An assessment of Carle against Japan
Columnist
By Tony Tannous, 22 Jun 2009 Tony Tannous is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- football, Nick Carle, Nicky Carle, Socceroos
Nick Carle. App Images
Arguably the most intriguing part of the Socceroos selection on Wednesday night was to see how Nick Carle would go with a rare start.
I thought he started pretty well, touching the ball numerous times in the opening 10 minutes. Australia were on top and it was only natural he would find the ball, even if his use of it wasn’t always of the usual crisp standard.
But then Japan started pressing high and we started coughing up the ball and retreating. Japan dominated the rest of the first half and none of our front men touched the ball as the likes of North, Neill, Williams and Stefanutto had to go long given that the short options, Culina and Grella, were given no room.
On the few occasions the two screeners did get it, the pressure was immense, and they couldn’t get it into our front third.
Carle, I thought, struggled to work out his defensive role in the first half. He dropped too deep and allowed Uchida to become the Japanese outlet, and he allowed him to venture forward too much, into our half, before pressing him. Some of his tackling was off as a result.
In the second half Carle worked it out, pressuring Uchida higher, getting in his face earlier, which meant the chance of missing tackles was reduced.
The whole team did well in the second period, pressing Japan, allowing us to win more of the ball higher and control the second half, and Carle played his part in that good work.
Once we started dominating he started to get on the ball, and his set pieces were at least on par with what we’ve seen throughout this campaign from Wilkshire, Emerton, Culina et al.
His in-swinging corners from the right were arguably the best corners we’ve produced in the campaign.
Carle showed, in the build up to the second goal, how dangerous he can be once he gets his foot on the ball often, and he started to combine nicely with the likes of Cahill and Culina as Australia got on top.
Verbeek seemed happy enough with his job after the game, but there is still the prevailing thought that he is not a wide player, especially against a team like Japan that can hold the ball well and shift it from side to side, as they did in the first period.
For mine, his performance was about average, with hopefully a few more opportunities to come over the next 12 months, particularly through the middle.
Follow Tony on Twitter @TonyTannousTRBA
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)
- Melbourne Victory vs Central Coast Mariners: A-League live scores, blog (95)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (8)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (6)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (8)
- Does the A-League need an injection of humour? (44)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Redknapp tight-lipped over England job
- Melbourne Victory vs Central Coast Mariners: A-League live scores, blog (95)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (8)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (6)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (8)
- 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)
- Explore:
- football, Nick Carle, Nicky Carle, Socceroos
whiskeymac said | June 22nd 2009 @ 8:21am | Report comment
i have posted before that I thought he did OK and certainly warranted another look, but now I know why. great analysis.
Slippery Jim said | June 22nd 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Carle is a good player, but not great, something I have been saying for years, based on his performances at club level.
The match against Japan highlighted that. As he admits himself, he still has too many touches on the ball. This was shown by the fact he tried to dribble around Ucheda on the wing, and was shut down every time bar one.
He also goes missing in matches all the time in the Championship. Henk Duut went to watch him in England for Crystal Palace and said in one match he only touched the ball five times! Carle looked lethargic and frankly uninspired against Japan, and gave the ball away frequently and dangerously.
It is a measure of the desparation some pundits have at justifying his hype in that they now resort to discussing his corner kicks as if they were something special…in reality he was only playing to make up the numbers with so many players absent and rested. I think the myth of a creative genius who provides defence splitting passes and can dribble at will through packed defences has been put to rest. He is an average player who prefers to play in a position in which we have probably the most talent available ahead of him.
Now it is time to start turning our attention to the more deserving unsung heroes in the greater squad, or those who have been overlooked who could fill more obvious positional holes in our squad, eg Djite.
The Bear said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
Very fair and accurate analysis, imo, Tony. Australia are in good shape with Pim assessing all his midfielding options with the likes of Garcia, Holman and Carle for SA2010. All very different players, which is good. As an aside, the likes of Nathan Burns and Dario Vidosic should be there, or there abouts in 2014…
Robbos said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
SJ, you started off the article well, by saying he’s a good player, but not great, which I think is a fair assesment, then you went into an anti Carle article.
Carle is the most talented player in his position Australia is not something you can argue about, whether he is the most effective player in that position is another matter. He can give us something different to Cahill, if things are not working, he is worth the chance. He might end up as you say, but hard to judge him on 1 game against Japan, plus his freekicks & corners were the best I’ve seen all campaign.
