Australia are one point away from claiming their entry rights for the 2010 World Cup, but quite frankly they are no were near World Cup material.
I was at the Australia Vs Uzbekistan game and, to my surprise, I found our European players quite terrible on the field. Don’t get me wrong: Kewell, Bresciano and, of course, Kennedy – aka Jesus – were great.
But for the best team in Asia, we definitely aren’t performing like it.
The first 25 or 30 minutes was poor football on Australia’s behalf, especially some Lucas Neill blunders which nearly cost us a couple of goals.
In the first 25-30 minutes, Uzbekistan had 64 percent of possession, compared to Australia’s 36 percent.
McDonald had an absolute shocker and Kewell wasn’t to be seen. We were lucky to have come away 0-0 in the first 45.
Kennedy came onto the field to change the tempo of the game, scoring one of Australia’s goals after just ten minutes of being subbed on.
I do like the Socceroos and want to see them do well. But we’ve really got to boost our team up as we are far from world class.
It’s great were playing, but honestly, playing Asian countries none of us have never heard of is doing nothing more than just elevating up our players ego.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- Socceroos screwed over by FIFA, again (41)
- Gulf influence cripples the FFA again (40)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (3)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (5)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (7)
- Does the A-League need an injection of humour? (39)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Redknapp tight-lipped over England job
- Departing Lavicka has players’ respect
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (3)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (5)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (7)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Melbourne derby reveals tale of two journeys (3)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (16)
- Capello ‘walks’ from England’s top job (13)
Sam said | April 3rd 2009 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Wilswils
Remember we never played Cahill who would have been an intimidating presensce for the Uzbeks. Still you’re right in saying that Kewell, Kennedy, Cahill and Bresciano are our weapons. We have some good workers in the midfield, although I worry about the quality of Grella or Valeri against the better teams.
Wing backs are quite solid, but our defence is a big problem. Even Neill can be prone to errors, and we will still be relying on Craig Moore in this World Cup. Not that bad I think, but could be better. Still the World Champions drew against Ireland on the weekend, so as long as we play as a group we will always be in with a show.
sledgeross said | April 3rd 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
So, by your standards Argentina are not WC material as well?
Millster said | April 3rd 2009 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Hmmm… he must have been at a different game.
Wils – we were the ones in yellow.
then agai nwhat can you expect from a supporter of ‘the filth’ ??
Tom said | April 3rd 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Where did you get that possession statistic from, Wils? Thats very different to what flashed on the screen on Foxsports.
I don’t recall too many Lucas Neill blunders, although both he and Beauchamp were patchy early. Over the 90 minutes though the Uzbeks had very few chances.
I actually think our side looks pretty good at the moment. Admittedly we’re not exacty playing the European all-stars but I’m not sure what more we can do than what we’re doing now.
And frankly, I think its just downright insulting to say we’re playing against ‘Asian countries we’ve never heard of’.
Alan Nicolea said | April 3rd 2009 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
Sledgeross
The South American qualifying zone for a world cup is the toughest in the world by far, whilst the asian continent is by far the easiest. I would love to see Australia pit their wits against the likes of Ecuador, Colombia, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile on a consistent basis. These south American nations are so under-rated yet on their day, they possess as much skill as Argentina and Brazil. Argentina will always be world class because they compete against nations that play world class football, and this to just qualify for a world cup.
If Australia were to be truly successful, they must play and beat nations who are consistenly in the running for football’s greatest prize. Uzbekistan, Bahrain, Qatar and Japan are hardly world cup material.
Millster said | April 3rd 2009 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
Alan – on your final line, I agree somewhat with the first three but not with the last. Japan on their day are a technically gifted and tactically astute opponent and for the record, whatever the official FIFA rankings say from one month to the next, I consider Japan to still be a class above the Socceroos. Also, while not quite at Japan level, the regular competition we will get against in particular the Koreas, the Saudis and Iran is also nothing to be sneezed at.
My second point in response is yes the South American zone may be theoretically more ideal than Asia for our development (in fact probably the best in the world on this basis) but we’ve already gone a long way in the right direction coming from Oceania into Asia. As per my point above, 5 or 6 of the Asian teams we will now regularly meet are ones that demand a measure of the football world’s respect.
Third, lets also show some respect for the so-called “minnows” of our region. You name the Uzbeks and Qatar for example as “hardly world cup material” but the world is an ever-changing place and these are countries where football is getting ever-increasing funding at all levels, and more and more professionally administered. Just 5 years back Australia was around rank number 50 or below, shambolically managed, and also “hardly world cup material” but we have pulled our socks up and started the reform of our game. It think its silly to assume that other nations in Asia can’t and won’t do the same.
Fouth and finally, the proof is on the pitch. Australia is not thrashing Bahrain, the Uzbeks and other so-called “minnows” every time (with the exception of Qatar). We have had some shaky moments, some lucky results, against these teams. So lets make sure not to get too much ahead of ourselves as the case for there being a real gap in quality and class between us and these nations is one that is not yet at all convincing to me. When we’re good we’re good, no doubt, but when we’re not we still play some alarmingly fragile and naive football which does not befit our “top 32″ aspirations.
Eamonn said | April 3rd 2009 @ 5:27pm | Report comment
Joke of a piece.
Just because you’ve never heard of the Asian Champions (Iraq) World’s Biggest nation, China, Japan and Uzbekistan don’t assume the rest of the sports public haven’t.
And 32 teams go to the World Cup…so as you;d expect in such a number, a fair bit of varying quality in there usually….Trinidad, England, Argentina, Costa Rica etc
Australia will be fine. We may or may not get out of the group.but we will be at the Greatest Show on Earth.
Midfielder said | April 3rd 2009 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
Eamonn
Agree … joke of an article and to me shows little knowledge of football history and how sides get to the WC…
Millster said | April 3rd 2009 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
What I hate more than anything is the assumption that nations which we have not regularly competed against in our traditional pissy little sports, or that don’t fit into some broad stereotype model (such as the “all South Americans are football gods” assumption here) are or should be “easy-beats” in the real world of football. Its a kind of closed-minded arrogance that I think is quite galling.
One of the very best things for me about the football world and the way the game is structured is that – without denying that there are a group of about 10 ‘football royalty’ nations – anyone who really knows the game knows to give respect to at least the top 50, if not 75, of the 200 footballing nations in the world. And even beyond that, a so-called “minnow” team that combines a disciplined defensive performance with one or two flair-filled players can be a real headache, a real banana-peel, even to the footballing powers.
The Bear said | April 3rd 2009 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
Definite room for improvement.