Holger Osieck and the Tim Cahill conundrum
By Davidde Corran, 8 Sep 2011 Davidde Corran is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- football, Harry Kewell, Holger Osieck, Socceroos, Tim Cahill
Related coverage
- Football news
- Socceroos news
- Socceroos Fixtures news
- Tim Cahill news
- Socceroos 2014 FIFA World Cup Qualifying news

Australia's Tim Cahill reacts after getting a red card during the World Cup group D soccer match between Germany and Australia at the stadium in Durban, South Africa, Sunday, June 13, 2010. (AP Photo/Julie Jacobson)
In the early hours of Wednesday morning, just four days after a 2-1 win over Thailand that was of such poor quality veteran goalkeeper Mark Schwarzer said it “feels like a loss”, we saw what makes the Socceroos a cherished part of the Australian sporting landscape – humility and determination.
In the immediate fallout of the Thailand game Australia’s senior players stepped up and owned their performance and committed to making up for it. In the oppressive heat of Dammam, they did just that.
While Australia now sits pretty at the top of their World Cup qualifying group on six points, the decision by coach Holger Osieck to leave Tim Cahill out of the starting XI against the Saudis stands out as particularly curious.
Before we get to what this move could potentially mean, we must understand the reasons for it.
Essentially, Cahill is most effective playing off the striker, but instead of serving as a link between midfield and attack, he can be prone to playing too close to Australia’s other striker.
However, the second striker in Osieck’s preferred 4-4-1-1 formation is also the position where Holman is most effective. A player who can drift between the lines, the AZ Alkmaar midfielder brings that much vaunted ability to link midfield and attack that Cahill lacks.
It’s a point Osieck agrees with as he revealed when explaining the decision to drop Cahill for yesterday morning’s match.
“It was tactical thinking,” the 63-year-old said. “I think with Holman, and he proved me right, that we had a lot of mobility up front, he worked into the channels and that was what I expected.”
Just as the English national team has grappled with trying to fit Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard into the same midfield for years, Cahill and Holman present our own similar little conundrum.
So then, what to do with Cahill?
While Osieck found a solution to fit them both in the same team during the Asian Cup by playing Holman to the right of midfield where he would play extremely narrow, when Kewell is absent the Socceroos lack a striker who makes the kind of runs that help the team become more direct at goal when they win the ball back.
The few times in the last two games where an Australian player has turned to face the opposition goal with the ball after he has won possession in or around the middle of the pitch, Kewell’s replacement Kennedy was making the wrong kind of runs or was caught offside.
Furthermore during Australia’s build-up play against Thailand, the team was often tempted to take the easy out when there was no horizontal pass to make. Lumping it long from defence or trying to get an early ball into the box from out wide is Verbeek-era stuff and against Thailand it simply wasn’t effective.
What better example do you need of the fallacy of playing direct than Australia’s inability to break down a team ranked 120th in the world with this approach?
While one alternative would be to drop a holding midfielder and play Cahill staggered ahead of either Valeri or Jedinak, it’s both a waste of the Evertonian’s talents and jeopardises Osieck’s preferred system.
So, while Cahill’s worth and ability is not in question, by leaving him on the bench against Saudi Arabia, has Osieck hinted at a potential Socceroos XI that doesn’t include the 31-year-old?
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Fans want a club, not a name, that fills them with Pride (129)
- The war that’s not a war (128)
- Would a video referee work in football? (103)
- Too many doubts over new A-League club (101)
- Magic EPL finish as Manchester City triumph in tightest of title races (93)
- Is this the end of the football salary cap? (63)
- Manchester City, ‘Uniting’ the sporting world (60)
- Bling when you’re winning
- Dual signings give Mariners A-League boost (12)
- Would a video referee work in football? (105)
- Oman the Socceroos’ focus, says Kennedy (18)
- There’s life In England’s lower leagues (20)
- Chelsea teach Barca and Real an ugly football lesson (20)
- Solving the issue of the long A-League off-season (17)
- Bling when you’re winning (1)
- There’s life In England’s lower leagues (20)
- Chelsea teach Barca and Real an ugly football lesson (20)
- Solving the issue of the long A-League off-season (17)
- Oh my god! They’ve killed Kenny (12)
- Is Chelsea’s Abramovic finally satisfied? (15)
- Is this the end of the football salary cap? (63)
- Explore:
- football, Harry Kewell, Holger Osieck, Socceroos, Tim Cahill


September 8th 2011 @ 7:19am
clayton said | September 8th 2011 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Can Cahill play as a holder / CM? He does bring a lot of skills to the table, its just that running with the ball at his feet isn’t one of them. When I have seen him dropping deeper, I have liked what I saw – smart, well weighted, simple passes, a strong guy that doesn’t get dispossed cheaply …
October 21st 2011 @ 6:39pm
Danny Bhoy said | October 21st 2011 @ 6:39pm | Report comment
I agree… while Davidde says staggering Cahill ahead of a holder is a waste of his talents i totally disagree. This is where Cahill first started his career and IMO where he has played his best football. His passes are clinical, he is strong in the tackle and at battling for the ball, and finally playing in this position utilizes his best facet- ghosting into the box late and getting a clean jump and header or mopping up scraps!
