Decentric from 442 wrote:
Although NZ only had 40% of the possession, they nearly matched Australia's passing conversion rate. They were more accurate in passing in defence - 96% to Australia's defensive pass conversion rate of 94%. After a while Australia wasn't applying intensive squeezing in NZ's defensive half.
NZ full pressed more effectively than Australia did in the early part of the game, putting our defence under pressure.
Overall pass accuracy for Australia was 88%. It was 86% for NZ.
Some Australians, Kilkenny 84%, and Troisi 70%, sprayed the ball around when passing - not picked up by the Australian football print media. They were well below Australia's or NZ's a team passing averages for accuracy. NZ put them under defensive pressure.
Also, Rojas was very effective in ball carrying runs of 15 metes plus and dribbling around Australian players.
Australia's keeper had to make the same number of saves as New Zealand's too. Even though Australi had many more shots on goal, NZ tested the keeper nearly as much.
Moreover, NZ went close to matching Australia in physical one on one duels. Add Nelsen, Fallon and a few others, and it would have been closer again. Australia has never been surpassed in one on one duels by any team since I did the first game against Bahrain three years ago.
I thought NZ performed superbly in the World Cup with the team they had. They were the only team to remain undefeated.
They also did well to qualify for the World Cup. The next step is to gain entry to Asia.
Australia has improved immeasurably as a team since playing in Asia. We are a match savvy team now. NZ can replicate it by playing in Asia.
