I agree. The amount of negative comments about Deng in the final is silly. The Uzbeks sent a lot of cross field balls to his winger, particularly in the second half. Often Deng cut them out, if he was free he pushed the ball forward and ran on to it. If the winger was close he trapped it and looked for a team mate. I couldn't recall him losing the ball once in the second half from a cross aimed at the winger(I will check), but the doubters were out big time. He also put in some decent headers to team mates, as I recall. The negativity beggars belief. I would swap him for any of our back 3 or 4.

Geez you must be fun at parties that was optimism...

They qualified now so get over it.

I just can't believe how negative some people are about so many aspects of football in this country. It is why, I, and a number of mates, rarely participate on this  forum anymore. This manifest negativism also seems to extrapolate, to an extent, to other sports too.

So many supposed football 'fans' appear to despise the Socceroos, the A League, Asian Champ League, most TV pundits, most Aus coaches, FFA hierarchy,  most players,  Matildas, W League, etcetera. People I know off forum, who are sports fans, and sometimes significant stakeholders, are so much more positive people!

Qualifying for the Olympics is a  tremendous  achievement by the Olyroos and Arnie.

Congratulations to all stakeholders  concerned in the Olyroos campaign.

Unfortunetly too many think they are experts on here Decentric, agree its a great achievement.

Wonderful exposure for Australian Football.

Thanks for  posting this, Kaufusi. I used to get you and Sokorny confused. I don't know.  He is much more positive.

Using specific football criteria, you've inspired me to  compose some detailed responses.

Your rationale implies all opponents were  infinitely superior in terms of -

technique,

tactics,

 game sense,

 communication

 and football specific  conditioning.

These are  generally specific criteria in which to appraise teams.

I missed the game against Iraq.

In the games against Thailand, Bahrain, South Korea and Uzbekistan, there were strengths and weaknesses.

Some posters have alluded to the only quality of the Socceroos being football conditioning, where Australia finished games well.

In some games, the other teams  applied intensive squeezing early in the game, in order to disturb Aus build ups  more effectively.   Australia turned over the ball a times, because the opposition  expended a great deal of energy in their intensive squeezing - hence - less time and space on the ball for Aus. However, the  consequence of intensive squeezing, is that   opposition teams can usually  only maintain this tactic for 60 mins.  They usually run out of gas at the 60 min mark. I haven't got to the end of the South K game replay yet, but SK applied a ferocious full  press and intensive squeezing in the first 60 mins.

After an hour, the squeezing becomes far less intensive. In addition, those teams then need to play with a more conservative, half, or partial press.

In other games, the opposition, defended deeper, with 4-5-1, or 5-4-1 formations in Ball Possession Opposition, when Aus had the ball. Aus was able to have plenty   of possession in the defensive and  middle thirds of the pitch,  and sometimes wide in the attacking third, but they struggled to penetrate in the attacking central third where so many opposition  players were condensed into  two tight lines of defence. We need to change the rhythm in terms of tempo of the attack, from slow to quick, and back to slow, better than we are.

 Australia at times played  the full backs up high,  with the wingers cutting inside. Hence, the CBs and DMs had to try and negate the speedy accelerated attacks in the opposition  Attacking Transitions when Aus lost the ball . Sometimes these  Aus players  weren't  quick enough chasing  opposition attackers facing their own goal, as Aus played a high defensive line.

*Many fans on forums denigrate the inherent  value of possession. Any football stakeholder of any substance in the HAL or NPL, knows that having possession is   preferable. Apart from Italy, no international team has had constant, sustained success, by allowing the opposition  to  dominate possession.

Possession  is useful both offensively and defensively. Offensively, the inherent value of possession  is obvious. Defensively, the opposition can't score if your team has the ball. Also, it requires a lot  more discipline, concentration and energy  to defend without  the ball, BPO, than to play with the ball, BP. Australia  always tries to adopt this Proactive approach - predicated on sound tenets. 

*Apart from South Korea, who were unequivocally a class above us technically - first touch, quick feet, two footedness, running with the ball, dribbling and handling  speed - all over the pitch, technically there were 'some' classy  opposition players from Uzbekistan, Thailand, Bahrain, particularly in advanced positions, but not all opposition  players in those teams were technically superior to all Aussie players. The notable exception  was South K.

If Arzani and Daniel de Silva  had been selected, along with Lachlan Wales not being suspended, the  technical stocks for Australia would arguably have been much better.

Hopefully,  SK won the tournament, because in footballing performance analytical criteria, they deserved to.

Good to read a post where the poster knows a bit about football, F55. 

I was surprised Arnold played  either of the CBs, Mourdokoutas or Ryan, in preference to Deng as a CB.

I thought Fleur was quite good going forwards as a RB, but I haven't  really scrutinised him closely enough in his defensive qualities.

Sometimes Uzbek players playing the  balls through to the Uzbek left winger had too many touches on the ball. This was  the  fault of other Aus players in not closing  the Uzbek distributors down more effectively.

Deng won a lot of  hard balls, but at times, was turned inside out by the Uzbek LW. I would rate  Deng the best of the back four over the  comp in terms of going forwards with the ball, and, ball winning. 

