World Cup 2010

[mangas21]

z, i agree that attitude is key....and it leads me into my point about "offensive football"....being an offensive team, starts with a mindset.....and how do you define "offensive?" throw everyone forward and take your chances against a counter or have the players that can seize cracks in the opposition by using speed/skill/etc? what is offensive?

i think a good offensive team get s a goal when they need it....in whatever way they can....problem with us, and i believe this 100%, is that otto drilled into the national personel - subconsciously - you guys aren't good enough to be offensive....and, when the time came where they needed a goal they layed an egg becaue the "offensive mindset did not match the teams ability on the fiedl to throw the switch"....

thats what italy can do....they pplay tight in the back, they are defensive first, but can swtich gears at teh snap of a finger if they have to....but the greek mentality has never been offensive, meaning the team never goes out and says we gonna fill the net tonight....they are , as far as i can remeber, always defense first and lets see how the game develops....but when the cracks appear they need to be ready to jump on them...thats whathappen in ukraine....if you watch that play that samara pass was sublime, not only because he put it right there on salpi's feet, but he was actually moving away from the play and was at a real weird angle when salpi burst for the net.....the key to that play was R E C O G N I T I O N

being able to see the potential crack BEFORE it is covered, and the boom exploit it....if we can make those type of smart, clever plays "at will", when we need em, then i think we may advance one round maybe even two.....but, we also need to get some speed on the flanks and mids that are not afraid to trail the play or even reverse the play....did you see salpi on the first one that he missed? left wing reversed the play to right saide and salpi could have had a frappe and still shot....

recognizing ....the 04 team seem to have been able to do this at will....chemistry and a sense of where the players are going is key......

so, i still think greece will never be an offensive team....but, they can be more offenssive if they just make a few change and adjustments in personel and attitude....

[mangas21]

THE EXPERTS: I LOVE IT

Greece and Ukraine are set to fight for one place at the World Cup in South Africa in what is one of the most evenly matched play-off encounters in the European Zone. The Greeks have had a lot of problems of late and their form seems to be on the downtrend, whereas Ukraine are full of confidence after the great performances in Group 6.

Injuries mounting for Herr Otto

Greece have largely struggled ever since winning the Euro 2004 and they were far from impressive in the last qualifying campaign. They won the second place behind Switzerland and will now have another chance to secure the place in South Africa but we see them as underdogs in this clash. The atmosphere in the team is very poor, boss Rehhaghel is missing several important players through injuries and we don’t think his team can match a very good Ukraine side that defeated England and drew with Croatia in both games. The Greeks can maybe avoid defeat in the first leg but we are pretty sure South Africa will remain just a dream for them. Therefore, we see a great value in backing Ukraine to qualify at 1.83 offered by Ladbrokes.

THE SMALL COUNTRY WITH THE HUGE HEART !!!!!!

YOU CAN'T MEASURE WHATS INSIDE

[zenon]

Great post

I love seeing so called experts with egg on their faces. Its exactly what I was getting at in my previous post. because Ukrane done well in the England group then they must be top quality. same with Russia and same with Croatia.

Same when they played Turkey in their group a few years back and were due to play them in turkey they went on about it like they were about to play Brazil!

The truth is most of the english media havent got a clue about Greek players.

[Clover22]

THE EXPERTS: I LOVE IT

Greece and Ukraine are set to fight for one place at the World Cup in South Africa in what is one of the most evenly matched play-off encounters in the European Zone. The Greeks have had a lot of problems of late and their form seems to be on the downtrend, whereas Ukraine are full of confidence after the great performances in Group 6.

Injuries mounting for Herr Otto

Greece have largely struggled ever since winning the Euro 2004 and they were far from impressive in the last qualifying campaign. They won the second place behind Switzerland and will now have another chance to secure the place in South Africa but we see them as underdogs in this clash. The atmosphere in the team is very poor, boss Rehhaghel is missing several important players through injuries and we don

[Hellene]

Anyone know what sort of money the EPO would earn from qualification?

I did read somewhere 12mil euro (headline on a greek sports paper) stating "Eisoda tis EPO 12ek euro"

apparently the spin offs to a nations economy are massive....the daily telegraph mentioned the world cup would add 2bil to the UK economy...

[zenon]

what has always irritated me about the reaction over the 2004 win was how unfavourably it was viewed.

Greece played defensive football etc. Yet the goals for statistics do not support this.

Denmark has always been praised for overcoming the odds to win their Euro competition, yet they did not have as many teams to beat and, very importantly they had not even qualified for the finals! They got there because of politics.

For me their victory does not count for that reason.

I am so looking forward to this world cup but they must not give the likes of shearer the opportunity to say things like, "how did this lot win last time". He repeated this three times within a minute after they lost to spain. He is not my favorite person!

The fact is that they had won in 2004 by NOT playing like the team of 2008 played but shearer wouldnt know this even though he is an "expert".

[Genome]

Anyone know what sort of money the EPO would earn from qualification?

I did read somewhere 12mil euro (headline on a greek sports paper) stating "Eisoda tis EPO 12ek euro"

apparently the spin offs to a nations economy are massive....the daily telegraph mentioned the world cup would add 2bil to the UK economy...

Yes very interesting indeed, I've wondered about this myself as well. Tv rights etc and money from FIFA and everything else indirectly involved... maybe someone else here knows more?

