Matildas vs USA: International football friendly live scores, blog

Huge fan of one touch football JB. Since Ronaldo moved from Man U to Real Madrid, I started to watch a lot more La Liga then any other competition. Xavi is the best one touch footballer of all time, add this to Inesita & Messi & no wonder you had Barcelona Tikka Tacka, it was a joy to watch. Real Madrid also had a great one touch in Angel Di Maria, he was unbelievable his was more touch & speed. So upset when RM sold him & have no idea why he failed at Man U, maybe showing how out of touch the English game was then. Love Liverpool, who is the best countering attacking side in the world, their front 3 & the one touch play is a joy to watch.

Punter, when you are watching any of the top European sides on TV ,take note of the number of times a ball gets "one touch" and is then passed to a moving team mate. This in itself is not based on talent as such,it is simply a comprehension of how to get a ball from one end of the field to the other end, ASAP. It is this comprehension, and the use of the tactic,that is finding out, not only our girls, but the boys too. Cheers jb.

Punter - actually you were not ahead of your time. Back before world war 2 Austria were , one of the top football nations,their team dubbed "the Wunderteam". That team had a diminutive ball playing play maker called Mathias Sindelar and he played centre forward!!!!, but behind the two recognised strikers. As you are probably aware the great Hungarian team of the early 1950's also used this system with a clever veteran left winger ,Hidegkuti, introduced into the same position, servicing Kocsis and Puskas and of course Don Revie played the same role for Man City in the late 1950's, so the talented small player had been recognised for many years before your experience Cheers jb.

Well JB, I've only been waiting 40 years for us to learn, having first followed the Socceroos in 1974. I know in early 80s, as a young ball playing midfielder, I tried out for a regional school representative side & having picked too many midfielders they asked me to play fullback, being a cocky little player I used to drop back & demand the ball from the keeper every time & set new attacks out from defence. I missed to a big German looking defender who even at 16-17 years old looked like he could stop a train & had a huge boot & throw to go with it. I understood as tackling was not my specialty. However, I was told later that the coaches deliberated for ages about him or me. I suppose I was ahead of my time, I never played fullback again, they were always big brutes especially in the reps sides.

Punter , agree wholeheartedly with your observation re. "speed out of the back". Seven years ago when AP introduced a style of play he must have observed being used by the then Barcelona side he dared to try something never before seen in the HAL. The pundits immediately dubbed it "playing possession football out from the back". The trouble with the tactic is that it is now 7 years old and as anyone with tactical knowledge will tell you ,that is a long time in football. AP moved to National football and it quickly became obvious he was trying to instill the same system into his charges but what the "pundits " failed to recognise was that tactically the game had moved on and speed had become the main factor in any "plan" being used. Possesion an d non-possession governed this thinking and AP found this out the hard way when his national team continually built up good "possession figures" but struggled to score goals. This American side showed where the game has reached tactically,through speed of movement,both of the ball and players. They decimated the Matildas defence who, even when behind, continually made pass after pass across the back, while their opponents ignored this "possession" completely and quickly got back to their "non possession structure" immediately flooding the midfield with bodies thereby cutting the Matildas' service to their classy front players,Forde ,Kerr and de Vanna. Watching the game one was reminded of the old song "When will we ever Learn." Cheers jb.

JB, I'm yet to see an Australian team men or women play out quickly from the backs & then produce a fast moving attack. The US women are able to produce these fast attacking moves plainly because they are higher skilled then us. Liverpool are the best in the world at present at this game. They have an industrious midfield, pretty average by world standard, but they have 3 electrifying strikers & their midfielders get the ball to them very quickly.

Stuart - "Those defenders" have not yet been taught what is happening in the rest of the football world, in that the endless playing of the ball across the backline, back and forth is actually "passe",only giving the opposition more time to get themselves back into their chosen formation when "out of possession". This in turn means that with six of our players in front of the back four and at least eight or nine opponents back in their own half, our midfield is hopelessly outnumbered on most occasions. When under pressure from a fast attack another flaw presents itself in our defence, our girls are very guilty of "ball watching" instead of tracking those fast moving attackers and in today's game this is a deadly flaw. Cheers jb.

Thanks. I had the sense that the 'squad confidence' (for want of a better description) and cohesion was better under Stajcic - where high expectations seemed to translate into results. I'm not convinced that the outcome will be better in the WC for the change. But as I said, while I prefer to watch them more than the Socceroos, I still haven't seen enough to form a reliable opinion.

marginal differences, not enough I don't think to say better under one than the other. They stood back a lot to day, rather than press the US players in defence when the US had the ball, which is not generally how they've played. They're usually a lot more aggressive in defence, but they did change to that in the second half, which was their better half. Also depends a lot on who he puts on the park - usually a bit of experimenting going in friendly games. They'll need to play better than today to advance to the finals at the WC, but they can play better I think.

So for those more in the know and watch more of the Matildas than me, after a few games, what is the general consensus, are they better under Milicic than Stajcic or no significant difference?

The USWNT are a seriously good side - in all positions, fast, strong, smart, depth, all the ingredients are there, but the Matildas did well. Perhaps a little lucky, but then unlucky to miss a couple of their own chances (like Kerr x 2 chances in the first half she rarely misses). I felt left back and distribution from midfield has been an issue for us under Ante. Not sure that Emily van Egmond is our best choice either, but we need to decide if we press or stand back first. They looked a bit confused sometimes, as to what was expected. I'd certainly expect Lisa DeVana to be in the WC squad (nice goal), and hope to see Gorry and Raso in our starting lineup.

Agree totally. Incredibly slow and unathletic

Seemed a little low intensity first goal was bad luck, just monstered off the ball and not given a foul. Apart from that midfield often left the backline under too much pressure created some nice chances and converted a few

Would have been a good game to watch. Being a novice on Women's football I think our central defenders are too slow. Thats from watching the previous tournament held in Australia last month.