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

After reading a bit I thought I would give some general views of mine on a few of the issues raised. We don't need an Australian identity. We already have one. We produce footballers who have good physicality and a fighting spirit. That's our football identity, has been for a long time and won't change in a hurry. We don't need a coach that imposes his philosophy come what may. We need a coach that looks at the players available and molds a system (hopefully more than one) that suits the players he has on hand. A club coach can more easily impose a philosophy simply because he can hire and fire from a broader pool of players. A national team coach needs to be more adaptable.

Popovic was actually a very good coach for us when he came in. His style was pretty much what we needed to get the qualifying campaign back on track. I think he is a bit rigid in his tactical approach and think that after the Asian Cup it's time for a new coach who is more willing to apply a style that suits the team rather than someone who sticks to his own philosophy
 
Alex M said:
After reading a bit I thought I would give some general views of mine on a few of the issues raised. We don't need an Australian identity. We already have one. We produce footballers who have good physicality and a fighting spirit. That's our football identity, has been for a long time and won't change in a hurry. We don't need a coach that imposes his philosophy come what may. We need a coach that looks at the players available and molds a system (hopefully more than one) that suits the players he has on hand. A club coach can more easily impose a philosophy simply because he can hire and fire from a broader pool of players. A national team coach needs to be more adaptable.

Popovic was actually a very good coach for us when he came in. His style was pretty much what we needed to get the qualifying campaign back on track. I think he is a bit rigid in his tactical approach and think that after the Asian Cup it's time for a new coach who is more willing to apply a style that suits the team rather than someone who sticks to his own philosophy
Click to expand...
You cant win on physically and fighting spirit alone, what the world cup has shown you need to be good in the ball and have players that value the ball in playing in a way that can be functional and ultimately successful.

Look at Argentina and Spain look how they value the ball and players with it if Australia wants to take the next step then it needs an evolution in how an Australian team can effective on the international stage so we can go into uncharted territory as a result.

Australia has done well to this far but it also shows they got severe limitations on how they play and view their football when competing against stronger nations.
 
Go Kuroda is still my first choice, language barrier or not.

He has some Asian experience with Machida Zelvia punching above their weight, obviously knows our main competitors and tactically suits our strengths and standing in world football.

Machida's 5221 formation and system is unfashionable and brutally effective. Unlike in Popa's system the two "attacking midfielders" actually suit wingers/strikers who are responsible for pressing in the final third, chasing second balls and sprinting back on que into a low block, the strikers main responsibility is linkup play and contesting long balls and blocking passing lanes during the press. The front three generally stay within supporting distance of on another and overload certain areas. The wingbacks push-up to form a four man midfield however will push up if the front three create the space. The midfield pairing are usually a traditional number 6 and 8 forming a diamond midfield in possession.
Passes are vertical and direct, set pieces and work ethic are apparently high priority at training.
The low block is Popa-ball-esque.
They often win with 30% posession.
 
I mean this game this morning.... England sitting back, Argentina with all the possession and all the shots.

Compared to against Cabo Verde. A team who's value is like a hundred million times less than this English team. Sure they have to sit back in periods of the game but they ATTACKED Argentina and really ran at them. At the end of the game it was Argentina who was holding on for dear life and sinking to the ground in relief that they held on against the onslaught. They had a more difficult game then than against this stacked English side. And that is due solely to the tactics of the two teams.

Park the bus tactics for any extended period of time will not work in the modern game. The best form of defence is attack or atleast being able to control some possession. You can't concede all the possession and all the momentum in the modern game and expect to get anywhere. You might get the odd result go your way... but more times you're just going to get punished.
 
Last edited:
Barca4life said:
You cant win on physically and fighting spirit alone, what the world cup has shown you need to be good in the ball and have players that value the ball in playing in a way that can be functional and ultimately successful.

Look at Argentina and Spain look how they value the ball and players with it if Australia wants to take the next step then it needs an evolution in how an Australian team can effective on the international stage so we can go into uncharted territory as a result.

Australia has done well to this far but it also shows they got severe limitations on how they play and view their football when competing against stronger nations.
Click to expand...
Having players good on the ball is a quality of player thing. Our progress isn't being limited by the National Team Coach (whoever we may appoint). We can't match the success of Spain and Argentina because we don't have players of their quality (at least not in any huge number). Lets be honest, we are a top 30 team with top 50 quality players. It's our physicality, fighting spirit and solid structure that allows us to compete with other top 30 teams.
 
Socceroofan4life said:
I mean this game this morning.... England sitting back, Argentina with all the possession and all the shots.

