Would Brendan Rodgers or Roy Hodgson play Steven Gerrard as a lone striker? Genuine goal scoring midfielders like Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Lionel Messi are rare and would never be asked to do hackwork up front as a lone striker.
They do their best work as box-to-box tyros who put themselves in goal scoring positions when it matters.
It’s a knack that’s hard to learn.
Holger Osieck’s genius FIFA World Cup Qualifying substitution to replace Tim Cahill with Josh Kennedy was just undoing his wrongdoing. Tim Cahill is not an out-and-out striker.
Playing Cahill up front on his own has never worked at international level. Cahill’s best and most prolific period for the Socceroos has been when he has been playing with a genuine striker like Mark Viduka or John Aloisi driving opposing defences backwards and creating space for him to create and often convert goal scoring opportunities.
And when Australia’s playmakers see Cahill standing on his own, surrounded by at least two defenders, what do they do but loft the ball in his general direction.
It’s been described as one-dimensional, agricultural football, a style that Australia has been trying to leave behind for decades.
Sophisticated and well-bred European football managers like Holger Osieck and technical directors like Han Berger were hired by the FFA to provide Australia’s emerging and elite footballers with the techniques and skills to play the beautiful game beautifully.
Western Sydney Wanderers currently play a better brand of football than the Socceroos.
Tony Popovic didn’t employ Shinji Ono as a lone striker. He was feeding off Dino Kresinger and Mark Bridge, who like to do the work of strikers and occasionally score themselves.
Yes, of course I am thrilled at the Socceroos qualifying for yet another FIFA World Cup Finals tournament and so genuinely pleased for Holger, Timmy, Josh and the boys. But at times it was frustrating to watch, so I can only imagine what it was like out there playing to that script.
Let’s not sugar coat things, if we are going to persevere with these tactics and this over 35s squad, Australia will make a quick exit from Rio and leave a lot of genuine Socceroos fans embarrassed by their performances.
As Johnny Warren once said, “we shouldn’t just be striving to qualify for World Cups, we should be trying to win them.”
While I don’t believe we will win the World Cup in Brazil, we have made ourselves an opportunity to nurture and develop a squad that could take us further than we have ever been before, especially if we get a favourable draw in December, and then build a platform for future Asian and World Cups.
Surely Australian football has moved beyond scrappy wins against teams we should put to the sword, especially at home.
We let Oman and Iraq drag us down to their standard, rather than impose ourselves on the contest. We are struggling to beat teams that are ranked by FIFA around 100 or more.
Timmy himself has said he is not an out-and-out striker. He seems to be shoved in there out of desperation by managers like David Moyes and Osieck.
Cahill’s greatest assets are his ability to make late runs into the penalty box to meet corner-kicks, free-kicks, crosses or convert simple knock-downs.
Mr Osieck, you have 12 months to find yourself a decent striker and groom him as Australia’s next World Cup hero. If you persist with these tactics, I’m just going to have to leave Australia out of my World Cup tipping competition and Timmy out of my World Cup fantasy team.
Even the boys from World Cup Fever will start poking fun at you.
Ralph Nadeer
Roar Rookie
Kennedy wears the number 9 and he should play striker. Agree we should have at least 2 strikers on the park man and make the opposition defence play deep and create more space for us. We're Aussies man, we don't retreat.
