Green, Gold and Orange

It seems to be a case of out with the old and in with the new in terms of everything to do with football in Australia. One big part of this change is the detachment from the British roots of the game in this country with a new connection being formed with all things Dutch. The FFA’s love affair with the colour orange started initially with the hiring of Guus Hiddink for the 2006 World Cup. Since then we have seen the appointments of Johan Neeskens, Rob Baan, Henk Duut, Pim Verbeek, Jan Versleijen and Mario Van De Eende into key roles with the Australian setup.

So what can we expect with the new Dutchification of the national setup? How will it differ from the old British aligned structure? Time will tell here but I’ll at least try to explain a few key differences between the old and new guard.

Footballing Philosophy

Footballing Philosophy is what sets apart the different nations of the footballing world from the joga bonito beliefs of the Brazilian game to the catenaccio game that the Italians are renowned for. We all know that the British philosophy when it comes to football has long been about building a strong team ethic and is geared towards a more direct (read Long Ball) style of play.

The Dutch however focus less on the team as a whole but more about how each individual plays in the team. By this I mean that the Dutch work on getting the best out of each individual cog in the wheel in the hope that everyone contributes equally on the pitch. The British sense of team is all about everyone working for each other and being committed whereas the Dutch system involves each working to their own goals in the hope that the team will then benefit from each working to their own strengths. This is exemplified by the Total Football tactic that the famous Dutch team of the 70’s adopted (and which was taken from the Ajax team before them). The whole notion of Total Football was that each player had their own space to work in ie ‘own’ and they had the play to the 100% of their ability within their own space. The ideal behind this was that if all players were 100% switched on and playing their best in their space on the field the team would be strong across the whole field. If 1 player had an off day and didnt give their best the whole structure fell away. This differs to the British approach wherein any ‘passengers’ on the field were carried by another who was playing above their ability. With the Dutch focus on the individual everyone was too busy perfecting their own game rather than worrying about covering for a team mate. This approach is what cost Holland the 74 and 78 World Cups as key players went missing and this gap was not picked up by teamates who were too busy focussing on their own game.This also has lead to team conflicts as teams are chosen based on individuals rather than the best team combination and thefore results in several big ego’s in the same camp.

The British however tend to pick the best team comnbination even if this means that some big stars miss out.

Although Total Football died in Holland when Rinus Michel did the Dutch still continue to be a team of stars rather than a star team. Given that Australia individually doesnt have the same calibre of player that Holland does it will be interesting to see if the overall Dutch philosophy is translated across

Mentality

Following on from Total Football, the mentality of Dutch teams for the past 30 years is one that the performance counts more than the result. This mentality dominates Dutch Football at all levels. This again differs to the British approach whereby football is a results driven business and the quality of play comes second to getting a result.

To this end many Dutch people dont shed tears about the 74 and 78 World Cup losses as most people feel that the team played the most beautiful football in those tournaments and this is considered more important to the Dutch than winning. To win ugly is not even considered. This notion is a throwback to the many world famous artists and architects that Holland has spawned over the years. The Dutch truly believe that beauty comes first before practicality. This is also why the Dutch are absymal at penalty shootouts as they dont practice them. You see for them to even comtemplate winning a game via a shootout is in direct contrast with the mentality of trying to play beautifully. Taking a penalty is not considered to be a beautiful aspect of football.

We saw this under Hiddink whereby Australia played some of the best football it had ever done. The early signs under Verbeek dont match this Dutch mentality unfortunately.

Tactics

Australia for the main has always previously played with that most British of tactics, the 442. The Dutch however treat this tactic with distain as it focusses too much on having a big centre forward that you can hoof the ball up to all day long. The Dutch notion of beautiful football and individual creativity is best served by a 433. This tactic employs 2 wingers as part of the 3 up front whose job it is to receive the ball out wide and run at the defenders before placing the ball on a platter to the poacher who forms the other third of the strike force. The 3 midfielders are all mobile, ball winning players who can find the man with precision from either 2 yards or 20 yards away. The back 4 usually man mark which usually always leaves one man free to venture forward. The key to this tactic is to have fast, tricky wingers (ie Robben, Van Persie), a lethal finisher up front (ie Van Nistelrooy, van Basten) and a creative midfield (ie Rijkaard, Seedorf, Davids).

Again this is a tactic that I would like to see Australia deploy as we have the creativity in midfield (Culina, Cahill) the tricky wingers (Bresciano, Kewell) and the poacher up front (McDonald, Viduka)

It remains to be seen what affect this Dutch hierarchy will have on football in this country but one thing is for certain is that there is never a dull moment when it comes to the Dutch football team!