September 8th 2011 @ 8:39am
The Cattery said | September 8th 2011 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Davidde
a good analysis of what Holger faced in deciding whether he had a spot for Timmy in the starting XI.
A couple of further points:
1. the success of Mckay on the left, in front of Zullo who had an excellent game at LB means if you want Holman’s run, you need him between central midfield and the striker; and
2. with the very hot conditions, Holger may have reached the reasonable conclusion that Holman was far more capable of covering the ground than Timmy.
Deep down Holger knows that he can’t head to Brazil with 6 or 7 players aged between 34 and 38, he is managing a gradual transition, and that means that blokes like Timmy and Harry are no longer automatic selections – he has no other choice.
September 8th 2011 @ 9:00am
TheMagnificent11 said | September 8th 2011 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Cahill’s best position for the national team is not “in the hole”; his best position is a box-to-box midfielder. This allows him to make the late, ghosting runs into the box (like Bryan Robson used to do). Therefore, for Tim to play, one of the holding midfielders has to be dropped.
This won’t happen because Holger likes to to have one central midfielder come to receive the ball off the back 4 while the other positions himself slightly forward forming a triangle with the wide midfielder. For example, Valeri will come left of centre to receive the ball of the back four when it is left of the centre. Jedinak will sit in the centre circle and McKay will be left of Veleri to form the triangle. Allows Valeri the two passing options when he receives the ball. Holman will drop between the lines as he plays McKay or Jedinak to form a new triangle. Cahill is not best-suited to any of the roles just mentioned but can do a job in the holding role (probably not better than the other holding midfielders).
For Everton, Phil Neville, Jack Rodwell or Arteta will come and receive the ball off the back four. Or, the back for will try to play directly to the strikers. Cahill is allowed somewhat of a free role to join in whenever possible because his main role is to get into the box the most opportune moment.
Cahill could play in midfield if Australia played a traditional 4-3-3 with one holding midfielder as the fulcrum (like Busquets does for Barca). Valeri is good defensively and has a good range of passing and could fill the role. You can then play Kilkenny and Cahill as the other central midfielders. However, I think Holger wants the extra defensive cover.
The main problem is that Cahill is best-suited to an “English” style of football. Australia is trying to be less direct and thus he is a square peg for a round hole. A very good square peg, but still a square peg. Perhaps even a square peg with rounded edges because he is decent on the ball, just not as good as Valeri or Kilkenny.
Tim came off the bench as an impact player when you change the system under Hiddink. Perhaps that will be his role under Holger as well.
September 8th 2011 @ 4:25pm
Bubbles said | September 8th 2011 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
some great points mag11, just one error, “Valeri is good defensively and has a good range of passing” defensivly valeri is at a pass mark but on the ball, i’d perfer cahill everyday of the week in any every area of the pitch
September 8th 2011 @ 4:37pm
TheMagnificent11 said | September 8th 2011 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
Sorry I have to disagree…IMO Valeri has better passing and vision than Cahill.
September 8th 2011 @ 9:34am
Midfielder said | September 8th 2011 @ 9:34am | Report comment
I think this opens up all sorts of things…. I would play Tim as a right mid, put Emo as right back and move Luke into one of the holding mids places…
September 8th 2011 @ 5:24pm
Melange said | September 8th 2011 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
I agree re Emo. I think the Asian Cup and a couple of the more recent games are showing that the young guys coming through have a much better passing range then Emo and I think he would be an absolute gun at right back. It may even prolong his NT career.
Luke into the holding mid would be great too, I am just not convinced that Valeri and Jedi should both be on the pitch, one or the other but not both.
I saw a post somewhere not long ago suggesting Luke is also an accomplished left back. I think someone made the point after Carney got injured at the Asian Cup and had to miss a game. With Zullo still learning the trade and Carney not really up to it, unfortunately for him cause he does his utmost best, perhaps Wilkshire could solve the LB problem?
Those are just a couple of thoughts, but there are so many possibilities in the next couple of years with an exciting new generation coming through, Williams, Herd, Spira, De Vere, Leckie, Burns and we haven’t heard about Rukha for a while, I’m really looking forward to how the team develops toward 2014.
September 8th 2011 @ 9:51am
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 8th 2011 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I think, before we start reading anything too serious into Holger’s decision in ONE match and making retirement plans for Australia’s most consistent goal scorer – who has scored some of the most vital goals for our NT in the past 5 years – we should reflect a bit on how Tim was used by Guus in the 2006 WC.
