grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
what time is kick off? anyone have links to the stream?
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
grazorblade wrote:what time is kick off? anyone have links to the stream? Same one as always off the ASEAN Sport Channel on YouTube.
|
|
|
grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
ahhh its tomorrow night
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
quickflick wrote:Decentric
Shall write a reply properly when I get home from work as it will take a bit longer. For now suffice it to say no offence taken, all good Good. You know I appreciate your 442 input.:)
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
JDB03 wrote:JDB03 wrote:walnuts wrote:JDB03 wrote:Decentric wrote:JDB03 wrote:[quote=Decentric]Is there a streaming link for this next game, which I assume is Thailand?
When does the next Aussie game take place? Thursday night 9.30 AEST yes there should be a stream. This time may have changed. On my details its 9.30 AEST 6.30 their time but on wiki its 6.30 AEST 3.30 their time. I will try to confirm. They did change the last game at the last minute, did they not? Not according to my info it was always 9.30 AEST. This next one has been so need to confirm. CONFIRMED 6.30pm AEST good luck to the boys. On no, the heat and humidity of a ferocious Thai sun.
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand.
|
|
|
grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Barca4Life wrote:If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand. show a bit of belief
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
grazorblade wrote:Barca4Life wrote:If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand. show a bit of belief Have you been in Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Indonesia, Singapore or Malaysia in the afternoon heat and humidity and tried to play football at this level of intensity? It is a big ask. Edited by Decentric: 20/7/2016 07:38:36 PM
|
|
|
grazorblade
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Decentric wrote:grazorblade wrote:Barca4Life wrote:If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand. show a bit of belief Have you been in Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Indonesia, Singapore or Malaysia in the afternoon heat and humidity and tried to play football at this level of intensity? It is a big ask. Edited by Decentric: 20/7/2016 07:38:36 PM i was born near cairns. Does that count?
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
grazorblade wrote:Barca4Life wrote:If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand. show a bit of belief I know but given how they played against Vietnam in those same conditions, i have my doubts. We will see how they go.
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
grazorblade wrote:Decentric wrote:grazorblade wrote:Barca4Life wrote:If Its in the heat then its game, set and match for the the Thailand. show a bit of belief Have you been in Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Indonesia, Singapore or Malaysia in the afternoon heat and humidity and tried to play football at this level of intensity? It is a big ask. Edited by Decentric: 20/7/2016 07:38:36 PM i was born near cairns. Does that count? I'd forgotten that. It is like a Cairns summer all year round.
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Playing football in Thailand is agony.
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
clivesundies wrote:quickflick wrote:Decentric
Any manager worth his salt looks at the weapons he's got and decides where on the spectrum to place his side. This is what Australia's management have really struggled with of late. I think you are still struggling to get your head around it. Lets try and explain it this way, clubs or countries in this instance have 3 real choices; A coach centered plan where the coach is appointed who has his own philosophy on how the game should be played and if he isnt successful you get rid and bring in someone with new ideas. Man utd. An owner model where the owner decides what happens and the coach follows the owners wishes. Chelsea A club/country model where the philosophy is predetermined and the coach develops or finds the players to fit the playing style. Barcelona. We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it. This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life. Now as this process is only 7 or so years old the 1st of those players are now around 19 so any thought of changing what we are doing will not happen for 10 years at the earliest. You dont have to agree with it but hopefully now you will have a better understanding of the who, what, why, where, when and how. Very good post on your part. You've explained the distinctions in the way in which different clubs go about things rather well, imo. The only thing I will add to that explanation is there can be (but isn't always) a slight difference with football clubs compared to nations. To paraphrase our old mate Harry Redknapp- he can't just bring Ronaldo into the side. In many instances, national team managers have to work with more limited resources than big European clubs for obvious reasons. Obviously countries with richer footballing traditions (and especially ones where kids have been coached properly for a long time) can have more choice. Then, of course, there's Jürgen Klinsmann who just goes wandering around Europe, looking for European footballers who had a parent who was in the US military and posted to that country... There was a crucial distinction in my initial post to which I did not make clear. It might have given your response a different complexion (I'm not sure). I say that national team managers look at what weapons they've got and decide where on the spectrum to put their team. Guus Hiddink did this with Australia, for example. As such, I would argue that any manager worth his salt utilises the resources at his disposal according to circumstances. But we're talking about the senior national team. A degree of pragmatism requires this to be so. The crucial distinction which I neglected to mention is that this needn't be the case at youth level. You, correctly, point out the following: clivesundies wrote:We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it.
