Spain 7, Matildas 0: 'Why this, why now' is the question as coach's kids destroyed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_AFF_Women%27s_Championship Matildas lost 0-1 to Philippines yesterday.

I've never seen a player given so many opportunities whilst never delivering a single shred of evidence that they are capable of playing at that level. Ibini's off ball movement is a zero, the one thing she can do is run in a straight line to goal (with or without the ball). She looked utterly flumoxed about how to apply defensive pressure against Portugal and she provides no intelligent supporting movements to enable retention of possession. And this isn't anything new. I saw her play NTC challenge as a 17yo and she was the same player then as she is now. Essentially they picked an athlete with the hope she'd develop an understanding of the game. This has resulted in being elevated to young matildas, w-league level and now Matildas despite many players in the local leagues who are more productive.

Exactly it makes no sense and is the opposite of what Gustavsson should've done. Instead of winning 18-0 which is completely ridiculous he should of blooded all the young ones for likely still a comfortable win, and use a strong squad to not get completely embarrassed against Spain.

Technically it's not on target because it's missing the actual goal.

so Gorry hitting the crossbar was not on target...?

You're looking right there P+, seems that way. Remember when one of the reasons quoted for sacking Staj was for doing just that, introducing try-outs. Staj timing was much better from memory, but some in the FA thought better.

Full Time - there is much hidden truth in what you have stated here. Back in 1974, yes nearly 50 years ago ,a man was brought to Australia and we were told he would be setting up a new system where the ASF would employ a coach in every state whose job would be to educate coaches on how to teach, a necessary talent if one is to be successful. Unfortunately this man's salary was being met by cigarette manufacturers ,and with the coming government ban on smoking advertising, the man was ever so slightly pushed into the background, but not before he had got his ideas across to some lucky potential coaches. We then moved on to 2007, just 33 years later and we find a new administration have appointed a well travelled Dutch coach to our shores where he was to produce a curriculum that would solve all our problems. At the same time another Dutch coach was made director of coaching and we assumed he would be installing the new programme. Then came the first surprise, after another 2 year wait we were told the new curriculum was ready for release and the author stated he was retiring from the game. His offsider ,the D of C, it was assumed, would oversee the installation of the new curriculum into our system. This did not happen and a statement was issued stating that the original 2009 curriculum was not workable in Australia and would have to be re-written. Another 2 year wait. Then the big shock ,the D of C announced he too was retiring from the position but did not leave the game, taking over as an executive of one of our big A-League clubs. And so we were left with an unworkable curriculum ,heavily based on that now ancient 1974 plan, that had been discarded by an impotent and not too bright administration. Now we have fans like yourself asking ,quite rightly, when is this New Direction going to be put to work or is it just another "pie in the sky" daydream to join the other "great leaps forward" that have never happened.?????? Keep up the good work. Cheers jb.

I do not think you have watched the Australia vs Indonesia. And you have not watch and read the commentators' saying after that match. That is why you put up irrelevant questions. How can one get new players in the middle of the match? Of course not! Did i say to change the squad? Many commentators comment that Tony did not substitute younger and newer players on the bench to gain experience. From your response, it is evident that you do not understand the point. The point is Tony do not know how to manage the Matildas. Have you really watched the Australia vs Indonesia's match? Have you heard the commentator's saying after the match. Did I say there should be a 50 member squad? Who did the squad selection? Tony. Why he chose a new-and-young-players squad to play a top 10 ranking team? Who get them to fly to Spain? Who is responsible? If no one is responsible, that is the end of the story. That is what you mean. I have just read what you say again. "How did you know to put them on the team sheet before the game or tournament?" It is not me to select. It is Tony the head coach to select. Why you ask me. Be rational man.

So you are 4.0 up in a knock out tournament and you take a bunch of state league players and put them on the team sheet? How did you know to put them on the team sheet before the game or tournament? How big is your team sheet, 50 players for one game? FIFA has rules dudes on how big a bench can be. Who takes experimental/green players to a knock out tournament?

Waz It may well be that all juniors are taught pressing but there are players playing in your favourite A-League team who quite obviously have never heard the word, never mind absorbing it's meaning, and yet because those players get picked every game the question has to be put, does the coach himself know what "pressing" is in it's purest form. Apparently not, for the evidence is right there in front of the knowlng fans who roll up to watch their team. The reason NPL clubs do not use "pressing" is quite simple, it is a tactic that requires full comprehension of the system, extraordinary fitness (not part time training), and a high degree of individual awareness which in turn allows a high degree of success in ball winning., it has very little to do with "long ball" or "short ball" . Cheers jb.

