Can Matildas, or anyone else, anyone dethrone the US at the Olympics?

Don’t a week and some hindsight make a difference?

This was a much better article than the headline suggested, thanks. It's a really interesting Olympics for the women's teams leading to the WC in ANZ. Gustavsson really doesn't seem to be getting the best from the Matildas. They have lost a lot of the attacking style they had under Staj. Defensively, they're all over the place. Alanna K is a great defender but I think the constantly changing formations and players is disrupting them. Why is Aivi Luik playing? She's looked ponderous and error prone every time I've watched recently. Caitlin Foord seems to have lost her shooting boots and doesn't pass. But with Raso, van Egmond and Carpenter providing service, Kerr should do alright.

Major test of Gustavson's coaching ability coming up. Goalkeeping should at least be sound with Lydia W a fundamentally solid keeper, and Micah a decent alternative. Defence depends on him sorting out what formation to play to make the most of his selected players, ideally still allowing Carpenter and Catley to get forward, as we are so dependent on them for good penetration down the flanks. Defensive midfielder is vital to allowing this to happen. Hopefully KK is fit and ready, Luik a fair alternative, Van Egmond doesn't have the mindset for this position.. And despite all the publicity about Sam Kerr, attack is a major problem. Kerr is completely dependent on good service; she makes great runs, and is powerful and skilful enough to convert a good percentage of the chances she gets. But she is never going to make goals for herself. It was noticeable in the recent warm up games that Kerr was starting runs, but midfielders and other forwards were not on her wavelength. Foord is a big question mark, she seems to have forgotten how and when to pass. I would have chosen de Vanna ahead of Foord given Lisa still showed tremendous skill, speed and team awareness in the last W League season. I was pleased with Kyah Simon's selection; she is smart and skilful, and plays for the team. And I think both Fowler and Cooney-Cross both show great skill, and the confidence to use it, so very pleased about them. It depends on whether Gustavson can get a functional defensive organisation, and some sort of attacking rhythm. If he can, and they get out of the group for a start, I will be impressed.

Women’s football landscape has changed dramatically since last time around the block. Countries that appeared to show little interest have suddenly sprung to life particularly in Europe and you suddenly get to see just how much talent there is on a global basis. It may well be that the Matilda’s struggle against countries that are now pouring resources and time into the sport and possibly not allowing the USA to gallop away anymore.

there are big concerns, dont forget that was a sweden second string team they played. Sweden are a quality team, swedends actual first XI is stronger than australias. the japan game might be more a closer look of what they're capable off this tournament Kerr will get you the goals if you can give her service, the issue is the other end and trying to keep them out.

Australia has to improve massively if they want to go beyond the group stage. We haven’t seen enough of them really, to judge how they are going under the new coach. They started badly, but that in retrospect, is understandable. Their defence looked much better in their last match but Sweden are not exactly a top team. They have their last warmup match v Japan tonight, and then it’s down to business. Good luck to them. Come on Matildas!

get a grip, players in Europe are doing well these days. Kerr earns over a $mil per season. Don't know the average wage, but the days of part-time professionals are pretty much over in the UK and Europe.

Thats a bit weird, I think I remember that was what the media said at the time, win the group and you go through. Of course there were Asian teams in the Oceania group anyway. So the difference was you had 2 teams not 1 go through to the world cup it was still a combined Asia +Oceania with a final group like 1978. Maybe that was what it was all about 2 spots and South Korea and Iran were missing , the top two teams from 1978.

Oceania has never had a direct qualifying spot for the World Cup. I think you are referring to 1982 but NZ had to play in a final qualifying group with Kuwait, China and Saudi Arabia after it won the group Australia was in before it made the World Cup finals in Spain. In 2010 NZ had to playoff against Bahrain after it won the Oceania group to qualify for the World Cup in South Africa.

New Zealand should pip Australia for 3rd place, Better squad and the Matildas are on the way down.

Since Australia has moved to Asia in the mens we have not had one competitive match with New Zealand and only one friendly which Australia won. NZ are no longer really relevant anymore internationally they are in a different confederation. Even before that the new regime saw off New Zealand to make the world cup, in which New Zealand were actually embarassed that Solomon Islands got second spot ahead of them. That was a huge embarassment to NZ football. Under the old regime Soccer Australia was certainly a failure against NZ on many big occasions. NZ going to the world cup the only time Oceania got a direct spot was a massive failure. In particular the most embarassing was when Soccer Australia could not afford to fly their legion of European superstars to make the Confederation cup and New Zealand could so Australian fielded a NSL team and lost out. That was the ultimate embarassment in Australian football history , and even more embarassing that nations like Tahiti can afford to do that.

How much would a player have to earn before they are considered professional. Even the NSWL the minimum nowdays is only 20k, 5 years ago it was 7k. European wages are increasing . W-league there used to be unpaid players now they have a minimum wage. I wouldn't say its money that is the reason for the US being dominant. They do have their college system which was great in the old days but going to a club young is better than going to college and having to mix full time study with sport.

Thats the mens u23 not the women. The Kiwis havent beaten Australia in the womens for about 30 years . That was in the NSl era before the Sydney Olympics bid was won where the womens team had to pay for their airfares and accomodation to play for Australia. Australia actually are facing New Zealand in the womens at the Olympics and that will be by far the easiest match. The mens u23 its ridiculous what Arnold has done, Kiwis have their strongest overage player in Chris Wood from the EPL and Arnold is doing his antics again and Australia dont even have their best u23 players thanks to Arnolds foolish demands. The overage players Arnold is bringing are a mystery why they are there, it seems more to be displayed on the player market. Kiwis are not involved with Australia anymore so its irrelevant what helping hand Australia is giivng them certainly the A-league has helped them. The rest of Asia made a mistake welcoming Australia into their den, Australia has taken one Asia cup and always taken a world cup spot and Australian players of mediocre standard have earnt millions tax free in the Middle East .

I dunno. Do the other teams have professional players or is it still just the US?

Mmm NZ just accounted for Aust in a lead up match 2 zip. Again NZ with a population of just 5 mill are able to defeat the indulged sporting nation I.e. Australia a population of 25 mill in all and sundry. Why.& how? Certainly looks like Australia will finish bottom of their group based on this mediocre result. Aside to that why are we fostering NZ talent by affording them membership of our domestic leagues? They are a sovereign nation while we continue this farce wherby they are gifted a claytons stathood to exploit our sporting capital. NZ would never display such benevolent largesse towards Australia in re to their coveted NPC of Rugby Union.