fadida
Guest
Interesting example, which I think I am supporting. Again I'm not suggesting "pressing" jb, or even condensing beyond "Normal". It's spacing, and the spaces between our players are often too big, bigger than that which allows us to move the ball in the way you describe, which isolates a lone striker and doesn't allow support quickly enough. For instance, if the fullbacks aren't high enough, the Oar/Kruse have to stay within contact distance to them to support them on possession, that 10-15 yards you used as an example. This mean if Cahill receive the ball, particularly early in a move Oar/kruse can't make the types of runs off him that we both noted from Thompson v Jordan. They are too far away.This also negates any runs beyond Cahill from Holman as he is too far away. If the cb's set their positions a little higher, this in turn naturally pushes up the fullbacks , plus holding midfielders. Distances between Oar/kruse and fullbacks remains the same, but they are closer to Cahill (10-15 yards)
j binnie
Guest
Fadida - Let's try another tack.Many years ago there was a Russian coach who came up with the theory that a team with good players in every position should be able to move a ball from goalkeeper's throw out to a strike on goal in 5 passes. Let's break that down. The keeper comes to the edge of the box and throws to his right full back who has found space, losing any marker. The ball is now 30 metres upfield. The fullback turns and moves forward some 5 metres before sending a pass 15 metres (not long) to his playmaker who has lost his marker.The ball is now 50 metres upfield. The playmaker covers another 5 metres and sends a ball another 15 metres to his wide man who has created space with his movement. The ball is 70 metres upfield.He immediately accelerates and gains another 10 metres before looking up and finding his striker,who has lost his marker, with an angled pass of another 15 metresThe ball having travelled 90 metres or so, the striker can move forward at pace and have a shot from 20 metres. Now the reason for citing this "example" is that it only involves players doing what they should be doing constantly, moving constantly, losing their marker constantly, passing the ball quickly and accurately, and you will note, condensing space has not come into the exercise. Pressing is a tactic used to try and get back lost possession not a method of getting linkage between the back central defenders and the lone front striker. Your men Terry and Vidic will have a set distance they like to push out to, usually to an area where shooting by the opposition becomes a gamble, say 30/35 metres. Cheers jb
Chopper
Guest
jb perhaps you do not understand the difference from a Terry or Vidic neither of which one could call a sprinter but both who push their line (including defensive partners and both fullbacks) to ensure that the team moves en bloc and our captain who I call lazy and fadida probably expresses it better in saying he knows his limitations. However the whole point to this discussion was started on the striking problem and I still am convinced that the huge gulf between our back line and the lone striker creates a massive workload for our midfield and therefore the striker as he cannot get the support needed to make an impression on the game. So it does not matter who is the striker(s)with a system that assists the defence because they are either lazy or want to play within their limitations.
fadida
Guest
I still think we are not quite on the same wavelength jb. One of the issues that I and I think chopper had identified is the lack of support our lone striker gets, and the role the distance from the defensive to attacking line plays, when we have the ball, as opposed to high pressing. Put simply, because the distance is so great the space betwen all lines can be too big; the midfield are too far away from an isolated Cahill who is rarely able to play a first time pass to Holman or the wide men. Correct distances allow any player in possession to be able to play 1 touch if necessary. Ball movement slows down while players wait for support to arrive, because support players start from 10-15 yards too deep. Our fullbacks are noticeably too flat at times when we have the ball. This impacts on their ability to support their wide men in front, and to overlap at pace. The cb position determines where the fullbacks are starting from. The fullbacks are crucial, without them pushed higher up we can't get into good crossing positions and create 2v1 crossing and scoring opportunities. This was a big factor in us losing our way v Iraq. I'm not talking about compacting play so that players are in a 20yard zone, but at the moment we are the opposite, too spread. This also means that on transition ie when we lose the ball we are open to a counter as the space in the middle is far too big, something that Jordan were threatening to exploit in Melbourne. We can't get second defenders in midfield because we are too open. I would certainly never advocate our current team "high pressing" as we desperately lack the physical traits to do so. I'm not sure if that clarifies my position or whether it makes it murkier than a FIFA meeting to decide who hosts the world cup! :) As always jb I enjoy your inputs
j binnie
Guest
fadida - Baresi was a superb organiser in the ItalIan defensive line for years ,but I think you may have misundersood when I used (your?) comment on centrebacks moving upfield, You will find my thoughts better explained in my reply to "chopper" sent in this morning and printed above. Cheers jb
Andy
Guest
His best position was most definitely CAM but is that what Australia really needs? We have a whole raft of players with no touch, and dropping him deeper isn't going to fix that. He needs space to ghost into the box, which is where it all goes wrong as a one striker buthe is not an CAM. He can't pass, he can't shoot andhe is a one trick pony. As a Toffees fan I will always love the guy but if Rogic keeps poressing he is going to offer a lot more than Cahill at CAM. I hope we can find a reliable striker over the next 12 months but I tink it will be Cahill or Jebus. Half the problem is our backline thinking that they can throw length of the field "passes" to players like Kennedy or Cahill. They need to keep the ball on the deck util the time is right and if enough of our attacking players utilise intelligent movement in and around the box it will free up the space fr Cahill to shine.
