By Kieran Yap 7/12/23
Above: Teagan Micah for Australia. Photo: Caroline Charruyer / Football Australia
The Matildas final games of 2023 were not ones to remember from an Australian perspective, but contrary to the loudest voices, that does not mean that there were no lessons to be learned from the games.
After we remove the hyperbole and separate the concerns of the broadcaster over which big names are going to attract the most eyeballs, this could still be a valuable window, even if the results were meaningless.
Australia lost two consecutive games against Canada, in Christine Sinclair’s farewell games, and on artificial turf.
These games took place in the middle of the English and French season and at the end of the NWSL, Damallsvenskan and Mexican Liga. This is important context, as is the fact that 2023 has been a year that Australia has planned towards for years, and these matches were sandwiched between important Olympic qualifiers.
But let’s get the criticism out of the way first, because it is important to point out the actual failings, and to some degree satisfy those in the comments who will claim outdatedly that “women’s football is never criticised.”
First up, the team selection was not ideal. Not in the personnel, these are all professional players with big game experience, not “cannon fodder” as some they’ve been referred to.
The issue was that the team is set up to press in attack, and defend in numbers. Without a striker noted for their pace, or any out and out wingers, Canada were able to play the ball out from the back under minimal pressure.
Tameka Yallop and Alex Chidiac both are excellent players when cutting into the middle of the pitch and they prefer to play that way. Canada’s fullbacks and wingers took full advantage of the gaps out wide, that were able to be found from deep with ease.
Secondly, the defenders were too deep, and the forwards not deep enough. This is one of those issues that arises from a team that has not played much together, but to put it simply, the side was stretched.
Polkinghorne’s error to concede the opening goal was when she received the ball deep in the 18 yard box. This feels unusual for Australia who’s centre backs are often found closer to the half way line without possession. The midfielders could not relieve the pressure with Remy Siemsen isolated further ahead.
Amy Sayer did move deeper to link play and find the ball, but this might have been helped had Holly Mcnamara been fit. A player who can take possession around half way and take the ball forward is rare. When McNamara recovers she will hopefully make resting Caitlin Foord or Mary Fowler seem like less of an issue.
Third, there was not enough pace in the 11 that started in the first game. This may have been unavoidable, but Canada likely looked faster because they were. It’s not a complicated issue. injuries to Charli Grant and Cortnee Vine limited the options without Hayley Raso, Steph Catley or Ellie Carpenter.
But moving on to what was learned, because there was plenty, and quite frankly it is hard to understand how any professional analyst could honestly say they could find no practical, usable lessons from the first game in particular.
There is a positive spin to what follows, but the way that The Matildas use friendly games is to try and gain something out of each match, the cost in non-tournament fixtures is not seen as important.
4-4-2 depends alot on available players.
This was touched on above, but Australia’s turnaround in form in late 2022 was on the back of as switch to an old fashioned 4-4-2 formation. They do switch it around when needed, especially in the World Cup, but it seems to be the default preferred setup.
Without fast fullbacks and specialist wingers, this system leaves Australia vulnerable. The gaps that appeared in the centre of the park did so because the midfielders turned it over. The ones that appeared out wide did so because on an absence of players, similar to Australia’s loss to Nigeria at the World Cup.
Both in possession and in defensive shape, The Matildas ideal formation only works best against minor opposition, or with the right players to fill the roles. They are building depth, but this game showed it remains a work in progress.
It’s not as simple as “start Chidiac!”
With good reason Alex Chidiac is one of the most popular players in the Matildas setup. Without going too much into her CV she has abilities that few others do. During the World Cup, it became a common refrain to demand Chidiac start or play more. This window, and to some extend the one before it shows that it is more complicated than that.
Chidiac should be played in a role that suits her remarkable talents. Melbourne Victory unleashed her in a free-roaming playmaking role, where she could run amok in the final third of the pitch. Overseas club coaches, and the national team managers have found it harder to accommodate this.
She is often pushed out wide where her close control and combination passing are not as useful. I doubt that a line will be put through her name on the back of the last two windows, but like many of the great playmakers of the sport, she is at her best when the playing system is tailored to bring out her qualities.
We all want to start Chidiac, but how she is used, and how that impacts other players is a more important and nuanced discussion. It is in the best interests of the national team to solve this riddle, because she is a dynamite footballer.
Micah has still got it.
This was hugely important and worth celebrating. Teagan Micah has had a long road back to starting for The Matildas. Since a concussion sustained in 2022, she has barely featured at club or national team level.
Suddenly, Australia’s wealth of goalkeeping options looked slightly less bountiful. When World Cup icon Mackenzie Arnold withdrew through injury Micah had to step up, and she did.
