"Football Australia has announced there will be a “thorough” review of the Olympic disaster"
How is losing to the 4th and 5th placed world teams a disaster? The article is throwing the baby out with the bathwater in my eyes.

"review will focus on high performance, including the fitness and conditioning of players"
That is exactly what Staj was doing and he got smashed for it. The players just have to cry 'body shaming' and they beat another coach because the perceived rights of the individual have overtaken the rights of the whole in every aspect of our lives. The environment has to change and the players have to be the ones to do it. Professional or leave.

"The Matildas conceded 10 goals over three matches in the group stage against Germany, Zambia and finally the US"
We conceded 5 goals to two blokes and still got a win plus 3 to Germany and 2 to USA. Not such a bad record when you actually look beyond simple numbers.

There is insufficient balance to this article as I see it. We did not play horrendously against Germany but we did not play as well as we should have or had the team that we should have had on the field to do it. Gustavsson's tactics and player choices have been suspect all along in my opinion and that is why he should be gone. He strikes me as someone who would be a good coach of a brilliant team - but not a coach of any team that has to work to get there.

Matilda's on the whole are their own worst enemy with the in-fighting, predation and power games we have heard about for a long time. As long as players think they have the right to be in the team and to play we are screwed.

I think we have plenty of players who really do work hard for the team and respect the chance and honour of representing us. Unfortunately there are also several who have put themselves above the team.

I would love the next coach to have the strength to overcome the undermining forces and who receives the genuine backing of the administration to do what has to be done. I find it hard after all these years to have much hope of that happening.

meh, someone else will come in and say this press is typical negative negative negative.

Lets look at the brightside - new gaffa and a rebuild, mountain to climb, some hidden jewels may surface in the future.
Nothing would have changed if TG was resigned, the FA would be happy the cash cow keeps producing milk in spurts but this is the next new venture into the unknown.

I would like you to name the source for the ‘infighting, predation and power games’ stories that you believe is happening (and don’t say the Murdoch press).
Facts matter! 

I am talking about everything from Staj onwards.

Same players.

I can't name the sources because it has run so long and been reported by many in different ways but I don't accept your inference that my inability to recall them now and lack of interest in trawling through looking for them makes the statement invalid. I also disagree with your contention that everything reported by Murdoch Press is wrong regardless of how baised they are.

The whole DeVanna issue - which I believe must have had some elements of sour grapes after being dropped - would not have all been made up. Having to put guards outside young girls' rooms on tour to stop predation by older players was reported in more than one place. Staj was undermined by a group of players and co-conspirators playing power games. The side we have been fielding under Gustavsson is proof of such things in itself - with Van Egmond starting games as striker when we had an actual striker on the bench proof that things were not right in the dressing room.

Facts matter indeed and my opinion has been formed over time from a variety of 'printed' and voiced reports from people in a range of credible positions.

I would honestly like to hear which of infighting, predation and power games you don't think has happened significantly from Staj to now - and if you backed that up with sources I would gladly add them to my mental cauldron of Matildas thoughts and views.

I'm not sure I agree with these assessments. Yes, Germany and USA are topped ranked sides, but the manner in which we were unable to create notable chances says a lot, considering we are side that should be within the top 10. Let's not fall to this mentality of, "oh, they are ranked higher, so it's expected". This is exactly how England have not won anything in so long. It's always, "it's not expected of us, so it's fine". 

10 goals in 3 games is a bad record, especially when 5 of those came in one match against a team in which we should be comfortable. You don't win games average 3 goals conceded per game. Go watch the goals again and look at the ineptitude of how some were conceded. Titles are won on strong defences and minimal concession of goals, 10 in 3 is quite significant at this level. Again, "still got a win" is kind of like, "we won anyway, so who cares how many we conceded". 

My comments were more to show the need for some balance in the article. I must admit, watching the Germany game particularly we could easily have conceded more goals. I agree that we failed badly in those moments when we were scored against and were hideously exposed several other times, but those moments to me equated more to a couple of players ball watching rather than a global disaster of a campaign by the Matildas.

I do not think it fair to include the Zambian game in consideration or relevance since it was not a fair game in my eyes. The Matildas produced an extraordinary result on the back of some terrible mistakes, an accidental goal, the equivalent of two or three elite male athletes in opposition, and Van Egmond as our striker. The 5 goals were an abomination and not deserving inclusion of a games summary. It is not without reason that Zambia includes the two highest paid women's footballers with the impact and advantage they create.

