Match stats/analysis for recent Socceroo games

[Decentric]

Australia

Haven't been on the forum a lot lately, because of so much football to watch in the WC, then the Festival of Football and Aus Cup.

Anyway have had a good second look at the Aus WC games, apart from the USA.

I have no doubt Popa has been excoriated on this forum!

However, there were a few good things.

* Opposition teams tended to play a lot of aerial crosses into the Aus pen box from the flanks - as opposed to central attacking third interplay. This is no coincidence. Popa set up the two defensive lines compact and centrally, in order to induce opposition wing play. Unlike Netherlands, who played a lot of crosses on the ground into the pen box, Aus's opposition played a lot of aerial crosses which Souttar and co were able to negate. That is apart from the subsequent second ball duels, where the opposition had plenty of shots from range outside the box, which are low percentage goalscoring opportunities.

What Aus tried to avoid was central attacking interplay, where Aus defenders had to turn and chase trying to counter dribbling or quick 1- 2 actions.

 

[Decentric]

A second positive is that Popa has injected a lot of youth into the Socceroos.

Not sure if he will still use Irvine , close to age 35 for the future, but at the end of the tournament, only Souttar, O'N and the injured McGree are arguably in his starting eleven over the age of 25.

Some will question Popa's 5-2-3, 5-4-1, 3-4-3 flat midfield formation, but what Popa needs to do in the Asian Cup with teams likely to play a Deep Defensive Block is get the wing backs playing higher much more quickly when Aus regains the ball in the Attacking Transition 6-10 second phase of play.

Netherlands did this well in the group stages, except they went to from a 5-4-1 shape without the ball, to a 4-3-3 attacking midfield triangle. The Dutch just lost the plot against Morocco.

 

[Punchanello]

What Aus tried to avoid was central attacking interplay, where Aus defenders had to turn and chase trying to counter dribbling or quick 1- 2 actions.

Agree. We tried to force the opposition's play wide, then when we regained possession, counter on the outside of their block at all times. I don't think it's a bad strategy when the opportunity presents itself, but it is one dimensional and predictable when it's your only intent.

Having now watched again, I think the most infuriating thing for me was the fact that we gave up on anything remotely close to a contested 50/50. Almost every single time the ball was there to be won north of a few metres outside our own area, we were timid and gave up on it in favour of dropping back into the block. We basically decided we were only willing to contest and counter out of a deep defensive area.

In the school of football I was raised in, intentionally or lazily allowing a ball to bounce, not contesting a contestable ball in defence or attack or allowing someone in your zone to receive and turn unchallenged would get you hooked.

 

[Decentric]

If Popa discards the 3 CBs, given Rowles , who has been a decent contributor in WCQ games was axed from the squad, CB is arguably Aus's strongest position ATM. Apart from the first half against USA, the Aus defence, including the entire team unit defending from the front, was the strength of the WC.

If we were to go to a 4-3-3 and 4 at the back in general we would have to leave out a pretty decent player whose specialist position is CB.

Hrustic, making the squad as an attacking player, was far less effective in his position than defender Rowles, was as a CB and LWB.The latter was discarded.

 

[LFC]

D
You are satisfied with least damage control tactics as much as poss and see it as a pass mark stats wise.
As they say - no shit sherlock - nothing wrong with expecting more/better/different.
Poppa massive Q marks
Changing Beach for Ryan
18yrs Herrington in crucial 4th spot pen taker
Irakunda persistance being a lone striker - absolutely ridiculous
Not starting our 2 goal scorers following game from memory.
The many times people here harped on about selections.
There is countless more when going back through the thread related.