Seems to me the only person that denigrates & has denigrated this forum is yourself. 

Please don't patronise people who still enjoy & patronise this forum which is quite active despite your non participation. 

Thank you.  

you would have to add McGree in here....

Just making up the numbers, nothing more nothing less - all day long.

Kalik also who apparently was held back by his club. 

I'm denigrating a pervasive negativity towards the entire Aus football milieu from a number of naysayers who assume a hegemony - not the concept of the forum.

There have been many positive achievements in Aus football since 2005, but it is sometimes  difficult to find those positives reading comments on here.   

I'm not sure if Blackwood is still eligible, but he scored the type of headed goal for AU last night, needed for the Olyroos as a target striker 

From a number of players over the  tournament , plenty had good games at times, but the game against South K was our worst, because we were outclassed in nearly every facet of the game.


*Glover - had a very good series as a shot stopper between the sticks and commanded his penalty box well, even if his distribution on the deck could improve. Probably one of our best players and decisive in us qualifying.

*Fleur - after watching his South K game, whereas previously I stated he was effective going  forwards, he was outclassed in ball winning, reading the faster ball movement of South K, and provided attacking impetus.Iin the other games he was effective in Ball Possession and less effective in Ball Possession Opposition.

*Deng- not  used against South K, was our best defender over the tournament with some tough, rugged ball winning, sound  distribution and attacking  impetus. Against the Uzbeks, he has  suffered from lack of on the ball pressure from teammates further up the pitch.

Hence,  Uzbek players made some good balls to their dynamic left winger. At times he trend  Deng inside out, but he received in a more favourable body position than Deng in accelerated attacks from our Defensive Transitions.

I  consider Deng as our best defender, because he won more hard balls from disadvatageous  positions and significant  pressure than Ryan. I also think of him more of a CB than a RB.

*Mourdakoutas - after being puzzled as to what Arnie preferred a him, who has played almost no HAL football, compared to CCM's Rowles who has played a lot, he improved  over the tournament and held his own against South K.

The distancing between him and Ryan was too wide over  the  ideal 10 - 15 metres in  the earlier part of the tournament, but they tightened up in the latter part of  the  tournament. Apart from South K, he often had a lot of time on the ball as opposition teams half pressed. This made him look better than he is. Ball winning was quite good. His  composure on t he ball was also quite reasonable. He should be playing HAL football.

*Ryan - steadier  than Mourdakoutas earlier in in the tournament. Won some some timely tackles, and like Mourdo looked better than he was with more  time on  the the ball with opposition half presses, apart from South K.

Lost a few too many heading duels for my liking. Ryan also made many timely intercepts from  good defensive positioning off the ball, and  often read the game well. He also didn't need to tackle a lot, because he positioned well in BPO.

*Gersbach- disappointingly he has made little progress since he last played in the HAL, when he was fantastic going  forwards. He still is a mediocre ball winner as a left back. It hasn't improved enough.

I loved his ball carrying, 1v1 attacking skills and crossing though. He was our most effective overlapping left sided option. I wonder if he could  be more effective as a left winger? As he advanced and overlapped, the left wingers tended to tuck in. Sadly, we had no dominating big, central target striker, to  convert those aerial  crosses - like a Kennedy, Cahill, Viduka or Juric - possibly George Blackwood.  

*Bacchus -  someone else thought he was great. I thought his distribution was okay most of the time and he was a consistent ball winner in midfield as the  tournament progressed.  What really concerns me  is his game sense and  slow decision-making. In limited time and  space he could think quickly enough when receiving under pressure, and was the culprit for many turnovers - some that leaked goals.

I thought Bacchus was one of our best, out of a bad bunch against South K. He was our best defensive midfielder in the comp and played above expectations, whereas most other DMs played below. Although it was very hot and humid, he could've  checked more to receive the  ball in more time and space from  the  defensive line when we played out. When closely marked he often stood there like a stature, rather than attempting to shake his marker with fakes.

*Duncan - sometimes when one compiles stats and does  an  appraisal after many slowed down frames, a player has done some little things better than first thought.

However, I thought as a distributor, ball winner, and in terms of game sense, he really struggled in the tournament. I don't know how he kept the likes of Genreau and Metcalfe out of the team? I'd love to interview Arnie with specific  football criteria to ascertain Duncan's performance. Maybe he was brilliant on the  training track and liked playing in heat?

*O'Neill - disappointing given what he has done in the HAL. So often misread the play. When he got to the challenges, he was a tremendous  ball winner, but didn't read where those challenges could be made quickly enough. Often, like Duncan, they were turning and chasing towards their own goal, when a better reader of   play, like a Milligan or Muscat, would have broken up an attack with well timed intercepts.

Genreau, Metcalfe - The former tightened up the midfield in one game, but given what I've seen them do in the HAL, they were very, very disappointing. I'm not sure if they were ill, or injured, but whereas Bacchus stepped up, the two City midfielders disappointed by their own HAL standards . Genreau was steady in distribution -  most of the time.

*Piscopo - a revelation.  Good on the ball and our only number 10 who was a  constant threat with the ball at his feet. He dribbled well and brought  teammates into the game, with defence splitting passes and killer passes.

