The team sent to Commonwealth Youth Games was most certainly a B selection of our age groupers; containing NONE of those selected for the upcoming World Junior Championships in Indianapolis starting Aug23. Having said that, the team that is being sent to THAT meet is of significantly lesser calibre to the team for the previous World Juniors (2015).

Having shuddered at the gargantuanly bloated AUS Olympic team in Rio, I certainly DO think AUS Olympic officials need to adjust to the realities of “now” and start going to school on the NZL model; a much “leaner” team both with regards to the individual sports (and more targetted selection policies) and which sports actually get their tickets punched.

You are right in saying that AUS swimming has a grass-roots problem but it is not isolated to swimming alone but is also endemic across many other Olympic sports in this country. And its a $$$ one, but not one of funding ….. but rather the reality that the sheer expense of a serious competitive career in many sports (even at age level) is rendering them no longer “sports of the people” but rather contracting the talent pool available almost exclusively to those of more affluent/private schools backgrounds. This trend has been evident for probably 15 years but now it is really starting to bite as regards its impacts.

The Yellow Jersey is generally “settled” prior to the final stage given the time differences are almost always outside the range that would be likely to be made up barring the MJ wearer having a crash that would not allow them to finish with the bunch.

KOM is always settled before the final stage in the major mountains. In any case there are only ever 1-2 points available on the stage, generally for some small hill on the course and are not seriously contested.

Green Jersey will depend on whether the leader of the classification has sufficient points lead that they cannot be caught by whomever win the stage or if they only just need to finish in X position. The sprinters will most certainly contest for the win on the Champs Elysses given its prestige but its impacts on the GJ are purely dependent on the situation coming into the stage

TUEs are most certainly a gray area with sports medicine; one would like to think that the overwhelming majority are justifiable but there is a very clear window for major abuse. Question is do we have our own selective morality with this issue; strenuously defending “one’s own”/those you like whilst hammering those one does not (an awful lot of AUS Rio Olympians were beneficiaries of TUEs)

No Orica rider will be a serious podium contender at this Tour, end of story.

Despite SBS and others in the AUS cycling commentariat’s furious efforts to keep “pumping up his tyres”, Richie’s greatest barrier to winning this Tour resides between his ears. Last year, he was able to sail under the radar for the most part but this year he has a dirty great big fat target painted on his back and his “they were all a bunch of big meanies !!” bleat post Dauphine doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in his resilience. He is going to have the blowtorch applied to his belly at every given opportunity be it in the mountains, on the flat or on the descents. It won’t be just UK Postal but every other GC team and it may vary on a daily basis according to a team’s ambitions for the day. For all the trumpeting of Richie the super time-triallist, he’s actually rather inconsistent in this discipline; when he’s on a good day he can rival the very best (esp when there’s some hills) but he can also be very ordinary

Richie to Orica ? No way. Richie’s asking price would’ve been far too high and Orica has been better served by investing in younger riders who have already outstripped Richie’s GT record. Chaves has already proven that he can galvanise a team around him, can’t see Richie has.

Correct in parts but less so in others. GBR DO care about Worlds but they look at them in the sense of the full 4 year Olympic “cycle” rather than just as events in themselves. GBR’S funding base from the National Lottery allows far greater $$$ to flow than AUS could ever hope to match even if AUS were to copy such a funding system; 67mn people is always going to outweigh 25mn.

Re Wiggo, you’ll find that post 2013, he began to scale down his road involvements (maybe partly due to being superceded at UK Postal by Froome) and in 2015-16 he was primarily concentrating on track.

Track sprint disciplines tend to be highly specialised and you really see very little road crossover unlike the track enduro events. With women, it is still very possible to mix high level road racing with track enduro commitments but increasinly less so with men’s. Some team’s WILL accomodate as far as possible but many will not and with the further contraction in team sizes coming up, this leeway is almost certain to disappear for good.

