For all the talk about Concacaf's lack of depth, I think it's remarkable how much Australia changes the landscape of Asian soccer. As I've said before, I don't think Costa Rica is very good right now, but in 2002 they were obviously superior to either China or the Saudis, who had qualified ahead of Iran. Even though the Ticos have dropped off since then, it's hard to imagine that many Asian teams have caught up with them, let alone bypassed them. Now, if Australia makes good on its potential to be distinctly better than Costa Rica, you could make a reasonable case that Asia's teams 1 through 10 will run stronger than Concacaf's. But without a strong Australia, the only place where Asia could claim an advantage in depth would be far below the level of international competition. While Mexico and the US did have it easy this time around, that's still very different from giving a cakewalk to a team like Saudi Arabia.
i think that with Australia they have 1. South Korea didn't impress me very much even when they went to the semis. Japan can't score. even australia couldn't compete with the top teams from each confederation when the Aussies and their opponents both have an average day.
From an Australian perspective, I'm not sure what you mean.I would be quietly confident of their chances against a concacaf team.They have defeated both the US and Mexico, and probably do have a little more depth in ability.They defeated the European champions last night without any real strike threat and have defeated France England and Brazil in the last 4 years.We would struggle against a number one conmebol team, but then so would anyone.Don't mean to sound rude, but I don't really agree with some of your conclusions.
i said that if the Aussies had an average game, and one of the top two teams from any OTHER continent had an average game, that i think Australia wouldn't win. Australia is perfectly capable of having a good game and beating any team. i certainly wouldn't want to play against you guys with Kewell attacking our boy Stevie.
... except that Australia hasn't beaten either France or Brazil in the last four years. They beat both of those teams in the 2001 Confederations Cup, when neither side was fielding anything close to a full-strength line-up. In the most recent Confederations Cup, Australia was the only team that failed to earn a single point.
I'm sorry I'm only new, and have just been through a dose of world rivalries.However, everything you said is right.I take it you follow Paraguay, what do you think of their chances in June?
Well to be fair, no team in any of those matches fielded their starting line ups.I know we didn't and Brazil didn't.France didn't either but probably came closest.Although, Australia did play a 1-1 draw against France a few months later when both squads played their starting line ups. Yes, our defence was a disgrace.There's no escaping that.But again, no starting line up.But we were terrible I'll grant you that.
We've a new coach and improved a bit in defence since then. We also played reasonably well in the games against Germany and Argentina in that tournament, but were terrible against Tunisia and lucky they didn't score twice as many against us. I now think we should be able to beat Japan, but still think Brazil and Croatia will be tough for us. Of course the Confederation Cup results mean nothing. We finished 2nd in 1997 and 3rd in 2001 and failed to make the World Cup after these tournaments. We came last in 2005 and qualified for 2006.
To be fair, besides the Tunisia game i tought the Aussies where pretty impressive in the games vs Germany and Argentina and have been pretty good for a few years, i doubt they'l have too much trouble in Concacaf.. probably get atleast 3th and 2nd place most of the times and probably even get 1th a few times. Australia is just as good as USA and Mexico
Yes and no. I think the Confed cup was a very important change. We found out that Aussies can SCORE, and if you're defense has improved nearly as much as it seems to have... well... I'm looking forward to Brazil dropping their jaws and losing one. Course, you'd better beat them, else we play them in the last 16. Tell ya what! We'll give you cookies... if you beat them for us. Deal?
No, the France team that faced Australia was awfully thin ... Coupet, Camara, Leboeuf, Karembeu, Brechet, Djorkaeff (Vieira 86), Dacourt (Pires 73), Wiltord, Nee (Anelka 70), Robert, Gillet Apart from Wiltord, the only familiar names who started were all past their prime by then. It seems as though the pieces are coming together to allow Australia to perform well on a more consistent basis (joining Asia, successful A-League re-launch).
Lol, I'm trying to figure the best way to approach this. Nobody had their starting line up.Nobody bares any resemblance to 2006.Australia are actually going to have a "manager" and their full squad, as I'm sure will the other teams mentioned.More importantly, none of this really means anything.
If so, then the schedule could work to Australia's advantage. Winning their opening game with Japan would give them a strong footing, and because their second game (with Brazil) is played after Japan-Croatia, they'll go into it knowing whether a one-goal loss does them any good. If they can go into the Croatia game needing only a draw, they'll have a much better chance of advancing.
its not crap, its just u.s. and mexico are miles better then the rest of the teams. thats about it, not there fault
Well if we're talking in regards to chicks, I agree.Nobody can hold a candle to the south and central American chicks, but football? Ummm, nup Not central America anyway.
yes costa rica is just as good in football as japan, korea. we'll see at the world cup won't we? concacaf> afc
LOL, I'm not GreenIsle, but I'll agree for the sake of a fellow Australian.I just wish everyone would get along as happens here in Aus.There surely isn't any need for all the name calling.