It might have only been possible for 20 minutes, but in the end the Socceroos scored the only way they seem to know how – via the head of Tim Cahill.
It would have been endearing if it was not so exasperating.
Yes, the first half was lively. Yes, we had more possession. Yes, we were playing the best team in Asia in their own backyard.
But for a team that dropped Cahill to the bench, presumably in the hope of finding new avenues to goal, it was disheartening to watch the team execute a game plan that was crying out for Timmy in the middle.
If the team selection on Tuesday night can be taken as a guide, Ange Postecoglou is looking at executing a similar attacking strategy to what he used at Melbourne Victory – speedy wingers crossing low and hard to onrushing men in the centre to tuck it home.
Understandable perhaps, since Australia does possess pacy wingers, and indeed, Messrs Mathew Leckie, Robbie Kruse, Massimo Luongo and James Troisi all had their moments in the first half.
However, for all the adventure they provided, they only produced one real chance – an admittedly tough header that Leckie did well to steer towards goal. And although it could be argued that the Japanese defence is more solid than others that will be found in the Asian Cup, it was worrying on two fronts.
Firstly, this is not a new Australian strategy. It is a minor tweak on the tried and tested ‘cross it to Cahill’, which worked again when we took the aerial route and found that magical forehead.
Secondly, this strategy can be counteracted by disciplined, close-to-goal defending that does not allow wingers space behind the full backs. The teams Australia needs to beat to win the Asian Cup will be well-drilled in this fashion.
Playing down the flanks worked for Postecoglou in the A-League, but perhaps he was lulled into a false sense of security by the talent at his disposal. At Brisbane he had superb wingers in Thomas Broich and Henrique, at Melbourne he had Archie Thompson, and at both he had Kosta Barbarouses.
All were superlative performers compared to the full backs they often faced – a luxury he did not have against a Japanese defence that still has Inter regular Yuto Nagatomo to return. Indeed, arguably our only superlative performer remains Tim Cahill.
Surely, Australia cannot be a team that just relies on the wings as an avenue to goal. Some will argue that Australia lacks the quality to attack through the centre. But Tuesday night would have been the perfect opportunity to try.
Because if Cahill goes down injured or is shackled by a tall defence, merely crossing lower is hardly a plan B. And if the full backs are disciplined, it is hardly a plan at all.
The Bear
Guest
I thought the first half had some good variation, Tony. What was clear to me is that Troisi needs to be jettisoned. I actually think he's a good player but he does not suit the current set up he hangs onto it a bit too long and does not penetrate with or without the ball. Also I have my doubts as Franjic's readiness to dominate his flank. The whole team seems low in confidence, understandably. Perhaps AP needs a few less morale demoralising replays of '97 Iran games from now on. Ange is doing his best and probably better than anyone else could right now. It will be an achievement to climb out if the group in early January but apart from adding Josh Kennedy or Juric up front at the expense of a Nicholls or Triosi then he's doing OK by me. Good points Tony, cheers.
Ian
Guest
I agree and have noted other teams have been changing their tactics and we haven't always been able to go with them, yet. Something to work on.
Barca4life
Guest
I agree entirely, but we cant go back to the past of playing direct football but we need to mix it up, we need to find a way to get the very best of our players, i don't think our players can play play to how Ange wants them to play they are not technically strong or intricate enough. I.e play with more width, play more quickly, get into good positions to cross the ball to Timmy or to anyone in the box etc. The FFA made a choice with Ange to play this way, and we don't know how long it will take for that to bare fruit, but there is no turning back.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
The Socceroos came out fighting for 10-15 minutes in the first half. In retrospect, perhaps it would have been better to include Cahill for a 20 minute run at the start of the game, to show them how it's done -- maybe score 1 or 2 goals, replace Cahill and try to hang on in defence. I have noticed that all the teams that we have played do have a flexibility to change tactics in the 2nd half, according to what has happened in the 1st half. Japan played 2 different games, Australia played the same game twice. This must be obvious to Postecoglou, who knows more about football than most of us. Whether the problem is in the coaching, the players, or both, needs to be sorted out soon.
melbourneterrace
Guest
The problem is not the reliance on wingers but rather the reliance on Cahill. Forget the Japan game, they are clearly better than everyone in Asia and we have done well to only lose by a goal in Osaka. We can't go back to direct football, nor should we. I agree with the FFA in appointing a manager with a mandate to play a certain style of football that is adherent to the style we are advocating in the National curriculum. AngeBall is the future but a 4-3-3 cannot work with a Target Man like Cahill who is only capable of getting onto the end of a cross. A Dutch Coach (they invented this style of game) will tell you striker in a 4-3-3 has three other duties in Ball Possession other than score goals: Run at defenders with the ball to suck in defenders link with the midfielders in build up play play wingers in behind. Cahill does none of these things and until we get more strikers in the Juric/Viduka sort of mould then we are really going to struggle with this current game plan.