Where I WILL take issue with the parent article is their reference to CommGames as any significant signpost. Whilst ENG/AUS may have strong squads, they will very much lean towards a youth mix as those riders with WT/Pro Conti contracts are unlikely to be released given the clash with the peak Autumn classics/start of major 1 week tours

Toronto hosted Pan American Games in 2015. Certainly, they COULD step into the breach but clearly they have little interest in taking on CGs. Indeed, the only potential interest may be from Edmonton

Being accepted into Asian Games is not necessarily certain as there is some resistance although some of it doesn’t really hold water.

Claims that AUS (and NZL) should build up Pacific Games is nonsensical. What is the population & economic scale of Oceania nations outside AUS & NZL ….. rather than render these events ridiculous displays of schoolyard bullying, these two nations allow these events to be opportunities for these smaller nations to compete at intl level.

Would AUS entry to Asian Games cause a stress on numbers ? Only too a point as I suspect that AUS sports will each make their own calls as to whether Asian Games should be a season priority or whether they would be better served prioritising other events/giving it a miss.

Would AUS entry change the balance of power at Asian Games ? Overstated ..frankly. You have CHN, who are essentially now no2 on the Olympic pecking order to US. Then you have JAP & South Korea (one strong across many sports, the other more niche strengths) who are probably on par with AUS, if anything stronger. AUS could “kick ass” at Asian Games in certain sports …. and the overall competition standard in many events far higher than CG but they will also be also-rans in others.

CAN has Pan American Games as another major option, albeit differing years to Asian/CG and in sports such as swimming, they also have Pan Pacifics. The Home Nations have European Champsionships in many Olympic sports.

To my knowledge, NZL has not yet made enquiries re Asian Games but should AUS gain entry, one cannot see them hanging back.

Dav, theoretically is very different to the reality of the past 3 Games. DO the top Kenyans turn up, do the top Jamaicans ? Will the top Brits even bother next year ?? AUS only has only a thin spread of track/field competitors of World finals level. Not sure the situation with RSA athletics but its “pay your own way” in some others like swimming. The timing (early Apr) doesn’t conflict with peak Northern Hemisphere season but you’re not going to see top drawer talent hopping on a flight to AUS for a “nothing” competition

Certainly not any grounds to pay top $$ for intl TV rights for what is likely to be a meet 2 levels below Diamond League ? Swimming – Euros would make more financial sense for UK interests and I can’t see Canada forking out major $$$. Track cycling may be good standard but will those riders with road contracts be released by their teams ? Road cycling – probably lower overall standard than that of British or AUS Nationals.

I fully agree, time to euthenase the whole edifice

Your point re gigantism and the Olympics IS very valid and we are already seeing candidate cities for 2024 dropping out due to both cost concerns plus lack of public support in tough political/economic climate. Whilst the Olympics may survive, its realistically over time to “stick a fork” into Comm Games as there is precious little “sustainability” argument both on financial grounds plus relevance on sporting merits.

The prime source of revenue for events such as Olympics/CG/Asian Games and essentially most major international events is from the sale of international TV rights. Can we honestly say that it would be worth paying top $$$ for the 2018 Games ?

– Recent games have struggled to attract the top T/F athletes from Comm countries given greater rewards elsewhere. 2018 CG is pre-peak season and involves major travel

– The major European road racing season will be well underway at this time and leading into the Grand Tours; you are certainly aren’t going to see many (if any) World Tour riders

– even swimming is under threat. The Brits have a “home” European Championships so it would make sense that they prioritise that ahead of a trip to AUS in Apr. Even for AUS & CAN, you have Pan Pacs in Aug where you have the “real world” challenge of the USA/CAN/JAP rather than a certain number of events where the Brits will be strong, in others the Canadians.

Other sports will, undoubtedly, have a quotient of international class competitors (up to and including World/Olympic champions/medallists) but in few will there be the depth of competition of a standard major international “meet”/tournament.

In all honesty, the only CG sports where the competition standard can legitimately be described as “World Championship” level are netball, lawn bowls and rugby sevens. Of these, only the latter is an Olympic sport and even the other two can survive very well without CG.

