World Cup 2022 Qatar FIFA World Cup (Round of 16) - On SBS

[gaskin]

Jodly any response?

Jod. Go to a Glory Game?

 

[Sausages]

Ooooh.....didn't realise this.....

"Argentina forward Lionel Messi is set to make the 1,000th appearance of his career in Saturday's World Cup last-16 tie with Australia.

He will win his 169th cap on top of 778 games for Barcelona and 53 matches for current side Paris St-Germain."

Let's hope it all gets too much for him

 

[Sausages]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[DaRick]

RE Argentina:

Over the last 30 years, they've been football's answer to the Pakistani Cricket Team. Very skilful, but also very temperamental and inconsistent. On their day, they could (and can) embarrass any side, but they could also embarrass themselves (see Saudi Arabia). As such, like the Pakistanis, they've won about two trophies in 30 years.

Unfortunately for us, they conceded under half a goal in the CONMEBOL qualifiers, and they've improved as the tournament has progressed. Moreover, Messi has singlehandedly covered up mediocre team performances for around 15 years, and he did so against MEX. Against POL they were really good.

Moreover, with hindsight we matched up well against DEN. DEN only really had one creative outlet and were at their best on the break rather than chasing games. ARG are the opposite - Messi and Di Maria have lost a lot of pace/stamina, and so this ARG side isn't particularly geared towards counterattacking. But they are geared towards breaking down low-block defences. While Degenek is fast enough to play a higher defensive line, Souttar/Rowles are classic low-block defenders. So playing against ARG doesn't suit Souttar's strengths.

Nonetheless, I feel like we have no choice but to play with a relatively high, compact defensive line like Saudi Arabia did, since ARG's attackers tend to drift inside and so can be quite narrow at times. Unfortunately, that probably necessitates dropping Rowles, putting Degenek in the centre, and bringing in Fran Karacic. Not ideal, but it is what it is.

We also need to win the midfield battle, because Enzo Fernandez is basically their regista/deep-lying playmaker - ARG rely on him to dictate the tempo and retain possession. If we can close him down, that somewhat shuts down Messi, since Messi doesn't move much off the ball any more. In Rodrigo de Paul they do have a box-to-box midfielder who can help break down high lines, so a 4-4-2 won't cut it, especially given Mooy's one of our least athletic players. On paper, a 4-2-3-1 seems best, especially since Goodwin/Leckie tend to take on their opponents, and Molina is a relative weak link in defence. Acuna is an excellent LB, but he's not especially pacey, so Leckie will keep him on his toes.

RE Mitchell Duke, he'll keep Otamendi busy, but I don't expect him to do much else. Otamendi is even better at winning duels than Souttar/Degenek/Rowles (plus he hasn't been as inconsistent as he was for Man City), and Martinez is more reliable than the likes of Sergio Romero. So their relative weak point has somewhat been addressed.

There are a few things in our favour - firstly, AUS have a fitness edge over ARG, partially because our players are very good athletes, partially because of Tim Cahill's Aspire Academy, and partially because we've had fractionally more rest than ARG.

Also, there's zero pressure on us, and zero expectations. There is a s**t-ton of pressure on ARG, however, and while they have recently discovered how to win trophies again, they still haven't broken their WC hoodoo. The longer we keep them scoreless, the more they'll panic, and I think there's a good chance we'll run them ragged in extra time. They won't want that to happen, especially since we've suddenly become extremely (and unsustainably) clinical. They've also bottled quite a few penalty shootouts over the years, whereas we've recently won one under considerably more pressure.

Also, I've been very critical of Arnold over the years, but he has more experience dealing with do-or-die situations in unfavourable circumstances than Scaloni. Scaloni has been good, but his lack of experience has been shown up at times, notably against Saudi Arabia. Plus, Arnold's somehow fashioned an effective counter-attacking side from very limited resources at the eleventh hour, and he's lucky if nothing else, so I wouldn't be 100% surprised if he pulls something out of the hat here. After all, Chelsea did in 2012 with much the same approach (defensive endeavour + energy + limited technique/skill).

Do I expect him too, though? No. Chelsea in 2012 doesn't happen very often (even then, they were much better resourced), and I think the skill gap is just too great. But one can always dream...

 

[Sausages]

RE Argentina:

Over the last 30 years, they've been football's answer to the Pakistani Cricket Team. Very skilful, but also very temperamental and inconsistent. On their day, they could (and can) embarrass any side, but they could also embarrass themselves (see Saudi Arabia). As such, like the Pakistanis, they've won about two trophies in 30 years.

Unfortunately for us, they conceded under half a goal in the CONMEBOL qualifiers, and they've improved as the tournament has progressed. Moreover, Messi has singlehandedly covered up mediocre team performances for around 15 years, and he did so against MEX. Against POL they were really good.