fadida
Guest
Not suggesting the back two go all Baresi on us jb, but they set the distances between defence and attack. Hardly tongue in cheek, but a legitimate structural problem
j binnie
Guest
Kellett -There is one emerging factor that cannot be ignored,the coach has used the same line up for the last 3 games although one of those games could have been described as a potential defend/breakaway system as opposed to the other two attack/focused games.On paper the result v Japan was an excellent outcome though to the shrewd observer there was a dearth of goal scoring chances created.Come Jordan and the problem is still evident until a substitution is made and 3 goals are scored.Come Iraq and the substitute who made the difference(Thompson) is again on the bench and we struggle to net for 80 minutes. Again a substitution and the winner is scored. So at this point in time Osiek's first 11 appears to be set in concrete with three substitutes who have been introduced and have made a difference.This then develops the argument ,what team out of those 14 players is actually the most productive?.Personally I feel Tim Cahill is playing out of position, if he was an international front man he would have been used there when he was at Everton. If you are implementing a system that encourages wide wing play or wing back play then a target must be presented and at this point in time Kennedy would be the obvious choice.Holman is yet to convince me as to what is his best position,his touch is not conducive with a playmaking role , his finishing too scarce to be of any help to his CV. Lambert at AV appears to have the same problem with the lad. To get to your point. If the Soccroos were to play a game tomorrow what would the starting eleven be?,I'll leave you with that to mull ove. jb
j binnie
Guest
Chopper - in answer to your question, in all the time I have been watching football I have never seen centre backs who coud have been said to be "condensing the play".Beckenbaur ,a superb technician used to push from his sweeper role though into midfield,and the great Dutch team of the early '70's were known to have a system that saw them switch from 4-3-3 to 3-3-4 by virtue of the "spine" of the team from goalkeeper to central midfielder "sliding" back and forth when in or out of possession. "High pressing" as it is known today is an extremely dangerous tactic especially in "one-off" games for it actually encourages fast breaking by extremely quick forwards who are historically faster than defenders. So you may ask,how far does a defender advance before he creates a problem for himself and his team???? Remember something that may help you answer that question. When a team advances"en bloc" there comes a point where they start condensing 20 players into half the available space on the field and not only does this help the defending team to "pick up" more quickly it also compresses the space for the attackers to work in. Also,when a team comes to visit with a defending/breakaway plan the home team has to encourage them out of their "shell" and "high pressing" by all players does not achieve anything in that task. Hope this is of some help to your thoughts. jb
Jukes
Guest
I liked what I saw from Babalj. Not only is he fast, quick, powerful. He is a menacing striker. He has that brooding attitude that you need to be successful in the position. You know the "prick" who ends up taking it on his own and scores and you cant give him a spray. He is selfish and I love him for it. Its the best back handed compliment I can give him. You strikers out there know exactly what I am talking about. I hope he has a ripper of a season because I think he could be an X factor if he makes it to the WC.
Griffo
Roar Guru
BP - Holger persued Gülüm early on (Asia Cup) for left back, but for the wishes of his father apparently elected for Turkey but has yet to be capped. Time to get the question asked again out there I say... ...get Traore's status sorted and application ready to go.
Patrick Hargreaves
Roar Guru
We're going to get thumped in Brazil. Babalj or McDonald really. McDonald is socring 10+ consistently at least. Not sure, I think it's hard to admit it, but Cahill doesn't fit in the team.
Cameron
Roar Guru
Jbinnie, Throughout the whole qualification process it seemed Osieck's systems were never comfortable with the Australian team. This may have been due to transition, lack of game time, team unity, confidence... Etc. whatever the case, this seemed as though it was addressed in the last three matches. The same formation was used and utilised to the point we achieved 2 wins and 1 draw... Successful? For qualification standards... Yes. World Cup? That's the big question and over the course of the next 12 months we will find out a lot more of the current crop of players and what they have to offer to the national setup. You may have noticed but against Japan and Jordan > Holman & Kruse's partnership was instrumental in creating opportunities for Australia, this in my opinion was not even evident against Iraq. Did they figure this out? It seemed like it. In fact our midfield was missing throughout the match against Iraq... Where was Cahill's service, why was Oar able to create space down the wing with blistering pace but no one to connect with in the middle? Granted his Crosses were wasteful. McKay was very solid against Japan, horrible against Jordan and not really tested against Iraq. Despite vast improvement... There is much much more to assess in terms of improvement required for Brazil. Will we do good against Brazil? Will we progress beyond the group stage? Will our performances of recent times be reflective of that's to come?? Many questions but no answers right now...