I have categorically blamed Gustavsson in various posts for not fielding a striker in games - using Foord, Van Egmond and Raso instead of at least putting Heyman on for the first 45 minutes of each game. To me, employing random hope, unbounded enthusiasm and unexpected behaviour is not going to produce goals and that is the manager's fault. The team put on the field did press and create the semblance of opportunities that went begging without a skilled point to the attack throughout all our games.

None of that is saying I think the Matildas had a good campaign. Far from it. I just don't think it deserves the 'disaster' label when you consider the good elements in our games too.

As an aside, I am really interested in your view - when you say we should be a top 10 side, which of the teams above us 'should' we be better than? I think DPR Korea is the only one I would put us above (on principle, truth be told) and the other 10 we would have to be a much better team to overtake.

Would you call this a disaster of an Olympics for the Matildas?

Not getting out of a group stage since the Sydney 2000 Olympics when you only need to be one of the two 3rd best placed teams whilst conceding 10 goals and Canada still going through when they had a 6 point reduction?

Yes it’s been disaster, considering we made the semi’s at the World Cup last year with a best ever generation of players how could this be acceptable is beyond me.

It's fine to offer balance when its justified, not for the sake of it. 

How was the Zambian game not a fair game? Doesn't matter how amazing or shit the goals were, you still analyse them because when they are shitter, that means there are bigger issues that need addressing. The reality is there was no clear good elements. There was nothing to rave home about. 

There was talk that a medal should have been on the cards, and we couldn't even get out of the group stages, despite Canada having a 6 point deduction. We don't always have to try and find balance. It's fine to admit it was shit and a disaster. That is the only way you can progress, but being willing to accept shortfalls and issues and then working to fix them. 

Considering for WWCom a past era. hired his mate as set piece coach , all that was forgotten in the Olympics, defending static and ball watching on all occasions. Attacking the ball was floated into the box and just catching practice.
Lack of leadership on the field to see this and adjust as it seems TG was totally clueless.
Playing 523 against the states, was inept coach from a past era.
The Matildas have creative players but TG and his team weren't able to use them properly with backfoot approach to games

It would have been interesting if Zambia had been in Canada's or Brazil's group instead. I keep saying it - their 5 goals against us were scored by two players with a huge advantage and that is really where our goal difference suffered. We only needed one single goal difference to have gone through ahead of Brazil assuming 'goals for' was the decider for equal goal difference. Put Zambia in the other groups and our goal difference improves without a doubt in my eyes.

Canada, being a top group team had 2 lesser teams as opponents - and they won all 3 games so they were their groups best team and went through in 2nd place not 3rd. Australia were a lower placed team so we had 2 higher teams as our opponents. No fair comparison between us and Canada there regardless of the -6 penalty.

Our progression was effectively measured against Colombia and Brazil - with Brazil higher in world rankings than us.

We had the best ever generation of players a long time ago in football terms - but I will willingly concede that our regression since 2000 can be labelled a disaster. Just not this Olympic competition.

In seeded group competitions we will always have a tough time of it unless enough teams compete to put us in the top seeded pot. We shouldn't lose sight of that in our expectations of progression.

I do not encourage acceptance of poor performance - and we performed poorly against my personal expectations despite all my commonsense and logic above - but our actual tournament just wasn't bad enough to be called a disaster when all the factors are taken into account.

Should we have done better - yes.
Did I expect us to do better - yes.

Lots of speculation and unnamed sources. Who knows what is true?

The only thing that's 100% true is Robbie Slater is an absolute flog.

The latest peurile garbage he put out today is beyond the pale. He wouldn't have a clue what goes on behind the scenes but carries on like he has hidden cameras everywhere. 

Wait a minute......

Happy to let the rest of the discussion sit as is.

It is not an insinuation - it is stating what I accept to be facts from the various reports around the issue.

For the Zambians, all 5 of their goals were scored by two players who have previously been banned from female sport for failing a gender test - so whether they are men or not they certainly had a massive advantage in a female sport. I do not expect Zambia to stay in 64th place for long if those players are allowed to continue to represent in female sport.

Replace those 2 players with two good female players and they do not score 5 goals against us. Every time they got the ball we had to have multiple players trying to control them and we were pulled out of position to do that.

Regardless of the game's laws struggling to catch up to gender crossover, it does not change the fact that a male athletic body can have a significant and unfair advantage in competition with a female athletic body. You can see that clearly in the first goal alone. It was an unfair match up beyond acceptable parameters for skill and body shape.