Sometimes his ideas  were not anticipated or read by other attacking Aus players. Piscopo is not a great ball winner or effective at causing turnovers and  disturbing build ups though . He needs to improve. A  bit like Robbie Kruse, he is constantly fouled because of his quick feet. 

*D' Agostino - not such a great  passer and mover in tight  spaces as a number  10 in attacking interplay, but his finishing was good - and- decisive  in us qualifying. I think his headed goal that was disallowed should have been counted.

Good predatory instincts around goal, but I thought should he have been the target  striker. His goal when he beat number of players in midfield and scored,  was individually brilliant! I'd love to hear Arnie's thoughts on this? He should be playing HAL football.

*Bouman - I don't like denigrating players, but  he looked  outclassed for the whole comp. He could not win any aerial balls played by Gersbach to convert to goals. He lost nearly every heading duel to opposition CBs. He  must have trained well, but  with the game plan,  Aus players weren't close  enough to him. This poor guy was innocuous.

* Toure - disappointed compared to his earlier HAL form. I thought he deserved much more game time than Bouman though. He was a goal threat at times.

*Najjarine - disappointing  by his own standards -  from what I've seen him do in the HAL. Was he injured or sick? On the left flank, he often cut in for Gersbach to overlap, but again was relatively  innocuous, even though the quality of ball he received wasn't great. 

*Buhagiar - another who by his own standards in the HAL,  struggled. He  received a lot of poor quality balls from our  DMs, CBs, RBs, as well. He didn't receive enough  balls where he could run  onto them with his body position facing forwards to showcase his blistering pace. He also struggled  as part  of a malfunctioning attacking unit in attacking interplay.

*Italiano -  I cannot  recall  much specifically, but was part of a malfunctioning attacking unit.





Apart  from Toure and D'agostino, there was little muscular ball winning  from the attacking  quartet players  - AM, wingers and  central striker. Most hardly  won any 1v1s - heading, body on body, tackling apart  from T and D. 










  

Absolutely.

He is eligible but he’s a better midfielder than striker imo and the AU coaching staff see him as a midfielder as well.

Something isnt right about that Decentric post. Too many spelling mistakes and misspelling of players names.

He's either pissed, had a stroke or someone has taken over his account

Sounds like good old Decentric to me.

Yeah that's a hard no from me

You don't want to let him go for international duties or you just don't like for the Olyroos ? :laugh:

He's not good enough for the Olyroos. 

Some may see my post as overly negative but apart from fitness and determination I didn't see much to be excited about in this tournament. It's not deliberately negative, it's an honest appraisal without sugar coating it to make us feel better. 
We could have easily lost every single game. Our opponents looked better on the ball, and largely better organised off the ball. Our boys made a lot of individual errors. Of course there were moments where we looked very good, but we weren't able maintain these periods for long enough. Too much baseless possession passing sideways on halfway, but in the conditions it's better to do that than launch a long ball and be back in defense again. 
How we beat Uzbekistan i'll never know. They were far superior in every aspect (bar discipline) but we had luck on our side. 

We need to be aiming to reach the levels of the Uzbek and South Korean sides, the 2 top teams of the tournament. South Korea are a mile ahead of course but if our current joeys can step up their better touch and technique will start to narrow the gap at olyroos level. 

Of course if our boys had a platform to play in they'll improve out of sight too. They simply don't play enough to develop. 

Some South Korean players played over 2000 minutes compared to our boys, of course it was going to be very difficult to beat them let alone compete.

Dunno what game you were watching but the Uzbeks were shocking in the final 1/3 , link up play non existent.

Honestly, the squad was gutted by the loss of its two best players,  Arzani & McGree as well as the important Atkinson.

Put McGree for Bauman, Arzani for Najainne and Atkinson at RB allowing Deng to go back to CB, and you already have a hugely improved side

Arnold really should be given credit for qualifying with such a weakened squad. And I am far from an Arnold fanboy. 

He recognised that without his best players he had a very even squad, and thus rotated a lot. This was telling IMO. The Uzbeks would have beaten us IMO if they were as fresh as our final team, i.e . many of our players did not start the Korea game 

Not surprising that we did not do it in any convincing manner, considering what was available... but credit where it is due.

Is anyone convinced that Deni Juric who is having a great season in the Croatian second division could be very handy acquisition for the Olympic team?

Shot count of 17-4 (9-2 on target) indicates they were creating 4 times as many chances we were. Especially considering 3 of those 4 shots were in the last few mins where they barely had 3 in defence.

If you describe their link up play as poor, how would you describe ours? Actually non existent? Or would non existent actually be an improvement on our output? 

not sure what game you watched but I had shots on target 5-2... they put like 15 in row Z.

I didn't proof read all of it!

I've just belatedly edited it - it now  reads quite  differently.

Forgetting Souttar and Kalik too who were both denied by their clubs. Souttar in particular would have improved the backline a lot. 
FYI atkinson is suspended for the olympics :( Strain though will be available for the olyroos by then 

Those are the official stats... And are true. They were dominant but yes they obviously (thankfully!) had no end product.