All Whites vs Belgium | Sat 27th June | 3:00pm (NZT) | BC Place, Vancouver

martinb wrote:
Anyway Belgium! Waffles, Huysegems! 

Do we dare to dream? Or did we fire our best shots and miss anyway? 

Can we at least preserve some dignity we lost? 

MetalLegNZ wrote:
Can people stop having a go at Baz... I didn't like his appointment, it was unambitions IMO and I struggled to see how he could be the best fit for the role, but let's look at some facts.

Unlike Hay and Hudson etc, Baz's selections have been a lot more understandable and justifiable. The players in general getting picked have deserved to be. Smith is an outlier for the WC, but at least there is a reason behind it. Outside that, I think most of us would agree he has got it right.

Back four... for years people on this forum complained about our negative back five, balls to the wall, hit long to Wood and hope tactics. We are now set up to try and hold possession, and actually do so quite well. We have had some lovely passages of football this tournament, and hints in earlier friendlies etc.

We are competative. People need to remember where we are on the world map footballing wise. We are a minnow, pure and simple, but we are playing good football and showing we are deserving of a place at the big dance. We haven't been humped 6-0 like other teams, or sat back on 20% possession and played super negative dross.

All this we could have made subs earlier, would in reality turn to, we should have made subs later had they come on earlier and we conceeded straight away etc. Arguing about what if's are pointless. Wood has played back to back 90 mins, how often does that happen? No one is calling for him to be subbed early, why?

New Zealand has done well under Baz. Better results, better brand of football overall. 

Is he a charismatic guy, no. But has he done a decent job, most definately.

Mainland FC wrote:

 martinb wrote:
Anyway Belgium! Waffles, Huysegems! 

Do we dare to dream? Or did we fire our best shots and miss anyway? 

Can we at least preserve some dignity we lost? 

Dignity means we have to do something different in face of adversity, show we are not just a cannon fodder for Belgium with our predictable game plan. Have to mix it a bit. We have little to lose now, literally. A safe draw is not enough -plus, the AWs of 2010 had three draws and we are apparently a better team.

coochiee wrote:

 MetalLegNZ wrote:
Can people stop having a go at Baz... I didn't like his appointment, it was unambitions IMO and I struggled to see how he could be the best fit for the role, but let's look at some facts.

Unlike Hay and Hudson etc, Baz's selections have been a lot more understandable and justifiable. The players in general getting picked have deserved to be. Smith is an outlier for the WC, but at least there is a reason behind it. Outside that, I think most of us would agree he has got it right.

Back four... for years people on this forum complained about our negative back five, balls to the wall, hit long to Wood and hope tactics. We are now set up to try and hold possession, and actually do so quite well. We have had some lovely passages of football this tournament, and hints in earlier friendlies etc.

We are competative. People need to remember where we are on the world map footballing wise. We are a minnow, pure and simple, but we are playing good football and showing we are deserving of a place at the big dance. We haven't been humped 6-0 like other teams, or sat back on 20% possession and played super negative dross.

All this we could have made subs earlier, would in reality turn to, we should have made subs later had they come on earlier and we conceeded straight away etc. Arguing about what if's are pointless. Wood has played back to back 90 mins, how often does that happen? No one is calling for him to be subbed early, why?

New Zealand has done well under Baz. Better results, better brand of football overall. 

Is he a charismatic guy, no. But has he done a decent job, most definately.

I think it's fair and normal to critique Baze after a loss like that. As long as it's balanced. Did he get his subs correct, probably not.

But McCowatt fashioned our best chance early 2nd half to go up 2-0. Despite being on a yellow I don't think you take him off any earlier, given the limited attacking bench options we have sans Garbett.

I do think it was a mistake to take McCowatt off for Old. Ben O is now a LB, at international level anyway. Then the only thing I remember Randall contributing was somehow butchering the opportunity, to play the ball off an Egyptian for a simple corner.

