Australia have started their 2018 World Cup with a 2-1 defeat against France, but Bert van Marwijk’s men proved they have what it takes to mix it with the best footballing nations on the sport’s biggest stage.
Despite looking like they’d done enough to secure a draw against one of the Russia 2018 favourites after Antoine Griezmann and Mile Jedinak traded second-half penalties, a looping, deflected strike from Paul Pogba which only just passed the goal-line was enough to consign Australia to a 2-1 loss.
The defeat is a bitter pill to swallow for Socceroos fans after an excellent, spirited performance from the side. Van Marwijk had his team well-structured in defence, constantly thwarting their high-profile opponents.
» Re-live all the action with our Socceroos vs France live blog
Aaron Mooy and Trent Sainsbury were immense in defeat, living up to their reputations as two of Australia’s best players, while N’Golo Kante was France’s top performer, defusing the bulk of the Socceroos’ drives into French territory.
The match started with a period of French dominance many Socceroos fans had feared was inevitable. Kylian Mbappe in particular was terribly threatening, and before too long Les Blues had registered four shots on target.
By that time, Australia had hardly touched the ball, let alone threatened Hugo Lloris’ goal, instead turning the ball over with a profligacy they could ill-afford. Such was the nature of the game then that some viewers might have been wishing the match was only being broadcast by Optus and not SBS, so that they were subjected to only an intermittent, stop-start stream of French attacks rather than the constant deluge actually happening on the pitch.
But some sharp work from Mat Ryan in goal kept the scoreboard unaltered.
While the Australian custodian was solid, the best save of the first half belonged to Lloris, the French skipper diving superbly to his left to turn a deflection from one of his teammates around the post following an Aaron Mooy free-kick.
The Socceroos made no more comparable attacks on the French goal in the half, but the same could not be said of their opponents, only a Mark Milligan clearance and some superb Trent Sainsbury defending keeping the match scoreless.
Despite France dominating the chances and field position, Australia had genuine reason for frustration at half-time, such was the frequency with which men in blue shirts threw themselves to the ground under minimal duress – none more so than Lucas Hernandez – only to be rewarded by referee Andres Cunha. Socceroos fans were no doubt reminded of the similarly infuriating adjudicating in 2006 against Brazil.
(Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)
But the refereeing would come under the microscope far more in the second half, the VAR intervening after Antoine Griezmann was brought down by Josh Risdon with only Ryan to beat. Cunha had originally waved play on, but the use of technology saw a penalty awarded a minute later.
It is cruel yet fitting that Australia, whose fans have been so frustrated with the implementation of the VAR in the A-League, became the first side in Russia to be on the wrong end of a video intervention, but the fact is there could be no complaints about this decision. The contact was clear, and Risdon can be thankful that Griezmann’s heavy touched saved the right-back from receiving the tournament’s first red card.
France’s star man made no mistake from the spot, and when his side made another foray into the Australian area soon after, one got the impression the floodgates were on the verge of opening.
But the Socceroos got the ball up the other end of the field and earned a spot kick of their own, Samuel Umtiti inexplicably extending an arm above his head to handle a Mooy free-kick. If the first-half refereeing was reminiscent of Australia’s 2006 World Cup fixture against Brazil, this infringement recalled memories of the following fixture against Croatia.
Just like Craig Moore in Stuttgart, Mile Jedinak stepped up and finished with aplomb to bring the scoreboard back level, but unlike the events of 12 years ago, it wasn’t enough to earn a result.
Despite the eventual scoreline, the Socceroos had moments where they were the better of the two sides, particularly in the second half, although that was due in no small part to France losing their way.
Didier Deschamps is sure to face a mountain of pressure to get his side performing at a far higher standard after guiding his side to a one-goal win in a match from which many were expecting a rout.
As for the Socceroos, the single-goal margin could be a major boost in their quest to qualify for the round of 16, particularly if Les Blues are stung into putting in two far more commanding performances against Peru and Denamrk.
But France’s performances in the rest of the group stage will not be at the forefront of Bert van Marwijk’s mind; the next match against Denmark and following encounter against Peru are now the focus, and based on the evidence of tonight, Australia look to have what it takes to qualify for the knockout stages of the tournament.
Fadida
Guest
Sorru jb, the contact was very very clear. The debate is over whether there was contact with the ball. No one is arguing that Risdon didn't trip him. The contact is in the follow through. One of the camera angles from behind the goal shows 100% contact with the ball, though very slight. I can see why they gave it.