Yeah 100% agreed. It’s also the way Ange played in Japan and Scotland from watching only a few games so I could be wrong. It’s also why the Socceroos looked really bad when it didn’t work under Ange as it exposes holes for the opposition to move into an md attack with even more venom than coming up against a traditional defensive side. It’s almost like a leveraged risky move to press as a team that only pays off if every player is doing. If the whole team doesn’t have the fitness than it breaks down and makes the coach look like an amateur.

Thanks for the wisdom bomb jb. I haven’t looked at it in that depth. At the moment all I know is that as you said it’s up to the whole team to put pressure on the opposition when they have the ball. If the players can’t do that for a full game than the tactic falls apart sooner or later and it just creates holes for the opposition to exploit. It’s unfortunate as it’s the most exciting form of football to watch in my opinion.

Full Time - the word 'pressing" is actually another media generated word to cover what used to be called "close man marking" at best, and "winning tackles" as even better. It was actually the money generated by a pop star at a small club in England called Watford who ,under the guidance of a young manager called Taylor, saw the team rise through the lower English leagues to go from fourth to first in only 5 seasons while changing the personnel in the team only marginally. Today it is quite easy to work out if a player ,or a team, is using a pressing game which you have to remember is only used in half (roughly) a game when trying to win possession back from the opponent. It is relatively easy to pick out a failure to this system by picking out the " ball watchers" in a team, that is players who stop running as soon as their team loses possession. They are in fact demonstrating that they have little or no knowledge of what "pressing " is, in it's perfect form, a tactic designed to put pressure, not only on the ball carrier, but on every opponent all over the field at the same time. Next time you are watching a game try working out who the" ball watchers" are and who the "workers" are who are applying "the press". Today pressing has become an important part of a player' s all round ability. Cheers jb.

There are heaps of good women players to pick from that could have at least bothered to defend. Ibini worst player from NSW NPL, Glienik , Yallop have they played recently look like dumped bench players. Van Egmond is useless, and deliberately played in attacking positions against weak sides , she was as bad as anyone,

Go back to school. Already said "not experiment". Why everything is "experiment"? Why the substitute young players to experience in the match vs Indonesia is called "experiment"? That is called "substitution". That is strategic planning. The match was sure a win. After the first half, the Australia team (at top 20) was 4-0 leading while the Indonesia was ranking around 95. How can that substitution be "experiment"? At 49', Australia led to 5-0. How can that be "experiment". Read carefully again. Already said about the 3 advantage of substituting new and younger players in that match. In a friendly, do you play full strength team with a team of ranking 130? When to play better players? Simple! Read the rankings. Study the opponents. Watch videos. LOL.

The roar did it for the best part of 4 years. Or at least 2 at the very least under Ange. It can be done but requires an understanding of, and unwavering commitment to fitness, strength and conditioning and recovery. As well as relentless training and education as to how and when to press.

How is ensuring Cup victories a good time to experiment and friendlies a bad time to experiment?

Some say something to protect Tony G, using the pretext “experiment”. In the match, which had Matidas winning Indonesia 18-0, Tony should have replace many younger players in the second half to experience. That was not “experiment”. That was to (1) reserved the energy of the main players for the possible 7 matches to reach the final; (2) to avoid the main players from exposing to the risk of injury; and (3) to provide the younger players to experience in a big occasion (Asian Cup). That was not “experiment”. If you experiment, you experiment safely and suitably. Using chemistry as an analogy, you do not pour strong acid to concentrated alkali. That is not experiment. That is ignorant. He is weird. When played against a weak team in Asian Cup, he fielded full strengths to win big. However, when playing the ranking 7 Spain, he played new young players. That is not “experiment”. That is ignorant, suicidal, and brainless. Of course, losing big to Japan years ago is not attributed to Tony Gustavsson. Why? Why the poor performance of Matidas many years ago has anything to do with Tony Gustravsson? People here are talking about how Tony has performed in his duty ever since he has been in the job. Ultimately, maybe, the point in the making is that Australia has not got good women players. Is that true? If “no good players” can be the excuse, then everyone can be a head coach with bullet proof shirt. That “no good players” is a panacea. Philippine has not got good players. But a good coach got them to reach top 4 in the recent Asian Cup and jump to rank 51 from 64 in 2021.

Exactly right. An experienced team beats other team in almost double digits and the coach needs to go. He experiments and he needs to go. What do people expect that a new coach will do? They have access to the same set of players.

Mate your logic is all over the place and not sure what you are talking about. The ALW and alm is a summer season game. Npl is winter.