All Whites vs Myanmar | Thuwanna Stadium, Yangon | 11.30pm | Mon 7 September

lasted 15min

What are the other two games?

I don't believe we have any other friendlies arranged.

We could try San Marino...they have amateurs to.

There have been rumours we may be playing Lebanon in November I think. To keep us preparing for that playoff against the 5th placed Asian side.

Actually it was 5-1. But more importantly, that result itself is a little but misleading. We were thoroughly outplayed in the first half, were behind by one and could have been more at one stage. The problem that Myanmar U20 side had was that they could play with required physical intensity only for the first 45, and then just couldn't physically compete in the second half. All their games in the World Cup followed that pattern - all were being drawn at HT (1-1, 0-0, 1-1) and all ended up being losses, two of them big ones (and the US one wasn't because of some poor finishing from the Yanks). I'm not downplaying the significance of the win, just noting that it mostly came because of physical dominance, rather than because if our superior technical and tactical ability.

As for the AWs passing being appallingly off? When isn't it?

Whats wrong with you lot watched Fred on the news  and him and his forked tongue dont seem to think there is to much of a problem us fans just need some patience.

Heard a rumour... Hong Kong - October 8. Lebanon - Nov 17. Annnd el grap were unlikely to get south american opp as every window theres a game for each of the 10 teams. NZF taking an advantage of acailable afc sides during these windows - i.e not as far to travel

*available

I thought the intention of a high tempo/pressing approach was very obvious through out most of the game but it wasn't executed particularly well. Pressing needs to be all-in, one player misses his trigger movement and the opposition get out and that kept happening. That's frustrating and is a complete waste of energy. So I guess I kind of agree with you...

Both would probably beat this team at the moment. The issue is NZF can't afford a reasonable foreign coach so its always going to the case of using cheap options, none of which are going to progress this team, especially not to the 2018 World Cup. 

so...

you're playing myanmar and you select a back 5 with a holding midfielder sitting in front of them and then you ask your 2 remaining midfielders to drop deep to start the play while the back 5 stand static behind the ball

#alignment

we have always had an affordable and more than satisfactory coach available here in neil emblen

i couldn't believe i was watching a new zealand team when he coached our london olympics side.  that team was so well put together and ryan nelsen was repeatedly singing emblen's praises. but what does he know right?!

I thought he did the good job when he coached in the game against South Africa. The ball was played on the ground and there was a clear game plan. 

What's wrong with Central American sides? Mexico haven't started their campaign yet, don't think Honduras have either. And I can't imagine these places are that much more difficult to get to than Myanmar.

There all busy el grap essentially. Beating myanmar hong kong or lebanon before ofc nations cup is a decent lead in for that. After ofc nations cup then yes central american sides and confed cup.

Well, Mexico was playing T&T the other day. They can't have been that busy.

But a moot point anyway since we're not going to qualify regardless of whom we play in friendlies.

Well this is true

HK have a friendly vs Thailand on 8 October.

My general reading of Hudson's coaching style and watching that match is that he has a philosophy of holding the ball and playing total football etc, well, that's what he bleats on about. Anyway, the problem is that every manager would love that too. All Whites were playing soooo sllooooowwww. Then players just have not much on so they thump it to nowhere. And they had more time on the ball than they will ever get again. Let's let go of the dream of being this ultimate amazing football of your dreams side... not be negative... but be realistic and try use our strengths. And I'm not sure Hudson understands that speed of play can be key.

Look at the Kuwait goals against Myanmar, good through balls along the ground a lot of the time, exciting, fantastic. We were slow and aimless and with our tactics. Only goal we got was a bit of individual loveliness from Rojas. Fact is, our qualification route is against a team that will be far better than us in quality. We aren't going to slow pass our way to victory. Heck, we need to slow them down big time, but we need to capitalise on small oppourtunities through the quick play of Rojas, Kosta, finishing of Wood, Smeltz etc. (Oh wait, remmebered we have to qualify through Oceania before that which seems more of a worry now)

We have players to be as competitive as we've ever been, but we are playing like when we had absolutely nobody of quality. I don't agree with the criticism that we are playing too many youngsters. The balance of the starting side last night had some experience, and half our top players currently are pretty young (a positive). The biggest worry for me wasn't the 'kids', but how the non-kids could look so ordinary as a group together. With Smeltz, Kosta, Rojas, McGlinchey, Brockie you've got 5 attacking players out there (ok, 4 & McG) who should be able to create a lot more than they did. But again, if you look at the Kuwait goals vs Myanmar, you see we are a world behind them.