Moreover, with hindsight we matched up well against DEN. DEN only really had one creative outlet and were at their best on the break rather than chasing games. ARG are the opposite - Messi and Di Maria have lost a lot of pace/stamina, and so this ARG side isn't particularly geared towards counterattacking. But they are geared towards breaking down low-block defences. While Degenek is fast enough to play a higher defensive line, Souttar/Rowles are classic low-block defenders. So playing against ARG doesn't suit Souttar's strengths.

Nonetheless, I feel like we have no choice but to play with a relatively high, compact defensive line like Saudi Arabia did, since ARG's attackers tend to drift inside and so can be quite narrow at times. Unfortunately, that probably necessitates dropping Rowles, putting Degenek in the centre, and bringing in Fran Karacic. Not ideal, but it is what it is.

We also need to win the midfield battle, because Enzo Fernandez is basically their regista/deep-lying playmaker - ARG rely on him to dictate the tempo and retain possession. If we can close him down, that somewhat shuts down Messi, since Messi doesn't move much off the ball any more. In Rodrigo de Paul they do have a box-to-box midfielder who can help break down high lines, so a 4-4-2 won't cut it, especially given Mooy's one of our least athletic players. On paper, a 4-2-3-1 seems best, especially since Goodwin/Leckie tend to take on their opponents, and Molina is a relative weak link in defence. Acuna is an excellent LB, but he's not especially pacey, so Leckie will keep him on his toes.

RE Mitchell Duke, he'll keep Otamendi busy, but I don't expect him to do much else. Otamendi is even better at winning duels than Souttar/Degenek/Rowles (plus he hasn't been as inconsistent as he was for Man City), and Martinez is more reliable than the likes of Sergio Romero. So their relative weak point has somewhat been addressed.

There are a few things in our favour - firstly, AUS have a fitness edge over ARG, partially because our players are very good athletes, partially because of Tim Cahill's Aspire Academy, and partially because we've had fractionally more rest than ARG.

Also, there's zero pressure on us, and zero expectations. There is a s**t-ton of pressure on ARG, however, and while they have recently discovered how to win trophies again, they still haven't broken their WC hoodoo. The longer we keep them scoreless, the more they'll panic, and I think there's a good chance we'll run them ragged in extra time. They won't want that to happen, especially since we've suddenly become extremely (and unsustainably) clinical. They've also bottled quite a few penalty shootouts over the years, whereas we've recently won one under considerably more pressure.

Also, I've been very critical of Arnold over the years, but he has more experience dealing with do-or-die situations in unfavourable circumstances than Scaloni. Scaloni has been good, but his lack of experience has been shown up at times, notably against Saudi Arabia. Plus, Arnold's somehow fashioned an effective counter-attacking side from very limited resources at the eleventh hour, and he's lucky if nothing else, so I wouldn't be 100% surprised if he pulls something out of the hat here. After all, Chelsea did in 2012 with much the same approach (defensive endeavour + energy + limited technique/skill).

Do I expect him too, though? No. Chelsea in 2012 doesn't happen very often (even then, they were much better resourced), and I think the skill gap is just too great. But one can always dream...

Don't make me bash you Rick

Tonight, this board becomes a bastion of hope and dreams - let us not venture into the how or why we may face defeat.

Instead, we shall turn our face to the dawn, to bask in it's promise of a new day with new possibilities

I always like us....I like us EVEN MORE when it's hot. And you know what they say.....can't stand the heat....

(*Edit - DaRick knows me from the Lions board, where I possibly annoy people with my overwhelming giddy optimism on game day threads Until a game is out of reach unless due to an Act of God, I maintain hope That said, good write-up )

 

[kaiserchief13]

Apparently Di Maria ruled out of the game

 

[DaRick]

Apparently Di Maria ruled out of the game

I don't wish injury on any player, but he's been excellent this WC, so that's surely good news for us.

Who will they replace him with, if that's true? Lautaro Martinez is fast, but he's been ineffective. Dybala and Messi don't seem to work well together. Angel Correa is a dark horse, I suppose.

 

[juss]

Apparently Di Maria ruled out of the game

Everything's coming up Millhouse

 

[Sausages]

I'm not gonna argue

 

[Frank Bunn]

Yes correct. There are no interpretations for in / out. The evidence provided showed the ball as in and thats the end of thr story.

Clear / obvious error overturn relates to subjective decisions.

I paraphrased The International Football Association Board (Guardians of the Laws of the Game). Clear and obvious error relates to all VAR use. The on field referee and assistants must always make a decision then VAR can make call whether there has been a clear and obvious error.

