The end is nigh - impending doom - Moss out etc thread

[Gratis]

I still think Josh Rose, probably our most consistent player this year, is a potential Socceroo

have to agree, he's been consistent, reliable and high quality all season. and even better now he can get forward a bit more again

 

[nearlyyellow]

I still think Josh Rose, probably our most consistent player this year, is a potential Socceroo

Sadly, Josh is 33 now. Out of the current Socceroo squad of 23 players for the Asian Cup only 6 are 30 or over, 7 are between 25 to 29 and the remaining 10 are sub 25. I recall AP's mantra was to rebuild a younger Socceroos , and that would effectively rule Joshy out, I think. You could take some solace in the fact that two of the youngest players are ex CCM, Trent Sainsbury 23 and Matt Ryan 22

 

[Forum Phoenix]

I don't - not at his age now. But he was definitely the best left back for a few years and didn't get a gig.

He was. And it seemed insane when we were so deficient at LB in the NT. Then he finally got selected for a camp...and didn't make the cut. Bottom line. He was, and still is, not a good passer of the ball. I haven't seen the stats, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he had the lowest completion in our squad, even though that should belong to the mids looking to playing the harder defence splitting passes. He was a converted striker, and it looks like he never really had the technical focus on his passing when younger. Zero chance as a Socceroo now.

But I love him. Awesome Mariner. Very good defender and excellent runs and support in attack. Though Kareem is right about the talent of Neill too. Though we might not see him for quite a while it sounds.

Duke is still probably the best bet. But he'll need to bang in a goodly amount of goals this year and likely (sadly) go OS and perform, before they'll take note again. Wasn't sure how old Poscy was...24 and just breaking into HAL, it seems unlikely. A number of players ahead of him.

Caceres...has a lot of talent, but unless he starts to run games, score more regularly, ( or go to MV) Hard to see him getting a call up for a very competitive spot. Personally I'd have him in the quad now over Matt Mckay. But that doesn't mean anything. Total waste of a spot. Should have been Ollie's in truth. We need goals from someone else besides Timmy, and McKay couldn't score in a brothel even if he was a f**king Lannister.

 

[style_cafe]

I like Rosey but seriously time has past him by.
Although a terrific club man he has his faults which would always deny him a place in the National team.
In saying that I wouldn`t swap him for any other LB in the A-League.

 

[Wombat]

He was. And it seemed insane when we were so deficient at LB in the NT. Then he finally got selected for a camp...and didn't make the cut. Bottom line. He was, and still is, not a good passer of the ball. I haven't seen the stats, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he had the lowest completion in our squad, even though that should belong to the mids looking to playing the harder defence splitting passes. He was a converted striker, and it looks like he never really had the technical focus on his passing when younger. Zero chance as a Socceroo now.

But I love him. Awesome Mariner. Very good defender and excellent runs and support in attack. Though Kareem is right about the talent of Neill too. Though we might not see him for quite a while it sounds.

Duke is still probably the best bet. But he'll need to bang in a goodly amount of goals this year and likely (sadly) go OS and perform, before they'll take note again. Wasn't sure how old Poscy was...24 and just breaking into HAL, it seems unlikely. A number of players ahead of him.

Caceres...has a lot of talent, but unless he starts to run games, score more regularly, ( or go to MV) Hard to see him getting a call up for a very competitive spot. Personally I'd have him in the quad now over Matt Mckay. But that doesn't mean anything. Total waste of a spot. Should have been Ollie's in truth. We need goals from someone else besides Timmy, and McKay couldn't score in a brothel even if he was a f**king Lannister.

You stand corrected. McKay scored and played well.

 

[Forum Phoenix]

Ha! What? He was total and utter... yeah he was great. Excellent game. Except for staling Tesco's goal

Whole team were fantastic. (Though Leckie is still so wasteful) and Oman were horrid and defeated early. But Ange's typical pressure and passing game was far too much for them. Huge kudos for AP -- we would have looked nothing like this under Pim or Holger.

