Match stats/analysis for recent Socceroo games

[Decentric]

his stats in austria have improved by a big margin in the last 12 months

he tends to be more attacking, even for a relegation battler, than he is for the NT. Probably will see that side of him soon

Interesting, Grazor?

Good to hear his stats have improved.

He has exceeded Strain, Karacic and Jones defensively - in the first 45 mins of this game. He is probably better than Miller at staying on his feet and defending. Although Miller is a better aerial duellist.

It looks like Italiano has better tight ball control than Geria and Miller too, as a RB or Right WB.

We haven't seen much of Ital's attacking qualities - yet.

 

[Decentric]

I've just finished both the Canada v Aus and USA v Aus games in terms of collating all the data from watching all the live footage.

Not quite sure why, but they have been the most exhausting games I've done this time round - since stopping about 10 plus years ago. I started again with Popa's regime and Armie's last 2 games.

I think there were frequent passages in both games against Canada and USA, where it was in a Contested Ball Phase, or, Transitions Defensive and Attacking, which should equate to about 6-10 secs per team when neither team has effective control of the ball in possession.

That could involve painstakingly going back to evaluate 4-7 successive 1v1 duels to see who actually won each duel, or if there was any outcome at all.

It is a lot easier when one or both teams have the ball for long periods of possession.

There were only 79 unique 1v1 duels against USA which had outcomes, which is very low figure.

Yet there were periods of play, where both teams were fighting hard for sustained periods to try and regain the ball.

Against Canada, there were 136 unique 1v1 duels that had outcomes, which is a very high figure. I thought it was a very niggly game, with Canada constantly the perpetrators of the niggle.

Paul 01 is an experienced ref, and thought he would have made a few tweaks, but essentially thought the game was adjudicated quite well. I'd love to know what other experienced refs, Muz and NCB thought?

Aus won approx 62% of the 1v1s that had outcomes against Canada.

Aus won approx 66% of 1v1s that had outcomes against the USA.

Both these figures are approximates from mental maths. They should be accurate , as I taught maths!

Australia dominated 1v1s in both games, like they have against all teams Indo, China, Japan B, Saudi, Kiwis.

Yet Popa's perception in an interview, was that Japan B, Saudi and the Kiwis physically bullied Aus. Not sure how many stops he used in the replays to determine victors for 1v1 duels?

Back in Holger's last game Aus was steamrolled by a very physical Brazilian team, who won 37 more 1v1 duels than the Socceroos.

In about the same era USA almost equalled Aus in 1v1s when physicality was paramount in US football.

 

[Decentric]

Many posters have been frustrated with Popa's selections.

In Popa's interview that Grazor posted in the Aus National Team thread, Popa says he never knows how quickly players will adapt in camp to the Socceroo game plans.

He said that he thought Degenek was never going to play well enough to be selected again. He admitted he was wrong to write him off.

Popa thought that Iran and Toure had the ability, some time in the distant future. He has been gobsmacked how quickly they have adapted to international football, more quickly than he thought.

Raw data that I've compiled has shown a lot of the new players that Popa has selected, and fans have been screaming for to be selected, have done well.

Popa has admitted how quickly his first eleven is changing.

Now Balard, Toure, Iran, Italiano, are pushing for first eleven selection. Circati and Bos were probably already in Popa's best eleven, but the others weren't.

Popa is anticipating even more young players stepping up in the next month or so.

Degenek did well until he encountered big, physical forwards from the Kiwis, Canada and the USA, where he was outmuscled a bit in 1v1s.

 

[Decentric]

At the same time as new players have done well in the data collated, so have players like O'Neill, who has been unpopular with G and G posters.

So has Metcalfe. Another unpopular player on these boards. A lot of the stuff he does well - having good vision, game sense, stamina in tracking back to keep the team shape compact in defence, first touch under pressure, ball winning, causing turnovers - goes unnoticed.

 

[Decentric]

Not sure how others saw it?

