Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Poppa Out

patjennings said:
I saw one of our noted posters say qualifying was a feather on Popovic's cap in what he said was a much stronger Asia. Given the number of qualification spots I find that and incredibly hard to agree with especially when we saw the relative strength of Asia in the World Cup.

I always think the aim should be to at least equal and preferable pass what has gone before. We made the last 16 last time. This time it would have been an a pass+ because it would have meant winning a knockout game. Realistically it was our best chance to do that. We fell at that hurdle so I find it hard to give the actual World Cup performance a pass mark.

The main problem was that there was not a structure for the most part that supported us scoring. That worked when capitalising mistakes in a weak confederation (ahead of the OFC and on a par or slightly ahead of CONCACAF but definitely behind the other three). However, it was a recipe for simply making up the numbers in the actual tournament. People can fawn over Popovic and how easily we qualified (mostly because Saudi Arabia had a shocker) but his selections made sure that we were only there to make up the numbers, something that I suspect will be the case even at the lesser Asian Cup unless he changes the way the team is set up.

This is not a shot at the players, they performed admirably will be constrained both by selection and structure by the manager.

I know I've been criticising him even when he was winning qualification - but it was there to see
Click to expand...
Let’s be honest: Asia isn’t stronger, it’s just more corrupt. We’re the third-best country in Asian men’s football, behind Japan and South Korea but ahead of Iran.
 
verrelli said:
Let's drill down a little further to look at goals scored/conceded in those 11 matches against top 40 teams which is the best yardstick of our success:

Japan 1-0
Canada 1-0
Turkiye 2-0
Japan 1-1
Switzerland 1-1
Paraguay 0-0
Egypt 1-1
USA 1-2
USA 0-2
Colombia 0-3
Mexico 0-1

Total:
Scored 8
Conceded 11

Those 8 goals were:
* Behich goal in open play
* Irankunda goal in open play x 2
* Metcalfe goal in open play
* Yengi goal in open play
* Bos goal in open play
* Own goal x 2

A few comments:
1. This is pretty pathetic. 8 goals scored in 11 games against opponents in the top 40, 2 of which were own goals and only 1 goal by a recognised striker (not counting Irankunda, as he wasn't playing as striker in either game that he scored those 2 goals).
2. Zero goals from set pieces which is staggering for a team that is widely considered to be strong in that area. With our height, that is particularly poor. The corners throughout the world cup were abysmal and this was a huge failing!
3. Zero goals from central midfield.
4. A slight tangent here but Metcalfe should never have been in our front 3 given how defensively we were set up. We needed to have 3 recognised goal scorers and he just isn't. Yes he scored against Turkiye but even a blind squirrel will find a nut eventually. He has 2 goals in 40 caps. How many other teams in world cup do you think had players in their front 3 with that sort of goals/game record. I have no problem with him starting and recognise that he can provide assists and stitch the team together but it should have been as a #8 or RWB. The fact that we never saw Irankunda on left, Volpato on right and Toure up front is unforgivable.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying, but its worth looking at the value of the starting xis in each match

ResultAustralia starting xi value (in millions of euros)Opponent xi's value
Australia 1 Egypt 14483
Paraguay 0 Australia 05056
Usa 2 Australia 030179
Australia 2 Turkey 040232
Switzerland 1 Australia 142155
Mexico 1 Australia 03160
Columbia 3 Australia 011165
Usa 2 Australia 124109
Australia 1 Canada 02575

Then the two Japan games. There was not a single game against a top 40 where we were better on paper

I would argue that the only reason we are in the top 40 at all is because we have had 3 coaches in a row who are above our current level in quality (Ange, Arnie and Poppa) who were good at getting us to punch above our weight

that will change in a few years, but still not enough that we will be favourites against opponents in the top 30 and be able to play attacking football imo

yeah that's depressing to hear, but we need to fix our pathways if we want that to change
 
grazorblade said:
I get what you are saying, but its worth looking at the value of the starting xis in each match

ResultAustralia starting xi value (in millions of euros)Opponent xi's value
Australia 1 Egypt 14483
Paraguay 0 Australia 05056
Usa 2 Australia 030179
Australia 2 Turkey 040232
Switzerland 1 Australia 142155
Mexico 1 Australia 03160
Columbia 3 Australia 011165
Usa 2 Australia 124109
Australia 1 Canada 02575

Then the two Japan games. There was not a single game against a top 40 where we were better on paper

I would argue that the only reason we are in the top 40 at all is because we have had 3 coaches in a row who are above our current level in quality (Ange, Arnie and Poppa) who were good at getting us to punch above our weight

that will change in a few years, but still not enough that we will be favourites against opponents in the top 30 and be able to play attacking football imo

yeah that's depressing to hear, but we need to fix our pathways if we want that to change
Click to expand...
I definitely think we can play more attacking football than we are and be successful against higher ranked opponents.

I'm okay we are defensively focussed but we have almost no recognisable plan to score by design. We're currently hoping one of our players capitilises on a low risk opportunity (chance) or an opposition mistake (fraught against higher ranked opponents).

I think we need to improve our counter attacks by design , triggers for when to go, and how we will support our strikers in those scenarios. We also need to improve our set-pieces. We need a better set piece taker, and I suspect organisation and strategy.

Popovic is a good defensive coach but limited. He needs to do better and find balance.
 
Quicky said:
I definitely think we can play more attacking football than we are and be successful against higher ranked opponents.

I'm okay we are defensively focussed but we have almost no recognisable plan to score by design. We're currently hoping one of our players capitilises on a low risk opportunity (chance) or an opposition mistake (fraught against higher ranked opponents).

I think we need to improve our counter attacks by design , triggers for when to go, and how we will support our strikers in those scenarios. We also need to improve our set-pieces. We need a better set piece taker, and I suspect organisation and strategy.

