Last Thursday saw international football in Asia ramp up a gear as we passed through to the final qualification stage along the Road to Russia 2018. Now down to the final 12 hopefuls the matches have clearly tightened up from the often one-sided open affairs which Round 2 was roundly scathed for. That being said, experience and quality continued to be the main catalysts, that alongside some debatable officiating (more of that later). Looking back on the last week of action, here’s the standout player, team and talking point from the Round 3 openers.
The Player
Quickly casting an eye over the opening fixtures in WCQ Round 3 in hope of plotting a path for an upset, Saudi Arabia’s first match-ups looked more than promising. At home to Thailand on Thursday before effectively playing a neutral fixture in Malaysia against Iraq the following Tuesday. In the end the score-lines proved the theory correct and Saudi Arabia top Group B alongside Australia, but it was far from an easy task. Three penalties over the two matches ended up deciding it, leaving Bert van Marwijk in the Saudi dugout owing a large debt of gratitude to Nawaf Al-Abed who stuck all three away.
The 5’6” pocket sized playmaker has become Saudi’s creative hub, now 26 has seemingly taken over the mantle from Al-Hilal team mate Salem Al-Dawsari. In both encounters this week he had bursts of influence, but the set-up of the team wasn’t there to fully harness his potential. He walks out of the week however with 3 goals from 2 games, smashing away three penalties, first the winner against Thailand late on in Riyadh, before the equaliser then winner (which he won himself) against a better on the day Iraqi side.
Questions will rage on, at least over the awarding of one of the penalties, but Saudi Arabia deserve immense credit for forcing six points when they could very easily be sitting only on one. How can they move forward into a credible dark horse for World Cup qualification then? The return of Mohammed Al-Sahlawi can’t come quick enough in attack, while van Marwijk desperately needs to develop a tandem to pair Al-Abed with another creative threat; Fahad Al-Muwallad seems to fit the bill after two impressive substitute cameos this week. With back-to-back home internationals against Australia and UAE in October, they know they can’t always rely on being gifted penalties and Al-Abed’s cool head to stick them away.
The Team
Round 2 was seen at times to be too easy for Australia, to the extent where they let their eye off the ball on a number of occasions most notably the loss to Jordan in Amman last October. But this past week has again shown why they should be considered Asia’s best hope of progressing furthest on the international stage with consecutive victories to start their Round 3 campaign.
Their home opener was widely assumed a given, which it proved to be. However Iraq, Asian Cup semi-finalists in 2015 are by no means pushovers as was evident in their Thursday clash with Saudi Arabia. Australia’s second match of the week however was deservedly put in the spotlight; a 1-0 away win against UAE in Abu Dhabi. The conditions were bordering on unbearable, the humidity was rendering some of the play meaningless, but instead of settling for the draw (which both team’s would’ve taken) the Socceroos clinched the vital winner through the unsurprising source of Tim Cahill, relishing in his new role as super-sub.
With their nearest realistic rival for top of the group Japan slipping up to UAE at home the Thursday before, you could make the case that Australia already look home and hosed after 2 matches. The resilient nature of this squad is a national trait that was instantly imposed by the coach Ange Postecoglou when he joined in 2014, but some of the play on the ball developed from that is starting to rival some of their European or South American rivals. With an away trip to Saudi Arabia before hosting Japan to come, October looks like another month where Australia can continue to write their own headlines.
The Talking Point
Referees and their questionable decisions has been a common topic of conversation over the last week for a couple of reasons; the quality has been highly questionable (which isn’t new) but crucially it has denied one of the so-called elite at least a point. Japan’s home opener against UAE, a broadly one sided affair possession wise, but the Emirates held their own on the counter. From an officiating perspective, there was nothing of note to raise the blood pressure really until the second period where decision after decision seemed to go against the hosts.
Firstly the awarding of UAE's equalising penalty, on first view a clumsy trip, second view a probable trip, but still contestable. Minutes later we had more penalty box decisions to debate; first Shinji Okazaki was seemingly pulled over in the box, on second viewing there was nothing in it. Secondly; Takashi Usami was blocked clearly by Ismail Ahmed just inside the box on the left, this did look clear-cut in retrospect; however both decisions were waved away. Finally the most contentious of them all; as substitute Takuma Asano saw his header clawed away by Emirati keeper Khalid Eisa after it clearly went over the line. With no goal-line technology in place in AFC football at present, this again went against Japan, being deemed a save, with a corner was given.
Now we’ve all been to matches where the referee has had one of those games where every decision seems to go against one team. This is usually contested after the match but broadly seen as a mistake or a lack of quality on the referee’s part. This example was different however, multiple opinions appeared on social media claiming match fixing, and some pointing to the referee because he was Qatari as a potential clash of interests. With no official protest since from the Japanese camp, where have these match fixing grounds come from? Were these decisions beyond the pale that only a crooked ref could make these calls, or is there something much darker in the psyche of some Asian football fans?
I posed the question after the event what differentiates bad decisions from suspicious decisions? Has the fact this has happened against one of the elite nations promoted such outcry? Elsewhere this week Saudi’s late penalty against Thailand appeared extremely debatable, while Bahrain (who in fact had three penalties awarded on the night) were awarded a penalty against Singapore without any seemed offence taking place (I encourage all to dissect the incident). These matches both affected lower ranked teams, while the second was only a friendly, consequently neither has caused much of an uproar.
It was pointed out to me that many East Asian referees have dropped clangers in major matches; the name of Australian referee Ben Williams hardly goes down well in many countries around the continent, but rarely would you hear of match fixing being suggested from them. The general standard in Asia, like the football on the pitch is clearly lower than the refereeing in Europe, even North America, so sadly these sort of decisions are going to occur until we seek improvement. To question the integrity of individual referees or worse individual nationalities does tread a worryingly divisive path however that continues to tarnish the federation's image.
No comments:
Post a Comment