Live I thought Aus weren't that good in the second half against USA.

After the replay, and slow analysis, it appeared the best half Aus has played against Canada and USA, despite conceding a goal against the run of play.

I was really surprised?

Aus had a lot more balls played into the pen box, more shots at goal, and the US keeper was far busier than Ryan. There was more possession and more territorial gain than any other time in the last two games, apart from straight after Iran scored against Canada.

In 70- 85 mins of that game, Aus dominated Canada. The home team looked lost after they went behind. They were very angry and lost discipline. However, Canada played all over Aus from 85 mins to 95 mins.

 

[Decentric]

Another big wrap to Italiano as RB or Right WB.

Popa gave him 56 mins against Canada and 77 mins against USA. Miller replaced him both times.

Italiano has better close ball control than Miller.

Is more nimble and less likely to get caught up in physical battles.

How?

In possession he is caught with the ball less than Miller. He has faster handling speed and is more nimble on his feet.

Without it Italiano is more likely to jockey, delay and show than Miller. The Blackburn player is more likely to commit and force a contest. The Italiano strategy means the team shape as a unit is breached less.'

Miller's advantage is a bigger, stronger unit to overpower or negate physically strong players, or, win heading duels.

Whereas I think Geria is also a quality RB or Right WB, he is a useful Right CB. More depth is being created on the defensive right flank.

I don't think Strain, Karacic and Geraint Jones are good enough as RBs. They all need to improve. Atkinson needs to improve his 1v1 ball winning, and seems better suited to midfield ATM.

 

[Decentric]

Keeping.

Ryan has copped a lot of criticism on G and G. Not sure why? Another G and G scapegoat.

In the last games Izzo has excelled as a shot stopper, but his distribution under pressure as a sweeper is way behind Ryan's.

Ryan is like a sweeper and serves as an 11th outfield player.

 

[Hillbilly55]

At the same time as new players have done well in the data collated, so have players like O'Neill, who has been unpopular with G and G posters.

So has Metcalfe. Another unpopular player on these boards. A lot of the stuff he does well - having good vision, game sense, stamina in tracking back to keep the team shape compact in defence, first touch under pressure, ball winning, causing turnovers - goes unnoticed.

I have really been impressed with the output and effectiveness of Metcalfe in the last several games, particularly the Nth American ones. He really seems to have flowered (can't think of a better word, [prospered?]) under Poppa's coaching. The only thing lacking is goals scored. Even the one he got against Saudi was effectively straight at the keeper, who somehow managed to dodge it.

I wonder at the psychology of people aiming for goal. When I played, my vision was of the net. I have asked people what they think of/look at when shooting and a surprising number say the keeper. No wonder their shots are drawn towards the keeper rather than the goal. I wonder if this is Metcalfe's problem, as he seems invariably to shoot at the keeper, or miss entirely.

 

[LFC]

Keeping.

Ryan has copped a lot of criticism on G and G. Not sure why? Another G and G scapegoat.

In the last games Izzo has excelled as a shot stopper, but his distribution under pressure as a sweeper is way behind Ryan's.

Ryan is like a sweeper and serves as an 11th outfield player.

Well I don't see Ryan comfortable as such sweeping.
I don't see the confidence I expect at that level let alone at club.
He's a good GK but I don't see him great at his feet.

 

[Decentric]

I have really been impressed with the output and effectiveness of Metcalfe in the last several games, particularly the Nth American ones. He really seems to have flowered (can't think of a better word, [prospered?]) under Poppa's coaching. The only thing lacking is goals scored. Even the one he got against Saudi was effectively straight at the keeper, who somehow managed to dodge it.

I wonder at the psychology of people aiming for goal. When I played, my vision was of the net. I have asked people what they think of/look at when shooting and a surprising number say the keeper. No wonder their shots are drawn towards the keeper rather than the goal. I wonder if this is Metcalfe's problem, as he seems invariably to shoot at the keeper, or miss entirely.