Popovic is a good defensive coach but limited. He needs to do better and find balance.
Click to expand...
Perhaps he needs a more attack minded assistant coach on the staff to help. The current assistants were all defenders or defensive mids.
 
patjennings said:
Do you think the management is a democracy? I think Popovic is more of an autocratic detail control freak. That seems to be the club feedback.
Click to expand...
No. I think Popovic is good at setting up his teams to defend. I'm sure he has a big say in who the assistants are. I'm suggesting that perhaps he needs an assistant that can bring something else to the coaching team, rather than more of what Popovic already provides.
 
With the FA offical statements immediately post Egypt loss and all the social discourse since, I think if Poppa rolls out this same dour football in the Asian Cup the only thing that will save him is if he holds the cup aloft. If not....he will be goneski.

And then it might be perfect time for a Mark Milligan to take over and lead this young crop into the natural next stage of our football evolution!
 
grazorblade said:
I get what you are saying, but its worth looking at the value of the starting xis in each match

ResultAustralia starting xi value (in millions of euros)Opponent xi's value
Australia 1 Egypt 14483
Paraguay 0 Australia 05056
Usa 2 Australia 030179
Australia 2 Turkey 040232
Switzerland 1 Australia 142155
Mexico 1 Australia 03160
Columbia 3 Australia 011165
Usa 2 Australia 124109
Australia 1 Canada 02575

Then the two Japan games. There was not a single game against a top 40 where we were better on paper

I would argue that the only reason we are in the top 40 at all is because we have had 3 coaches in a row who are above our current level in quality (Ange, Arnie and Poppa) who were good at getting us to punch above our weight

that will change in a few years, but still not enough that we will be favourites against opponents in the top 30 and be able to play attacking football imo

yeah that's depressing to hear, but we need to fix our pathways if we want that to change
Click to expand...
When I look at the WC I consider it match by match and ask who had the players playing at a higher level and who was expected to win. Only Paraguay would I say it maybe approached even. Expectations for that match were shifted because both sides needed the draw.
All the other points can be true and probably are. It was the easiest group we have had. The talent in our squad is higher. We should be aiming to progress and do better than last WC. The Egypt match was there for us and he made some strange decisions. All of that can be true.
But going in to each match, we were underdogs, the opponents had players at a higher level, and we were expected to lose. This didn't happen and we got out of the group.
 
We should be looking into Norway as a way forward for us.
A population of only 5 million people a strong sporting nation similar to us and they took a long term approach to get them back into a World Cup and pushed England all the way in the quarter final which is there best ever run.

It’s possible for smaller populations to compete but you need to have a clear plan in mind and maximise your resources.
 
Barca4life said:
We should be looking into Norway as a way forward for us.
A population of only 5 million people a strong sporting nation similar to us and they took a long term approach to get them back into a World Cup and pushed England all the way in the quarter final which is there best ever run.

It’s possible for smaller populations to compete but you need to have a clear plan in mind and maximise your resources.
Click to expand...
Cabo Verde and 2010s-era Iceland are also templates for us to follow.
 
My problem is he seems to have few ideas on how to win games, other than relying on individual players to jag a goal, but is busy making sure we don't lose. This is a tactical dead end and ensures we won't progress in the long term. It is hardly his fault, but the cowardice of the FFA who desperately need the FIFA group progression money to stay afloat. The annoying this is that years and years ago they identified the problem and the solution but have seemingly let expedience lead to short term solutions for a long term problem
 
McZero said:
My problem is he seems to have few ideas on how to win games, other than relying on individual players to jag a goal, but is busy making sure we don't lose. This is a tactical dead end and ensures we won't progress in the long term. It is hardly his fault, but the cowardice of the FFA who desperately need the FIFA group progression money to stay afloat. The annoying this is that years and years ago they identified the problem and the solution but have seemingly let expedience lead to short term solutions for a long term problem
Click to expand...
What was the solution?
 
The old NC outlines proactive, possession football with creative attackers. It was based on analysis of the teams in the 2006 WC that went deep into the competition. Not sure if any further analysis has been done on succeeding WCs , but suspect it'd be similar
 
What might have been. Egypt, Argentina and Switzerland all very beatable imo. Popa has, afaik, improved every club he's gone to and the Socceroos also when he took over from Arnie so credit to him for that. I guess I have similar frustrations to others in that he looks like he sets teams up not to lose rather than to win. Perhaps that partly explains his lack of success in grand finals. WSW won the ACL but were outplayed and owe their success in the final mainly to Ante Covic's heroics in the final. Nevertheless, very well done of Popa to get that team to the final.
Then there's the issue of selections, more specifically the non-playing of Segecic and Triantis. Principle v Pragmatism. I think Arnie would have ensured both of them saw minutes, even just 5 minutes. Arnie the pragmatist. Is Popa principled or just bloody-minded? All for the sake of 5 minutes playing time. He might argue that he had no inkling they would jump ship which is fair enough but with young talent like that I think I prefer Arnie's pragmatism. Segecic apparently is one of the corner-takers for Portsmouth. We had a problem with set-piece deliveries in the WC. Segecic might have solved that when on the park if he and Volpato were the RCF options and Irankunda and 2 others on the left side. We had the height to trouble opponents, just needed decent delivery.
 
McZero said:
My problem is he seems to have few ideas on how to win games, other than relying on individual players to jag a goal, but is busy making sure we don't lose. This is a tactical dead end and ensures we won't progress in the long term. It is hardly his fault, but the cowardice of the FFA who desperately need the FIFA group progression money to stay afloat. The annoying this is that years and years ago they identified the problem and the solution but have seemingly let expedience lead to short term solutions for a long term problem
Click to expand...

I can't seem tp gel these two phrases together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top