Mooy was the best player on the park. He was back to his best. For a long period in the second half in particular, he was controlling the centre of the field and setting the tempo and setting up plays, including forward thrusts. The Peruvian press recognised him as the best on the park. A big part of the reason Peru´s good players could not find their rhythm is because Mooy was dictating the Rythm (whilst less technical players like Irvine and Leckie were working their asses off to close off space and breaks)

If Mooy brings that to the world cup, it really strengthens us a lot.

Also a shout out to Boyle for his defensive efforts. He was threatening in the first half, but in that second half he worked really hard to get back. I had never before recognised that part of his game. 

 

VAR takes joy out of football. When Redmayne made that last save I could not fully celebrate incase VAR determined he had come off his line early. There is no excuse for the on field umpire not to be able to make that call, since he could not possibly be looking at something else or be unsighted like he can be in general play.

VAR takes joy out of football. When Redmayne made that last save I could not fully celebrate incase VAR determined he had come off his line early. There is no excuse for the on field umpire not to be able to make that call, since he could not possibly be looking at something else or be unsighted like he can be in general play.

Mooy was not really back to his best because of his lost speed (or is it just that he is still getting his fitness level up maybe).

I saw him not even try to run down players or get back when they got past his line of defence a few times when I expected him to.

It was Mooy at his tactical best though I will say. His involvement went so far towards letting us play our game instead of constantly defending with backs to the wall like we have been against foot gifted teams.

I think Mooy deserves the praise he is getting for his effort, contribution, and effectiveness. His ability to create havoc in the middle defensively worked beautifully with the efforts of others further forward who also applied pressure and chased.

All up it was a really good tactic to employ against Peru and I will happily concede that the responsibility for that belongs to Arnie.

The responsibility for the success of that tactic sits with the players who played like it mattered and earned it.

Kalac well lets just say I'm still not convinced that he didn't have bet somewhere to throw the game.  

I've seen a lot of YT videos today about the game - mostly in Spanish.

I must have seen the same one somewhere where the  Peruvian pundits laughed at us!  Another video where  Peru fans thought they would walk it in!

Another one, which I'm getting really fed up with, was Mark Schwarzer stating how the Socceroos would likely lose, because we are a really weak team compared to  his amazing  high quality Golden Generation teams.

Sorry, Mark, but your amazing GG Socceroos did no better qualifying against a South American team in 2005 than today! Both  Socceroo teams won by penalties.

Also, given there are four facets of a keeper's play:
1. Shot stopping
2. Coming  off one's line and  commanding the penalty box.
3. Playing as sweeper with one's feet.
4. Distribution by throwing and rolling the ball.

Australia has  improved immeasurably  as a team since Mark's retirement, because Matt Ryan is better at 2, 3 and 4 than Mark, and similar quality at 1.

So our keeping for the Socceroos has been better since Mark retired!   

Expert pundit decentric has to get his nasty little digs in at the golden generation- is that really necessary? Schwarzer was a better keeper than Ryan- just.

Great to get the win and the team played more like a team that wanted to win than we have been gifted for some time.

But let's not forget that Arnie's ideal striker is one who chases a lot as his primary indicator of performance.

I saw three times that Duke ran into space and missed and I have to wonder if Maclaren would have done better in those moments. I like to think he would while also acknowledging the chasing role and how it both helped limit the creativity of Peru and gained the ball back for us.

Arnie got us there the hardest way possible, and just maybe he is going to hang around for the WC itself - which will mean more shit selections, more questionable tactics, and selections based on his baked on ideas about what makes a team.

The team played a fantastic game compared to earlier in the qualification process, but we still played a lot of Arnie ball in that second half when we helped Peru to get to penalties by pissing around in the backline and passing backwards - when pressing and going forward were both proving to be such an effective limiter of Peru's attacking options and gave us chances. The result was a sprightly Peru in the last half of extra time when they should have been dead on their feet halfway through the second half of normal time - and they did look like pinching the win then.

There is nothing 'unAustralian' about not loving Arnie and being able to see his failings beyond the victory. I do not believe he has seen the light or the error of his ways and we still should have beaten Peru in normal time.

Did it make the victory so much sweeter getting there with no fingernails at the end of an intense penalty shootout? Bloody oath it did.

Genuinely pumped about the win and how the players stood up. Hopeful and excited about the next stage of our testing. Mindful of the gaffer's limitations still.

VAR takes joy out of football. When Redmayne made that last save I could not fully celebrate incase VAR determined he had come off his line early. There is no excuse for the on field umpire not to be able to make that call, since he could not possibly be looking at something else or be unsighted like he can be in general play.

I'd put Schwarzer head and shoulders above Ryan. That's not to say Ryan's no good - he's excellent, but we've always produced quality keepers. Schwarzer was extra special when you consider the entirety of his career. He was always number one and almost single-handedly kept Boro in the EPL for two or three years.

As for his penalty saving... 

I usually agree with your opinions, RIMB.

However, regarding Duke's selection and Arnie's coaching, I disagree.

Given we don't have a big, imposing, tall target striker like Josh Kennedy, or,  Mark Viduka, ATM,  Mitch Duke's selection has been  plausible as central striker. He caused quite a few turnovers in the attacking half of the pitch against Peru - this is a phenomenon of modern football. If teams win the ball high up the pitch, in our Attacking Transitions, it is very dangerous for the opposition. Alex Brosque, Matt Leckie and Brett Holman, have all been very good at this too.

Particularly at the instant  of the turnover, our Attacking Transitional phase of play,  invariably the opposition players  are running off the ball to support the ball carrier advancing forwards.  Many of the opposition team are just a few more seconds slower to reconfigure into a defensive shape after being in an offensive shape in these high up the pitch turnover scenarios.