Good question, Hillbilly?

When I was aged 10-13, I played as a forward and winger.

Then I became a midfielder and defender, not shooting as much, but playing at a much higher level.

I've coached players to aim for the two top corners, or, put markers like stand up cones to place just inside the posts for strikers to aim at for training ground shooting exercises.

That Saudi goal scored by Metcalfe was a beauty.

Leckie missed a lot too.

Another point is compared to spectacular players like Iran, Bos and Arzani, it is easy for anyone to see their strengths.

With Metcalfe a lot of what he does well is a lot more subtle. I've often had to repeat and repeat replays to determine of who won the ball, him or or his opponent.

Or, he often makes superb first touches under pressure, but one has to repeat and repeat the replay to see that Metcalfe has actually done something really good with the ball within centimetres of an opponents' foot.

 

[Decentric]

Well I don't see Ryan comfortable as such sweeping.
I don't see the confidence I expect at that level let alone at club.
He's a good GK but I don't see him great at his feet.

For the Roos Ryan has been our best sweeping keeper.

He has been under more pressure with opponents' Full Pressing and intensive Squeezing though in recent games.

A lot more Aus keepers are better sweepers in the current era than the past. I've done a lot of keeping courses to learn about improving my knowledge of shot stopping with Dean May, but mainly gained info that the most a keeper touches the ball is with his/her feet.

 

[Keeper66]

With Metcalfe a lot of what he does well is a lot more subtle. I've often had to repeat and repeat replays to determine of who won the ball, him or or his opponent.

I don't follow this. It should be quite clear who wins a one v one on first viewing. If it's not, I would say it was inconclusive. If it's not clear on first viewing who has won the ball, then neither has won the ball.

 

[Decentric]

I don't follow this. It should be quite clear who wins a one v one on first viewing. If it's not, I would say it was inconclusive. If it's not clear on first viewing who has won the ball, then neither has won the ball.

It isn't clear at all in some 1v1 contests, Keeper.

Metcalfe has often played a superb pass to a teammate under pressure in time and space, that could overtly look like it has come off an opponent's foot, with Metcalfe losing a 1v1 duel.

It has been a real pain in the last 2 games the number of 1v1 contests that were hard to adjudicate a victor - but there was a victor after revisiting the action a few times.

There are usually between 8- 15 unique 1v1 contests over 90 minutes, where it is difficult to determine a victor. I count them as neutral 1v1 contests.

I'd love some of your keeping insights!

 

[LFC]

For the Roos Ryan has been our best sweeping keeper.

He has been under more pressure with opponents' Full Pressing and intensive Squeezing though in recent games.

A lot more Aus keepers are better sweepers in the current era than the past. I've done a lot of keeping courses to learn about improving my knowledge of shot stopping with Dean May, but mainly gained info that the most a keeper touches the ball is with his/her feet.

well the others have hardly had enough chances to date.
I can't judge them yet but you can tell easy enough what kind of composure their body and action looks when on the ball.
Ryan does not exude that whatsoever for me - infact he looks unsure/scared - even before the hard pressing/squeezing has increased therefore makes it worse.
As I said - even before the very recent times he hardly looked convincing.

 

[Decentric]

well the others have hardly had enough chances to date.
I can't judge them yet but you can tell easy enough what kind of composure their body and action looks when on the ball.
Ryan does not exude that whatsoever for me - infact he looks unsure/scared - even before the hard pressing/squeezing has increased therefore makes it worse.
As I said - even before the very recent times he hardly looked convincing.

Shot stopping is a weakness of mine for evaluation. Most of Ryan's critics on G and G have questioned his shot stopping, not his sweeping.

The younger keepers in Aus are better sweepers than past eras. I'm not sure how they compare to Ryan though as a sweeper?

 

[Keeper66]

It isn't clear at all in some 1v1 contests, Keeper.

Metcalfe has often played a superb pass to a teammate under pressure in time and space, that could overtly look like it has come off an opponent's foot, with Metcalfe losing a 1v1 duel.

