Australia at the World Cup is a wonderful thing for Australia. It has for so long eluded us since that first World Cup appearance in 1974 that it almost took on a mythological quality. When eventually we got there again in 2006 that was the win. That we made it out of the group was the making of a new mythology. Since then we've qualified for every World Cup and the getting there is no longer special, we want, nay need, to progress.
That's the Australian view.
Elsewhere that Australia has a football team is as cute as finding out the Netherlands have a cricket team. It's nice that they're trying to compete but how good could they be really? A casual glance at the group would result inmost people picking Denmark and France to go through. And every time they do this pervading belief that Australia's presence lends credibility to the word "world" but not so much to the World Cup itself.
"Brave" or "Heroic" defeats are not something to be celebrated (much as that is part of the Australian psyche) because if we take a moment to have a look at what the opponents are doing it's that they're going into the knockout phases of major tournaments and don't care they got an undeserved draw or win against Australia.
Australia needs to win, and they needed to win against Denmark. It looks like they also felt there was an advantage in an all green strip, any advantage is a good advantage, right? So when Denmark started strongly and scored through Erikson after 7 minutes it was hard to reconcile that harsh reality with the desired outcome. There was every opportunity to believe that narrative that Australia are just making up the numbers and would follow the other teams out the door.
However there's a strange dynamic that plays out in a teams psychology. Both for the team going 1-0 up and the one going 0-1 down. On the one hand the team behind knows that the only thing that will get them out of the mess is a goal and they push harder than they did when it was level and they could afford to bide their time with a hope that a chance will present itself.
The team going ahead will, perhaps even subconsciously, think to itself I don't have to bust a gut to score anymore let's take it a bit easier.
This didn't happen right away n the match but it did happen and with the balance of play slowly shifting Australia managed to finish the half with an equalizer exactly as it did against France. With, this time, a VAR endorsed, penalty for handball that was perhaps a bit harsh on the Danes. Then again anyone who remembers the penalty decision against Australia in the past will say stuff that. With the scores locked at 1-1 and Australia having their tails up halftime was going to be telling. Would the Danes re-group, could Australia maintain the rage?
As it happened Australia had the balance of the play and their main downfall was the lack of a cutting edge to put that final ball away. When Kruse made way for Arzani the young teenager had a fantastic impact and had himself a great shot at goal saved and a number of other potential assists foiled. When Andrew Nabbout's shoulder popped out and he was replaced you thought Tim Cahill would be the obvious choice because of the number of crosses Australia were able to generate. Instead Tomi Juric came on and had less impact but the fresh legs still helped. Finally Irvine came on for the excellent Rogic, who himself had a great shot at goal saved, but try as they might Australia could not find a way to beat Denmark and sadly the VAR couldn't find anymore handballs.
For their part Denmark did well enough to generate a few opportunities of their own but they too failed to take advantage and seemed to falter physically late in the game. Ultimately the 1-1 draw keeps Australia in the hunt but the situation now is that Australia needs to beat Peru. Also...
- If France beats Peru we need France to also beat Denmark
France 9
Australia 4
Denmark 4
Peru 0
- If Peru beats France, it gets complicated. It actually offers Australia more outs but Denmark beating France works. Denmark and France drawing might work depending on goal difference and France beating Denmark might, again, work depending on goal difference.
Denmark 4 (+0, 1, 3)
Australia 4
France 3 (+0, 1, 3)
Peru 3
If Peru and France draw then we could also still make it on goal difference, the problem is Peru will be thinking the exact same thing and if Denmark and France draw in that scenario it's all over red-rover. So no draw.
With all that in mind a rejigged French lineup took on Peru in the ensuing game and immediately you sensed that this was a France team that wanted to prove the doubters wrong. Mbappe's first half goal was one of several they could have scored, though to be fair Peru could have had two of their own as well.
In the second half Peru began by hitting the frame of the goal, but it was from a long way out. The rest of the half was spent expending a lot of energy to achieve very little. The French certainly weren't setting the world alight with their prowess but they did enough and you did get the sense that they could have upped their tempo a bit if it were required. It wasn't.
The final game of the night is Croatia v Argentina.
Sometimes you're not playing against the 11 on the pitch but against the weight of storied history. Play against Argentina and you play against a team that has won world cups, and lost a few in the final. Players like Kempes, Ardiles, Burruchaga, Batistuta and of course Maradona have worn those shirts (well, ones like it...laundering can only do so much) and when you face them you're not really expected to win as much as you hope to. Even if you're Brazil, Germany or Italy. This is why Icelands disregard for history in getting that draw mattered. Over time Argentina might look a lot more like Uruguay. A decent team whose best years are long behind them.
Croatia themselves are no slouches but their history goes back barely 30 years. Before then their players represented Yugoslavia and identity is what the World Cup is all about. Are the USSR and Russia the same? Of course not... but how many Latvians look at the USSR team results and identify that as "their" team. So too Croatia whose players like Suker and Prosinecki... and Simunic haven't had enough time for their exploits to attain the kind of mythology that comes only with time and the retelling of those stories of heroism.
Argentina needed a win to assuage the doubters and take their tally to 4 points with a game against Nigeria to seal progression. Croatia already had that win and a second would mean 6 points and at least 2 more games to play. The early stages of the match saw Argentina miss some very gettable changes. Infact the misses were so uncharacteristic a little voice deep inside coughed politely to gain attention and suggested "maybe this isn't going to be Argentina's night".
Pish, posh strange voice. This is Argentina. Land of steaks, football and a massive inferiority complex about their more storied neighbours. Little by little though Croatia realised it was a match against just these 11 guys, and apart for one of them (who was having a poor night) they're not that good. Things got a bit rough but at 0-0 the halftime whistle brought us no closer to the result but you felt that one way or another there would be one.
In the 53rd minute the first goal could hardly have been more calamitous. The ball was played back to Caballero, the Argentine goalkeeper, in one of those let's reset the attack movements that employ the gloveman as some sort of sweeper. As Caballero went to loft a pass to his fullback he quickly realised there was too much loop, and not quite enough oomph. As a reult the ball pretty much landed where the lone Croat forward in the vicinity, Ante Rebic, stood and taking full advantage he swung his leg expertly at the ball on the full and stuck it into the net for a 1-0 lead.
10 minutes later Argentina were denied a goal they would have scored 98 times out of 100 and a little voice cleared its throat.
With 10 minutes to go Luka Modric did what he could to ensure his exploits might become legend by thumping the ball from well outside the box past some defenders he got sick of trying to dribble past and despite the heroic dive Argentina were now 2-0 down. A loss here wouldn't necessarily end their dreams but goal difference is important. Goals conceded here will have to be made up by Argentina elsewhere, against Nigeria to be specific. Their 1994 World Cup encounter might play on the minds of both sides. Still, at 2-0 with 10 to go Argentina were at long odds to get anything out of the game, so the important thing was to ensure that if there were to be another goal it would be to the credit of Argentina.
"Ahem..!"
"Quiet you!"
Otamendi then did his best to get sent off, clearly he'd had enough of being associated with the side that was losing and kicked the ball into a fouled Croatian players head. What's surprising is that from a full 50 cms away he hit the target, if only the Argentine forwards had such accuracy.
The free kick resulting from that foul (Otamendi only got a yellow card), slammed into the crossbar. Argentine hearts were shaking. In added time they broke as Croatia passed the ball around and while Argentina appealed for offside the Croats followed up the goalkeeper save and passed the ball into the net.
Who knew?
"Harrumph!"
No comments:
Post a Comment