I wasn’t inferring that these things didn’t happen, they happen in all walks of life. What pisses me off is the ‘quoting from sources’ without naming them. If you believe the information given by Newscorp, Robbie Slater et al is fact then name those sources.

I’m not having a go at you personally, I know you are  genuine in your posts, but it is a constant irritation, for me, to see people using gossip and innuendo as facts. 

My main source is this website - but following the links to external sources and looking for other information when something gets my interest. I know, as a forum, everything posted has some bias and represents a range of opinions on every matter.

I could not quote the specific threads and external links but I know they are there.

All the same, I understand what you are saying and why it would grate when anyone quotes scuttlebutt as 'the truth'.

Fair enough, as I said you are genuinely interested in all matters football (and a passionate Roar supporter) but if someone is accused of anything untoward I would like it to be backed up by evidence.

Anyhow, the Matildas will survive and continue to grow and in my opinion keep selling out stadiums wherever they go.

I'm not going to get into whether they are men or not, that's not for me to decide. The main point still stands. The ball gets to them somehow, and we were shocking as a unit. We should have been able to cover the other areas of the field to limit these players getting the space, time and chances they got. That first goal where Banda just turns and shoots in hope, the keeper should do much better. In saying that, you are also suggesting that it doesn't matter what happens, as soon as those players get the ball, there is nothing the Matildas could have done. That's completely false. 

You also are unable to then explain how other teams with much lesser quality in them were able to control these two players. This year they drew with Ghana, drew with NZ, and lost to Morocco amongst other losses to top 10 sides. 

So, in sum up, our campaign was a massive failure. There is no mitigating factor that could argue we did anything good. It's also somewhat dangerous rhetoric to be making assumptions about people without all the information about their gender classification. I'm sorry mate, this was a disaster for the Matildas. No two ways about it. 

https://www.flashscore.com/football/world/world-cup-women-u20/#/pCaxHLfc/table

Australia U20 start in WWC to host Colombia. 9am Sunday.

https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/news/how-watch-commbank-young-matildas-v-colombia-fifa-u20-womens-world-cup-colombia-2024tm

I say it every year but how does Blayney still remain as head coach? 

That was hard to watch. A lot of missed passes, not much combination play in the final third and massive gaps between the lines in BP and BPO.

I won't watch the underage women's games anymore. That last comp where we could not complete simple passes and had no effective combination play made it unwatchable for me I am afraid.

Sounds like that still.

Would most of the U20s in 'good women's footballing countries' be training through powerhouse clubs and academies these days? I may be wrong (having no idea on it) but I would be surprised if our U20s have that base to work from.

Doh 

I think most if not all the girls are playing for clubs in the ALW. 

That is where my thoughts were heading.

I don't think there is the emphasis on young women's football development in this country; sufficient to lift the younger players into anything close to world competitiveness at their age. I think it is only once they start playing in the ALW that they begin to develop and become footballers in a career sense. Countries that have serious development at the younger age will see players stepping up to their national competitions (and higher) from a significantly higher starting point.

We may question the managers of the younger groups and their lack of success but I have seen several people say that our senior national coaches lack the cattle to do anything better and yet our underage coaches don't get much credit for lacking the calves for better football themselves.

As someone who does not follow youth development much at all - am I being too generous on Leah Blayney thinking that she may not have much to work with due to the low priority placed on female youth development in this sport?

Not a good watch, another abysmal performance.
2-0 to Mexico. Shots on goal mexico 24-3.
Blayney should have been fired years ago… FA have got a lot to answer for.

I don't watch those games but for Matildas and I cough what I see there but this sounds ugly.

Our female youth teams appear to be absolutely rubbish. Every other nation, many still fairly unknown for women's football, are doing well. The question remains whether our players will eventually kick on a few years older but it's unlikely as the pathways aren't really there and the US and European Leagues will prefer these better developing nations. 

shame, so pretty much as its been years and years for the boys/men, head abroad.
Really showing how lacking we are at the back end worse for womens football considerign its growth last 10yrs and more.
No matter whos's up top managing our game its always just about the top making sure the honeypot keeps the money rolling in.

I watched snippets of the game and what was alarming is how poor technically they looked compared to the opponents, something is not going well in the youth development front and it needs fixing fast otherwise the next decade or so could be a different one.

What’s the saying, no youth no future? The countries that improve focus on the youth, it seems we can’t say the same about us sadly.