There were reports a couple of weeks back that AUS Olympic officials are seriously pursuing becoming part of the Asian Games. Given that World/Olympic qualification for some AUS sports is already through Asian confederations; this is only logical as Oceania is essentially a farce and should really be rolled into a joint Asia/Pacific grouping. Also an indictment that they are seeing CG as no longer sustainable nor best serving many AUS Olympic sports

Very sound and realistic arguments against a permanent location. However, the enormous demands placed on host cities by the IOC (who have yet to rein in their own gravy train) are a significant “turn-off factor” for any potential host city. Granted it is never going to be a cheap undertaking but unless the Games contract in size (and that means culling sports) and the capital expenditure required decreases; you are just not going to have cities willing to take it on.

Harsh as it may seem, the Olympics will almost certainly have to scale down considerably or they will put themselves out of business.

Re McEvoy and 100free; we said the same about Sullivan then about Magnussen. His name isn’t yet engraved on that medal. Re that relay, I’d also add BRA to that list. Abood actually is more reliable than some of the others. Re Roberts, whilst its a great story, the issue in question is his capacity to “do the business” in intl competition. Not buying that the shoulder issues were a significant impediment during 2011-2012.

M200free is just a very difficult race to predict. They could be “players” or just as likely one of them could miss the final. M4X200 – whilst McEvoy is stellar in 100 relays, his record over 200 relays is very erratic. Smith DID impress last year & TFH usually reliable. However would not trust McKeonD in the kiddies paddling pool. Hansford – senior team rookie and Chalmers only intl outing in this discipline was 2015 World Juniors where he was less than stellar. He has certainly advanced but this is also a non-optimal distance for him so he carries a certain “risk factor” in this relay that is absent for the 100 relay

I see Horton as a clear contender in both 400 & 1500 but these races may be raced very differently to his domestic swims. He is very metronomic but whilst his diesel engine is very powerful and he can maintain that 3rd gear, how does he react to surges ? I still have a degree of caution with him after Kazan.

I see the M100back as being very close; Larkin is clearly a major player but I’d prefer the ‘each way bet”. He was certainly dominant in the 200 in Kazan and he probably deserves favouritism. However his 1.53.9, whilst formidable, isn’t exactly shutting the gate on the competition. He’ll need to get everything right in Rio to win.

Concur re M4XMED; USA as prohibitive favourites in this one as their women in 4X200 and AUS W4X100.

In fact, my final comment re Larkin rings true for ALL of AUS gold medal prospects; which most certainly we have. None are stone cold certainties and they WILL need to get everything right when it counts to win. Hopefully some, maybe most can/will but fate isn’t always kind.

Response as follows

No one’s name, not even the likes of Katie Ledecky, is yet engraved on any Rio medals. NO relay medal can ever be seen as a “sure thing”. Whilst the AUS W4X100 IS dominant, they very nearly ballsed it up in Kazan with C2 cutting it extraordinarily fine on her changeover.

W50free. C1 clearly the favourite but she has to do it on the night. This is her 3rd Olympics and the previous two weren’t necessarily kind to her. She IS, most certainly a very different competitor to the 2012 vintage but both she and C2 remain very fragile physically and health wise. To medal, C2 would need to break 24 and as yet, she hasn’t done so.

W100free: have to dissent re Sjostrom; her PB stacks up very well with C2’s. C1’s PB is fastest, sure, but it cannot always be taken as read that they will swim it in the big final. There are currently 3 consistent sub53 swimmers, all named above, and unless there is a new player at the table in Rio; I see the medals as being between those three and it could be in any order.

W200free: will need to see how the US trials pan out as to whether any other American other than Ledecky looks a major factor. Medal race esp for bronze may be very fluid. McKeon may or may not be at that party.

Concur re Ashwood.