From what we've seen, being in the Asian qualifiers this World Cup would have ended up in utter, utter humiliation.

Good thing we've drawn the South American qualifier then. We'll show those bastards!

QFT

We don't have the players to effectively play an intricate possession-based passing game (take a look at our central midfield). We also don't have the players to play hoof-and-hope longballs (Wood might look like a targetman but he doesn't play like one). What we do have the players for though, IMO, is a quick, direct counterattacking game played along the ground. Sit deep and let the likes of Rojas, Thomas and Kosta run at players or into space, and the they can pull the ball back or drive a low cross into the box for someone like Wood or Smeltz arriving late to turn into the net. It might mean that Rojas, Thomas and Kosta tire more quickly in games but then we have players like Fenton and Boyd to come on. Our strengths are our centrebacks, wingers and a poaching striker and our weaknesses are fullback and central mid. We should play in a way that maximises the impact of our strengths and minimises the impact of our weaknesses. 

Agreed. Any half decent coach should be building a style of play around that, not trying to shoehorn players into a style of play that they are technically not suited to

To me that comment is key:  international football is not like club football. At international level [especially for us with the limited pool we have to select from] you need to cut your cloth to suit the type of players you have and their strengths. At club level you have the opportunity to get the type of players you want to play in your system. The 2 are complete opposites and we need international coaches that appreciate that. You look at the likes of Guus Hudink [sorry about the spelling] but they come into international environments and find ways to make the current players produce results where others have failed. It is mostly down to playing to the strengths you have with a little bit of tactical brilliance thrown in admittedly.

So what Ricki did?

Killen wasn't a CM though, nor was Vicelich. He played his best 11 regardless of position did he not?

Meaning more 2010 side. Ugly but effective. Had his best 11, played a formation that got those players on the park.

Which is why that team was effective. It all went wrong for Ricki when he didn't adapt to different situations such as Honiara and playing Killen at DM. The idea was to maximise the strengths in your squad - that doesn't necessarily mean playing your best 11 players no matter what, it means finding the best way to play with the resources you have.

So much this! Here is how I view our strengths.

We have 4 quality players in the front half of the field in Thomas, Kosta, Wood and Rojas. To me, that's a front 4 that other than Wood being a big strapping lad, are players that are quick, nippy, have good footwork and like to either run at defenders or whip in low dangerous balls. (think Marco to Archie at MV for example). This is our current strength. These 3 (K,M,T) should all start every game in that band across the field behind Wood but not limited to getting up there as well. Experienced and proven performers. Why do we need wingbacks when we have those guys that can sit out wide and are dynamic footballers. The only thing you ask of them is to drop 10y when we don't have the ball to help out. Not revert to FBs. We don't need big loopy balls into the box so we do away with that immediately.

It does not need McGlinchey to sit as high for this so you can realistically use him more as a straight CM and link those guys with Tuiloma. I have never been a fan of Tuiloma but the difference was noticeable once he came off so I have to eat my hat and admit that he is growing into that role. He is not a distributor and should immediately be looking for simple passes to players that will do that. I felt he tried to distribute a little against Myanmar and its not his strength in my opinion. He needs to screen, intercept and protect the 25y space in front of goal and the back 4. Thats all.

With those 6 players and taking into account you are going to have Kosta/Thomas/Rojas on 2 flanks, it does not require wingbacks so you can use Smith, A-Z, Reid, Smith and Fenton (for his pace if necessary and realistically, he is our best RB). You then find a keeper. We seem to have a few of them and Hudson has gotten one thing right and unearthed a number 2 in Marinovic.

Defensively, you can use Wood to shepherd balls into the corners and force them to play out from there. The 3 behind him are quick enough to harrow in and recover if the ball gets out and because you don't need McGlinchey to sit as high, you are not left with a gaping hole behind your front guys but in front of your DM.