Brazil's main issue today is lacking a goal scorer/s - hence main reason punted out no diff to us.
As for us
3 goals scored from 390 minutes of football.
Wonderful 2 clean sheets.
Poppa's hard to break down system as mentioned keeping us defensively compressed - pretty obvious high balls will cleared by our tall CB's.
You got to go for it sooner or later.
Popovic’s precautionary principles, Australia were tough to break down at the expense of attacking vitality. From their three group matches they recorded an expected goals value of 2.08 according to Opta – a measure of how many goals they would be expected to score based on the location of chances. That places them in the bottom quarter of the competition.
This doesn't get you deeper in a tournament.
Say no more.
We progressed out of the World Cup group for the third time, matching efforts from 2006 and 2022. Yet in the expanded tournament, we failed to replicate the mathematical progress of those two earlier tournaments: the round of 16 trumps the last 32.

 

[Decentric]

Agree. We tried to force the opposition's play wide, then when we regained possession, counter on the outside of their block at all times. I don't think it's a bad strategy when the opportunity presents itself, but it is one dimensional and predictable when it's your only intent.

Having now watched again, I think the most infuriating thing for me was the fact that we gave up on anything remotely close to a contested 50/50. Almost every single time the ball was there to be won north of a few metres outside our own area, we were timid and gave up on it in favour of dropping back into the block. We basically decided we were only willing to contest and counter out of a deep defensive area.

In the school of football I was raised in, intentionally or lazily allowing a ball to bounce, not contesting a contestable ball in defence or attack or allowing someone in your zone to receive and turn unchallenged would get you hooked.

Agree. We tried to force the opposition's play wide, then when we regained possession, counter on the outside of their block at all times. I don't think it's a bad strategy when the opportunity presents itself, but it is one dimensional and predictable when it's your only intent.

Having now watched again, I think the most infuriating thing for me was the fact that we gave up on anything remotely close to a contested 50/50. Almost every single time the ball was there to be won north of a few metres outside our own area, we were timid and gave up on it in favour of dropping back into the block. We basically decided we were only willing to contest and counter out of a deep defensive area.

In the school of football I was raised in, intentionally or lazily allowing a ball to bounce, not contesting a contestable ball in defence or attack or allowing someone in your zone to receive and turn unchallenged would get you hooked.

I'm not going to record all the stats for the WC, like I've done in most most previous games, because of having to get around those annoying 2 minute plus SBS advertisements, so it will take forever.

Aus won every contest that I accrued stats for in terms of 1v1s - against USA, Canada, Colombia ( close contest), Japan A ( close contest), Japan B, Saudi, China, Indo, Kiwis, Venez.

It just makes so much difference looking at them slowly on replays. Live it is hard to gauge. My opinion nearly always changes after I accrue stats slowly on replays.

Where Colombia and Japan beat our players quite a lot was dribbling around Socceroos and pace over the turf, or nimbleness. The 3 Aus CBs, 2 DMs and particularly when Toure was on the pitch, gave Aus the ascendancy in winning hard balls - body on body, heading and tackling.

I have no comprehensive data to substantiate my opinion, but I thought Italiano's jockeying, showing and delaying against some great opposition dribblers was outstanding in the WC when he was on the pitch. Italiano might not have stood them up a lot, or dispossessed them, but the opposition wingers were of a very high quality.

Anyway, interesting observation, Punchanello.

 

[Punchanello]

The fairest question I think you could ask of Poppa is, did he play to our strengths and/or get the best from our individuals? Maybe, from a defensive perspective. Certainly not in midfield and attack. Nobody was able to impact he game in the 9 position despite their efforts. It was great to see Irankunda and Metcalfe score but that starts to look more like an anomaly than a trend when you look across the 4 games. Bos was most people's bet as the breakout player and the system let him down. No assists, no goals. Barely a few moments outside our own third.

 

[Decentric]

D
You are satisfied with least damage control tactics as much as poss and see it as a pass mark stats wise.
As they say - no shit sherlock - nothing wrong with expecting more/better/different.
Poppa massive Q marks
Changing Beach for Ryan
18yrs Herrington in crucial 4th spot pen taker
Irakunda persistance being a lone striker - absolutely ridiculous
Not starting our 2 goal scorers following game from memory.
The many times people here harped on about selections.
There is countless more when going back through the thread related.