Maybe Baze could have made his subs earlier, but when they came on Bindon apart they didn't offer much.  We still don't have great depth. Wood has had to play 180+ mins as we have no other striker near his class. But most other nations at the big dance have some useful no 9 backups. Commentators have mentioned the "NZ has only about 60 fully professional footballers' for a reason.

You feel yes we need a higher quality, more internationally experienced coach to help take this team to the next level. To give this squad who should be better overall in 2030 (can we find a RB), a fair shot at success. But those type of coaches generally don't come cheap. I'm not sure if NZF - and the NZ football community when any salary is revealed - is yet ready to pay $1M/year on a head coach.

And yes we ain't the worst team at this WC, despite being the lowest ranked one.

Edit - and interesting that Marto who was there thinks the Egyptain CB who came off in the first half, was basically tactical, disguised as an injury. Certainly from about 30 mins they did a much better man marking job on Wood, and the layoffs just dried up completely. That's when the game just started going their way. 

You suspect Belgium will do an even better job, cutting off the long balls forward to the Woodsman. Then we start to live off scraps. What is Baze's Plan B when that happens?
For this scenario almost alone, I'd start Paulsen ahead of Crocs, for the former's higher quality more pinpoint distribution. Lets see what happens.

AucklandPhoenix wrote:
Let’s also hope if the referee has a dodgy moment that Baz gives him an earful during the game rather then having a conversation after the game which achieved nothing.

MetalLegNZ wrote:

 coochiee wrote:

 MetalLegNZ wrote:
Can people stop having a go at Baz... I didn't like his appointment, it was unambitions IMO and I struggled to see how he could be the best fit for the role, but let's look at some facts.

Unlike Hay and Hudson etc, Baz's selections have been a lot more understandable and justifiable. The players in general getting picked have deserved to be. Smith is an outlier for the WC, but at least there is a reason behind it. Outside that, I think most of us would agree he has got it right.

Back four... for years people on this forum complained about our negative back five, balls to the wall, hit long to Wood and hope tactics. We are now set up to try and hold possession, and actually do so quite well. We have had some lovely passages of football this tournament, and hints in earlier friendlies etc.

We are competative. People need to remember where we are on the world map footballing wise. We are a minnow, pure and simple, but we are playing good football and showing we are deserving of a place at the big dance. We haven't been humped 6-0 like other teams, or sat back on 20% possession and played super negative dross.

All this we could have made subs earlier, would in reality turn to, we should have made subs later had they come on earlier and we conceeded straight away etc. Arguing about what if's are pointless. Wood has played back to back 90 mins, how often does that happen? No one is calling for him to be subbed early, why?

New Zealand has done well under Baz. Better results, better brand of football overall. 

Is he a charismatic guy, no. But has he done a decent job, most definately.

I think it's fair and normal to critique Baze after a loss like that. As long as it's balanced. Did he get his subs correct, probably not.

But McCowatt fashioned our best chance early 2nd half to go up 2-0. Despite being on a yellow I don't think you take him off any earlier, given the limited attacking bench options we have sans Garbett.

I do think it was a mistake to take McCowatt off for Old. Ben O is now a LB, at international level anyway. Then the only thing I remember Randall contributing was somehow butchering the opportunity, to play the ball off an Egyptian for a simple corner.

Maybe Baze could have made his subs earlier, but when they came on Bindon apart they didn't offer much.  We still don't have great depth. Wood has had to play 180+ mins as we have no other striker near his class. But most other nations at the big dance have some useful no 9 backups. Commentators have mentioned the "NZ has only about 60 fully professional footballers' for a reason.

You feel yes we need a higher quality, more internationally experienced coach to help take this team to the next level. To give this squad who should be better overall in 2030 (can we find a RB), a fair shot at success. But those type of coaches generally don't come cheap. I'm not sure if NZF - and the NZ football community when any salary is revealed - is yet ready to pay $1M/year on a head coach.

And yes we ain't the worst team at this WC, despite being the lowest ranked one.

