I have yet to see anyone saying it's not time for a change.
The arguments seem to be that Ricki should be sacked for not playing the U20 squad and not playing like Spain - at altitude in front of 100000 against a side who are light years better than us. Us 'part time fans' don't think that is a fair assessment.
For the first 30 minutes the plan he used (the right plan) worked and then we made stupid errors. Sure there are a couple of selection questions (for me Ivan should have played in midfield and Siggy should have played ahead of plodder, and I have no idea what the story is with Fitzgerald) but for me the tactics were our only option. The tactics were not for our defenders to fuck up, and I'm sure they were meant to have a more controlled possession when they did win it. Unfortunaely the simple facts are that we are not that good. As Evald sais the sudden expectation that a side who couldn't string three passes together against New Caledonia should suddenly be able to do that against Mexico is laughable.
There are a generation of people that jumped on the bandwagon in 2009 and now think that is the norm. SInce then we have lost Nelsen, Elliot and Brown (our entire competent midfield) and were missing Reid (and to a lesser extent Payne). The nation and a pile of johnny-come-lately football fans have delusions of adequacy about this side and the depth and quality of footballers we have available.
Last time I checked the U20 players people are advocating start achieved exactly what at the U20 world cup? This is real football, not kids football yet people are saying that even though they were poor at the U20 world cup they would have been more competitive than the experienced players we used?
Please.