The use of VARs in football matches is based on a number of principles, all of which must apply in every match using VARs.​

​

1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee only in the event of a ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’ in relation to:​

​

a. Goal/no goal​

b. Penalty/no penalty​

c. Direct red card (not second yellow card/caution)​

d. Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team)​

Most but not all factual calls will be made solely by VAR. And most but not all offsides and ball out of play decisions are factual. As I said, I think this was a factual call. But given that the original decision was a goal kick I'm questioning whether they had the evidence to show that it was a clear and obvious error.

 

[Zidane98]

I'm not gonna argue

Lol @ the poster rubbishing Mat Ryan after the French game. Not like any keeper would have stopped any of the 4 goals conceded anyway.

 

[Zidane98]

I paraphrased The International Football Association Board (Guardians of the Laws of the Game). Clear and obvious error relates to all VAR use. The on field referee and assistants must always make a decision then VAR can make call whether there has been a clear and obvious error.

The use of VARs in football matches is based on a number of principles, all of which must apply in every match using VARs.​

​

1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee only in the event of a ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’ in relation to:​

​

a. Goal/no goal​

b. Penalty/no penalty​

c. Direct red card (not second yellow card/caution)​

d. Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team)​

Most but not all factual calls will be made solely by VAR. And most but not all offsides and ball out of play decisions are factual. As I said, I think this was a factual call. But given that the original decision was a goal kick I'm questioning whether they had the evidence to show that it was a clear and obvious error.

In this case they had ball tracking thanks to internal sensors which confirmed the ball position.

Maybe withoit that tech the decision possibly may not have been overturned.

It was the same tech that confirmed Ronaldo was full of it claiming the goal from Fernandes cross.

 

[Frank Bunn]

In this case they had ball tracking thanks to internal sensors which confirmed the ball position.

Maybe withoit that tech the decision possibly may not have been overturned.

It was the same tech that confirmed Ronaldo was full of it claiming the goal from Fernandes cross.

Yet they seemed to be relying on camera footage?

 

[Zidane98]

Yet they seemed to be relying on camera footage?

Perhaps a combo of both.

 

[GC2015]

Apparently Di Maria ruled out of the game

Huge. Absolutely huge for us.

Like Degenek said, they only have one Messi and when you remove Robin from Batman's side, suddenly the task for Messi looks far more difficult. You never underestimate a champion like Lionel Messi but at the same time there's only so much one man can do. In a figurative sense, one man simply cannot beat 11 other men so Argentina would need other to step up. The Saudis exposed this Argentinian side and we should be studying that game closely for intel.

So when do we start to believe? It would be truly remarkable if the so called 'Soccerwhos' managed to reach the quaterfinals for the first time in history and waiting for us will be an opponent that's potential also beatable (Netherlands/USA). Really shouldn't get carried away here but reaching a World Cup semifinal would be truly amazing and quite possibly the greatest ever achievement in our nation's sporting history!

 

[SM]

I paraphrased The International Football Association Board (Guardians of the Laws of the Game). Clear and obvious error relates to all VAR use. The on field referee and assistants must always make a decision then VAR can make call whether there has been a clear and obvious error.

The use of VARs in football matches is based on a number of principles, all of which must apply in every match using VARs.​

​

1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee only in the event of a ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’ in relation to:​

​

a. Goal/no goal​

b. Penalty/no penalty​

c. Direct red card (not second yellow card/caution)​

d. Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team)​

Most but not all factual calls will be made solely by VAR. And most but not all offsides and ball out of play decisions are factual. As I said, I think this was a factual call. But given that the original decision was a goal kick I'm questioning whether they had the evidence to show that it was a clear and obvious error.

Name one factual call not made by VAR? If VAR can see factually that a goal should or should not stand, it will always overturn the on-field referee. All offsides and out of play are factual.

 

[Zidane98]

Traditional AFC powers getting the job done.

 

[Zidane98]

Jod. Go to a Glory Game?

He promised to if the Socceroos knock over the Argies.

 

[sydney_gws]

RE Argentina:

Over the last 30 years, they've been football's answer to the Pakistani Cricket Team. Very skilful, but also very temperamental and inconsistent. On their day, they could (and can) embarrass any side, but they could also embarrass themselves (see Saudi Arabia). As such, like the Pakistanis, they've won about two trophies in 30 years.

Unfortunately for us, they conceded under half a goal in the CONMEBOL qualifiers, and they've improved as the tournament has progressed. Moreover, Messi has singlehandedly covered up mediocre team performances for around 15 years, and he did so against MEX. Against POL they were really good.

Moreover, with hindsight we matched up well against DEN. DEN only really had one creative outlet and were at their best on the break rather than chasing games. ARG are the opposite - Messi and Di Maria have lost a lot of pace/stamina, and so this ARG side isn't particularly geared towards counterattacking. But they are geared towards breaking down low-block defences. While Degenek is fast enough to play a higher defensive line, Souttar/Rowles are classic low-block defenders. So playing against ARG doesn't suit Souttar's strengths.