Edit - and interesting that Marto who was there thinks the Egyptain CB who came off in the first half, was basically tactical, disguised as an injury. Certainly from about 30 mins they did a much better man marking job on Wood, and the layoffs just dried up completely. That's when the game just started going their way. 

You suspect Belgium will do an even better job, cutting off the long balls forward to the Woodsman. Then we start to live off scraps. What is Baze's Plan B when that happens?
For this scenario almost alone, I'd start Paulsen ahead of Crocs, for the former's higher quality more pinpoint distribution. Lets see what happens.

Randell made one nice attacking run, beat a couple players with his pace cutting in on the right side for a change. Lost possession, but possibly deserved a foul near the 18 yard box.

MetalLegNZ wrote:

 coochiee wrote:

 MetalLegNZ wrote:
Can people stop having a go at Baz... I didn't like his appointment, it was unambitions IMO and I struggled to see how he could be the best fit for the role, but let's look at some facts.

Unlike Hay and Hudson etc, Baz's selections have been a lot more understandable and justifiable. The players in general getting picked have deserved to be. Smith is an outlier for the WC, but at least there is a reason behind it. Outside that, I think most of us would agree he has got it right.

Back four... for years people on this forum complained about our negative back five, balls to the wall, hit long to Wood and hope tactics. We are now set up to try and hold possession, and actually do so quite well. We have had some lovely passages of football this tournament, and hints in earlier friendlies etc.

We are competative. People need to remember where we are on the world map footballing wise. We are a minnow, pure and simple, but we are playing good football and showing we are deserving of a place at the big dance. We haven't been humped 6-0 like other teams, or sat back on 20% possession and played super negative dross.

All this we could have made subs earlier, would in reality turn to, we should have made subs later had they come on earlier and we conceeded straight away etc. Arguing about what if's are pointless. Wood has played back to back 90 mins, how often does that happen? No one is calling for him to be subbed early, why?

New Zealand has done well under Baz. Better results, better brand of football overall. 

Is he a charismatic guy, no. But has he done a decent job, most definately.

I think it's fair and normal to critique Baze after a loss like that. As long as it's balanced. Did he get his subs correct, probably not.

But McCowatt fashioned our best chance early 2nd half to go up 2-0. Despite being on a yellow I don't think you take him off any earlier, given the limited attacking bench options we have sans Garbett.

I do think it was a mistake to take McCowatt off for Old. Ben O is now a LB, at international level anyway. Then the only thing I remember Randall contributing was somehow butchering the opportunity, to play the ball off an Egyptian for a simple corner.

Maybe Baze could have made his subs earlier, but when they came on Bindon apart they didn't offer much.  We still don't have great depth. Wood has had to play 180+ mins as we have no other striker near his class. But most other nations at the big dance have some useful no 9 backups. Commentators have mentioned the "NZ has only about 60 fully professional footballers' for a reason.

You feel yes we need a higher quality, more internationally experienced coach to help take this team to the next level. To give this squad who should be better overall in 2030 (can we find a RB), a fair shot at success. But those type of coaches generally don't come cheap. I'm not sure if NZF - and the NZ football community when any salary is revealed - is yet ready to pay $1M/year on a head coach.

And yes we ain't the worst team at this WC, despite being the lowest ranked one.

Edit - and interesting that Marto who was there thinks the Egyptain CB who came off in the first half, was basically tactical, disguised as an injury. Certainly from about 30 mins they did a much better man marking job on Wood, and the layoffs just dried up completely. That's when the game just started going their way. 

You suspect Belgium will do an even better job, cutting off the long balls forward to the Woodsman. Then we start to live off scraps. What is Baze's Plan B when that happens?
For this scenario almost alone, I'd start Paulsen ahead of Crocs, for the former's higher quality more pinpoint distribution. Lets see what happens.

Randell made one nice attacking run, beat a couple players with his pace cutting in on the right side for a change. Lost possession, but possibly deserved a foul near the 18 yard box.

martinb wrote:

 MetalLegNZ wrote:

 coochiee wrote:

 MetalLegNZ wrote:
Can people stop having a go at Baz... I didn't like his appointment, it was unambitions IMO and I struggled to see how he could be the best fit for the role, but let's look at some facts.