Wback: If Wilson swims to her 2015 levels then she WILL be a major factor but as yet, she has not been sub59 this year. Leaving aside the Americans, Hosszu & Nielsen are major players. Franklin was on top of her game in 2013 but had problems since. Think 200back her best option, think the 200 a very open affair

Wbrs: Bohl has had a great season but Rio will be her senior debut; always a very big ‘variable factor”. Would take final as a good outcome. Potentially a significant strengthening of the medley relay but again, how will the nerves play out ? They certainly sunk McKeown & McKeon in Kazan

Wfly: 100 was a very slow race in Kazan and not really a particularly great guide for this year. We would need to see what comes out of US Trials to see a fuller picture but the race is already looking quicker. McKeon’s advance is very positive but would think she’s need considerably advance to be in the medals. Groves swam similar times at last year’s Trials so no real advance.

Concur re IM

W4X200: the inescapable fact is that after McKeon & Barratt; it falls right away to 1.58s (OK Groves was a smidge below). Whilst Coutts & Evans were options for this relay in the past, they haven’t any recent times on the board in this event. This relay missed the medals in Kazan and doesn’t really look any advance in quality.

W4XMED: AUS were considered the favourites by many in Kazan but for better or worse, McKeown & McKeon “froze”. Bohl & McKeon’s advances since then are most definitely major positives but races aren’t won “on paper”. They’re very much “at the party” but they’ll all need to put it together on the night.

Much that I can agree with. Whilst the Europeans will not have the cross the board depth of the USA (and to a lesser degree AUS); many have either specific areas of strength and/or 1-2 exceptional performers who will bring them in results (up to and including golds).

The international “mover” that you have actually overlooked is JAP whose depth appears to be widening considerably on both male & female sides, away from just having specific areas of strength. Notably AUS & JAP have formed somewhat of an mutual relationship in recent years.

Where I will take issue with you is regarding RSA. Whilst it continues to produce some high performers; their women’s side has completely falled away (0 Rio qualifiers); the adminisation is a complete mess and most RSA swimmers (with the exception of VDB & LeClos) have to take the US NCAA route.

Where I fully agree with you is the frank realisation that the years of plenty that existed Syd-Beijing are over and its a return to normal programming. The public funding $$$ is only going to decrease and corporate $$ will remain transient. AUS will continue to produce some exception talents; some of whom will realise that potential whilst others (for whatever reasons) may not. Medals at the very top of international competition will be be very hard earned and AUS is only one of many significant players.

TBH, the IOC have been writing their own obituary for some times due to the increasingly bloated nature of the events themselves and the demands made of potential hosts. Whilst global and domestic economic factors are the prime factors behind Rio’s potential failure; it is also the case where the “chickens have came home to roost” for the IOC before the eyes of the world. Athens was “alright on the night” but its legacy has been more stark than Montreal; Rio has the potential (which hopefully is not realised) for going awry “in real time”.

They are already finding it very difficult to find hosts for the Winter Olympics, as seen with Beijing being granted 2022 and if Rio goes “belly up”, one can hardly see many cities or even countries being eager candidates. Even if Rio “scrapes through”; this is still likely to be the case with most western economies still “feeling the pinch” and public sentiment being far more in favour of public expenditure on necessary public infrastructure, health and education rather than “circuses”.

We are now seeing this with team selection policy even in major European “Olympic powers” where selection standards are ever more stringent and this will only continue as public funding inevitably contracts. Rio is likely to be the very last “bloated” AUS Olympic team as funding is likely to get much much tighter and a number of non-performing sports/teams lose funding post Rio. An AUS team would never be small but a team of 400+ when the return is probably only going to be 30-35 medals at best ……. and quite probably outpointed on the gold ranking by NZL (shades of 1984) isn’t exactly sustainable. And furthermore, the public “care factor” has significantly diminished from what it may have been 10-15 years ago.

Men:

McEvoy could be a minor medal chance in 50free but 50s are always a crapshoot. A clear favourite in 100free but so were Sullivan & Magnussen. Chalmers will do well to make final. M4X100 – a medal maybe but nothing more. Roberts intl CV doesn’t read very well and how will Magnussen’s psyche handle being relegated to supporting cast ? They will need to drop over a second from their TT to medal.

