Ange Postecoglou announces final 23-man Socceroos squad for June internationals

Very good point about Ange at Victory. The link between the narrowness of the Roos of late, and of the way things went at Victory, had struck me too. It is worth remembering that it didn't work for Ange at Victory, and that his "no plan B" mantra was a contentious issue when he was at Brisbane. There is fine line between self belief and arrogance, and Ange at some point appears to have crossed it Self belief is inclusive of other points of view; arrogance excludes them. It is, by definition, myopic and, in the end, inevitably, self defeating. I suspect that, in this regard, Ange has passed the point of diminishing returns. Thursday will be very interesting, but the Confed Cup even more so.

You last paragraph is a good point, Ben. Ange has indicated that a better level of media discussion is a good thing for football. I'd like to see those sorts of questions asked at press conferences and squad announcements. ;-)

Caltex et al: More of the worry with Cahill was that he needed treatment at half time to overcome soreness and fatigue in his legs at the end of the season. I doubt he's even a 70 minute first eleven player now, especially if the intensity of training has dropped off since the end of the A-League season. Impact player is where he's at - imo - and how effective he'll be at Confeds is the big question on his main role should we make Russia 2018.

I do agree with you there Kaks. In some way the Brazil 2016 squad was a major overhaul, but at this point the team has progressed but I agree that it's more to do with NT experience than actual, current game time and form for clubs. 'Experience' and 'caps' comes out loud and clear in the press releases. Some Confed Cup game wins would be nice, but we really need to win against Saudi Arabia next week. I'm more concerned with the formation and which players are in which position. I hope it works out. A lot is going to depend on how the Saudis approach the game: typically Middle Eastern defensive counter-attack for an away game, or to take it to us. They're currently second in the group so they should be confident...

I do, Fad. It appears the approach has changed but the story-line has remained the same. For me Jedinak is a great breaker of play and a superb on-field leader, the type of player we need when playing the top nations and our back 4 need cover. In the qualifiers though only Japan really challenge us on this front and I'd prefer to see Luongo/Amini in that role (which they have played successfully for their clubs) to give us more creativity going forwards as the back 4 don't need the extra cover. It is a pity Goodwin wasn't selected as he naturally plays very wide and also offers both defensive and attacking options. Hence I would like to hear more as to the rationale for the current selection as some of it may be perfectly reasonable however it escapes me.

@Realfootball I certainly don't care about validation, nor criticism, from strangers. And, don't try to hide how much i (dis)regard most posters on this forum.

The problem i have is people who know nothing about most players who are overseas claiming to have superior knowledge than Ange who studies their every move in matches & at training. The mental attitude is extremely important at this level. No one on this forum has a clue about each player's mentality. So, by all means critique Ange. But, if you denigrate a knowledgeable professional you better not be ignorant

That means you don't know if he was a leader or a follower at Sturm Graz.

Australia was better off with Osieck. He qualified for the World Cup but Ange won't.

I think that's more a selection problem, I think the formation is ok personally, sure Ange could have just been a bit more pragmatic instead, but let's look at who is available, but overall I think his selections are the most worrisome anyway. How about selecting Wilkinson, been at a WC before, that friendly against England he could have been our best player, a mix between him and Mooy but Ange has never selected him again? Just had a great season with Sydney, I reckon he is overlooked. But at CB we also have Sainsbury, Wright who just won promotion, Degenek playing regularly now in Japan, Cameron Burgess played for Bury on loan from Fulham got regular game time and Jedi or Milligan are options. Leckie can play wingback, has even done it in the Bundesliga, but I wouldn't put him in as a fullback. Right FB we only have Grant, I'm not sure he's ready, maybe Gabriel Cluer could be next in line, he's been playing in the Serie B, but we're pretty thin. LB Smith isn't playing and is a liability, Gersbach isn't getting game time since Rosenberg made a new signing and has no right foot other than to stand on, Ange doesn't like Behich, Goodwin could play there but he's no specialist, James Meredith is probably the best option voted League 1 player of the season and signing for Millwall. Pretty thin there. But Goodwin could certainly play a wingback, doesn't need to be as proficient in defence and can obviously play advanced. Central midfield we have an abundance of players available. Right forward we have Leckie who finds it hard to score, Kruse who is out of form, Goodwin and Burns who can't get a game in Japan. Left forward we have Leckie who finds it hard to score, Kruse who is out of form, Goodwin and Troisi who would be makeshift. Strikers Juric who is scoring, Maclaren who is unproven and needs service, Cahill who always comes up with the goods, Rogic could do a deep lying forward role in a two striker system and Troisi at a pinch. So a 3421 which Ange has introduced is making sure most of our best players are on the park, central defence and central midfield. Personally I don't understand all his selections, but that's my opinion. The Old 433 means we have to field players where we have the least depth, out wide. Ange tried to make it viable, even played Luongo out wide, Milligan at RB etc, but we don't have enough quality to play the 433, that's why I don't mind it.

