Elise Kellond-Knight, the injured Matildas veteran on Channel Seven’s coverage, said: “It was curious. I would have personally done something at the 70-minute mark.” Over on Optus Sport, Socceroos legend Mark Schwarzer wondered if the result would have been different had Alex Chidiac been thrown on much earlier than with five minutes of regulation time left. Some fans didn’t have to wonder.
- Advertisement -
Really, it’s such an agricultural idea, to chuck your biggest unit up front and pump long balls into the box. It’s the very last lever you want to pull. This team has done it before, including at the Tokyo Olympics, but is surely capable of so much more.
Another choice Gustavsson-ism: “It’s bigger than the 90 minutes of football.”
Well, it is and it isn’t. What he means is that the Matildas’ legacy at this tournament will not solely be defined by how they perform on the pitch — it will also be about how many people they inspire, and the flow-on effects for women’s sport, and all that. Which is nice! Really, it is. But it’s of a piece with the notion of women’s sport being friendly and cuddly and not quite as cut-throat as men’s sport, not just yet. It’s a safety blanket in a results-driven business; a fire escape for when the heat turns up.
- Advertisement -
This is a World Cup. Ultimately, it’s only about the 90 minutes. That’s why we’re here.
What have they actually crafted at this World Cup so far? Three goals: a penalty against Ireland, a gift from an awful Nigerian goal kick, and a solitary header after dozens of other failed, low-percentage aerial incursions. There have been lots of ‘chances’, sure, but how many of them were high quality?
Only Steph Catley’s penalty proved the difference between Ireland and the Matildas in their World Cup opener.Credit: AP
- Advertisement -
How many more people would be more inspired if the Matildas played better football? If they could actually construct something meaningful in that black hole just forward of central midfield instead of just crossing the ball, and then their fingers?
When it works, it works — but when it doesn’t, and the back-up plan is to throw a defender forward, what does that say?
If the Matildas go out in the group stage of their own home World Cup, it will be an unmitigated disaster, and a third major tournament failure after the Tokyo Olympics and 2022 Asian Cup. It should not only end Gustavsson’s tenure, but raise questions over the footballing credentials of Football Australia for backing him in this far.
- Advertisement -
If they beat Canada on Monday night — and they still absolutely can, make no bones about it — this all might look like overreaction in retrospect. It’s not; these are classic unresolved Australian soccer problems. But it’s worth pondering, just for a moment, precisely what is at stake here.
- Advertisement -
This is not just about the Matildas. It’s bigger than that. (Sorry for pinching your line, Tony.) This is probably the best and perhaps only chance an Australian team, male or female, will ever have of winning a World Cup for the foreseeable future. This is a team filled with quality players, most of them at the peak of their careers, playing on home soil.
The Matildas lost the Tokyo Olympics bronze medal match to the US. Who won gold? Canada – their do-or-die opponents on Monday.Credit: Getty
The stars may never align quite like this again. The women’s game is improving at lightning pace and there are already hints that Australia’s first-mover advantage is evaporating as other nations get their act together. This is why Gustavsson’s appointment was so crucial to get right, and why so many people have been riding him for so long: because the sport couldn’t afford to screw this up, and it nearly has.
Loading
We will never know how differently things might have unfolded had Kerr not pinged her calf before the Ireland game, or had that not been compounded by whatever happened to Fowler at training, or whether someone like Remy Siemsen or Holly McNamara would have offered something decisive had they been selected instead of Simon.
But we do know where we are now: must-win territory. It’s where the Matildas are trying to convince themselves they do their best work. What else can they do?
“We’ve been in these situations before, with our backs against the wall, and I have full belief and positivity with the group that we have that we can get the job done,” said Emily van Egmond.
Added Chidiac: “You look at all World Cups in history, male and female, and teams face adversity, and bounce back. I think we’re a team that thrives off of that.”