This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life. I agree with that and I think that's probably the best general football philosophy The nuance here, which I think is misunderstood, is there's absolutely nothing wrong with making sure that the training and game style at youth level, grass roots level, etc., correspond with that exceedingly proactive philosophy while modifying that philosophy slightly for the senior NT in order to produce more favourable outcomes. Especially given that the senior NT footballers were not coached under the NC. There ain't nothing wrong with having a different style for the NT compared to other levels. Guus Hiddink quickly gauged Australia's strengths and weaknesses, and the strengths and weaknesses of other football teams, and developed a style accordingly. He worked out where on the spectrum between reactive and proactive the Socceroos should sit. Likewise, Didier Deschamps has done the same with France. He doesn't get them to play entirely proactive football nor does he play entirely reactive football. As I say, managing a national team is about allocating your resources as efficiently as possible. Sorry if that sounds too economicsy. My main argument about what Ange has done is that the hasn't managed his resources all that well. He definitely didn't do that in Brazil (although that may have been every bit as much do to personnel choice and aerobic fitness levels as much as style). He hasn't done that since. In fairness to Ange, maybe he just doesn't give a shit about pointless friendlies against England and Greece and is fully aware that the risk of playing overly proactive football (without suitable footballers) against crappy Asian teams isn't nearly as high as doing the same thing against quality teams. Maybe he's using this whole phase as experimentation to see how far he can take this football style against decent opposition. I happen to know he pulled Tommy Oar aside before the WCQ against Japan for the last World Cup and told him to get as many early crosses to Timmy Cahill's head as possible. That's inconsistent with our football philosophy, but very pragmatic. Maybe when push comes to shove, Ange will become a bit more pragmatic. Dunno. Any of that you particularly disagree with, clivesundies?
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
Tipping a 3-2 win to Aus. Our attack is decent our defence is meh.
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Decentric
I initially wrote you a reply here. Then I decided it was better placed in the Australian National Team thread. You'll find the response to your points over there.
Edited by quickflick: 21/7/2016 01:48:30 AM
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Anyway, should say. Am I right in understanding that things aren't quite as bleak with this lot as first thought? Especially if we have an even better squad for that age group?
Edited by quickflick: 21/7/2016 01:34:07 AM
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
TheSelectFew wrote:Tipping a 3-2 win to Aus. Our attack is decent our defence is meh. I agree the attack is their biggest strength.
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
clivesundies wrote:quickflick wrote:Decentric
Any manager worth his salt looks at the weapons he's got and decides where on the spectrum to place his side. This is what Australia's management have really struggled with of late. I think you are still struggling to get your head around it. Lets try and explain it this way, clubs or countries in this instance have 3 real choices; A coach centered plan where the coach is appointed who has his own philosophy on how the game should be played and if he isnt successful you get rid and bring in someone with new ideas. Man utd. An owner model where the owner decides what happens and the coach follows the owners wishes. Chelsea A club/country model where the philosophy is predetermined and the coach develops or finds the players to fit the playing style. Barcelona. We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it. This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life. Now as this process is only 7 or so years old the 1st of those players are now around 19 so any thought of changing what we are doing will not happen for 10 years at the earliest. You dont have to agree with it but hopefully now you will have a better understanding of the who, what, why, where, when and how. Good post, Clive.
|
|
|
Decentric
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 22K,
Visits: 0
|
quickflick wrote:clivesundies wrote:quickflick wrote:Decentric
Any manager worth his salt looks at the weapons he's got and decides where on the spectrum to place his side. This is what Australia's management have really struggled with of late. I think you are still struggling to get your head around it. Lets try and explain it this way, clubs or countries in this instance have 3 real choices; A coach centered plan where the coach is appointed who has his own philosophy on how the game should be played and if he isnt successful you get rid and bring in someone with new ideas. Man utd. An owner model where the owner decides what happens and the coach follows the owners wishes. Chelsea A club/country model where the philosophy is predetermined and the coach develops or finds the players to fit the playing style. Barcelona. We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it. This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life. Now as this process is only 7 or so years old the 1st of those players are now around 19 so any thought of changing what we are doing will not happen for 10 years at the earliest. You dont have to agree with it but hopefully now you will have a better understanding of the who, what, why, where, when and how. Very good post on your part. You've explained the distinctions in the way in which different clubs go about things rather well, imo. The only thing I will add to that explanation is there can be (but isn't always) a slight difference with football clubs compared to nations. To paraphrase our old mate Harry Redknapp- he can't just bring Ronaldo into the side. In many instances, national team managers have to work with more limited resources than big European clubs for obvious reasons. Obviously countries with richer footballing traditions (and especially ones where kids have been coached properly for a long time) can have more choice. Then, of course, there's Jürgen Klinsmann who just goes wandering around Europe, looking for European footballers who had a parent who was in the US military and posted to that country... There was a crucial distinction in my initial post to which I did not make clear. It might have given your response a different complexion (I'm not sure). I say that national team managers look at what weapons they've got and decide where on the spectrum to put their team. Guus Hiddink did this with Australia, for example. As such, I would argue that any manager worth his salt utilises the resources at his disposal according to circumstances. But we're talking about the senior national team. A degree of pragmatism requires this to be so. The crucial distinction which I neglected to mention is that this needn't be the case at youth level. You, correctly, point out the following: clivesundies wrote:We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it.
