Ange can say whatever he likes, as long as the Socceroos win

I've had the pleasure of seeing Postecoglou up close in a series of press conferences.. he's a tough character who likes to challenge journalists, just like his players. I think most journalists know that he is a tough nut.. .and they are not going to get a gift from him. That's how it goes.. it's everyone's job.

Agree those ticket prices are a rip off

Important enough for you take time out on your weekend to read an article about Football & post a comment. Smell The Fear.

Gee, the way you people carry on, you'd think soccer was actually important in this country. It isn't. It's a minority sport like Hockey.

I'm glad we cleared that up Fuss. :) We wouldn't want a cryptic caveat clause to be confused for gullibility now would we? Well written though if this was your objective.

I think someone needs to improve his attention to detail. In his haste to reply, this poser didn't read the caveat clause in my opening sentence. Or, perhaps, the poser read the clause but the caveat was too cryptic to decipher ?

The Socceroos can do it, they have the players, they just really need to be tight.

I think somebody needs to look at the date.

Apologies to Mike for going off topic, but this is massive news that has to be read today. Victory to bid for Big Bash League licence Melbourne Victory is pleased to announce it will launch a formal bid to be included in cricket's Big Bash League when the competition is ready for expansion. ... Home games would be played at Etihad Stadium. As technology advances, Victory hopes to host the world's first cricket-football double-header, with Etihad Stadium's drop-in pitch to be removed and replaced with grass in less than an hour between matches. "The parallels are there too – both cricket and football feature 11 players per side on the ground, and both sports feature a round ball." said MVFC CEO, Ian Robson Full story: http://www.melbournevictory.com.au/article/melbourne-victory-to-bid-for-big-bash-league-licence/eqjy16bb9z421udqy6jn2hzgg

@Midfielder Sorry your reply came whilst I was doing my last response. I think most of your points have been addressed in my discussion with punter. The above referred studies all say unless a person learns these skills are learnt between say 4 – 12, that person can never acquire the necessary touch to be a top player. Totally agree with you. That's why I'm suggesting to target elite junior AFL talent in this age group, not senior players. Give them options, market the game to their parents. AFL does it — fight fire with fire. FFA needs to devote heavy resources in marketing and talent scouting at this level, directed primarily at junior special squads within the AFL ranks. @punter I can't edit either for some strange reason for the past few days. I like editing my text once it's posted — easier to read than this @#$%y text editor. Mods please fix this.

@Punter "I was not debating on whether football was a more skilful sport then AFL, I was quoting a fact." Fact hey? Should be pretty easy to reference some scientific research which proves this as 'fact' then. I tend to find people throw this word around far to much (e.g. The Bulgarian Butcher of English) on this site; insisting on using their opinion as 'fact'. When you can't do this, perhaps we can move on — since it's irrelevant to this discussion (as previously mentioned). "However, where you lose me is there may be potential Ronaldo’s running around playing AFL." Don't confuse my use of the term 'AFL' with the elite AFL competition. I only use AFL on this particular forum (along with Aussie Rules) to avoid confusion with the sport of football. Conversely, on the AFL forum I use 'soccer' instead of football. There may well be a player in the AFL — i.e. Nat Fyfe, Garry Ablett etc — equally as talented and skilful as Ronaldo, but I don't believe they could just crossover and play football to become an instant world class player, or even have the capacity to do so from such a mature age. Hope that clears any confusion for you. "Secondly, if you have a child with the potential to be a footballing superstar, would you choose to play a sport where you can earn $1M a year & be a world name in 4 states or earn $1M a week & be a Worldwide superstar." You are I both know this is not what makes a child decide what sport they wish to play at 6 years old. Parents probably have the most significant influence here, which is why we see such a divide in Australia. Sporting hero's would also influence kids greatly. The likes of Tim Cahill — in his prime — are just not as prominent here in Australia to children as a Buddy Franklin or Jared Jayne, simply because they are overseas a majority of the time. Don't underestimate the AFL's rule changes to minimise head injuries in their elite competition either. Head injuries will have put a lot of parents off their kids playing AFL, especially over the past 10 years with the increased national exposure of the game. With less head injuries (hopefully for the AFL & its players) we should see an increase in junior participation rates — most likely at the expense of football. Again, just my opinion, but a pretty well informed one, which I think most would agree makes logical sense. "hence why they will never be the best in the world in football, because to be the best you have to dedicate yourselve to it from a very young age." That's why you target the parents of younger kids. Give them options — variety is the spice of life my friend. :) I know my club (Port Adelaide Magpies) do in their surrounding region. Increase your talent pool base...it stands to reason you'll have a far greater chance of finding a young 6 year old potential Ronaldo. Give them the option of football (as well as AFL) but market it better than the AFL — the masters of this — and we'll hit multiple little Ronaldo's soon enough. @The Bulgarian Butcher of English "More boys under the age of 14 play football than Aussie Rules" Awesome contribution. Thanks. If we remove the BS between you and I Fuss, there'a a reason I rarely comment on any of your posts: "There simply aren’t enough kids playing AFL at junior level for football to be bothered." ...you're just too biased in your opinion. You lack the ability to see the other side of any argument. This is just a stu$id statement, which no one on this site would even remotely agree with you on.