M200free: hard to read as it has been slow internationally in the past couple of years. If it drops below 1.45 then both TFH & McEvoy become outsiders; if its a 1.45 race then they may be chances. M4X200 – always reads well on paper but hasn’t really fired for some years. Maybe a medal shot but my money is on US to fight back from losing in Kazan.

Horton has swum brilliant times in both 400 & 1500 but he did the same last year. For all the “illness”, he was still able to nab bronze in the race that didn’t count (800). He’s clearly a major contender in both and could win ….. but is far from a sure bet. McKeonD = serial “tourist”. McLoughlin swam a great 1500 PB at Trials but anything he may produce in Rio would be a bonus.

Larkin is probably more likely to win the 200back but will need to swim to at least 1.53 flat. He’s clearly well in the medal mix at 100 but its likely to be a very tight race.

Packard did well to make 100brs final in Kazan but will most likely have to swim nearly 0.5sec faster in Rio to repeat that achievement

Irvine & Morgan unlikely to survive semis over either 100 or 200fly.

TFH has a chance of making 400IM final but his poor backstroke precludes anything more

M4XMED: like the women, they probably possess the best bookends but whilst Packard may not haemorrhage too much on brs; fly is where they are giving away something like 1.5sec. Even McEvoy heroics have limits.

Ok, this is my read. We really need to wait until after US Trials to have a better read of the various events

Safest gold bet is W4X100 (if they don’t break and they can keep C1 & C2 fit and healthy.

Seebohm is a probable favourite in W100back but hardly “owns it”. If Wilson can swim to her 2015 level then she could medal. Both Seebohm & Hocking could medal or even win W200back but much will depend on whether Franklin is back to her best or not.

W50free was a slow event in Kazan, will almost certainly need sub24 to medal. Realistically only one Campbell can medal and Cate (C1) is probable favourite. 50’s are always lotteries and one mistake and you’re done. Either C1 or C2 could win W100free and look likely medallists but Sjostrom could just as easily win as them.

W200free. McKeon should make final but suspect medals will be decided at least a 2nd faster. Barratt = always erratic performer. W4X200 falls away badly beyond them, no medal certs. Ashwood is very much in the scrum for minor medals in 400 & 800 but there are at least a handful in the same catergory.

W breaststroke: if Bohl can continue her progress then she’s a solid chance of making the 100final; medal = unlikely. If McKeown can hold it together in Rio (failed to do so in Kazan) then she should make 200final; would need a sub 2.20 to medal and currently a second of two away.

Wfly: If McKeon swims to her best then she should make 100final. Throssell was 4th in 200 in Kazan but event likely to be faster in Rio. Regrettably Groves record has been one of stellar domestic times but failing to swim near that level in international competition.

Wmed: Coutts could well make 200final but likely to be a second or two outside medals. Evans could make 400final if she can drop to 4.34 or better.

W4XMED: Despite having the best bookends, brs & fly imploded in Kazan leaving C2 too much ground to pull back on CHN & SWE. Bohl’s progress is very positive from a relay perspective and if McKeon swims well; they are very good chances to win. However CHN is solid across the board and US will be hurting after missing the Kazan podium; the key will be gaining maximum ground on back and keeping any deficits on brs/fly down to below a second going into the anchor leg

Very pleasing times but in all honesty, she is only an outside medal contender in either of her individual events. Sjostrom is in a totally different league to her competition in the 100fly and it will most likely need a time in the 56lows to medal (a drop of over 0.5sec from her current PB). Ledecky and Sjostrom look to have the potential to take the 200free into the 1.53s, again well out of McK’s current range.

To be frank, her best medal hopes look to be in relays. The AUS W4X200 falls away terribly after McK & Barratt and would be lucky to medal but W4X100 look prohibitive favourites and the W4XMED should medal.

There HAS been a cultural change, for the better, in the AUS swimming team post London but I’m struggling to see how Mr Bertrand deserves any specific credit. The “house cleaning” of problematic individuals in both swimmer and coaching ranks was already under way before he took this (non-executive) role.

If anything, his public handling of the most serious issue to face AUS Swimming during his presidency; that of sexual abuse allegations, was rather maladroit. Certainly his initial announcement almost came across as an attempt at deflection.