Despite conceding six goals in two games, she was excellent while under siege. In the first game, she kept the score from tipping over into disaster areas, and in the second Canada could only score with Micah on the ground and out of the contest. Her positioning to stop a Nichelle Prince breakaway was perfect in its timing and execution. she closed down the angle after Clare Hunt’s lung busting run to stop an almost certain goal.
Her hands were as strong as always, overhead she is composed, and her reflexes cannot be faulted. Micah took a major step for herself and the team. She should have every confidence of repeating her Tokyo form in the upcoming Olympics.
Sarah Hunter and Charli Rule will return to this level.
Although both teenagers took some adjusting to the pace of full senior international football, they did not hide from the game, did not shirk responsibility, and kept trying to back their abilities and experience. In exhibition games, coaches look for more than just stats. These two showed the right mentality, and Rule was rarely out of position, even if she was often isolated.
Consternation of Hunter’s elevation sometimes betrays a lack of understanding of how she got there. She was the best player at Australia’s Under 20 World Cup in Costa Rica, was Australia’s dominant midfielder with the Under 23’s in the AFF Championships that same year, was the best young player in 2022/23’s A-League Women season, and was Sydney FC’s midfield pivot as the team won the league and Grand Final.
Since then she has left her comfort zone and signed for Paris FC. In short, she has done everything to be selected, and earned her chance. She will want more, because everything she has achieved so far indicates that she is a winner who is willing to go through hard times to achieve.
If there is a lesson to be taken from the performance of some players it is that there is still a gap between being a great A-League Women player and being a capable international footballer against top opposition.
Too often we hear calls for in-form but very young Dub players to be chosen for The Matildas. The ease in which Emily van Egmond has dominated for The Jets demonstrates that we cannot be too hasty and immediately hype up players for the very top level. When they take their first steps, we must be patient with them as fans.
Clare Wheeler pretty much stamped her ticket for Paris (if we make it)
It is easy to forget that coaches often look for different things in a player than fans. Anybody watching the first game could see that Clare Wheeler is at ease at any level, and in a variety of roles.
In the win against The Philippines, Wheeler was pretty much allowed to do as she pleased. She was under minimal pressure in midfield as free to move around behind the ball to support and create. Against Canada she was under considerably more pressure and space was much more limited.
Wheeler was still able to receive the ball and turn to face goal in attempts to move Australia forward. The Everton player was Australia’s best player, and looked at home in a senior role in that midfield. Wheeler is often described as a “six” and started almost every 2021 Asian Cup match as a defensive midfielder but is more than a stopper.
She can carry the ball, play quick passes and intercept attacks. There would have been some temptation to bring on the big names at half time, but there was value in letting the same lineup start the second half. It was worth seeing who responded to the situation and if anybody would try to step up and influence the match from there.
Wheeler seemed spurred on by the deficit, all the more determined to change the circumstances. We saw Clare Wheeler: Matildas leader emerge in this game. She is surely a shoe in for an 18 player Olympics squad.
Learning to play out from the back is worth pursuing.
At the start of this international window, Tony Gustavsson made it clear that Australia needed to learn to build attacks from the backline. Alana Kennedy and Steph Catley’s long passes have always yielded results, and Ellie Carpenter or Clare Polkinghorne’s ability to charge up the field has offered other outlets to start attacks. However, an issue that arose from the World Cup semi final against England was that Sarina Weigmann’s team had adapted and prepared for the quick counter attack.
Australia need to perfect multiple ways of creating chances. Gustavsson pointed out that The Matildas were in the top three World Cup sides for breaking down the last line of defence, but were among the bottom sides at the tournament for breaking the first line, or opposition press.
If we assume that the World Cup starting XI spent the first week in training for this tactic, with the plan to try it in Game Two, then there is still much work to do. There were signs of it bearing fruit, but it was infrequently successful over the 90 minutes.
This is not a reason to give up on it. It will be required to win a medal in Paris, and may be needed to get past Uzbekistan to qualify. It may require a change in formation, or having fullbacks inverted, but despite the issues in the execution, it is something that The Matildas need to be able to turn to when necessary.
An available Sam Kerr might create more space by stretching the opposition team, and Charli Grant’s ambidextrous passing might help them reach their goal. It will take some tinkering, and probably will cost some more goals in exhibition games, but this was not a wasted opportunity. The coaching staff would have learned some of what they need to know to make it happen.
It is a certainty that the coaches would have learned more about this game than anybody watching on, but almost all of the focus has been on the lineup in the first game. Very little discussion has gone towards the tangible and fixable issues that occurred against Canada.
But there were lessons to be learned, and a few deep breathes and an attempt to watch it from an unbiased, non-brand concerned perspective revealed that these games, although hard to watch and impossible to enjoy, were not a waste of time from an Australian perspective.
Follow Impetus on social media – we’re @ImpetusFootball on Threads, Instagram, X (Twitter), TikTok, and Facebook.
impetusfootball.org 