So I think we shape best like this

I didn't really see our strengths being utilised. Not ragging on them but Kosta he didn't do as much defensive duty because that's not his game. Doyle didn't do as much attacking duty because that's not his game and one could argue he is more CB than WB if there was a choice. One side you have Doyle set up for loopy crosses when he does get up and Kosta to work with Rojas on the other or put in loopy crosses. When those 2 work together, it looked good. Smeltz and Brockie never really got the type of service they prefer in part because they are not guys that get loopy crosses from the left and Kosta was never allowed to whip in low dangerous crosses all game. It just had tactical dumbness all over it. If Brockie is not and AW then neither is Boxall because I thought he was poor. When you play a back 3, if you make a mistake, the exposure is greater with less numbers back there.

These are arguably our best players in their best positions. It does not need shoehorning. It requires a flexible formation, one that Hudson does not have the ability to implement.

Haha, my thoughts exactly. Sack Ricki! No, bring back Ricki!

The bottom line is, we don't have enough good players at this level to be a consistently competitive unit. And we don't have enough money to bring in expensive overseas coaches and overhaul the domestic set-up. In other words, it's a long haul type exercise, with no easy-fix answers.

This is very true. The problem Ricki had though was when he stuck to that 3-4-3 for too long. It worked with those players cause he used it for those players. When he no longer had the players for that formation, he should have changed so that his potential best XI (or if your are overloaded in 1 position, 10) were on the park in positions that worked.. Not crazy shark like Killen or Durante at DM.

Killen at DM was a failed 2012 OFC Nations Cup experiment, otherwise he played up front. Vicelich was DM at Roda, I'm pretty sure.

Fixed

Comes back to lack of options once Elliott and Vicelich were gone. Ricki's experiments failed. Hudson's experiments aren't working. The bottom line is we just don't have good enough players in that role who can compete effectively at international level.

I agree. 

I think its hard to say Hudsons experiments have failed when the only thing he has not tried is to get the best players on the field in their best positions. 

I've listed one above that I think works. I am not a super genius football coach but I can see it, surely with his experience with Jose, Pep and co, he should be able to see the obvious.

I'll also list players that can fill in with Brockie, Boxall, Payne, Keat, Henderson, James (ok its a marginal call), Smeltz, Musa, Adams, Howieson and that's without really racking my brains too hard. Out of that, I can at least make a 3-5-2

Not once there did I have to pick a player that was ineligible or playing NZ regional club football. I would not have Wynne near my side anyway.

We have some players EG, but not ones that are being picked. At the end of it though, we wont be going to Russia cause we wont be going past the qualifier against South America and we may struggle with the Island sides if we persist so I guess its all just hot air from me.

Here is an interesting exercise.

Pick your best 22 NZ players today. You must have 2 keepers in the mix and all players must realistically be available for Russia (age wise so lets say 35 in 2018). Does not matter if they are injured right now and it must be based on their ability today, and not their potential for tomorrow.

Of that 22, how many did Hudson not pick?

I don't think we have good enough players to be beating teams like Mexico or whoever OFC might playoff against from CONMEBOL, but we definitely have good enough players to be winning comfortably against teams like Myanmar. The fact we can't is a coaching/tactical issue, not a player quality one. 

I dont like Hudson and this will seem a bit weird in that it will sound like I am defending him.

He said at the beginning that one of his aims was to try and create more competition and depth with respect to AW positions.  So when does that process end and when does he start to solidify his team?. Maybe he hasnt yet finished his depth and competition phase?, maybe the Myanmar game was the last of that process?.

Yeah but so many people advocate we should join AFC because the standard of football is better and we would be better served playing against better teams. Would the same not apply to playing against CONMEBOL teams or CONCACAF teams?

What you have just said is we should beat teams like Myanmar.... whom are no better/different than teams currently in OFC like Fiji, Tahiti, New Caledona, Solomons. If Myanmar is the standard of opponent we are targeting to play against to get wins on the baord, we should be going to OFC 1st. The only thing I can think of is money reasons in that the hosting team is paying. It would probably help our relationship with OFC no end of good if we did choose to play the Island teams (PNG, the home of Mr Chung?)