Carle gives us something most outside of Kewell & Bresc, can’t do, that’s to play the ball along the ground thru the middle, it gives us another option of playing. So he may not be able to supply defence cutting passes or dribbles the whole team everytime he touches the ball, this is an ability he does pocess inconsistently, like other players we have, players who struggle for game time in a side regalated in the German league, struggling for game time in chamipionship sides or even the lower teams of the Turkish league. These are the players we have.
Please, please quote me all you want about Dutch managers, but no more Holman.
Mick of Newie said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
I tend to agree with you SJ, but I wonder if the strength of your views is not about Carle but really about those of us who have pushed his barrow.
Robbos I think inadvertently identifed the 3 things stopping Carle from a regular spot, Cahill, Kewell and Bresciano.
Carle is unique in the Australian game and hopefully many will follow in his footsteps. Is he an international gamebreaker probably not, will he play an off the bench role for the roos in South Africa like Robbos suggested again probably not. If we have to chase a game I am guessing Pim will follow Guus’s lead and bomb it forward to Kennedy, Cahill and McDonald.
Robbos said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
But Mick, he is worth the chance, give him a go before we can dismiss him.
Give me Cahill tem times out of ten over Carle, but Carle has different abilities to Cahill which we could use in Sth Africa, but the question as you put it, is he good enough, we need to find out.
Tony Tannous said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Slippery JIm, what I will say about Carle is that in Pim’s current template, with it’s emphasis on letting the opposition have the ascendency and sucker-punching, Carle is highly unlikely to flourish, especially out wide role in a counter-attacking set up. Even blind Freddie Fittler could see that.
But he did show that he can do a job, even out of position, even if he would be the fifth or sixth option in such a role.
While his goal-of-the-season effort against Adelaide in season 2 was a long dribbling effort on the counter, that has never been the Carle style, as he simply doesnt have the speed to dribble past defenders.
But if Pim wants to press the opposition, pin them back in their own half and keep the ball, get on the front foot, then Carle can play ahead of the holders and keep the cycle ticking by rolling the ball left, right and forward and threading those passes and tee up the likes of Kennedy and McDonald.
As for his set pieces, if you’ve read TRBA over the years you’d know I’ve long seen them as one of his assets, and given the context of our generally poor set piece delivery, the number of set piece goals scored at international level these days, and the fact we have some quality aerial options in Cahill and Kennedy, I think it’s a very valid point to throw into the debate.
Pippinu said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Very fair analysis Tony (on a subject that invokes a variety of views!!)
One thing upon which we should all be able to agree – Carle’s corners are top shelf!!
(that point alone carries plenty of weight when you’re shifting names around the magnetic board)
Pippinu said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Tony
a great point on the set pieces – most football pundits ignore this new truth (we all prefer not to believe it, but that’s where the modern game is).
Slippery Jim said | June 22nd 2009 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Fair points Robbos and Mick of Newie, I will try to be more moderate and fair ala Tony, who has done an excellent analytical job with this article. Sometimes when the pendulum swings to far to one side, it swings back too far in the other direction in return…
I will choose to respectfully disagree about Carle’s set pieces, as I quite clearly recal a couple of them being pretty poor (I believe even the commentators expressed the same opinion).
The corner that lead to the goal was 1. missed by the first attacker and defender, and 2. Allowed to bounce (!) in the middle of the six yard box due to the other defender and attacker having brought each other to the floor WWE style. This left a tap in by Cahill. Extremely poor defending, and most world class defences would have taken care of that easily.
However, the fact that Carle was given most of the corner and free kicks to take shows that he must have shown a talent for these in training above those of the others available (keeping in mind that Kennedy, Cahill and some others are better left free to get on the end of them).
When it comes to regular play, ‘something different’ is not necessarily ‘something better’. I certainly don’t believe he is our most talented player in his preferred position! I’m not judging him solely on one game, however this article is specifically talking about his performance against Japan (especially as he is off season and possibly not 100% fit). Foxsports website rated him a 6/10, which I think is spot on (compared with Cahill’s 9/10).
Time will tell, and he has a whole year to improve. I would be very suprised to see him in South Africa.
Oh, and Robbos, Holman played an important part in the Socceroos controlling the Dutch midfield and beating, away from home, the currently ranked second best national team in the world (albeit in a friendly)…he can be a very effective, if clumsy looking weapon…it’s worth repeating.