monitor him during game situations.

If he still persisted in doing it wrong well then you'd need to sit him down and have a serious chat about his place in the squad.

What technical aspects you have mentioned? I think the skill level is good but to be fair that's expected given many of these guys have spent some time in SAP focusing on the core skills.

Agree in the defensive 1v1 in terms of tackling and jockeying they looked a bit vulnerable, but the bigger issues for me were in positioning and in decision making.

They better than the last batch of joeys in 2011 in playing through the first and second lines into midfield its just when they tried create chances they had no options forward when playing someone in behind or trying to find some sort of combination going forward, we were just too narrow with no forward runs.

As everything was played in front of the defences and given they were too narrow the germans pick pocketed them and counter us but we didn't deal with their counter in the first half, we adjusted in the second half but we still had issues when trying to create chances throughout the match.

What happened to that Maskin lad? he was quite good at holding the width and making runs behind the defences.

This way of playing you have relying on a high level execution in passing but its very difficult, i think we made hard on ourselves whilst making it easy for the Germans when we lost the ball, but there front 4 are quality though.


Edited by Barca4life: 19/10/2015 05:29:13 PM

Thanks for your reply but I'm talking about specific instances of poor technique not positioning, transitions, setups or structures etc.

The 2 examples I mentioned were;

(a) not hitting it first time with his left when one on one with the keeper (preferring to try and bring it back onto his right) and
(b) going in arse first to a tackle (which cost us our first goal. As mentioned above.)

It's very ordinary to see that sort of thing from our rep players.

I think your harsh on the first one, the lad probably should have taken it first time but he probably anticipated and made a decision to turn back on to his right foot thinking it would be an easy finish, it goes back to decision making in the end.

The second one again goes back to decision making, should be first to a tackle or stay on his feet? again choices, choices, choices!!!

The top level the execution what you do on the pitch is very important, the higher the level the smarter you have to be.

Thats our next step in our revolution.

Edited by Barca4life: 19/10/2015 05:39:27 PM

Cheers again.

You say "decision making" I say "poor technique". If you can't kick with your left foot or tackle with your left foot you are going to decide to either try and kick it with your right foot or go arse backwards into a tackle. (As was duly demonstrated.)

Really that's the the point I'm trying to make. I'm unsure as to how these blokes are getting selected if they refuse to listen to instructions or don't have the requisite skill set when they arrive in camp.

Or, worse, they're not being told and shown by the coaches.

as I continue to say the section process of the FFA is the problem here. Let's compare the two football team and their respective selection process

Germany -

- don't have a CoE, 1full time u17 , NO TD just for u17s, no team mangers , no marketing guy etc etc no huge cost in full time staff compared to oz. etc etc

- Over the last 2 years have had 96 different players called for camps and identification.
- have identified 32 a class players and 44 b class players, through these call ups which in turn lead the players to getting better club contracts

Benefits of Germany approach is that it's more cost effective. Expenses are used for player transport, transport of coaches for identification purposes . Breeds a environment of competition

Compare this to oz. we chosen played at 14. Give them a comfortable full time contract. All coaches , TD , team a mangers etc etc also get fully tume roles which can only breed complacency. Looking at the players used since December 2014 we have used only 28 players. The coaches have not scouted others because they are to comfortable coaching at home rather than traveling Australia or overseas to see how players not originally selected have developed.

3 months ago germany came second at the euro and the team had 4 changes to it. If you asked the FFA who the next 4 players are for the joeys they would have know idea.

Look at the selection process for players and coaches before trying to analyze the game. This is where hopefully those in power will focus, first and foremost.
Berger set this all up 4 years ago and there has been no evolution since.... Why?

Edited by robbo: 19/10/2015 08:02:33 PM

Are you assuming our players are at the same level as of the German players? Because we are not at their level regardless of lack of talent ID process.

a better second half from the boys but the damage was already done in the first half. I thought we were a bit naive when it came to defending the counter attack in the first half. Decision making with the ball is still an issue though, as it was during the qualification stage. For me this is the biggest concern.

So we shouldn't bother trying to improve then ?

And where would those players be playing outside of the A.i.s ? The state ntc runs programs up until 18 don't they ?

And that's my point. If a player is physically and technically superior why not promote to test him. The current ais process doesn't allow for this. They all train with each other every day, so in theory the training session will not push the more talented player, thus causing stagnation.