Luongo was my MOM again. What an impact he's having.

Juric with a quality finish.

Matty Ryan has it all.

 

[nearlyyellow]

I may be drawing a long bow here, but here I go. Does anybody see any similarities in the style of play between the Ange Postecoglu coached Socceroos and the Phil Moss coached Mariners, especially in the last two games? Or am I just too infatuated with winning results. Or am I just not yet absorbed enough in the game and not knowledgeable enough to spot the differences? Please be gentle on me. Intelligent and knowledgeable comments would be appreciated.

 

[sydmariner]

Well we (ccm) haven't scored 8 goals in our last 2 games for a start plus he went 30+ games (with BR) in a row unbeaten

 

[VicMariner]

I may be drawing a long bow here, but here I go. Does anybody see any similarities in the style of play between the Ange Postecoglu coached Socceroos and the Phil Moss coached Mariners, especially in the last two games? Or am I just too infatuated with winning results. Or am I just not yet absorbed enough in the game and not knowledgeable enough to spot the differences? Please be gentle on me. Intelligent and knowledgeable comments would be appreciated.

My football analysis is not worth much and probably wrong but:

I suppose we are trying to play the same style - passing, possession, play out from the back etc.
The difference as I see it is the socceroos have high confidence atm, are playing lesser quality teams, are closing down quick and regaining possession, always trying to get forward and attack, have guys who can finish, and everybody seems to know their job.
Japan will be a good test. I'll wait till we play them before getting too carried away but everything is looking good so far.

The Mariners pass around the back too much and seem to struggle to get forward. Midfield gets shut down too easy and our front guys struggle to score except Simon. The teams we play know us and we are probably a bit low on confidence which is very important imo.
BUT.. we are not getting smashed and the last few games before the Asian Cup break showed some good improvement.
I think we need to play at a higher tempo and press better, have some mongrel and go for the kill.

IMO

 

[nearlyyellow]

Well we (ccm) haven't scored 8 goals in our last 2 games for a start plus he went 30+ games (with BR) in a row unbeaten

Point taken, of course you are totally right. But it was the *hint* of an improvement in the last two games I felt I had noticed, and the similarity in style.

My football analysis is not worth much and probably wrong but:

I suppose we are trying to play the same style - passing, possession, play out from the back etc.
The difference as I see it is the socceroos have high confidence atm, are playing lesser quality teams, are closing down quick and regaining possession, always trying to get forward and attack, have guys who can finish, and everybody seems to know their job.
Japan will be a good test. I'll wait till we play them before getting too carried away but everything is looking good so far.

The Mariners pass around the back too much and seem to struggle to get forward. Midfield gets shut down too easy and our front guys struggle to score except Simon. The teams we play know us and we are probably a bit low on confidence which is very important imo.
BUT.. we are not getting smashed and the last few games before the Asian Cup break showed some good improvement.
I think we need to play at a higher tempo and press better, have some mongrel and go for the kill.

IMO

Thanks for your nicely put ideas.
"passing, possession, play out from the back" - that's what I was kind of inferring.

"BUT.. we are not getting smashed and the last few games before the Asian Cup break showed some good improvement." - More of this and winning, positive results on the scorecard, and the confidence levels are bound to improve, and then we should regain some of that mongrel we have lacked. With the new signings we may begin to see some power up front and some light at the end of the tunnel. I hope, anyway.

 

[dibo]

I think there's a broader 'Ange' style that has different flavours depending on personnel. At Brisbane he was able to control his circumstances absolutely - he closed a season with Fwankie's squad, rebuilt it from the ground up with significant resources at his disposal and had an enormous pre-season with players he wanted and changed their style of play completely.

Theoklitos basically hit zero long balls, and had to release short to a DM or a widely-spaced CB by hand or foot every time. They passed their way up the park, they crossed the ball less than they tried to put a guy behind the line. They invited teams to press them so they could pass through the press.

Even then, it took time to gel before they hit their straps. They showed their new style straight away but got absolutely hosed by Melbourne 3-0 down there in a match where Melbourne pressed them relentlessly and forced error after error.