Brazil's main issue today is lacking a goal scorer/s - hence main reason punted out no diff to us.
As for us
3 goals scored from 390 minutes of football.
Wonderful 2 clean sheets.
Poppa's hard to break down system as mentioned keeping us defensively compressed - pretty obvious high balls will cleared by our tall CB's.
You got to go for it sooner or later.
Popovic’s precautionary principles, Australia were tough to break down at the expense of attacking vitality. From their three group matches they recorded an expected goals value of 2.08 according to Opta – a measure of how many goals they would be expected to score based on the location of chances. That places them in the bottom quarter of the competition.
This doesn't get you deeper in a tournament.
Say no more.
We progressed out of the World Cup group for the third time, matching efforts from 2006 and 2022. Yet in the expanded tournament, we failed to replicate the mathematical progress of those two earlier tournaments: the round of 16 trumps the last 32.

D
You are satisfied with least damage control tactics as much as poss and see it as a pass mark stats wise.
As they say - no shit sherlock - nothing wrong with expecting more/better/different.
Poppa massive Q marks
Changing Beach for Ryan
18yrs Herrington in crucial 4th spot pen taker
Irakunda persistance being a lone striker - absolutely ridiculous
Not starting our 2 goal scorers following game from memory.
The many times people here harped on about selections.
There is countless more when going back through the thread related.

Brazil's main issue today is lacking a goal scorer/s - hence main reason punted out no diff to us.
As for us
3 goals scored from 390 minutes of football.
Wonderful 2 clean sheets.
Poppa's hard to break down system as mentioned keeping us defensively compressed - pretty obvious high balls will cleared by our tall CB's.
You got to go for it sooner or later.
Popovic’s precautionary principles, Australia were tough to break down at the expense of attacking vitality. From their three group matches they recorded an expected goals value of 2.08 according to Opta – a measure of how many goals they would be expected to score based on the location of chances. That places them in the bottom quarter of the competition.
This doesn't get you deeper in a tournament.
Say no more.
We progressed out of the World Cup group for the third time, matching efforts from 2006 and 2022. Yet in the expanded tournament, we failed to replicate the mathematical progress of those two earlier tournaments: the round of 16 trumps the last 32.

You are on fire, LFC!

You've posted enough for a thesis in responses!

*Regarding Socceroos

Agree that playing Irank as central striker was perplexing? He is far more comfortable playing wide. Were Toure and Yengi injured?

Beach - agree about the pen shoot out replacement by Ryan being weird. I was perplexed Beach playing over Ryan, but his keeping against Turkey was incredible as a shot stopper.

Herrington pen taking - astonished? Big Popa mistake.

 

[Punchanello]

I'm not going to record all the stats for the WC, like I've done in most most previous games, because of having to get around those annoying 2 minute plus SBS advertisements, so it will take forever.

Aus won every contest that I accrued stats for in terms of 1v1s - against USA, Canada, Colombia ( close contest), Japan A ( close contest), Japan B, Saudi, China, Indo, Kiwis, Venez.

It just makes so much difference looking at them slowly on replays. Live it is hard to gauge. My opinion nearly always changes after I accrue stats slowly on replays.

Where Colombia and Japan beat our players quite a lot was dribbling around Socceroos and pace over the turf, or nimbleness. The 3 Aus CBs, 2 DMs and particularly when Toure was on the pitch, gave Aus the ascendancy in winning hard balls - body on body, heading and tackling.

I have no comprehensive data to substantiate my opinion, but I thought Italiano's jockeying, showing and delaying against some great opposition dribblers was outstanding in the WC when he was on the pitch. Italiano might not have stood them up a lot, or dispossessed them, but the opposition wingers were of a very high quality.

Anyway, interesting observation, Punchanello.

Yeah, I think when it comes to the challenge, we certainly would be winning our fair share. We aren't afraid of that physicality. Given that's a strength, what disappointed me was how often we decided not to contest in more advanced positions when the opportunities presented themselves. Statistically I'm fairly certain we would have been right up there in 1 on 1 contests, but the vast majority would have been in our own third.