In the Ball Possession Opposition phase of play they have to cover the teammates and make the pitch smaller and more compact - very quickly. Again causing these turnovers in the attacking third is invaluable. A team can catch them out of shape. It is also advantageous suddenly having the opposition chasing, and having to defend  running towards their own goal and keeper.

Moreover, Duke is the type of striker, who does not need pinpoint service like Maclaren. Despite the Melb City striker being the more clinical finisher. The likes of Kennedy, Duke and Leckie, are more likely to win loose balls, or second balls than JMac.

In addition, given Duke's incredible engine, he is particularly effective at tracking back and keeping the defensive shape compact in our Ball Possession Opposition. Most strikers haven't got the  engine to do it. Although JMac has been more effective recently.

Moving the ball around at the back probing for gaps to build up forwards is the axiom in international  football. Peru did it too. 

One Chilean media article anointed Aaron Mooy as best player on the pitch, for controlling the tempo of play, which caused them to lose the  game. They had to run more than they would have liked. Australia wasn't able to do this in the past, because technically, we weren't good enough to maintain possession and build up from the pack, with rhythm changes. From watching extended highlights the Socceroos should have won in 90 mins.

Admittedly, Peru had three chances in quick succession in the second half of extra time. I think it was due to the impact to Peru's fresh subs. Over the game we had more scoring chances though.

Nope, he wasn't.  Neither are anywhere near Bozza.  Best game I've seen from an Australian player, period was the Club World Cup he  won for Man U

At what club was Schwarzer not number one (apart from Chelsea where he went as a definite number 2 or 3)?

Pretty sure he was always number one, unlike Ryan.

As for Bozza, you're welcome to your opinion. For years of consistent excellence I'd have Schwarzer way ahead of him and, on pure natural ability, Robert Zabica the best of the lot.

Nope, he wasn't.  Neither are anywhere near Bozza.  Best game I've seen from an Australian player, period was the Club World Cup he  won for Man U

I thought you were talking about the Socceroos number one. 

Re: Scharzer v Bozza.  Schwarzer would've spent his Socceroo career at number 2 if it weren't for Bozza's extra-curricular activities. 

I saw Zabica too and I still rate Bozza- on ability- ahead of all of them.

Mooy was able to have so much time because they sat so deep and left so much space in the middle. It was actually a major tactical mistake by them. If they’d pressed more and not dropped back we would’ve coughed up the ball all night. 

At what club was Schwarzer not number one (apart from Chelsea where he went as a definite number 2 or 3)?

Pretty sure he was always number one, unlike Ryan.

As for Bozza, you're welcome to your opinion. For years of consistent excellence I'd have Schwarzer way ahead of him and, on pure natural ability, Robert Zabica the best of the lot.

Agree that Peru did not press very well.What was so good about Mooy's play ( and always has been) is his willingness to receive the ball either from his defenders or the other middies so that they can hold their positions and then he can absorb any pressure from the opponents and slow down the play or accelerate it( with a good pass) as he thinks appropriate.Sometimes it looks as if he doesn't know what he is doing but I think he is giving his team mates time to  make their runs or set up for the next phase.

I can see why the Peruvians thought he was player of the match as many South American teams ( club and national) treasure a player like Mooy who is willing to put their foot on the ball and control the tempo of the match. He isn't flashy but is an important cog in the Socceroos.The extended period in camp gave Arnie and the team the  time to put al l this into place with Mooy being the centrepiece.We have not had many players like this though Ned Zelic would be the closest to Mooy I have seen.

Mooy was not really back to his best because of his lost speed (or is it just that he is still getting his fitness level up maybe).

I saw him not even try to run down players or get back when they got past his line of defence a few times when I expected him to.

It was Mooy at his tactical best though I will say. His involvement went so far towards letting us play our game instead of constantly defending with backs to the wall like we have been against foot gifted teams.

I think Mooy deserves the praise he is getting for his effort, contribution, and effectiveness. His ability to create havoc in the middle defensively worked beautifully with the efforts of others further forward who also applied pressure and chased.

All up it was a really good tactic to employ against Peru and I will happily concede that the responsibility for that belongs to Arnie.

The responsibility for the success of that tactic sits with the players who played like it mattered and earned it.

Whist I agree Bozza was brilliant in that game, the group game against Brazil in the 1997 Confederations Cup was the game par excellence for Bozza.

Mooysi has never had speed - lack of match fitness at times yes but he's never been quick to back track even whilst at BHA days.
He's great at reading the game in turn anticipates great but he's done once turned depending who is opposing him from my perspective.

And the weird thing is he was a winger at St Mirren.

Mooysi has never had speed - lack of match fitness at times yes but he's never been quick to back track even whilst at BHA days.
He's great at reading the game in turn anticipates great but he's done once turned depending who is opposing him from my perspective.

Good that you've admitted it.

You  have had a lot to say doubting the current Socceroos, QF.

Agree that Peru did not press very well.What was so good about Mooy's play ( and always has been) is his willingness to receive the ball either from his defenders or the other middies so that they can hold their positions and then he can absorb any pressure from the opponents and slow down the play or accelerate it( with a good pass) as he thinks appropriate.Sometimes it looks as if he doesn't know what he is doing but I think he is giving his team mates time to  make their runs or set up for the next phase.

I can see why the Peruvians thought he was player of the match as many South American teams ( club and national) treasure a player like Mooy who is willing to put their foot on the ball and control the tempo of the match. He isn't flashy but is an important cog in the Socceroos.The extended period in camp gave Arnie and the team the  time to put al l this into place with Mooy being the centrepiece.We have not had many players like this though Ned Zelic would be the closest to Mooy I have seen.

nothing like the powers of youth, 20yrs then.
Obviously as time went midfield role suited his game.