I've never understood the hate for him.

He has usually been good as a central midfielder.

Not nt standard. 

Mckay isnt not standard now that we have Mooy Luongo Milligan jedinak and Rogic. But he's still a bloody good player and has been fantastic for Australia over many years.

Excellent in linking the defence with attack without losing the ball. Equally excellent in getting out of tight spots in midfield and steadying the team down. So many good attributes and a great servant to the NT and his club. No wonder Ange kept calling him in the NT.

You can more easily understand the McKay hatred if you go back and reference the Postecoglu hatred after we lost a single match in the last round of qualifying.  It was all over!  We wuz fugged!  It was a stupid experiment and it failed! 

McKay was a quality player til he gave up a handball in Japan when played at left back.  After that he was the worst kind of shit. Behich has been loathed since his failure to nudge a ball over the line in a GF. 

McKay only fails to make the NT legendary list because he just doesn't score enough goals. He has scored only two, which of course is one less than Matthew Leckie.

Every need  team needs a few experienced players to organise less experienced players on the pitch.

One has to know one's own game well to organise others around them.

Experienced players make less experienced players better, by positioning them to be more effective from putting into practice coaching instructions from the coach off the pitch. All coaches need a few players who are their coaches on the pitch.

How punchable is your face, mate?

LOL!

Quoted for future reference.

Along with Kruse, Leckie and Troisi he is the best athlete in the Socceroos according to comprehensive testing.

McKay has a great engine.

Apart from Holger playing him  as LB, I think he has always played pretty well as a central midfielder.

In fairness to McKay, who I don't particularly rate on a technical level, he always provided the highly mobile overlapping/link player, of the Wilkshire variety, the type that is very valuable to coaches like Guus and Ange.

He never impressed me greatly at a club level, but certainly provided something at times for the Socceroos...

What comprehensive testing? Were the results released?

There are different components of athleticism. Not my area but from memory along the lines of; anaerobic capacity, aerobic fitness, agility, flexibility, etc. Hand-eye, foot-eye and other types of co-ordination are also parts of athleticism (at least by my definition, not sure about the experts). Different tests measure these separate components. Some athletes will do very well in one or two components, but not so brilliantly in others.

For what it's worth, (as far as athleticism to do with sprinting goes) Brad Smith is right up there. Apparently, when he was 14 he was running the hundred in 11 flat. That's phenomenally quick (especially for that age) and suggests he was one of the very few quickest schoolboys in Australia. Based on what I've seen of his football, he also has phenomenal aerobic fitness as well.

But then I'm not sure he has Rogic's co-ordination, by the same token.

There was an article I read a few years ago where the author claimed that with tests conducted, that the four aforementioned were the supreme athletes.

 Smith wasn't in the squad then.

Smith's 100 metres time  was phenomenal.

more qualified to make this comment than pretty much anyone on this forum

"Grella rates Ange's midfield stronger than golden generation"

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2016/09/09/grella-rates-anges-midfield-stronger-golden-generation

More qualified but that's not the same thing as more objective. And that's praise, not criticism. To have been a a key midfielder for the NT is mighty impressive. But he'd look a bit of a douche if he went around saying the midfield outfit he was a part of is better than the current one. Plus, Grella is mates with the current Socceroos and helps them out with management. It's in his best interest to talk them up. Reading over what he has said, he seems perfectly balanced, though.

NB- at no point in this post have I said that one is better than the other

Also, Vinnie Grella doesn't say which is better. He just says that the current midfield is decent and has more depth than Guus' midfield.

He says they'd give Guus' lot a run for their money. That's rather vague. Understandably.

His opinion has been misrepresented somewhat.

Which technical  aspects did you appraise him on?

i dont know what you might appraise him on but he holds the ball up well under pressure and dictates the game speed well.  he picks out difficult passes.   he probably has a high pass completion percentage. he also has a very big work rate and has good positional sense. a good number 8 but i think his entire NT role has been taken by mooy now.  dont be surprised to see him come in if mooy is injured for a squad.

mckay is a good player to bring in to settle a midfield or against a stronger team.

he was improving in the nt and then lost his place in the squad. meanwhile i think his impact at the roar has dropped off.

Grella has a much smaller ego than some from the supposed Golden Generation. At his peak he was the best player in the team too.

Grella had 46 caps. Milligan has overtaken him on 50 caps.

About time we saw some of the GG provide in depth analyses on the current Socceroos. Many of them think they were far better than the current team.

I'm asking  Eldorado, whose made some big claims of late. 

You haven't.

I agree with the  points you've made though.

it was a bizzare claim to call mckay - of all the australian players you could pick - not technical. 

I'm looking forward to him explaining why.

"Big claims of late"??

Do tell?

What, so you're all going to tell me suddenly that McKay is one of our more gifted technical players?

FFS, I think the same thing as most; he's mobile, adequate, hold the ball up, and does well for the Socceroos.

He's not Iniesta. he's not Rogic. He's solid, and does a decent job for the Socceroos. Did you even read what I said about him?

Where the big claim?

Who does? Or rather, who has said they they're better than the current side? I think a lot are fairly reticent, overall. They'll make specific statements as pundits, but won't launch into comparisons which might paint themselves in a more favourable light.