A database of players would be a good start and replacing Craig moored player lisason role would be a even better start by the FFA

Edited by robbo: 19/10/2015 09:01:23 PM

It's a bit a theatrical. But the point that the Germans have produced a side which is both athletic and technically good stands. I'm unsure what the FFA's stance is on this, exactly.

As for the Joeys...

I'm not sure. I missed the first fifteen minutes but I saw the rest. Apart from one passage of play when I was watching (and potentially another when I wasn't watching), the Joeys definitely didn't move the ball as fast as the Germans and perhaps they weren't as fast, in general. Australia didn't look as athletic as the Germans, I don't think.

Maybe they just had a bad day, I don't know. But it was concerning.

Athleticism is usually demonstrated in 1 vs 1, I think. That's where you need a bit of athleticism (anaerobic ability, co-ordination, strength, etc.). And Germany are good at 1 vs 1. Australia are not (or didn't show much in that way).

I reckon, or I'd imagine, they do.

You've hit the nail on the head.

Aren't we narrowing the talent pool by only testing 28 players in this age group over the last 2 years?. Let alone allowing for late developers ?

Good link.

I'm being a bit theatrical but the essence of what I'm saying is that Germany have done a good job at producing a side which is technically superb and has a number of players who are genuinely good athletes.

By athleticism, I don't just refer to height or strength, but also speed, balance and (foot-eye) co-ordination, among other things.

I don't think it's good to have a bunch of good athletes who don't know how to play football.

I also don't believe that team needs every player to be a good athlete. Paul Scholes, I think, was one of the best players ever. He was not a particularly good athlete. But his football IQ was off the charts.

However would a team of Paul Scholes' be that useful? Probably not. Paul Scholes playing alongside guys like David Beckham (also not a very good athlete), Cristiano Ronaldo, Roy Keane, Ryan Giggs, Ole Gunnar Solkskjaer, now that's an amazing combination (obviously they didn't all play at the same time). Some of those blokes were outstanding athletes. There was a balance and it was lethal.

Germany (at all levels) is similar. Some big players, some small players, lots of football IQ, some super fast players and some players with the ability to skip past opposition.

I think there are some areas of the game where, to be successful, you need to be a good athlete. I think for 1 vs 1 ability, you need speed, (foot-eye) co-ordination and balanc. Strength is useful, too. I mean look at the best 1 vs 1 exponents in recent years. Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Thierry Henry, etc. Most are very fast, have beautiful close control (and thus great co-ordination) and good athletes.

The thing is that not every player needs to have 1 vs 1 ability. As I say Paul Scholes was brilliant and never really demonstrated much 1 vs 1 ability at all, as far as I remember.

But you need some players to have 1 vs 1 ability. That means you need some players with superior athletic ability.

Australia had very few players on the park who demonstrated much 1 vs 1 ability (although I would like to see more of Joice and Arzani). I don't know. Maybe the others just had a bad day. But maybe it's symptomatic of more. This suggests that Australia's players either lack the skill or the athletic ability or both.

The commentators noted Australia's toothlessness in terms of 1 vs 1 ability. They noted that Germany had players capable of running at opponents with speed and passing them. Look at Felix Passlack. I'm not sure Panos Armenakas can't do 1 vs 1 stuff. But he was doing walking step-overs. This is not good enough (well it's not bad, but it's not that difficult for defenders). When a striker runs at the defender at speed with the ball close to his feet and does step-overs (or whatever 1 vs 1 manoeuvre) that's far more difficult to defend against. The NC and SSG were supposed to address this. Australia, so far, still aren't demonstrating any improvement.

All we've seen is that, in addition to being far, far more poorly organised than previous Australian youth teams, they're just as rubbish in 1 vs 1.

The other thing is look at Germany. Get the ball in a good area, wind up, shoot, BANG, the ball's in the top or bottom corner and is a goal. Our players just aren't that clinical.

It's all a bit depressing.

You've hit another nail on the head.

we're only just starting to learn what it takes to make a modern day footballer. We can't expect to have better players than Germany after only 6 or 7 years of curriculum football. Theres so much more that needs to be done to have a good development system.

Robbo

great post, above comparing Australian infrastructure to Germany. I'm going to copy and paste it and put it on the transparency and accountability thread.

Edited by quickflick: 19/10/2015 09:46:43 PM