They refused to change tack, and that was the only game they lost. When they beat Heart a couple of matches later was when they really showed their true style, and they have basically kept that going until Thiessen came on board, and they're now a little more pragmatic.

Under Arnie, we also had a similarly strong pattern of play that contrasted well but was similarly effective - pass short where you can, control possession where you can, but look to find quick movement to strike from deeper areas and catch opposing defences when they're moving backwards. We were far less adept at the dominating style of play where we take on a deep-lying defence. We'd try to get the opposition to come to us so we could launch angled balls to the wings rather than to play through.

If we couldn't draw them up the park we'd try to catch them sliding - big switch balls to the fullbacks on empty flanks and then try to pass in behind the defenders as they slide across to cover.

Both attacking plans were successful when we had players able to finish them off.

Ange actually played more similarly to Arnie's plan in attack at Victory, because he had players like Archie and Barbarouses who are well suited to being hit with big angled escape balls to strike quickly. Archie's probably scored 3/4 of his goals that way. Playing out they had the same Ange feel though.

Ange's Socceroos look a little different again - *lots* of crosses! I think this is because we've got players like Cahill, Juric, Spiranovic, even Sainsbury who are very strong in the air and can punish weary or disorganised defences. Ange shows us that he changes how he plays based on who he's got in the shed.

This brings us back to Moss. Our dressing room is thin on absolute quality. What we do have is depth. So we're trying to play a style that doesn't rely on much quality, more on players getting in and doing a defined job, knowing that there's someone who'll step up and replace them next week if they don't.

The pattern of play when playing out is different to Arnie in that we're much more focussed on the short balls. It's closer to an Ange-at-Brisbane style of play. In attack, we don't really have players who can skin a million players and set all our hearts a flutter, and our crossing and heading is usually woeful, so we're trying to play dinky balls into the area to score from in front of the 6yd box.

It's fairly predictable but it's really all we've got available to us. Teams are happy to sit deeper against us to disrupt us, knowing the vast majority of the time we'll cough it up. What's helped in recent weeks is that because we're keeping the ball better at the back and playing out more effectively, more players are willing to make runs in behind and so we're getting less predictable in front of goal.

Duke isn't the only threat, which means he actually gets freed up to be more threatening. He doesn't have two gorillas on him all day because at least one gorilla needs to be looking for the other runner.

It is taking time, and I totally understand impatience and frustration. "Moss out" doesn't help now any more or less than it would weeks ago because it doesn't change what we've got in the shed to work with. We're skinny on quality but fat on depth. As the style beds in we'll get better and if other teams start weakening through injuries etc. (like Sydney has) then we might climb a few rungs.

We won't match the Brisbanes of old and the Adelaide of this year because we simply don't have the quality. If we did and still weren't winning there'd be questions to ask. We all have to basically suck that up and realise that whoever's coaching us, we aren't winning much this year.

 

[nearlyyellow]

I think ..
Under Arnie, ..
Ange ..
This brings us back to Moss. ..
It is taking time, ..

Thanks dibo, plenty to read there and very informative for a newbie like me. But I must say I did actually understand your logic and the points you made. When I think about the games I've seen in recent times I begin to picture more team on field structure, more player positional strategies being employed. I must be learning from you guys. There's hope for this old RL boyo yet.

 

[Gratis]

very well summed up dibo

 

[Forum Phoenix]

Always great posts Dibo. Appreciate the effort you put in and your insight. Nice to have you on the boards by the way NY.

We are lining up similarly, but we don't have the pace wide that the Roos have anymore (bar when Rosey gets forward). The strongest similarities are definitely in how we play out and look to build. As said possession based football. The biggest difference in that regard is that Ange has them they move the ball quicker, and at least for a large portion of the Oman game their movement off the ball was very good.