 

[Decentric]

The fairest question I think you could ask of Poppa is, did he play to our strengths and/or get the best from our individuals? Maybe, from a defensive perspective. Certainly not in midfield and attack. Nobody was able to impact he game in the 9 position despite their efforts. It was great to see Irankunda and Metcalfe score but that starts to look more like an anomaly than a trend when you look across the 4 games. Bos was most people's bet as the breakout player and the system let him down. No assists, no goals. Barely a few moments outside our own third.

Could the attacking game have been better whilst maintaining the defensive structure that Popa achieved?

We always seemed to attack in an accelerated form, when we could have been more patient at times, particulalry against USA and Turkey.

 

[Kitwally]

You are on fire, LFC!

You've posted enough for a thesis in responses!

*Regarding Socceroos

Agree that playing Irank as central striker was perplexing? He is far more comfortable playing wide. Were Toure and Yengi injured?

Beach - disagree. I congratulate Popa. I was perplexed Beach playing over Ryan, but his keeping against Turkey was incredible as a shot stopper.

Herrington pen taking - astonished? Big Popa mistake.

You’ve misread. LFC means changing Beach for Ryan for the penalty shootout.

 

[Decentric]

One criticism of a lot of pundits in Aus, including former Roos on TV and many others, is nobody shed light on the opposition tactics, and, how Aus played in response?

Turkey - they gegenpressed the guts out of us. Full Pressing and intensive Squeezing high up the pitch. They often had 9 players in our defensive half when we had the ball. The remaining Turkish CBs played a very high line too .

USA - the same as Turkey.

Both these games Aus struggled to keep the ball in advance of the defensive line with so much off the ball pressure.

Paraguay - completely different. They played a Deep Defensive Block or Partial Press and Half Press. No way were they going to forsake that impregnable defensive structure. This enabled us to have a lot more ball, even more than them. They were cagey, organised and cautious. They were also tough to penetrate.

Egypt - they didn't Full Press as aggressively as USA and Turkey, or use as deep a Defensive Block as Paraguay, enabling Aus to have a lot more ball under a modicum of pressure.

I thought in the second half we should have won , but Egypt were better in extra time. Where was our much vaunted fitness?

 

[Decentric]

You’ve misread. LFC means changing Beach for Ryan for the penalty shootout.

Thanks, K.

Apologies, LFC.

My bad!

 

[Punchanello]

Could the attacking game have been better whilst maintaining the defensive structure that Popa achieved?

That's the trick isn't it? I think you set your whole of team defence with a view to what you will do when you attack, and visa-versa. Assuming that's what Poppa set out to do at the WC, it only worked once.

I look at most competent sides and they have two out of possession phases. Say, immediate counterpress and then a fall-back low-block. We only seemed to have one.

 

[Decentric]

That's the trick isn't it? I think you set your whole of team defence with a view to what you will do when you attack, and visa-versa. Assuming that's what Poppa set out to do at the WC, it only worked once.

I look at most competent sides and they have two out of possession phases. Say, immediate counterpress and then a fall-back low-block. We only seemed to have one.

Good points, P.

I don't know what our pressing triggers are?

We rarely seem to Full Press and Squeeze, and if we do, after a short period, Aus regains its 5-2-3 shape further up the pitch, dropping back to a 5-4-1 as the opposition builds up towards our own goal.

 

[LFC]

That's the trick isn't it? I think you set your whole of team defence with a view to what you will do when you attack, and visa-versa. Assuming that's what Poppa set out to do at the WC, it only worked once.

I look at most competent sides and they have two out of possession phases. Say, immediate counterpress and then a fall-back low-block. We only seemed to have one.

this all comes to fruition the cattle you have - be it start up and your support bench.
Meaning the quality you have at your disposal.
We may have a sound reliable backline, ie CB's especially but we lack the "touch" "finesse" of midfielders who can play one touch, react fast enough to turn defence into attack.
We can counter those few times when the ball sticks but holding possession ?, manipulate the opponent off the park exposing the holes we do few far and between.
When we get pressed, we are squeezed out, lack time on the ball, make errors, hence its all about the quality.
As for pressing - when your tactics are defensive you have too much fear pressing high up the pitch - you know your going to get reamed leaving that much room behind your last line of defence.
Again, all this stems down to quality of players - hence the fear of putting your neck out.