Rick Appreciate the discussion, also accept in the AFL playing ranks are sports people who could have been decent Football players as well. What you seem to be struggling with as I see it is what Punter has been telling you about skill levels needed, and why age is so important. Countless studies have been undertaken pertaining to Football skill levels. What we call touch. Touch is that skill that allows you to stop a ball at your feet or gently or quickly control and move the ball. The above referred studies all say unless a person learns these skills are learnt between say 4 - 12, that person can never acquire the necessary touch to be a top player. If I may give an AFL example, and sorry if I get names and positions wrong, its just I have over my life watched less than a game. Please tell me if I get the AFL bit wrong... assume a player takes one of those big catches where they jump in the air and are surrounded by other players also jumping for the ball and trying to take the catch. My guess watching what I have seen is the player taking the catch watches the ball into their hands. After catching the ball the player stands up and takes a free kick to whatever part of the ground they desire and can even have a free shot at goal. I want you to imagine the same catch without watching the ball and running. When you play Football at the highest level you need to be able to keep your head up essentially see where the ball is played and time your run to met the ball and then pass it under pressure never looking at the ball. Essentially past a certain age you cannot train your body to be able to do that. Cheers and hope that helps

Fads - with all due respect for you and your opinions Mathew Leckie is now 26 years of age and that is 'way beyond the teaching age for players,if he doesn't know how to defend now it is unlikely he ever will.. In 39 appearances for the Soccceroos he has only scored 5 goals and 2 of those have been in the last 2 games so his "output" as a winger has not been what one would call "high" and that stat is matched by his Socceroo mates. So the interesting thing is that the national coach has tried something to remedy not only the dearth of goals scored,but using a system that could see the back line and midfield strengthened numerically provided every player is fitted into that system. However, back to Leckie. The interesting thing about those 2 recent goals is that they were scored with his head when he was positioned for a set piece delivery right in front of goals. Could the attack minded player become the "new" Tim Cahill??? There is only one way to find out !!!!! Cheers jb.

We have the cattle.

Sorry for poor grammar, unable to edit.

Firstly Rick, I was not debating on whether football was a more skilful sport then AFL, I was quoting a fact. Secondly, I agree with if there was no AFL or NRL in Australia & we were a true football nation like Spain & Portugal, I agree we would have the ability to produce a Ronaldo. However, where you lose me is there may be potential Ronaldo's running around playing AFL. Firstly as I said to be a superstar, you need to eat, breathe & live football from a young age. Secondly, if you have a child with the potential to be a footballing superstar, would you choose to play a sport where you can earn $1M a year & be a world name in 4 states or earn $1M a week & be a Worldwide superstar. Now I hear someone saying maybe they prefer to play AFL, they may & hence why they will never be the best in the world in football, because to be the best you have to dedicate yourselve to it from a very young age.

Fact: More boys under the age of 14 play football than Aussie Rules Fact: Apart from the Goal Keeper, Football requires the ball to never be controlled with the hands. Fact: The best Aussie Rules players are highly skilled in controlling the ball with the hands. Fact: Given the opportunity to kick the ball, or pass the ball by hands. In the 2016 AFL Grand Final, the stats tell us the bets Aussie Rules players in the world choose to deliver by hand as often as by foot. These simple facts tell us the technical requirements needed for football will not be found in Aussie Rules. There's as much chance of an elite footballer being found at the junior National swimming carnival, National athletics carnival, National tennis/hockey/basketball etc carnival. Final Fact: AFL actively poaches kids from other sports to play in their elite competitions. As far as I know there is ZERO evidence of any kid who fails to make it as an AFL professional then transferring his skills to football. There is more money to be made as a pro-footballer than a suburban or state based AFL player, so, if any failed AFL player had the technical ability, he would make the change.

More boys under the age of 14 play football than Aussie Rules

@Punter & Midfielder I'm not going to get into a debate over which sport is more skilful. I could easily argue there is more diversity within Aussie Rules i.e. ruckman have a very limited but specific skill set to a rover vs a power forward etc. You only have to look at the different body types playing Aussie Rules vs Football to come to this conclusion. Therefore certain positions — i.e. rover, ruck rover, centre & wing — within Aussie Rules may well require more skill and critical thinking than any position within football's starting 11, yet collectively have less skill than football as a whole. They may not either; but I love both games, so it's much easier for me to be less biased in this discussion. Midfielder, I understand your point too. However, the stark reality is: Australia is the most unique footballing country in the world. No other country can boast to have four competing football codes...none! Your reference to player numbers may well be true, but there's too much conflicting 'data' to draw any real conclusion from it. One thing is almost certain: Aussie Rules has — in my opinion (the AFL believes otherwise of course) — the second largest junior participation numbers behind football. It's a lot, however you cut it; a naturally abundant resource of sporting talent available to football in countries like Portugal, Spain etc, but not Australia. What can FFA do about this? Well, I believe it can do what the AFL has been doing for years: poach elite junior talent. The argument of whether AFL is more skilful or not (sorry punter) is irrelevant to this discussion. Raw skilful talent WILL be playing Aussie Rules and League; talent that may well put a 'Ronaldo' to shame should they grow up playing football. I don't believe a Ronaldo is 'made' either, just refined, an area Australia needs to become better at with time — a completely different discussion for another day though. FFA needs to allocate resources to talent identification within the Australian sporting landscape as a whole, not just football. If we combine a holistic approach to junior talent identification, coupled with greater resource management and funding (again for another discussion), I believe Australia can and will win the World Cup in my lifetime.