Defensively however they apply a very typical AP press. When they lose the ball they work flat out, willing to expend lots of energy to get it back quickly or make it very difficult for their opposition to find a rhythm. It's easy on the eye And it's easier to press than keep possession; so it's often successful and takes high quality players and sides to defeat through short passing, evasion and movement. Teams like Saudi Arabia, Japan especially, Iran and Korea will put our press to a much greater test and it will be interesting to see if AP is going to adjust tactically, and if not how our pressing game will fare.

 

[dibo]

Pressing is a key area of contrast between AP teams over the years and the way CCM has played going back to Lawrie's days.

Whether we're playing a diamond 4-4-2, a 4-2-3-1 or a 4-3-3, we typically set up in a deeper 4-4-2 block, with the back 4 sitting on or not-far-in-front-of the penalty area, with the midfield 4 sitting behind the centre circle. The only exception to this is the few times we've played a 5-4-1, in which case we simply stay in the 5-4-1 shape in defence.

This creates a congested space that is difficult to play through. If the ball is in the opposition's hands on the other side of half way, we don't really care all that much. We're happy to see their centre backs knock it between them - the game goes for 90 minutes and we're happy to wait and draw breath.

When they play it to their fullbacks to try to begin a movement up a flank, we close down the spaces and try to force them back or force an error (ball played out over the sideline, ball played into an interception, etc.). If they play into midfield, same deal. The key thing is to make their two 'easy' options to either keep the ball at CB or try to play a Hail Mary ball over the top (which is easily dealt with by any one of the back 5).

Where we come undone is when we haven't yet got into shape and get caught in transition with really effective passing sides - sides that can play through congested areas. Brisbane of old, Adelaide now, Wellington (sometimes) - or sides that counterattack extremely effectively - Perth this year, Melbourne Victory when they're *on*, WSW when they're *on*, Wellington (sometimes).

AP sides play a different game. When they lose the ball they're not happy to wait to win it back. They press in the same shape (typically 4-3-3) they play in attack, so their transitions are lightning quick. They always look to win the ball back in the first 5 seconds after losing it. This means that the other team either has to play past the hard press (i.e. be as good as Brisbane used to be with the ball at foot) or retreat to the keeper and rebuild.

It's risky - they can be caught overcommitting (all three attackers pressing hard up into the attacking spaces leaves you vulnerable if a fullback presses up a flank and you can be hit with a counterattack).

We saw against Oman and Kuwait that counterattacks are a vulnerability of the Socceroos side at the moment, but we've got two mobile and sensible centre backs and our fullbacks are adept at making ground and making clutch tackles - Franjic made an absolute belter of a tackle on Tuesday night.

FWIW, Mossy shows that we're happy to try to play this high press sometimes, and we look more flexible in defence than the Lawrie/Arnie Mariners sides of old. We're also weaker, but this is a combination of weaker personnel and learning a new way of doing things.

I don't think our side is fit enough to play an AP style press for 90 minutes each match, but I'd be surprised if that wasn't Mossy's ambition.

 

[midfielder]

Nearlyellow

Many many moons ago when I first started to understand Football was more than hoof and run. I was at a lost to find the way forward in coming to a better understanding.

Then the coach of Liverpool FC at the time the best club side in the world and still ranked as one of the best club sides ever, kinda the Barca of today.

Any Whooo the coach was asked how he coached and played the game… this is a one line answer simple in the extreme but it explained a lot to me and have used the advice in coaching and playing and understanding player movement in professional games, ever since.

So here goes and hope it helps Nearlyellow as best as I can remember it and its in one line...

“”When we lose the ball everyone get behind the ball and mark a player or space and when we win the ball push every player to push off their marker and move into space to receive a pass””

 

[Wombat]

I may be drawing a long bow here, but here I go. Does anybody see any similarities in the style of play between the Ange Postecoglu coached Socceroos and the Phil Moss coached Mariners, especially in the last two games? Or am I just too infatuated with winning results. Or am I just not yet absorbed enough in the game and not knowledgeable enough to spot the differences? Please be gentle on me. Intelligent and knowledgeable comments would be appreciated.

We have looked like Oman for all but the last two games.

