Time to take a chill pill about Tim Cahill

By james rosewarne / Roar Guru

Somewhat dampening the excellent result enjoyed by the Socceroos against Saudi Arabia in Dammam last week was the reaction in some quarters to the presence of Tim Cahill on the bench.

The Saudi match indeed presented a marked improvement by the Australians whose opening World Cup Qualifier against Thailand demonstrated few of the qualities that took Holger Osieck’s team to the Asian Cup final in January.

For the Saudi match, Osieck fiddled with the team’s formation and composition to affect a game plan which was far more midfield and centrally-orientated.

Matt McKay switched to the midfield from left-back, Mile Jedinak returned to the starting line-up while most importantly Brett Holman operated as a shadow striker of sorts, functioning behind Josh Kennedy who scored twice.

The changes were employed to add steel and sharpness in midfield, as well as mitigating the stream of mindless crosses which characterised the Thailand victory.

For some, however, the fact Tim Cahill wasn’t utilised overshadowed what was in effect a brilliant display by Osieck’s charges.

It demonstrated the Socceroos are capable of beating the biggest teams in Asia, with or without the team’s most accomplished players such as Cahill or Harry Kewell.

Indeed Cahill’s temporary omission from the Socceroos starting eleven caused mild hysteria among some pundits who went so far as to question whether Osieck still has plans for the Everton-based player through to the World Cup in 2014.

Furthermore, and equally ludicrous, was the charge that Cahill and Kennedy are perhaps incapable of operating up front together.

To be fair, the Cahill/Kennedy combination against Thailand bore little fruit, however to suggest their combination was the chief factor contributing to the team’s laboured performance in Brisbane is folly.

Rather the duo’s lack of production against the ‘War Elephants’ had little to do with either’s ability to compliment each other’s games, but rather plenty to do with the truckload of crosses sent their way.

That Thailand’s defenders were prepared for the tactic was hardly surprising. That it failed to discourage the Socceroos from sending in more than 50 efforts was surely more worthy of examination and intrigue.

For the Saudi fixture Osieck sort to rid the mistakes of Brisbane and opted for a formation motivated by midfield possession against a team supposedly considered more capable than Thailand and in a hostile environment with temperatures exceeding 40 degrees.

For that specific match, against that specific team and in those specific conditions, Osieck went for a more narrow approach which succeeded in maximising the space afforded to the team’s sole striker, in this case Kennedy.

It was a move that worked to great effect and reduced the tendency to cross it in at the first opportunity.

In this respect, Osieck’s game-plan worked remarkably well. If such a move however casts doubt on Cahill’s green and gold prospects, than I’ve missed something.

Tim Cahill’s benching was neither punishment for a sub-standard showing against Thailand nor does it foretell an immediate Socceroo future which won’t require his premium services.

The Socceroos performance in Dammam should have been celebrated as a resounding success where not only was the coach able to demonstrate his tactical acumen, but to also prove there’s more to the Socceroos attack than Cahill and Kewell – the very issue which was most pressing in the wake of last year’s early World Cup exit.

Cahill will likely play a major role in the upcoming friendly against Malaysia as well as the third Qualifier against Oman. Indeed Kewell won’t be too far behind him either.

However in the meantime Osieck reserves the right to experiment with the squad and the formation, and to continually develop contingency plans for the variety of teams scheduled across the qualifying campaign, and hopefully into the Socceroo’s third straight World Cup.

For sure, sporting personalities shouldn’t be immune from serious analysis or speculation.

However we really should be spared the histrionics where something as bogus as Cahill’s Socceroo future is concerned, at a time where there really is plenty to be celebrating.

The Crowd Says:

2011-09-13T22:47:57+00:00

sledgeross

Guest


BTW Swampy your childish "exemplifying my point jibe" doesnt validate your argument. I think Cahill is best used as impact off the bench, just like Harry should be.

2011-09-13T22:45:36+00:00

sledgeross

Guest


Swampy, at whose expense would you pick Kewell? Holman plays in his preffered position, and Harry doesnt like to play out wide anymore.

2011-09-13T12:01:38+00:00

Realfootball

Guest


Cahill is a limited player. He really only functions as a penalty box predator these days, which is a luxury for most teams, including Australia. He was never in the same a league as Kewell when K was at his best. Did Man U, Chelsea and Liverpool ever come calling for Cahill? Did any club of any stature ever come calling? Wildly overrated player in Australia and always has been. The brutal fact is there are better, more skilled and more versatile players available in Cahill's role for the NT. The NT is rapidly moving past the point where either Cahill or Kewell can command starting 11 berths. In fact, past tense - moved. Already.

2011-09-13T11:42:59+00:00

Swampy

Guest


Sledgeross - really??? I can't be bothered to be honest. Just exemplifying my point. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.

2011-09-13T05:30:36+00:00

sledgeross

Guest


I cant see where Kewell would play in the current team, there are better players available.

2011-09-13T04:12:38+00:00

fatboi

Guest


perhaps in hindsight, Holger should've played only 1 of Valeri and Kilkenny in the Thailand game, and pushed Mackay into Left Midfield and played Holman in behind Cahill and Kennedy. There is no denying that Cahill and Kennedy both play the same position, but it can work against teams we are expected to dominate and control possession.

2011-09-13T01:51:44+00:00

TomC

Guest


It should be noted that Cahill's most famous performance for the Socceroos, the brace against Japan at the 2006 World Cup, came after he started on the bench. When you pick a football team, there are all kinds of complicated factors at play, and sometimes it means you can't squeeze your best 11 players onto the pitch at the same time.

2011-09-13T01:48:38+00:00

TomC

Guest


Indeed.

AUTHOR

2011-09-12T23:14:20+00:00

james rosewarne

Roar Guru


Kewell and Cahill functioned extremely well at the Asian Cup in January despite Cahill carrying an injury. In fact their combination was so good it resulted in the Socceroos best ever tournament, nearly pulling off an Asian Cup victory. In fact I think it's fair to say Osieck's preferred attack consists of both Cahill and Kewell, however he's simply exploring his options with almost three years to go until the World Cup. With that said, Osieck is very much open to change and his squad selection in recent times has acted as an open invitation for anyone wanting to take either of their spots.

2011-09-12T23:00:26+00:00

Swampy

Guest


The pro-Cahill fraternity can often be claimed to also be the anti-Kewell fraternity. Not starting Cahill is tantamount to an attack on the Anti-Kewell stance and makes any pro-Cahill is our most important player argument a bit shaky to say the least. Cahill has always been a difficult fit to the Socceroos and has done his best work for Australia coming on as a sub for the last 25 minutes. In the current setup if Kewell is fit, due to his versatility, he would be starting somewhere on the pitch. Cahill supporters know this and are digging in for their long standing argument by claiming Cahill should be automatically first picked despite positional limitations and the fact his best position is better occupied by Brett Holman in the current setup. Cahill is a fine player - one of our best ever, but we don't need to harm our national team's best setup just because one half of supporters don't want to lose an argument unrelated to the best interests of the Socceroos. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.

2011-09-12T22:48:50+00:00

Fussball ist unser leben

Roar Guru


James, I 100% agree with your sentiments and, I certainly look forward to the day that football in Australia - particularly, analysis of the National Team - is "... spared the histrionics ... at a time where there really is plenty to be celebrating." But, having read about similar media hysteria that surrounds the performance of the National Teams of England, Italy, France, Brasil, Argentina, Germany, etc., I guess, media hysteria surrounding our National Team is further evidence that Australia continues to evolve as a football nation.

Read more at The Roar