Me
Guest
I agree with what you're saying but my point was not about the VARs intervention but about correcting the the wrong view that a touch of the ball prevents a free kick or penalty
Me
Guest
I thought so too Whether it was enough to bring him down is another argument
MQ
Guest
You need to take another look. Griezmann was definitely clipped.
Redondo
Guest
The VAR is supposed to be there to correct clear errors. In this case the replays were inconclusive, as evidenced by the amount of debate they’ve generated. The VAR should not have intervened. Once the VAR steps in it puts the ref under enormous pressure to change their decision. That’s fine if they have clearly made a mistake, but not in cases like this, where informed opinion remains divided even with the benefit of thousands of slo-mo replays. The VAR should have said ‘not sure - play on’. Who knows how the game would have turned out, but that’s not really the point. It’s how the VAR is used that’s important to get right. At the moment it’s interfering in cases where doubt exists despite the replays. That’s not how it should be.
steveng
Roar Rookie
AGO74, that's football, the world cup is not the Premier League and its a shame that the world cup is always intimidated by these prima donna acts, its been that way for many decades and the VAR won't change that! i though that the French players knew that Australia is a very physical side and they milked every opportunity to get the result that they have. The French penalty was in no way a penalty, the ref didn't give it 'straight away' and only gave it through VAR a few minutes later. If Risdon didnt touch him the ball would have gone into Ryan's arms easily. The Aussies did a good job and this game should have been a draw as the French didnt look that convincing and/or the billion dollar side (billion dollars which is absolutely ridiculous) an amount of money for a sporting team!
shirtpants
Roar Guru
The call is subjective
shirtpants
Roar Guru
Also need to remember that if the first penalty wasnt awarded that we wouldn't have received ours either as the play would have been in Ryans hands as opposed to the halfway mark. Every little decision changes the game from there on.
jbinnie
Guest
Like millions of others I watched this "penalty" replay over and over again and, apart from Risdon making an uncontrollable slide tackle in a dangerous position I have yet to see his foot come in contact with either the ball or the Frenchman's ankle, in fact the, the Frenchman, made two definitye strides before deciding to take the dive. A poor refereeing decision and a harsh lesson for Risdon,never make a slide tackle in the penalty area unless absolutely last resort,too dangerous. Cheers jb.
jbinnie
Guest
Waz - Has it not been said often on these columns?? The aim of the game is to score goals ,and, although our players covered themselves in "defensive glory" the same old problem was evident ,not for a "spell", but for 95 minutes. Given the length of the coach's tenure on the job he is to be admired for what he has accomplished with the players he has but still the real problem has not been solved,and it is extremely unlikely a tactical change is going to alter that "status quo". We can but hope. Cheers jb.
MQ
Guest
Nabbout got 4 touches, but his job wasn't to get touches. Last night was all about defending our goal, which we did very well, extraordinarily well, so yes, all 11 did the job that BVM set them, that's why it was a fantastic result.
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
We would have breezed through qualifying playing in this manner
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
Rogic shouldn't have started this match. Luongo would have been a better option in the number 10 role given the position comes with dealing with Kante. Rogic is too slow and doesn't do the work in a game where we forfeited the bulk of possession and needed to defend against France's pace. Denmark and Peru are a better fit for him
Kevin
Guest
Waz I have to say I concur..and was thinking of a shot on goal that required a save other than the penalty and near own goal ..i couldn't think of one ..
Waz
Roar Rookie
It’s hard to say “all 11 did their job” when the attack was impotent. The only two attempts on target were a penalty and a near own goal. The attack lacked cut through, failed to create a single clear cut chance in open play, and allowed france confidence to push forward in the absence of any attacking threat.
Me
Guest
A lot of people seem to think that if Risdon touched the ball then it couldn't be a penalty This isn't true. If he brings the player down then it can still be a penalty despite the touch on the ball
Blubber
Guest
Does the VAR see all the camera angles ? The commentators seemed to suggest the ref didn't see the footage that showed it wasn't a penalty.
Simoc
Guest
The contact caused Griezmann to fall, otherwise he would have scored. The contact was only noticeable on the replay. A clear penalty. If it was the other way around and blue shirt bringing a gold shirt down, it would have been way clearer to everyone.
Kangas
Roar Rookie
Agree
Kris
Guest
Probably what we all felt would happen. We sat narrow and deep and denied the French the chance to play through the middle. We dared them to play down the wings and put in crosses. The French refused the invite and kept trying to play through us, without much success. They looked toothless on the set pieces. We then hit the deck every time we went forward knowing we were some chance to nod one in with our height advantage. Almost worked but fair result in the end.