Compared to against Cabo Verde. A team who's value is like a hundred million times less than this English team. Sure they have to sit back in periods of the game but they ATTACKED Argentina and really ran at them. At the end of the game it was Argentina who was holding on for dear life and sinking to the ground in relief that they held on against the onslaught. They had a more difficult game then than against this stacked English side. And that is due solely to the tactics of the two teams.

Park the bus tactics for any extended period of time will not work in the modern game. The best form of defence is attack or atleast being able to control some possession. You can't concede all the possession and all the momentum in the modern game and expect to get anywhere. You might get the odd result go your way... but more times you're just going to get punished.
Click to expand...
I got a glimpe of what could have been in R16, Popa would've parked the bus from kickoff if we'd made it through.
Defensive football is fine but parking the bus without an outlet is suicide.
 
There's the issue of whether Australia as a nation needs a footballing identity, and the separate one of whether it's the national team manager's role to cultivate that identity.

Ultimately, if we want to be a nation that plays proactive football, I think that probably needs to come from the bottom up. The national team manager needs to fashion a winning team from the tools he/she is given. If the national footballing philosophy is proactive, the national team manager is in a better position to style a winning team accordingly.
 
Alex M said:
Having players good on the ball is a quality of player thing. Our progress isn't being limited by the National Team Coach (whoever we may appoint). We can't match the success of Spain and Argentina because we don't have players of their quality (at least not in any huge number). Lets be honest, we are a top 30 team with top 50 quality players. It's our physicality, fighting spirit and solid structure that allows us to compete with other top 30 teams.
Click to expand...
We still have to make maximum-effectiveness out of the skilled players that we do have, though. Let’s not have Herrington/Nestor/Volpato playing AFL with a round ball&no hands just because that’s what Connor Metcalfe does, for example.
 
Toebash said:
There's the issue of whether Australia as a nation needs a footballing identity, and the separate one of whether it's the national team manager's role to cultivate that identity.

Ultimately, if we want to be a nation that plays proactive football, I think that probably needs to come from the bottom up. The national team manager needs to fashion a winning team from the tools he/she is given. If the national footballing philosophy is proactive, the national team manager is in a better position to style a winning team accordingly.
Click to expand...
It’s possible to attempt a halfway-approach in the meantime.
 
BA81 said:
We still have to make maximum-effectiveness out of the skilled players that we do have, though. Let’s not have Herrington/Nestor/Volpato playing AFL with a round ball&no hands just because that’s what Connor Metcalfe does, for example.
Click to expand...
Of the 4 you mentioned the closest we have to playing AFL with a round ball and no hands is Irankunda.
 
Toebash said:
The ball is the post, and the post was obviously AI generated.

Stick to embarrassing yourself on the politics forum mate.
Click to expand...
I get your objection to the post being AI because a bottle’s worth of water was used up forever in generating it..but that aspect aside, as long as there were no lies/exaggerations in said post then who really gives a fuck❓
 
BA81 said:
I get your objection to the post being AI because a bottle’s worth of water was used up forever in generating it..but that aspect aside, as long as there were no lies/exaggerations in said post then who really gives a fuck❓
Click to expand...

I come onto an internet forum to engage with and hear the views of real people, not views generated by algorithms running on data centres in California.

Maybe people don't care, and that's fine, I'll leave it, but I sincerely think AI generated slop cheapens the experience of an internet forum.
 
Alex M said:
Having players good on the ball is a quality of player thing. Our progress isn't being limited by the National Team Coach (whoever we may appoint). We can't match the success of Spain and Argentina because we don't have players of their quality (at least not in any huge number). Lets be honest, we are a top 30 team with top 50 quality players. It's our physicality, fighting spirit and solid structure that allows us to compete with other top 30 teams.
Click to expand...
Its not so necessarily a player quality thing its also can be a player profile thing, we don't value technical players compared to other nations and if we have them the coaches prefer not to use them for various reasons.

Will make it us a top 30 nation by staying the same? Depends but should try not to put a limitation on how we go because we don't believe we cant develop a player or football in a certain way, this is the challenge Aus football faces if they want to take the next step.

Revolution rather than evolution?
 
Barca4life said:
Its not so necessarily a player quality its also can be a player profile thing, we dont value technical players compared to other nations and if we have them the coaches prefer not to use them for various reasons.
Click to expand...
And in any case don’t know how to use them effectively.

If Popa’s confirmedly in it for the long-haul, then we can def kiss any prospect of Gianluca Okon/Antonio Arena/Mahdi Nicoll-Jazuli and now this Max Anastasio kid ever playing for us🇦🇺 goodbye😔
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top