My thoughts:
- I would have been OK with that result normally, but in this context I'm a little disappointed because we were the better side in the second half. At least we won't go home with zero points and have kept our campaign alive.
Now let's see how France prepare against Peru. France have far better players than Peru, but Peru function very well as a unit and were unlucky to lose to Denmark.
RE Peru, their strikers Farfan/Ruidiaz are much more dangerous than ours - Farfan did well in Russia while Ruidiaz excelled in Mexico (for mine one of the Top 10 leagues in the world). Unfortunately for them, Guerrero isn't really match-fit, coming off a prolonged ban. Carillo didn't have the best season with Watford, but he is quick enough to trouble an unwary FB. Cueva is a genuine attacking midfielder, rather than a classic #10, in that he's not overly creative and is quite sharp, instead troubling opponents with his able dribbling into the opposition box, thus making him a goal threat. He is inconsistent, but he lifts himself for the national team.
On paper, our midfield of Mooy/Rogic/Jedinak should best Cueva/Yotun/Tapia, but as I've said before, this Peruvian team performs well as a unit.
Peru's CB's are solid - possibly like facing two Sainsbury's instead of one, but they do not have the ostensible quality of Denmark or France's CB's so Juric/Maclaren/Cahill might get more joy. Trauco the LB not bad either. Gallese is one of the best keepers playing in Mexico but IMO he's the weakest of the four keepers in our group. Advincula the RB is an interesting proposition - he has the pace to burn any player but he also doesn't offer much defensively or offensively. Would it be wise to give Kruse 60 minutes suppressing Advincula, before bringing Arzani on to take advantage of his tiredness? I am happy to be more liberal and introduce Arzani earlier, but I'm not sure what his stamina and defensive abilities are like - someone help me out here.
- I thought that van Marwijk's initial team selection was too conservative as soon as I saw it and so it proved.
- Leckie justified his re-inclusion with his work rate, composure, trickery and body balance.
- However, Kruse, whom I assume was selected to work hard, was disappointing, wasting so many shooting opportunities. We may need to consider giving Arzani up to 45 mins of time against Peru if Kruse continues to perform poorly.
- Nabbout worked hard without accomplishing much and probably won't accomplish any more.
- Mooy was again a standout, proving himself an able playmaker by dictating terms and making smart passes and even helping win the penalty.
- Jedinak's leadership and penalty kick not only prevented us from collapsing but also allowed us a share of the spoils. He'll start against Peru surely, like it or not.
- Even Rogic was more involved, probably because there was no Kante to snuff out his forward runs.
- The side-backs (Behich/Risdon) did a pretty good job against their respective foes and tried to threaten going forward, but unfortunately neither could come up with much end product.
- Sainsbury/Miligan were a worry early, which indicates to me that they get nervous early doors when placed under pressure, but both settled into the game quite well. Next game Jedinak and Mooy must provide an effective defensive shield for those two during the first 20 minutes before Mooy drives forward.
- The fact that we haven't scored a goal from open-play is a real-worry. The problem until now is that Nabbout/Kruse/Leckie, hard working and pacey as they are (although Kruse less so) are not especially prolific at such a high level. Could MacLaren (and using Cahill judiciously) change this? I don't expect much from Juric.
- The Tim Cahill call was a travesty IMO, but one I think can be explainable by van Marwijk's relative ignorance of Australian football (having not coached long). An Australian would have understood very well Tim Cahill's propensity to score in clutch matches but I'm not sure van Marwijk did (and I'm not sure watching a few match highlights from years ago would have given him much insight). All a foreign coach like van Marwijk would have seen was a fading attacking midfielder. I suppose this is why you would prefer an Australian coach to a foreign one, all other things being equal (I don't think someone like Arnold was up to the task of coaching a WC for example) - because they have a more intimate knowledge of the players they're meant to be coaching. I'm actually not sure he'll play Cahill at all unless things get truly desperate, TBH.
- Eriksen is the true difference-maker in this Danish side. Not surprised he got the early goal of all people. It just goes to show you how sheer quality can keep a side in the game even though a weaker opposition are giving you a run for your money, much like Pogba's moment of quality managed to win the game for France after a debatable penalty. Could Farfan/Guerrero be those guys against us? They have nowhere near Eriksen's quality but Guerrero in particular lifts at international level.