 

[Punchanello]

When we get pressed, we are squeezed out, lack time on the ball, make errors, hence its all about the quality.
As for pressing - when your tactics are defensive you have too much fear pressing high up the pitch - you know your going to get reamed leaving that much room behind your last line of defence.
Again, all this stems down to quality of players - hence the fear of putting your neck out.

I don't buy the quality angle 100%. Yes, it's a determining factor, but so is how you set yourself out to play.

Re: Pressing, the trend for the top European teams is full-blown gegenpress. But that's an extreme option. You don't have to push your defensive line high at all times to press. There are all sorts of scenarios. You can drop most of the team into a low block and have 3-4 players press at the turnover, you can decide only to press when the ball crosses a particular threshold, you can press with a particular effect in mind, i.e. try to trap the ball wide or centrally. I don't think anyone is expecting us to successfully deploy some high-line tiki-taka full pitch gegenpress hybrid.

I see at least 6 ball-in-play phases in a game. 1. you just lost the ball. 2. the opposition has consolidated/retain possession. 3 the opposition is actively attacking 4. you regain possession 5. you consolidate/retain possession, 6. you are actively attacking.

I could really only identify 2-3 of those where we showed some kind of repeatable, recognisable method.

 

[Punchanello]

We may have a sound reliable backline, ie CB's especially but we lack the "touch" "finesse" of midfielders who can play one touch, react fast enough to turn defence into attack.

A while ago I would have agreed with you. But I think we do have good, neat, technical players and I think that's a product of SSG (a whole other topic). I don't think we culturally produce huge amounts of flair, creativity or football intelligence. But with the right set up, any team with some technical ability can hold the ball. Maybe not hold the ball to prize a team open, but maybe long enough to catch a breath and ease some pressure for a few seconds?

 

[LFC]

A while ago I would have agreed with you. But I think we do have good, neat, technical players and I think that's a product of SSG (a whole other topic). I don't think we culturally produce huge amounts of flair, creativity or football intelligence. But with the right set up, any team with some technical ability can hold the ball. Maybe not hold the ball to prize a team open, but maybe long enough to catch a breath and ease some pressure for a few seconds?

agree your previous post of not having to full on press as the top NT's or Clubs but our set up is that deep/and held back agreed we manage just 2/3 as mentioned.

When I talk about good neat technical players as you know, a player receiving the ball under pressure has the ability/touch dealing it without even thinking, impulsive reaction, a one touch release to support, or hold/shield the ball with ease/calm, sudden turn of the ball/body lose your opponents/s and give.
We don't have many as such.
We also lack the pace/movement - that extra half yard.
I agree with the right set up you can compete better and stick to your tactics BUT we get shut down more than I like - or get pressed to error under the pump.
I suppose the mention to catch breath is the amount of back passing more than I like seeing but that again backs my theory re quality.

 

[Decentric]

I've been trying to finish the second half Aus v USA. It suddenly doesn't seem as relevant.

I'm probably in the minority on G and G who agrees with the bigger WC numbers. I'm not sure DR Congo and Capo Verde would have qualified in the 32 team comp?

Still haven't seen Capo V v Argentina yet. However, saw the entire England v Congo game.

I was impressed with the organisation and tactical quality of Congo. England found them hard to penetrate, who eventually came third in the overall WC.

Moreover, the technical ability of the Congo players was high.

There were also 2 Congo wide players, 1 on each flank, who were decent ball players and worried England with their dribbling and ball carrying.

Congo were athletic and had pace all over the pitch too.

I think England only won 2-1. Have no idea what the structure is of DR Congo football is like, but the current team is pretty impressive in all facets of play.