Mr Bertrand WAS an outstanding yachtsman and clearly possessed certain man management skills which aided his acheivements in this field. However, just how much impact DO speeches from talking heads have on the actual performance of the elite sportsman ?

Some DO seek the services of sports psychologists but these sessions are tailored to their own specific situations. There performances (or non performances) in Rio will be the result of their own talents; the quality of the preparation which centres on the work done by themselves and the coaches/staff who specifically work with them; their fitness/health at the time …… and the circumstances of the events themselves.

As regarding London; was it really the disaster results-wise that it was painted or just a “return to normal programming” after the years of plenty (and the Sydney/Athens generation passed from the scene ? There was most certainly a toxic atmosphere due to poor management and problematic individuals/conduct but would the hue and cry have been as loud had a couple of those silvers (ie Seebohm, Magnussen, Coutts, Sprenger) been golds ?

The 10 swimming medals (with one gold) from London looks paltry compared to the Sydney/Athens/Beijing tallies but when you look back through the Games preceeding; LA, Barcelona & Atlanta had tallies of 12 medals and having to wait until the last day of swimming competition to snare gold.

There most certainly WERE negative inputs that impacted London but lets also be clear that the face of world swimming has been changing. The “old firm” of USA & AUS may still remain powerful (esp USA) but the spread of nations with areas of specific strength is far wider and these impact the medal lists.

Whilst there is most certainly good reasons for confidence re the AUS swim team in Rio; nobody’s name has yet been engraved on any medals. Illness and injury can “take out” anyone from a rank amateur from Burkina Faso to a Katie Ledecky, Michael Phelps or Cameron McEvoy. There is only one event where an Australian or AUS relay is clearly dominant and that is the W4X100 ….. and even they can be brought down by illness/injuries or “breaking”. A number of Australian swimmers such as Seebohm, Larkin, McEvoy or either Campbell COULD walk away from Rio with gold medals but none are cold certainties and could just as easily end up with minor coin.

Actually, I would slightly disagree re Cambage’s stature in the world game. I’d still possibly rate Penny Taylor as being of higher stature albeit she too is nearing the end of her career. Cambage has the potential to be a major international major stars but as yet she has yet to cement those claims in either the professional sphere and in international competition.

Whilst she’s raking in the big $$$ in the Chinese league, it is essentially a case of remaining the big fish in a smaller pond. Sadly she may’ve burnt some bridges with her conduct at Tulsa Shock in the WNBA. Whether she may get another shot at the WNBA post Rio remains to be seen but she’ll need to be far more professional in all senses of the word. Maybe she’ll remain content to rake in the Chinese $$$ and remain the big star in the lesser league(s)

Opals prospects in Rio ? Sadly I fear their Olympic medal run may come to an end. They’re still a legitimate medal chance but no longer are they an almost sure medal bet. Jackson won’t make it and as yet Cambage is a long way short of her stature as a player and team leader. Taylor is still a major influence but I’m not sure the latest generation measure up to previous one’s. USA will win gold; silver and bronze are a complete lottery

Cambage most certainly had every right to be offended however by “playing this out” on social media and in the public forum, she has probably done more harm to herself. How so ? HAD the other party been someone been she didn’t know/some public figure then I really wouldn’t have a problem.

However this is someone she DOES know and is someone that she, in effect, has to work with and develop some degree of trust at minimum. Therefore I feel that she should have communicated her (legitimate) grievances direct and privately to Kunek ….. and yes both Twitter and FB DO have the facility for doing so.

This is NOT going to help build a good team environment where team mates are going to be thinking just how far can we trust this person to be up front with us rather than air every little or large issue in the media. Even team mates who fully understand her grievance on this issue (and there will be some) are likely to feel she’s gone the wrong way about this.

Sadly she’s already in a situation of having to mend fences with national team-mates after last year’s “Splendour in the Grass” issue. Previously she’s “high hatted” her US professional team by deciding to not return to finish the season post London Olympics ….. not because of any injury but claiming fatigue …. which didn’t stop her doing the social rounds. Whilst she went back the following season, she’s probably burned a number of professional bridges in the world’s top professional league.