This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life. I agree with that and I think that's probably the best general football philosophy The nuance here, which I think is misunderstood, is there's absolutely nothing wrong with making sure that the training and game style at youth level, grass roots level, etc., correspond with that exceedingly proactive philosophy while modifying that philosophy slightly for the senior NT in order to produce more favourable outcomes. Especially given that the senior NT footballers were not coached under the NC. There ain't nothing wrong with having a different style for the NT compared to other levels. Guus Hiddink quickly gauged Australia's strengths and weaknesses, and the strengths and weaknesses of other football teams, and developed a style accordingly. He worked out where on the spectrum between reactive and proactive the Socceroos should sit. Likewise, Didier Deschamps has done the same with France. He doesn't get them to play entirely proactive football nor does he play entirely reactive football. As I say, managing a national team is about allocating your resources as efficiently as possible. Sorry if that sounds too economicsy. My main argument about what Ange has done is that the hasn't managed his resources all that well. He definitely didn't do that in Brazil (although that may have been every bit as much do to personnel choice and aerobic fitness levels as much as style). He hasn't done that since. In fairness to Ange, maybe he just doesn't give a shit about pointless friendlies against England and Greece and is fully aware that the risk of playing overly proactive football (without suitable footballers) against crappy Asian teams isn't nearly as high as doing the same thing against quality teams. Maybe he's using this whole phase as experimentation to see how far he can take this football style against decent opposition. I happen to know he pulled Tommy Oar aside before the WCQ against Japan for the last World Cup and told him to get as many early crosses to Timmy Cahill's head as possible. That's inconsistent with our football philosophy, but very pragmatic. Maybe when push comes to shove, Ange will become a bit more pragmatic. Dunno. Any of that you particularly disagree with, clivesundies? Well answered, QF. Nevertheless, I disagree that a national team should play differently from a designated nationally adopted style. This is because it doesn't vindicate what all the national underage teams further down are doing at the top level. The premise for employing Holger, who wasn't educated in the desired national style at the time, was that the players under him were not part of the new development system. After a while we went backwards under Holger, after some quality national team coaching from Guus and Pim which adhered to a plan and generally Dutch approach . In some games it might seem prudent for Ange to change the formation from 1-4-3-3 attacking midfield triangle to the 1-4-3-3 defensive midfield triangle. I'd love to ask him why he doesn't do it more often. At times he uses the very adaptable Milligan in a rotating midfield triangle. This is where Milligan plays as a DM in defence and AM in attack. I'm sure he has plausible reasons for doing what he does though.
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
playmaker11
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
Here we are, chaps. [youtube]98q26cbFGmA[/youtube]
By now, American Samoa must have realised that Australias 22-0 win over Tonga two days earlier was no fluke.
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
Just over a half hour till we kick off. Lets av it and start post mortem discussions about how we are gonna either win the world cup or never qualify ever again.
|
|
|
switters
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.6K,
Visits: 0
|
bloody hell I got home just in time
|
|
|
maxxie
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
How much time do our boys spend in camp compared to the other countries we're playing against?
|
|
|
eldorado
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
Most interesting thing so far is the flame war between the Thais and Viets in the comment section...
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
did that thai player just kick our guy in the face
|
|
|
switters
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.6K,
Visits: 0
|
goalski
|
|
|
eldorado
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1K,
Visits: 0
|
1-0 to us
D'Arrigo
|
|
|
clivesundies
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Could get a bit tasty me thinks.
|
|
|
clivesundies
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
The pressure on the ball is relentless, wonder how long they can keep it up.
|
|
|