Nonetheless, I feel like we have no choice but to play with a relatively high, compact defensive line like Saudi Arabia did, since ARG's attackers tend to drift inside and so can be quite narrow at times. Unfortunately, that probably necessitates dropping Rowles, putting Degenek in the centre, and bringing in Fran Karacic. Not ideal, but it is what it is.

We also need to win the midfield battle, because Enzo Fernandez is basically their regista/deep-lying playmaker - ARG rely on him to dictate the tempo and retain possession. If we can close him down, that somewhat shuts down Messi, since Messi doesn't move much off the ball any more. In Rodrigo de Paul they do have a box-to-box midfielder who can help break down high lines, so a 4-4-2 won't cut it, especially given Mooy's one of our least athletic players. On paper, a 4-2-3-1 seems best, especially since Goodwin/Leckie tend to take on their opponents, and Molina is a relative weak link in defence. Acuna is an excellent LB, but he's not especially pacey, so Leckie will keep him on his toes.

RE Mitchell Duke, he'll keep Otamendi busy, but I don't expect him to do much else. Otamendi is even better at winning duels than Souttar/Degenek/Rowles (plus he hasn't been as inconsistent as he was for Man City), and Martinez is more reliable than the likes of Sergio Romero. So their relative weak point has somewhat been addressed.

There are a few things in our favour - firstly, AUS have a fitness edge over ARG, partially because our players are very good athletes, partially because of Tim Cahill's Aspire Academy, and partially because we've had fractionally more rest than ARG.

Also, there's zero pressure on us, and zero expectations. There is a s**t-ton of pressure on ARG, however, and while they have recently discovered how to win trophies again, they still haven't broken their WC hoodoo. The longer we keep them scoreless, the more they'll panic, and I think there's a good chance we'll run them ragged in extra time. They won't want that to happen, especially since we've suddenly become extremely (and unsustainably) clinical. They've also bottled quite a few penalty shootouts over the years, whereas we've recently won one under considerably more pressure.

Also, I've been very critical of Arnold over the years, but he has more experience dealing with do-or-die situations in unfavourable circumstances than Scaloni. Scaloni has been good, but his lack of experience has been shown up at times, notably against Saudi Arabia. Plus, Arnold's somehow fashioned an effective counter-attacking side from very limited resources at the eleventh hour, and he's lucky if nothing else, so I wouldn't be 100% surprised if he pulls something out of the hat here. After all, Chelsea did in 2012 with much the same approach (defensive endeavour + energy + limited technique/skill).

Do I expect him too, though? No. Chelsea in 2012 doesn't happen very often (even then, they were much better resourced), and I think the skill gap is just too great. But one can always dream...

They don't throw games do they?
There where rumours about the 1999 world cup final.
I hope we win, if Saudi Arabia can we also, but I don't think we have strikers very likely to reproduce the Saudi goals against Argentina.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'm not gonna argue

This side is above the threshold of Gooners (0). Someone else at centrehalf.

Kthxbai.

 

[DaRick]

They don't throw games do they?
There where rumours about the 1999 world cup final.
I hope we win, if Saudi Arabia can we also, but I don't think we have strikers very likely to reproduce the Saudi goals against Argentina.

I don't buy that they threw that final; they just imploded under pressure.

Temperamental sides like that despise relentless, consistent sides who apply constant pressure, and by that stage of the tournament AUS were certainly that. SA had an even better record against them than we did despite falling just short of our skill level.

 

[Sausages]

Huge. Absolutely huge for us.

Like Degenek said, they only have one Messi and when you remove Robin from Batman's side, suddenly the task for Messi looks far more difficult. You never underestimate a champion like Lionel Messi but at the same time there's only so much one man can do. In a figurative sense, one man simply cannot beat 11 other men so Argentina would need other to step up. The Saudis exposed this Argentinian side and we should be studying that game closely for intel.

So when do we start to believe? It would be truly remarkable if the so called 'Soccerwhos' managed to reach the quaterfinals for the first time in history and waiting for us will be an opponent that's potential also beatable (Netherlands/USA). Really shouldn't get carried away here but reaching a World Cup semifinal would be truly amazing and quite possibly the greatest ever achievement in our nation's sporting history!

WHEN DO WE START TO BELIEVE?

LIKE.....RIGHT ******* NOW DUDE

I been driving that bus around for days, get on board

 

[Frank Bunn]

Perhaps a combo of both.

According to the BBC, FIFA said that "the video match officials used the goalline camera images to check if the ball was still partially on the line". So the decision was not based on ball tracking, or the Goal Decision System that operates between the goal-posts.

If VAR had shown at the time the evidence that it was a clear and obvious error we wouldn't be here now.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/63829718

 

[Sausages]

If it goes to penalties.....

....does the chief make the same call?

 

[lewdogs]

If it goes to penalties.....

....does the chief make the same call?

Yes