j binnie
Guest
Some very good points being made but one is being studiously ignored,the opinion of the national coach, who has named and used 15 or so players over the last 4 weeks so his opinion has to be considered as well for he is the man who doesn't only name players but sets out the systems of play his team will use. It is the system I feel could be tweaked in the coming months to improve what we have been watching.Forgetting for now the numerical combinations that can be cited almost endlessly and look at how the system used in the last 3 matches can be improved.It could be argued that 2 systems were in use,the "away defend" system and the "home attack" system.Now Holger has used the same players to operate these systems and in making 2 substitutions in the latter games has earned himself some "brownie points" with Thompson and Kennedy creating changes that resulted in goals being scored. Everyone writing here have indicated what they think would be huge improvements in personnel but have refused to comment on how the present system can be improved.The differential in Tommy Oar's performance between the Jordan & Iran game points to some heavy coaching being impressed on the lad.He emulated what Thompson had achieved in the Jordan game and in doing so improved Mackay's contribution to the overall team play.If this result can be achieved in another few positions then the overall team performance is going to improve accordingly. Someone mentioned the back 2 not pushing "high" and this causing a breakdown in the transition phase. This is a bit tongue in cheek for it is only in the highest echelons of football that centre backs who contribute to attacking moves can be found. Beckenbaur was the classic example. It is going to be an interesting12 months and maybe some younger players will push through but if Osiek is still coach I would not bet on too many. jb
fadida
Guest
I agree Chopper, and posted the same further down. We definitely sit too deep. I don't think Neill is lazy, simply he knows his limitations. We saw v Jordan away how messy it gets if we push high. Bresciano, for all of his quality lacks mobility which compounds the space between attack and defence. Throw in Wilkshire's prospensity to hit deep and early crosses and you've got a very isolated striker.
Chopper
Guest
JB don't you think one of the problems in connection between the front third and the rest of the team is that the central defenders sit too deep. A lot of our problems can be resolved by younger more mobile central defenders that push up and condense the team. I think we are glossing over the glaring problems created by a lazy captain who likes to sit back and make his job easy at the expense of the rest of the team. That is what put us under pressure against Jordan and Iraq because if you have a good look at it both of those teams only had a solitary striker marked by three or four Aussies. Japan were different as they pressed us and that brought our front three closer to our defence and we then relied upon counter attack which we managed quite well. Hopefully within the coming season some players will put their hand up as Oar and Kruse have this year. Maybe Williams or Devere at the back, Leckie, Taggart or Bulut up front. But none of this current squad should be guaranteed a spot.
BP
Guest
Surprised Holger never played Kennedy up front with Cahill behind him. Hope that now we have qualified we can convince Ersan Gulum to play for us and for Adama Traore to gain citizenship. Seems like nothing will be able to move Lucas from his position, so I hope he finds a club and has a decent to season to warrant his selection, but I do value his leadership and experience. So realistically would like to this to be our team in Brazil: Schwarzer; Wilkshire/Williams, Neill, Gulum, Traore/Lowry; Milligan/Jedinak, Bresciano; Kruse, Cahill, Oar; Kennedy. Rogic, Holman and Archie as subs. Kewell may still be handy as a sub to provide that little bit of magic we may need. Would be great to see guys like Leckie, Rukavytsya and Troisi have breakthrough seasons with their clubs like Kruse did last season to give Holger something to think about.
fadida
Guest
Agree with that second paragraph Griffo
fadida
Guest
Agree Itscalledfootball. I also think that the reason our striker is isolated is because of our system of play. The wide midfield/attackers don't come off their flanks enough to link, and Holman often doesn't get close enough. Compounded by our back 4 sitting too deep to compensate for lack of pace, which creates too big a space for the midfied to support appropriately.