By johnszasz - 16 Feb 2023 7:35 AM
Very hot across Ecuadorian media. Games in Melbourne and Sydney next window. What an excellent test and I'd argue tougher than how Tunisia and Denmark were at the world cup. Ecuador were quite decent.
|
By Enzo Bearzot - 10 Apr 2023 7:25 PM
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAfter looking at the replay, I have some ideas about RB. Degenek struggles against more mobile and quick right wingers. In the game against Ecuador, Deng struggled against big, strong, fast central strikers - Rodriguez. Wright and Rowles had no trouble with his strength. Swap them around, although Degenek isn't as good as either Souttar or Rowles as a CB. Deng is more mobile than Degenek is as a RB. Degenek played some nice crosses into the pen box. I don't know what Deng is like going forwards? Atkinson is good going forwards, but if a more defensive minded RB is needed, I think Deng could be tried as an alternative to Degenek at RB. I'd just play Strain. Also hoping Miller keeps getting minutes at Hibs. One of the phenomena Arnie alluded to in interviews is that there are only three decent pitches in Scotland. I'd surmise it is Hampden Park and Rangers and Celtic's home grounds. It is a bit difficult to extrapolate performance on dodgy Scottish pitches to international football where the Socceroos play their games. Devlin is apparently going well in Scotland, but at international level, is nowhere near as good as O'Neill as a defensive screener/ DM. O'Neill plays AL football. I don't think it's an issue that Strain or Miller play in Scotland. It doubles the games on offer (if playing) in a league of comparable quality to the AL, but with two very good top teams. I don't share your view about the SPL and don't think it should influence NT selection. I have not watched the SPL or SPFL for a few years, and it was a very physical league. According to Arnie, and Kuol it is still overly physical, with a lot of big lads. Arnie implied most of the pitches aren't good enough to play technical football. However, I take the point that Martin Boyle has played his club football on Scottish pitches and has been a qualified success as a Socceroo. Another phenomenon about Scotland, acknowledging the fact they play more games than the AL, which is good for development, is they haven't qualified for a World Cup for 25 years. Hence, the Scottishbasedroos, in all probability don't play against many players with World Cup Finals or Euro Champ Finals experience week in, week out, at club level. I'm sure there are a number of players in Celtic and Rangers who have had international success, but I'd surmise not a lot more players outside those two teams are successful international players playing in successful national teams. Having said that, how good are Scottish club coaches? How well are they trained? Few would have the same quality as Arnie, and could make different decisions about players' ability. If our Aussie players play in the Netherlands, the coaches are usually extremely well-trained. The may extend to Denmark too. If they play in Japan, South Korea and the USA, there are a number of their domestic players who play in big international tournament final comps. So you haven't watched Celtic lately to see how Anges's coaching style may have evolved? Qualification for World Cups is much harder in Europe than Asia. We live in the present not the past. You do realise that Scotland beat and outplayed Spain 2 0 last week? They lead their European qualifier group. European WCup qualifiying is harder but the gap is getting smaller. Roos beating Peru to make Qatar and reaching 2nd round proved that. Scotland beat Spain in a friendly- Roos beat Denmark in the actual WCup!
Celtic are only average outside of Scotland. Celtic losing to Sydney FC 2-1 proved that. Their lack of success in Champions league games proves that as well.
No. Scotland beat Spain in their European qualifier. It was as far from a friendly. Spain is ranked 10th in the World. Denmark is ranked 18th.When is the last time Australia beat, in a competitive match, any nation in the top 10? You can't take anything from Celtics loss to Sydney. It was on a goodwill tour and a friendly. To suggest Sydney are anywhere close to SPL standard is delusional. My mistake about it being a Friendly. Well done to Scotland. but come on - Sydney fc beating Celtic means Melb City, Wsw and Mariners would have beaten them that day too. What does that say about celtic playing away?! (Their nothing special) Anybody that thinks the Socceroos are NOT a decent football side is an idiot.
btw, when was the last time Scotland finished 11th in a WCup?!!!
.
Celtic did not bring their World Cup stars to Australia. But, despite that they were on holiday. I would suggest that the A-League is upper Scottish championship level at best. In Scotland, Celtic win away as much as they win at home (and they have only lost one game this season). But is is only just over a 3 hours drive by car from Glasgow to Dingwall (which is the longest trip). As there are no stops in the team bus it would take about the same time. I know you meant Europe but lets see what happens next year. No one is saying that the Socceroos are not a decent side. They are. But at the moment Scotland is stronger with the majority of their players involved in the EPL. Celtic win away because it is a relatively weak league. It is axiomatic amongst the Aus football coaching community, that outside Rangers and Celtic, the Scottish top league is no better than the AL. With due respect, after not qualifying for the World Cup since 1998, it is difficult to argue that Scotland is currently better than Australia. Denmark topped the UEFA WCQ group that Scotland was a member of in the campaign for WC 2022. Australia beat Denmark in the Qatar WC and drew with them in the Russian WC in 2018. Australia is a better international team unit than the sum of its parts. Just because Scotland have a few EPL players, as a team unit, they have consistently failed to qualify for the WC in 6 successive WC campaigns. The excuse that Europe is a tough qualifying group, can't really be extrapolated to the international sphere, because many UEFA teams don't play particularly well outside Europe. Germany (not this time), France, maybe England, Portugal, Croatia, Netherlands and Switzerland, have had qualified success outside Europe over a sustained period? Belgium and Denmark certainly haven't. Asia had the same percentage of teams who qualified for the round of 16 in Qatar as UEFA, or rather 60% to 61%. If we look at East Asia exclusively, 100% of East Asian teams qualified for the last 16 in Qatar. Also, Denmark were ranked 10th in the world when Aus beat them in Qatar. Hence, Aus beat a top 10 team in world rankings in a WC. @Decentric 2 - Asia had 3/6 make the round of 16 = 50% Europe was 8/13 = 62%, But over many World Cups Europe's numbers are far superior to other confederations whereas Asia has its ups and downs. Clearly if the goal was to have the 32 best teams qualify there would be more European teams qualifying for World Cups at the expense of other confederations and with the expansion to 48 Europe will be even worse off relative to the strength of its middle tier teams. True, except Qatar didn't qualify for their own WC. 3 out of 5 Asian teams who qualified for Qatar made the last 16, equating to 60%. We are also discussing this last WC played in Asia, not previous WCs played in Europe. We might be better at playing in unfamiliar continents that some UEFA teams. The empirical evidence from the last WC in Qatar is that Asia may have improved as a football confederation. Our tougher qualifying campaign as only the 5th best Asian team in WCQs might have stood us in good stead for the Finals in Qatar.
Home ground advantage historically has favored Europeans and Sth Americans. If more tournaments are played outside of those confederations, the gap would narrow.
|
|