You’ve heard it more than once or twice before: ‘Hindsight is a virtue’ or ‘hindsight is a beautiful thing’.
For the Socceroos, they will look back at their 2010 World Cup campaign with plenty of unanswerable questions, despite the fact they matched their 2006 efforts.
What if we had Tim Cahill playing against Ghana? What if we had Harry Kewell and Craig Moore playing against Serbia? What if we had come out and played aggressively from the get go against Serbia? What if we hadn’t left our run so late? What if Mark Schwarzer hadn’t fumbled and let Marko Pantelic pick up the crumbs for an easy goal?
Too many questions for such little shuteye.
But the following question is the one that will continue to be asked and pondered over during the next few weeks: what if we had actually believed that we could beat the Germans in our first game?
Australia was bundled out of the World Cup earlier this morning despite a 2-1 victory over the Serbs. It was a gutsy, gritty and determined performance but one that was left far too late.
Sometimes sport is purely a mental game. It is all about your attitude to the contest and the belief you have in yourself and your teammates. You might be hurting physically or have no energy left to exert whatsoever, but when a team- or individual for that matter- has the mental edge and a bigger will to win, they already have a massive advantage.
The Socceroos went into their game with Germany- one of the biggest soccer powerhouse in Europe- with little to no belief that they could win. Even our coach Pim Verbeek conceded defeat before the match even began by saying, ‘a draw would be a fantastic result (because) Germany are a superior team to Australia’.
The Socceroos’ 4-0 was embarrassing to say the least. We played negatively, almost hesitantly. We played that game as if we feared them. It was as if a baby was trying to take its first steps of its life.
What made our performance even more bewildering is that after looking at some of the other surprising results in the tournament so far, we had every right to feel confident about a victory.
Who would’ve thought that New Zealand would salvage a draw against Italy, or that Algeria would share points with England? Even more astounding, who would’ve thought that Switzerland would beat pre-tournament favourites Spain by a goal?
We had no reason to fear the Germans. The ingredients were certainly there on the field with players like Cahill, Kewell, Moore, Schwarzer, Scott Chipperfield, Lucas Neill and Brett Emerton- all world-class players. Not to mention an entire nation was behind the team and the support for them over in South Africa was the equivalent of a home crowd advantage.
However you can’t expect a team to make up a four goal difference in such a hig pressure tournament such as the World Cup. The Socceroos exposed themselves after that horrible loss to the Germans and it was always going to be an uphill battle from then on.
Let’s not take anything away from our final two performances against Ghana and Serbia. Coach. Verbeek seemed to have learnt his lesson from the first game and made a few changes that seemed to work. And it always helps when players like Luke Wilkshire decide to stand up as well.
Our slim hopes of progressing through to the next round sprung to life against Serbia when Cahill cleverly headed through a long cross from Scott Chipperfield at the 69 minute mark. Then just four minutes later, Holman scored his second goal for the tournament and probably the goal of his career with a sensational long range strike to put us two goals ahead. Unfortunately, Pantelic pounced on a very rare Schwarzer fumble to bury our World Cup dreams.
It is always a terrible situation to be in when your fate lies in the hands of other teams or individual athletes. No matter what sport it is, to know that you can’t control your future is an extremely frustrating predicament.
The Socceroos’ 2010 campaign will always be known as a ‘what if’ campaign and one that we probably deserved more out of.
dasilva
Guest
Another what if? Wilkshire made another critical error against Ghana as he was largely responsible for the equaliser against Ghana and he really should have dealt with the threat from Anew. Wilkshire had a great World Cup but he made two critical error against Ghana that was responsible for our elimination. Harsh perhaps? Well Lucas Neill was our best player 4 years ago and he was responsible for our elimination as well. Football can be a cruel game.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
good recall - that's easily the biggest "what if" of the whole Australian campaign: Wilkshire was there, alone, about five metres out, the whole goal face to aim for, time, space, unhurried, could have picked his spot, could have done a million things other than kicking it straight into the keeper - as they say, sometimes you can have too much time to think about it. I know from my own personal experience in both aussie rules and soccer - I always preferred doing it on instinct, barely a glance, hitting it quickly without having to think about it, often not even looking at the goals. Set shot with time? It's a completely different animal. But - this is the thing - Luke is a thinking player - that's not a criticism - that's what he is - pretty much at the opposite end of the spectrum, to, say, Cahill, whose key attribute is slotting goals with no thinking music on (both the goal in the friendly agaisnt the US, and the goal against Serbia are classic examples - no time to line anything up, no time to think about it, no time to even get foot or head to the ball properly)
danny
Guest
what if luke wilkshire had buried his chance against ghana?
Ken Bailey's Probation Officer
Guest
"What made our performance even more bewildering is that after looking at some of the other surprising results in the tournament so far, we had every right to feel confident about a victory. Who would’ve thought that New Zealand would salvage a draw against Italy, or that Algeria would share points with England? Even more astounding, who would’ve thought that Switzerland would beat pre-tournament favourites Spain by a goal?" All these games took place after Australia were slaughtered by the Germans. Are you crediting the vast rump of Australian supporters with the ability to see into the future? Are you saying Pim shouldn't have feared the Germans because he knew there were surprises aplenty for big sides just around the corner? There's no shame in starting a game with the intention of taking a point. Verbeek's players - whether they liked it or not- went out with a clear plan against Germany; they just weren't up to the execution. I think the what if here is "what if we didn't all have unreasonable expectations of a side for the most part not quite as good as we think they are". The trick now is to move on, away from the tide of hand-wringing and self pity that's already threatening to swamp Australian football, and learn from the experience. And find a decent striker.
dasilva
Roar Guru
You know what, I think the Germans shot themselves in the foot for winning. They had a free ride to the semi finals if they finish second. They probably should have deliberately concede an equaliser in the 90th minute. Although I'm confident Germany will beat England. I feel they may struggle against Argentina.
punter
Guest
Further more from my calculations, we would meet the US in last 16 & either Sth Korea or Uraguay in the quarters for a shot in the semis, no, not easy, but I would say much easier on paper than Germany, who has to meet England in the last 16 & Argentina in the quarters. What if!!!!! Yeah I woke up.
drew777
Roar Pro
What if we weren't screwed over by an Italian once again... if that grey area penalty was not awarded we would be through right now, and facing USA in the round of 16. What's more, we would be facing USA with the knowledge that they beat us, and we would be hungry for redemption. We are dangerous when we want something, are against the odds and need to take points, that was shown at 4.30am AEST. Well done boys.
Perce
Guest
Please, please, please don't use that ghastly Americanism "get go". If you mean "commencement", "beginning", "outset" or even ... gulp ... "start", say so. It's as bad as "bounce down" in AFL (the ball actually bounces up after the umpire throws it down) or being out "adjacent to the stumps" in cricket (how can you be LBW when standing alongside the stumps? Are you paying attention, Tony Greig?). Plain, clear English please. It works much better in getting a message across.