Sorry, Joe, but Ewan is way “not ready for prime time”. He’s damned quick without a doubt and a stupendous crit rider, he’s generally in hot form at this time of year but really that’s not of any real overall significance in the overall picture.

He’s small, lightweight and lacking the engine to get him within 40-50km of the finish of a major one day race. This small engine sees him pinged off the back of a GT peleton once they drop the hammer (yes, he won 1 Vuelta stage but every other one he completed he was distanced miles before the business end).

He hasn’t the climbing ability of a Matthews and is dropped as soon as they up-tempo.They could try and build him up physically to build up that engine but this may well impact negatively on his climbing, an area where he is already deficient. At this point, his chances of finishing a GT in the next couple of years are negligible

I have little doubt he will win many races, but what will the quality of those wins be ? I’m sure he’ll continue to kill em in crits; he’ll probably continue to rack em up in 2nd level races against 3rd tier sprinters. He’s likely to continue to be in peak form in AUS summer so he’s likely to pick up more TdU stages and maybe some more in other one-week tours (Poland & Eneco). He could maybe even sneak another 1-2 early Giro/Vuelta stages but finishing a GT/winning on the Champs Elysses …… a long long long way off

There is a lot at state with Rio qualification for the Matildas. Whilst the recent Women’s World Cup DID draw some impressive TV audiences; qualification for the Olympics means the opportunity for primetime TV exposure to an audience that is countless times larger.

The Matildas have shown they are a team that can frighten the daylights out of the very best sides in the world. In fact, they are prob ably only 1-2 players shy of potentially being one of the elite top 4-5 teams.

Japan has had the advantage over the Matildas in recent years however these DO tend to be tight affairs and they have to feel they can reverse this.

Vietnam have to be considered the underdogs in this competition but from there it gets tougher. South Korea made the round of 16 at the World Cup and China matched the Matildas in making the quarters (going out to the USA). AUS beat South Korea at last year’s Asian Cup but it was a tight one. AUS has recently had the upper hand over CHN but this cannot be taken for granted.

North Korea has tended to be the ‘bogey team” for the Matlida’s in the past two tournaments; sinking them both times. They were banned from participation for this last Women’s World Cup but their current World Ranking is above the Matildas at no.6.

This WILL be very tough; a quantum leap in difficulty above World Cup qualification. Very achievable and I really would like to see them do it but I’m not sure I’d care to wager any sum on them making it.

Yes, Roar did look far better yesterday than they looked all last season. Canberra looked very disjointed through midfield and a couple of newer players looked all at sea. Brisbane’s 2nd goal ….. something you might see once every 4-5 seasons from someone like Williams. Whilst she’s definitely “in the gun” for that goal, Canberra have her to thank for NOT going down by at least another 2 goals.

Next round will test the depths of the various sides with the Matlida’s away but we aren’t likely to get definitive “reads” until all squads have everyone in place. City, however, looking “scary” even before the arrival of Fishlock and Little.

Whilst Dennis can be competitive in, and even win, 1 week tours I just don’t think his climbing is anywhere near the standard (or consistency) to be a GT contender.

One of the very top bracket of ITTers; most certainly. Win ITTs, both prologue and long, at GTs; very possible.

The fact is that most of the W-League entities are ‘at arms length” from the A-League clubs and in some cases merely have an agreement to share the colours/emblem/name. In some cases, its further !!

In many cases, the W-League operation is under the control of the local/state association who have varying levels of resources.

A good number of Matildas do or have played in the US leagues or major Euro leagues however the FFA demand that they play in the W-League in order to be considered for national selection means they are required to seek early clearance from these obligations should there be “cross-over” with seasons.

Unlike in male football, contracts in the women’s professional game are very rarely beyond one season (especially for international players in foreign leagues). Players in US WNT, German, France & Japan DO earn reasonable sums however the greatest proportion of these are generally their central national team contracts rather than club contracts.