I was just reading an article on the German approach under Low and an analysis of our game against them. Very interesting reading.

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/06/08/germany-world-cup-2010-tactics/

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/06/14/germany-4-0-australia-germany-tactics/#more-3515

I would be interested in comments on how the Germans played. How we played has been done to death.

It pisses me off when its mentioned they can't play against extremely defensive teams, which is the way we have played bar this game. Pims suck an F*** wit

Second article was an interesting read, especially with the pressing section. The points highlighted make us look really poor and naive tactically

The interesting thing to me is that everyone has been wanting Pim to play 4-4-2 and when he does we get hammered. There are lots of reasons for it not the least of which is the quality of our players. I wish he had stuck to what had got us to the Cup. Against a side the quality of Germany we probably would still have been defeated comfortably. There is so much to learn from what they did. What really impressed me is that as much as they could they played the ball along the deck and they played it precisely.

We are naive. Hopefully this defeat will send our coaches at all levels back to the texts and videos on how the game is played now.

I think the national team needs a clean out. It can't decide what it wants to do, we play defensive against NZ and then press Germany. I think the team should be picked around the players we have and not the coaches preferences as we are limited in our players also.

We didn't play 4-4-2 we played a 4-6-0 which was stupid. The Germans have speed in abundance and this is our weak pint obviously ans with youtfull players like Ozil and Muller whipping around we didn't press them at all but stood back and let them knock their passes around. Tacticaly we were woefull whereas they were exceptional, as heart breaking as it was the German's systematical destruction of us was actually entertaining if you could shut out the pain

Yes, but it wasn't a conventional 4-4-2. For starters we had no strikers

Fixed...

Indeed, they looked really good.

But what did the German's do that meant that the players we had up front never got good ball?

Is this a Craig Moore reference?

Well we only ever supply with crosses and Tim Cahill was dwarfed by Mertesacker and isolated upfront on his own, Kennedy shoukd have played. Cahill's best assest is his runs from midfield and ability to pop up in the right place at the right time but when you isolate his upfront he can't do that. They didn't shut down our crossing efficiently we were just poor and they nuetralized the threat at the end of the cross, they were more physical than Cahill and Garcia and our lack of actually playing a passing game meant we only look to score via crossing

You are right in what you say but I can't recollect us getting into many positions where we could even cross the ball. Germany played with very little space between their back four and their DM's when we had the ball and their two wide men also provided pressure on the ball. Other than Emerton's occasional runs with the ball and Wilkshire getting down the right we never really broke their defence down. We had quite a number of good passing movements but none created space off the ball or behind the German defence.

Edited by gyfox: 15/6/2010 08:21:06 PM

Great read. Watching the game I couldn't quite understand (like Pim ;) why Germany had so much time on the ball in the attacking third. I think the great teams in the world are the ones that can adapt their formation. I'm interested to see how Germany play against a more technically experienced side that can force them to play in a different formation. Maybe Holland, Italy or Brazil. I don't think Diego has the experience.

In the first half we were out numbered in midfield. Grella and Valeri vs Schweinsteger,Oestil and Khadira. They were never going to supply quality ball fast enough to our front runners.

Also Culina was out of position (among others). If you look at Podolski and Mueller they are both fast, good finishers and good in 1v1 situations (Mueller more so)Emerton didn't do too badly as a wide striker, but again can't do much without the ball. Culina is good on the ball but not in a wide position. This is where Kewell, Oar and Emerton would be strengths for us. Being able to take on defenders and supply to the central striker.

In the 2nd half we had culina, valeri and holman in the middle and that stabilised us. With better service and quicker ball movement Holman could have been making some of the diagaonal runs through their defence that Oestil ended up doing to us.
After Cahill got sent off we went back to being out numbered again.

Player for player Germany were technically better, they were all nimble and quick with the ball, along with their vision or insight which made their all round movement alot faster than us.
Germany thought 2-3 passes ahead. Australia only thought of the next pass. In other words Germany passed and moved, Australia passed and stood still.

The germans played really really well. They were absolutely clinical and have looked the best out of all the teams so far. Their squad is probably the best they've had in a while and though a more testing side would be interesting, I think they've got it in them to adapt to the challenge. They were technically excellent.

Mostly because we didn't close them down enough and didn't control the play in the midfield. That was never going to happen when Cahill was up forward being hob-nobbled by Badsturber the whole game.