They have some good player but I'm glad those cods got rolled by Peru.
They hardly got rolled.
57% to 43% possession
14 to 4 shots
8 corners to 3.
The major difference was they could not finish.
A more prolific or clinical striker would improve the team a lot.
Doesn't matter how many chances you create when your striker is Tommy Juric, Robbie Kruse is starting and a mediocre 18 year old is the next great hope.
Its an average Aussie squad that will be average for quite awhile unless they do what we did and pull a Winston Reid out of their ass. A full strength NZ squad could absolutely push them a long way, depending on how good Schmidt turns out to be - our best XI really isn't that much less talented.
Another major difference is the quality of managers Australia can afford. New Zealand Football can't dream of recruiting someone with a CV like Guus Hiddink's, Pim Verbeek's or Bert van Marwijk's.
Another major difference is the quality of managers Australia can afford. New Zealand Football can't dream of recruiting someone with a CV like Guus Hiddink's, Pim Verbeek's or Bert van Marwijk's.
I've (crudely) figured out if the All Whites can beat Aussie after the Peru game
When you play at home, you have the home crowd advantage. That means theoretically, through the support of the home fans the home team should play a lot better than if they played on neutral or away grounds (Unless its the Nix in recent times). We played one home game and one away game during our qualifiers against Peru. At home we drew 0-0 when we had the home advantage, and lost 2-0 away when Peru had the home advantage. We need to find the middle ground of the scorelines as it should tell us what the score would be if it was played on neutral ground. Therefore we can say that we would've lost 1-0 on neutral ground. Australia played Peru in the World Cup and lost 2-0, the same amount we lost by when we were playing in Peru. However, Australias game against Peru was on neutral ground (Russia), so neither team had the home advantage. Peru were only able to beat us 2-0 when they had home advantage, but could beat Aussie 2-0 on neutral ground.
By recent results, I can determine that New Zealand would beat Australia in a football game
If you had watched the game you would not be saying that.
Right now they would beat us easily.
Joke post
I know we wouldn't beat Australia
There are plenty of other flaws in the post
I've (crudely) figured out if the All Whites can beat Aussie after the Peru game
When you play at home, you have the home crowd advantage. That means theoretically, through the support of the home fans the home team should play a lot better than if they played on neutral or away grounds (Unless its the Nix in recent times). We played one home game and one away game during our qualifiers against Peru. At home we drew 0-0 when we had the home advantage, and lost 2-0 away when Peru had the home advantage. We need to find the middle ground of the scorelines as it should tell us what the score would be if it was played on neutral ground. Therefore we can say that we would've lost 1-0 on neutral ground. Australia played Peru in the World Cup and lost 2-0, the same amount we lost by when we were playing in Peru. However, Australias game against Peru was on neutral ground (Russia), so neither team had the home advantage. Peru were only able to beat us 2-0 when they had home advantage, but could beat Aussie 2-0 on neutral ground.
By recent results, I can determine that New Zealand would beat Australia in a football game
If you had watched the game you would not be saying that.
Right now they would beat us easily.
Joke post
I know we wouldn't beat Australia
There are plenty of other flaws in the post
Are you Austrian?
I've (crudely) figured out if the All Whites can beat Aussie after the Peru game
When you play at home, you have the home crowd advantage. That means theoretically, through the support of the home fans the home team should play a lot better than if they played on neutral or away grounds (Unless its the Nix in recent times). We played one home game and one away game during our qualifiers against Peru. At home we drew 0-0 when we had the home advantage, and lost 2-0 away when Peru had the home advantage. We need to find the middle ground of the scorelines as it should tell us what the score would be if it was played on neutral ground. Therefore we can say that we would've lost 1-0 on neutral ground. Australia played Peru in the World Cup and lost 2-0, the same amount we lost by when we were playing in Peru. However, Australias game against Peru was on neutral ground (Russia), so neither team had the home advantage. Peru were only able to beat us 2-0 when they had home advantage, but could beat Aussie 2-0 on neutral ground.
By recent results, I can determine that New Zealand would beat Australia in a football game
If you had watched the game you would not be saying that.
Right now they would beat us easily.
Joke post
I know we wouldn't beat Australia
There are plenty of other flaws in the post
Are you Austrian?
No, why?
I've (crudely) figured out if the All Whites can beat Aussie after the Peru game
When you play at home, you have the home crowd advantage. That means theoretically, through the support of the home fans the home team should play a lot better than if they played on neutral or away grounds (Unless its the Nix in recent times). We played one home game and one away game during our qualifiers against Peru. At home we drew 0-0 when we had the home advantage, and lost 2-0 away when Peru had the home advantage. We need to find the middle ground of the scorelines as it should tell us what the score would be if it was played on neutral ground. Therefore we can say that we would've lost 1-0 on neutral ground. Australia played Peru in the World Cup and lost 2-0, the same amount we lost by when we were playing in Peru. However, Australias game against Peru was on neutral ground (Russia), so neither team had the home advantage. Peru were only able to beat us 2-0 when they had home advantage, but could beat Aussie 2-0 on neutral ground.