It has been a real pain in the last 2 games the number of 1v1 contests that were hard to adjudicate a victor - but there was a victor after revisiting the action a few times.

There are usually between 8- 15 unique 1v1 contests over 90 minutes, where it is difficult to determine a victor. I count them as neutral 1v1 contests.

I'd love some of your keeping insights!

I don't really follow your example. If Metcalfe, under pressure, has played a pass to a team mate that has reached the team mate, how has he lost a 1v1? Even if the ball has deflected off an opponent, if the pass has still reached his team mate then Metcalfe has been successful.

I agree it isn't clear in all contests. Many 1v1's don't have a clear winner. That's why my thinking is, if it isn't clear, then it is inconclusive and it should not be credited to either player/team. Viewing a contest over and over because a winner is "needed" to satisfy a stats collector is not really useful.

There isn't anything wrong with not having a clear winner in a 1v1, it's part of football.

 

[Keeper66]

Well I don't see Ryan comfortable as such sweeping.
I don't see the confidence I expect at that level let alone at club.
He's a good GK but I don't see him great at his feet.

I agree that sometimes Ryan looks a bit uncomfortable with the ball at his feet, but not always. Mostly he looks ok, but certainly not at the level of the best feet-playing keepers (e.g., Ederson). His major issue for me is that he doesn't seem to have a lot of length on his kicking when he needs to go long, anything over halfway is becoming a stretch for him.

However, he is a long way better than Izzo is on the ball. That is a major weakness in Izzo's game.

 

[LFC]

Yes thanks you get where I’m coming from.
Also forget the Ederson/Ryha/Allison’s they are way above in every discipline of GK skill.

Agree Ryan lacks a long ball - don’t think he ever had one tbh.
The other point is it’s our insistence playing from the back - that’s when I see Ryan being unsure for let’s face it we are not really convincing on ball and when pressed high we lack the skill set even though D will say otherwise.
All this plays in a GK mind.

 

[Decentric]

I don't really follow your example. If Metcalfe, under pressure, has played a pass to a team mate that has reached the team mate, how has he lost a 1v1? Even if the ball has deflected off an opponent, if the pass has still reached his team mate then Metcalfe has been successful.

I agree it isn't clear in all contests. Many 1v1's don't have a clear winner. That's why my thinking is, if it isn't clear, then it is inconclusive and it should not be credited to either player/team. Viewing a contest over and over because a winner is "needed" to satisfy a stats collector is not really useful.

There isn't anything wrong with not having a clear winner in a 1v1, it's part of football.

You missed the inference. I said at times it 'could look like Metcalfe lost a 1v1', that was not meant by his opponent who looked like he won the duel, but the ball looked like it went to a Socceroos teammate by accident.

When in fact Metcalfe had played a deft ball under extreme pressure to a teammate. This is a closely contested 1v1. It has a clear winner of the 1v1 contest. I don't agree that it just satisfies a stats collector.

It is the antithesis of some of Bos's or Irankunda's easily identifiable spectacular runs, where they may carry the ball for some distance and beat 2 players.

They are all 1v1s in different manifestations. Some players are doing some useful work for the team that is harder to identify.

 

[Decentric]

Yes thanks you get where I’m coming from.
Also forget the Ederson/Ryha/Allison’s they are way above in every discipline of GK skill.

Agree Ryan lacks a long ball - don’t think he ever had one tbh.
The other point is it’s our insistence playing from the back - that’s when I see Ryan being unsure for let’s face it we are not really convincing on ball and when pressed high we lack the skill set even though D will say otherwise.
All this plays in a GK mind.

No I don't say we should always play out from the back.

A few of our recent opponents have applied some very effective Full Pressing and intensive Squeezing, high up the pitch. It has occurred to the extent that the opponents have closed down all free Socceroo players, and hence closed down all available passing lanes, at the back and even in midfield.