Unlike Hay and Hudson etc, Baz's selections have been a lot more understandable and justifiable. The players in general getting picked have deserved to be. Smith is an outlier for the WC, but at least there is a reason behind it. Outside that, I think most of us would agree he has got it right.

Back four... for years people on this forum complained about our negative back five, balls to the wall, hit long to Wood and hope tactics. We are now set up to try and hold possession, and actually do so quite well. We have had some lovely passages of football this tournament, and hints in earlier friendlies etc.

We are competative. People need to remember where we are on the world map footballing wise. We are a minnow, pure and simple, but we are playing good football and showing we are deserving of a place at the big dance. We haven't been humped 6-0 like other teams, or sat back on 20% possession and played super negative dross.

All this we could have made subs earlier, would in reality turn to, we should have made subs later had they come on earlier and we conceeded straight away etc. Arguing about what if's are pointless. Wood has played back to back 90 mins, how often does that happen? No one is calling for him to be subbed early, why?

New Zealand has done well under Baz. Better results, better brand of football overall. 

Is he a charismatic guy, no. But has he done a decent job, most definately.

I think it's fair and normal to critique Baze after a loss like that. As long as it's balanced. Did he get his subs correct, probably not.

But McCowatt fashioned our best chance early 2nd half to go up 2-0. Despite being on a yellow I don't think you take him off any earlier, given the limited attacking bench options we have sans Garbett.

I do think it was a mistake to take McCowatt off for Old. Ben O is now a LB, at international level anyway. Then the only thing I remember Randall contributing was somehow butchering the opportunity, to play the ball off an Egyptian for a simple corner.

Maybe Baze could have made his subs earlier, but when they came on Bindon apart they didn't offer much.  We still don't have great depth. Wood has had to play 180+ mins as we have no other striker near his class. But most other nations at the big dance have some useful no 9 backups. Commentators have mentioned the "NZ has only about 60 fully professional footballers' for a reason.

You feel yes we need a higher quality, more internationally experienced coach to help take this team to the next level. To give this squad who should be better overall in 2030 (can we find a RB), a fair shot at success. But those type of coaches generally don't come cheap. I'm not sure if NZF - and the NZ football community when any salary is revealed - is yet ready to pay $1M/year on a head coach.

And yes we ain't the worst team at this WC, despite being the lowest ranked one.

Edit - and interesting that Marto who was there thinks the Egyptain CB who came off in the first half, was basically tactical, disguised as an injury. Certainly from about 30 mins they did a much better man marking job on Wood, and the layoffs just dried up completely. That's when the game just started going their way. 

You suspect Belgium will do an even better job, cutting off the long balls forward to the Woodsman. Then we start to live off scraps. What is Baze's Plan B when that happens?
For this scenario almost alone, I'd start Paulsen ahead of Crocs, for the former's higher quality more pinpoint distribution. Lets see what happens.

Randell made one nice attacking run, beat a couple players with his pace cutting in on the right side for a change. Lost possession, but possibly deserved a foul near the 18 yard box.

I think these were the main complaints against the referee tbh. 

Iirc Just, McCowatt, Randall and Old all had good runs forward stopped by questionable challenges and we got nothing, whereas from an NZ fan position he gave similar challenges against us. 

I saw something very similar in another game, maybe in Netherlands Japan…

However, I don’t think it was particularly egregious compared to say the A league where we had that ridiculous VAR run where iirc in 3 games we had two penalties re-refereed against us after they’d been given and then we had one re-refereed for us, only to have the referee turn choose to ignore the VAR’s advice!

The referee didn’t make any obvious blunders in terms of red cards or penalties. He didn’t help us and helped them slightly, but I don’t think it was Wayne Barnes worthy. Also a name for reminding your ‘don’t blame the ref snowflake’ rugby mates.