I don't know if you agree Ben, but initially Ange was all about attack, risks and being positive. It was about selecting players, preferably young and up and coming, over those who were out of favour at club level, or clubless. It was a merit system and many a carrot was dangled. Even at the WC when outclassed we pressed high and were positive and aggressive. It won us the Asian Cup. At the moment selections are based on past deeds (Jedinak and Kruse), and merit and playing regularly are irrelevant. Results have nosedived, the positivity and pace has gone out of the game (McGowan at fb v Japan). We have got narrow (see Ange as time went on at Victory), ball speed is reduced, overall speed is reduced and we now have a formation not suiting our strengths

A back 3 relies on quality wing backs. We don't have them, so our attack is blunted (no width), and we are sharing in wide defensive areas. If we had 3 great cb's I could understand it, but we don't. The new formation weakens us both in defence and attack

Because the last time we scored from open play was from a Robbie Kruse assist, the last game was set plays. It's just Kruse is so out of form, he produces more dross than class, but he is definitely capable, just needs to find a club and play regularly.

Tbh I don't have a problem with his back three, it's playing to our strengths, because it's out wide where we are vulnerable, centrally we are strongest. Probably the wrong time to introduce it through during qualification, but last match it was looking a lot better and I expect it will be even better in Adelaide.

Point in case is his latest statement: there are no unlucky players, but there are lucky players.....then goes on about performance, game time and putting Kruse in the shop window. I think it's a bit cryptic and can easily be interpolated in all sorts of ways. If my cryptic skills are right, I think he is trying to say: No one is unlucky, because they don't deserve to be in the team by my standards and so some players are lucky that I have no choice but to select them. He's never been good with the media though, eyes down, looking like it's the worst thing in the world. Hahaha.

I agree mate, central midfield is our strongest.

Can't disagree sadly Real. His current attitude of "how dare people criticise me" is far removed from the Ange who took over. His claim that qualification isn't in doubt and that we'll qualify in style is asking for trouble. I'm not seeing reasons for such confidence. I'm still stunned he's gone to a back 3 without either a left footed a Cb or appropriate wing backs, at this stage of qualifying. Our problems began with poor team selection and Ange moving away from the marauding fullbacks we uses to have. The selection of McGowan at FB v Japan (couldn't get a less attacking fullback) in such a narrow formation was mind boggling. The selection of players without clubs or not playing is the very antithesis of the early Ange

Fuss, you do realise you can critique coaches you rate? Most would welcome it, Ange used to. His selections have been poor recently, merit no longer at the forefront. His change to a back 3 has to this point been hairy to say the least. These issues simply deserve discussion, particularly given qualification is a 50-50 proposition owing to poor performances over the last year

Because Kruse had a good game 2 years ago

Again, by your own deluded logic, you yourself can't have an opinion on any football matter, as you aren't at training, haven't coached or played at that level etc. Remember when you spent years desperately defending Osieck using that same logic "you haven't coached at that level so you can't question Holger"? It turns out we were right, things would be better without him, with a proactive coach who didn't pick favourites over merit. It appears Ange may be slipping into this mode, hence the murmurings of discontent.