 

[Wombat]

I think there's a broader 'Ange' style that has different flavours depending on personnel. At Brisbane he was able to control his circumstances absolutely - he closed a season with Fwankie's squad, rebuilt it from the ground up with significant resources at his disposal and had an enormous pre-season with players he wanted and changed their style of play completely.

Theoklitos basically hit zero long balls, and had to release short to a DM or a widely-spaced CB by hand or foot every time. They passed their way up the park, they crossed the ball less than they tried to put a guy behind the line. They invited teams to press them so they could pass through the press.

Even then, it took time to gel before they hit their straps. They showed their new style straight away but got absolutely hosed by Melbourne 3-0 down there in a match where Melbourne pressed them relentlessly and forced error after error.

They refused to change tack, and that was the only game they lost. When they beat Heart a couple of matches later was when they really showed their true style, and they have basically kept that going until Thiessen came on board, and they're now a little more pragmatic.

Under Arnie, we also had a similarly strong pattern of play that contrasted well but was similarly effective - pass short where you can, control possession where you can, but look to find quick movement to strike from deeper areas and catch opposing defences when they're moving backwards. We were far less adept at the dominating style of play where we take on a deep-lying defence. We'd try to get the opposition to come to us so we could launch angled balls to the wings rather than to play through.

If we couldn't draw them up the park we'd try to catch them sliding - big switch balls to the fullbacks on empty flanks and then try to pass in behind the defenders as they slide across to cover.

Both attacking plans were successful when we had players able to finish them off.

Ange actually played more similarly to Arnie's plan in attack at Victory, because he had players like Archie and Barbarouses who are well suited to being hit with big angled escape balls to strike quickly. Archie's probably scored 3/4 of his goals that way. Playing out they had the same Ange feel though.

Ange's Socceroos look a little different again - *lots* of crosses! I think this is because we've got players like Cahill, Juric, Spiranovic, even Sainsbury who are very strong in the air and can punish weary or disorganised defences. Ange shows us that he changes how he plays based on who he's got in the shed.

This brings us back to Moss. Our dressing room is thin on absolute quality. What we do have is depth. So we're trying to play a style that doesn't rely on much quality, more on players getting in and doing a defined job, knowing that there's someone who'll step up and replace them next week if they don't.

The pattern of play when playing out is different to Arnie in that we're much more focussed on the short balls. It's closer to an Ange-at-Brisbane style of play. In attack, we don't really have players who can skin a million players and set all our hearts a flutter, and our crossing and heading is usually woeful, so we're trying to play dinky balls into the area to score from in front of the 6yd box.

It's fairly predictable but it's really all we've got available to us. Teams are happy to sit deeper against us to disrupt us, knowing the vast majority of the time we'll cough it up. What's helped in recent weeks is that because we're keeping the ball better at the back and playing out more effectively, more players are willing to make runs in behind and so we're getting less predictable in front of goal.

Duke isn't the only threat, which means he actually gets freed up to be more threatening. He doesn't have two gorillas on him all day because at least one gorilla needs to be looking for the other runner.

It is taking time, and I totally understand impatience and frustration. "Moss out" doesn't help now any more or less than it would weeks ago because it doesn't change what we've got in the shed to work with. We're skinny on quality but fat on depth. As the style beds in we'll get better and if other teams start weakening through injuries etc. (like Sydney has) then we might climb a few rungs.

We won't match the Brisbanes of old and the Adelaide of this year because we simply don't have the quality. If we did and still weren't winning there'd be questions to ask. We all have to basically suck that up and realise that whoever's coaching us, we aren't winning much this year.

The last two games have showed how we can play with a more attacking set up. Our ultra defensive line ups and lazy off the ball work have made us a dream opponent for most teams. A decent coach (moss may develop into one in a few years time) and we would probably be sitting in the top 6.

 

[dibo]

I've learnt well enough not to bother engaging with you on football.

 

[Spacks]

I think our biggest problem is the lack of confidence.

When we play confidently and attack, instead of 'parking the bus', we do well.