The essence of the thing is that they were far better up front, on the left wing, in defence and in goals than what we currently. However, we're now starting to see a midfield which is comparable (but its strengths are in rather different areas in comparison to Guus' midfield). This current one has more depth than any Australian midfield in the last couple of decades (including the Golden Generation), but there are also more holes in it and it's not so seamless as Guus' midfield. Add to that, Ange employs a different system which has different strengths and weaknesses.

First touch.

Handling speed.

1v1 attacking and defensive skills.

Short passing.

Long passing.

Shooting.

Running With The Ball.


Well?

Ned Zelic

Zelco Kalac

Jason Culina

Mark Schwarzer 

At times Slater and Bozza when lauding their teammates.

Kewell and Cahill when they name their best ever teams.



Others like Emo, Stan L, Chipper and Bresc are a lot more modest. Same with Moore and Aloisi.

Have a look at some old footage of the older teams it might be sage for some of these guys to stop criticising current players when there were bigger gaps in the individual performances and team play.

Now when I look back at Guus and Pim's early days, I think they have been superseded by Ange's coaching methodology. The game inexorably progresses.

I think Graham Arnold has reached the  crossroads too. Most of the other HAL coaches are going on sabbaticals to top European clubs in the off season. It looks like he hasn't according to SFC performances.

I've read recently that Brad Smith isn't getting game time. At his age he needs regular football. Whatever level is better than none, but he needs to play possession football at club level  like the Socceroos.

Some scenarios are:

*A possession based Championship team like Newcastle, Derby County or Notts Forest.

*Any team in Portugal, Holland or Belgium's top division. A worse option is Denmark at a lower level.

*If none of this  materialises, a stint in a  HAL team playing ACL football and finals football, under progressive coaches like Amour, Muscat, Popa + his Spanish assistant, the Aloisis, even Okon,  could give him close to  40 games in a season as incumbent LB. He needs it.

His athleticism and sheer pace means he can cover mistakes up. He looks the real deal for our permanent LB.

bournemouth doesnt have the cash to throw 7 mill at someone they are not going to play

the intention was there. it's up to smith to break through now. he's where he needs to be for now.  he needs to tough it out and give it a shot. remember he was breaking into the liverpool first team.  he can do it at bournemouth.  i just fear that teams down the bottom end of the table get a bit too risk adverse and conservative in their squad selections and they end up doing silly things. smith is probably seen as a more attacking option - not someone you throw on when trying to defend.

One thing that Smith has been useful for the Socceroos is at attacking corners. He has been our player positioned  closest to our defensive goal and our keeper.

His job is to chase down opposition  fast ball carriers in accelerated attacks. He has done this very well, chasing down and dispossessing fast ball carriers.

In those scenarios where the opposition launch fast counter attacks in our Defensive Transitions, Smith  has nullified them with his extreme pace. QF mentioned he ran 11seconds flat as a 14 year old for 100 metres. This is very quick at any age.

You can't say that Harry Kewell and Tim Cahill are egocentric for naming their best teams ever as the 2006 World Cup side as opposed to the current side. It's their call. They can't be blamed for being honest there.

Mark Bosnich, Robbie Slater, Ned Zelic and Zelko Kalac are more exuberant than nuanced (or so it seems). In some cases, there'll be an element of egotism, but it's difficult to be sure. Basically, it's easy to mistake the way they go about things for egocentricity. I think they don't really measure their comments all that much.

Then I've noticed nothing that Jason Culina has said that suggests he's self-satisfied. He mightn't be as much as an FFA yes-man as Craig Foster is (or as Craig Foster has been since his row with Ange). But that's not a bad thing, that just means he's giving his opinion, not the opinion that automatically looks favourably upon whatever the FFA, current Socceroos and Ange Postecoglou are doing. This is somewhat refreshing.

I enjoy the footballing philosophy that Ange brings. Whether it's an improvement on what Guus did is another matter. It's more attack-heavy. Guus' was probably more balanced and more tailored to Australia's specific strengths and weaknesses.

In my opinion, the litmus test of Ange's coaching will be adaptability. How will we fare when face top notch nations who also use a high press?

It's interesting (and disconcerting) that Celtic lost seven nil against Barcelona. Some may say they should have played the way they normally do (and maybe those people are right). I suspect doing so would have meant it was open season for the Barcelona attackers because of even more space.

Celtic, like the Socceroos, encounter nothing but average opposition for the majority of their matches. Then occasionally (in the matches everybody remembers) they encounter opposition several levels up from themselves. This is Australia's predicament. I think you need to be adaptable enough to deal with scenarios where that happens, even if that means compromising somewhat on your football philosophy (as long as you don't compromise unduly). This is where Guus was phenomenal. He brought his philosophy of attacking football, but he measured it perfectly in accordance with Australia's athletic strengths and mental fortitude.

Ange is going to have to consider carefully if it's better to throw the kitchen sink at the top notch opponents we face. Or if it's better to play a bit like France did against Germany (whose style is that which we seek to emulate) in the Euros. France, a footballing powerhouse who play possession-based football, surrendered a lot of possession (knowing Germany are better than them there) but left the Germans less space and then attacked with prudence. And they won.

Well what?

I just fucking told you twice; he's a decent player, he's perfectly adequate.

You chosen to latch on one phrase "I don't particularly rate on a technical level", which admittedly may be ambiguous, (all I meant is that he is not the best that we have, not that he's shit) but as I've twice explained that I rate what he does for the Socceroos, i don't know what your issue is.

.