By recent results, I can determine that New Zealand would beat Australia in a football game
Australia had more chances to score in their game against Peru than we would have created in 5 games against them.
We hadn't fully implemented Chip and STAR then. Wait till we come at them with that!
Doesn't matter how many chances you create when your striker is Tommy Juric, Robbie Kruse is starting and a mediocre 18 year old is the next great hope.
Its an average Aussie squad that will be average for quite awhile unless they do what we did and pull a Winston Reid out of their ass. A full strength NZ squad could absolutely push them a long way, depending on how good Schmidt turns out to be - our best XI really isn't that much less talented.
I don't think that anyone here is arguing that this isn't an average Australian side, but even so, they threatened Peru a lot, and I mean a lot, more than we ever did, across two games.
And yes, we do have talented players in our first XI - our two best players are pretty solid international players. But the gap between them and our next couple of best players is pretty big, and then the gap between those and the rest is, basically, huge. Aussie have much better depth in that respect, and that helps create a reasonably cohesive, but a pretty unspectacular unit. Which, by the way, achieved about as much as could reasonably be expected in this tournament - no-one really hammered them or had an easy time with them, but they just lacked enough quality, especially up front, to really challenge good sides.
The Australian midfield of Jedinak, Mooy and Rogic is actually pretty damn good - this is why they would beat NZ, we have no one that comes close to being able to compete with them in the middle of the park. It's also very well balanced in terms of player roles and tecnique. Rogic will be playing in a top league within a season or two, better than Mooy IMO.
They have some good player but I'm glad those cods got rolled by Peru.
They hardly got rolled.
57% to 43% possession
14 to 4 shots
8 corners to 3.
The major difference was they could not finish.
A more prolific or clinical striker would improve the team a lot.
Yep; Juric is poor, Maclaren is average, Cahill is an old man and Nabbout was a stop gap that could run around a lot.
NZ easily has better striking options than Aus now; bit strange.
Comparing playing against Peru the real point of difference between Australia and the All Whites is the coach. Australia had a world class coach who took Holland to a World cup final. The All Whites had...well, Antony Hudson, a complete novice as a coach(and not a great coach seeing his MLS results) If NZ had had a proper buildup with a coach like Gus Hiddink then we could have beaten Peru IMO and we could probaably beat Australia too
You could see how Marwijk transformed Australia. They were disciplined, they played to a well structured pattern. Head to head we have better attackers and defenders but I concede that Mooy, Rogic and co are better in midfield. Australia would struggle to break down Reid and co on attack but Wood would really trouble their very average defense.
They have some good player but I'm glad those cods got rolled by Peru.
They hardly got rolled.
57% to 43% possession
14 to 4 shots
8 corners to 3.
The major difference was they could not finish.
A more prolific or clinical striker would improve the team a lot.
Yep; Juric is poor, Maclaren is average, Cahill is an old man and Nabbout was a stop gap that could run around a lot.
NZ easily has better striking options than Aus now; bit strange.
You'd think only Wood Reid and Thomas would make the starting XI. Probablty in that order of liklinesss.
Possibly Rojas?
Replace Jedinak with Luongo whom had an outstanding season and he & Mooy would team up really well. Sadly, Luongo didn't get a minute on the pitch. Certainly better than Jedinak. Luongo knows how to go forward and score goals.
You'd think only Wood Reid and Thomas would make the starting XI. Probablty in that order of liklinesss.
Don't think Thomas would.
He was the one I wasn't sure about. Same position as Rogic, whereas the other two don't have strong competition.
I've (crudely) figured out if the All Whites can beat Aussie after the Peru game
When you play at home, you have the home crowd advantage. That means theoretically, through the support of the home fans the home team should play a lot better than if they played on neutral or away grounds (Unless its the Nix in recent times). We played one home game and one away game during our qualifiers against Peru. At home we drew 0-0 when we had the home advantage, and lost 2-0 away when Peru had the home advantage. We need to find the middle ground of the scorelines as it should tell us what the score would be if it was played on neutral ground. Therefore we can say that we would've lost 1-0 on neutral ground. Australia played Peru in the World Cup and lost 2-0, the same amount we lost by when we were playing in Peru. However, Australias game against Peru was on neutral ground (Russia), so neither team had the home advantage. Peru were only able to beat us 2-0 when they had home advantage, but could beat Aussie 2-0 on neutral ground.
By recent results, I can determine that New Zealand would beat Australia in a football game
If you had watched the game you would not be saying that.
Right now they would beat us easily.
Joke post
I know we wouldn't beat Australia
There are plenty of other flaws in the post
Are you Austrian?
No, why?
Sorry mate, just the last guy who said we could never beat a team was...
I don't really see the angst here. A claim was made that Australia looked better vs Peru than we did, which is pretty indisputable.
I would love the All Whites to beat Australia, but while we could maybe in a one-off match with our full team, they have more quality throughout their side than we do. It's very difficult to argue we're as good as them.
It's a shame the chance for such a match doesn't happen more though.
He was the one I wasn't sure about. Same position as Rogic, whereas the other two don't have strong competition.
You could consider him on the left for Kruse