1. Timmy was NOT in the starting line-up against Japan and came on in the 60′ … and created, perhaps, the greatest ever moment in Australian sport
2. In the next game against Brasil, Timmy started but was benched after 56′
3. In the vital knock-out match against Italy, Timmy started the game but was subbed soon after 1/2 time in the 49′
So, at the 2006, WC Guus only played Timmy for one full match.
Perhaps, Timmy (& H and, maybe even Emo) can be best utilised as impact players coming off the bench in the 2nd half?
And, in the match against Saudi, I think the main reason Holger would have started with Timmy on the bench is to cause confusion in the Saudi camp. Without doubt, Rijkaard would have created his game plan around Tim Cahill being in the team, so Holger’s strategy was a tactical master-stroke.
International matches are one-off games – almost Cup competition … so, it’s a luxury to have a pool of players and you are able to pick and choose the best 11 – for that day and that opponent, in those particular circumstances.
September 8th 2011 @ 1:34pm
JAJI said | September 8th 2011 @ 1:34pm | Report comment
Hi Fussball
In Germany at the 2006 World Cup I am pretty sure Timmy played full games against Italy and Croatia….remember the Italy game the complaint was Guus waited for ever to make only one sub and brought off Sterjovski in the 81st?
Timmy didnt play the first leg away vs Uruguay but played in the home tie
September 8th 2011 @ 1:50pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | September 8th 2011 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
JAJI
Well spotted – you are absolutely correct about the Italy game. And, now that you mention it, I recall at the time I was wondering why Guus hadn’t made any more subs given we were a man up.
Thanks for spotting the error – and, I was actually at the ground, sitting in line with the infamous penalty on that side of the ground … but the whole match is still a blur.
September 8th 2011 @ 10:23am
ShootOut said | September 8th 2011 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Very interesting article.Holman plays well with McKay.Maybe when Harry is fit we can utilise Cahill better.
September 8th 2011 @ 11:16am
jmac said | September 8th 2011 @ 11:16am | Report comment
I’m not so sure cahill is the best man for any position in the team – striker, shadow striker, central mid, wide mid – when you look at things from a pure footballing perspective, and the fluidity of the system. we do look better when he is not there.
but there is no denying the guys ability to bob up and score at the most important times, which is why the decision to leave him out is such a huge one. no point playing a team off the park and coming away goalless – you’d obviously much rather play like rubbish and have timmy nick the winner.
I don’t know the answer.. holger is on the big bucks to make the call, and the other night he certainly earned his coin.
Interesting sideline within your article davidde – are you making a case for kewell, once fit, to come in for jesus?
September 8th 2011 @ 12:57pm
Lmacca said | September 8th 2011 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
Go back two games to the match against Wales, and Cahill was very effective. He isn’t suited to playing with Kennedy, but operates very well with McDonald or Kewell. As someone pointed out yesterday regarding Tony’s article, the horses for courses approach, and rotation of a squad, are factors to consider.
The Verbeek era saw a set starting XI. By contrast, Holger has shown in his tenure the ability to mix it up – see McKay at left back in Asian Cup, dropping Emmo in Asian Cup etc.
It reflects the growing strength in depth the NT has. Would definitely like to see Rhys Williams as the next player introduced to the mix – I wager either he or Wilkshrie would be better than Jedinak in the middle of the park.
September 8th 2011 @ 1:09pm
TheMagnificent11 said | September 8th 2011 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
It seems the most people now agree that Cahill and Kennedy is not a good combination (if Cahill is playing near Kennedy).
It also appears that Holman is a better “link-man” than Cahill. I think Kennedy has earned his spot as starting striker even when Kewell is fit because I think Kennedy is more clinical than Kewell.
So the question now is what is the best midfield mix behind Kennedy. I assume Kewell or someone more mobile will play up-front when Kennedy is not available or the opposition lack pace/mobility at the back. Then you have a separate question of what the best midfield mix is behind a more mobile striker.
September 8th 2011 @ 4:34pm
@uni said | September 8th 2011 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
when kewell and scotty mac are fit they’ll be 1 & 2, holger wants to play the ball to feet and if you watched the last two matches, the number of times JK offered his feet to his mids would be in the single digits. yes he scored goals (2/3 were gifts) but the actually interplay between JK and the 5 other mids is alot poorer then the other two.
Holger thinking may now be:
JK = Brett Holman
HK/Mac = Cahill
September 8th 2011 @ 5:31pm
punter said | September 8th 2011 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
That would be me, I suggested the horses for courses & it’s great to see the Socceroos side having options & players that can adapt.
September 8th 2011 @ 1:08pm
Matt F said | September 8th 2011 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
As far as problems go this isn’t a bad one to have
September 8th 2011 @ 1:11pm
wtf said | September 8th 2011 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
I think it’s horses for courses
Tim and Scotty Mac combine really well
Brett and Big Josh combine really well
just a matter for using them appropriately