[Euro2004]

Anyone know what sort of money the EPO would earn from qualification?

I did read somewhere 12mil euro (headline on a greek sports paper) stating "Eisoda tis EPO 12ek euro"

apparently the spin offs to a nations economy are massive....the daily telegraph mentioned the world cup would add 2bil to the UK economy...

Yes very interesting indeed, I've wondered about this myself as well. Tv rights etc and money from FIFA and everything else indirectly involved... maybe someone else here knows more?

Ireland's defence minister has asked for the game against France to be replayed. He was supported by Irish economists who said this cost the Irish economy

[mangas21]

look, if it were that easy to predict outcomes we would all be millionaires betting sports.....but the truth is there was no reason to suspect Greece in 04 was going to carry over - and it didn't....our history did not in any way suggest that we would go from the outhouse to penthouse of international soccer because we won 04....dont want to get into what should haev happened, but what did happen is there for all to see.....we layed multiple eggs all the way up to this qualification...so as an outside observer the PERCEPTION of a good team is made through very casual observances of what they do in tounamants and competitions....

i agree in 04 we did not get teh press we shouls have gotten...i mean it was truly an amazing story - very newsworthy - for all the right reasons, but instead it was looked at as fluk - we had the chance to make it stick but again 06, 08 etc..proved the disbelievers right....we had no experience defending anything, let alone a european crown....we could not handle that, both on and off the field because our soccer successes have always been unexpected - hit and run, and if we hit then great..we did not know how to handle being expectd to win...

i have made this point over and over as have many of you...confidence bordering ona littel arrogance is a MUUST in this game....if you really dont thing you can win then you are laready defeated before u walk on the pitch....and team unity, chemistry and trust go along way so long as you have a minimal level of skills - i believe we have some ability and some talent- i think otto should right away schedule at least 6 friendlies and get teh midfield in shape so we can play box to box alittle more.....and try and keep the same team together to build so chemistry

the fact is we are inconsistent....and as long as we are that way we will never be considered a "big" footballing nation....you cant "bet" on greece to be anything but inconsisitent....we can change it by qualifying for every tournament and going deep in a few here and there....

[thrylos]

and take both Koutsianikoulis and Kyriakos Papadopoulos for the experience.

you cannot go to a World Cup and take players fro experience. You got to take players that will help you win that World Cup. Bring in a couple of young guys as passengers, but don't let them interact with the team.

I would take Avraam to the World Cup, but he will only play if needed. Pliastikas should never have played in RD the past game. Then again, totlally different situation with Giourkas and Toro in the lineup.

[andrew_g]

What sets a part 2008 and 2010 from 2004 is that, the 2004 team played with each other for a very long time, had been through a lot of adversity, and were at their peak. It's not a long peak, maybe a once in a lifetime, once in a tournament moment, where everything falls into place and the players communicate with each other without even saying anything. By 2008, what we had were players who were very old and slow, Dellas, Nikopolidis, stood out for being past it.

In the past 12 months, I have seen a team that has brilliant sparks, but has no cohesion--for Greece to make some noise, we need several friendly games and some luck, and the younger guys to gel with the older guys.

[Clover22]

what has always irritated me about the reaction over the 2004 win was how unfavourably it was viewed.

Greece played defensive football etc. Yet the goals for statistics do not support this.

Denmark has always been praised for overcoming the odds to win their Euro competition, yet they did not have as many teams to beat and, very importantly they had not even qualified for the finals! They got there because of politics.

For me their victory does not count for that reason.

I am so looking forward to this world cup but they must not give the likes of shearer the opportunity to say things like, "how did this lot win last time". He repeated this three times within a minute after they lost to spain. He is not my favorite person!

The fact is that they had won in 2004 by NOT playing like the team of 2008 played but shearer wouldnt know this even though he is an "expert".

Yeah I've always said to label the 04 team "defensive" is an oversimplification. What we had was an excellent defense - probably the best at that time. We did not have creative strikers and attackers, but the team never put up a wall of 10 guys in front of the goal...there was a lot of possesive midfield action. We also had Tsartas who was great at setting people up and could also score - he was used perfectly by Otto - and Zagorakis, who was like the "engine" of the team. We have NO players like this in our midfield squad right now. Players like that, once they got the ball they did what they were going to do and that was the end of it. And they knew ahead of time.

Also something interesting. The game we played against England in '01 (2-2) was probably one of our best in what - 10 years? More? Man we were so good. That was probably closer to what you might call creative in midfield. If only we could play like that now...

[Akritis_1944]

Also something interesting. The game we played against England in '01 (2-2) was probably one of our best in what - 10 years? More? Man we were so good. That was probably closer to what you might call creative in midfield. If only we could play like that now...

We have the players to play like that NOW!

However Otto is responsible for the style and quality of our tactics and play.

I used to bang on about how in the past we were actually a very skillfull NT. We could have loads and loads of possession and dominate teams, but we had little in the way of decent defense or cutting edge up front and we would regularly see matches end in blowout scores where we actually dominated posession.

In the late 80's and early 90's we used to beat teams by large margins in friendlies... I remember a 6 - 1 win over Egypt (then a humiliating 7 - 1 against Denmark or that 5 nil against England at old Wembley prior to the 94 WC where as some have forgotten or did not watch the match....we had far more posession than the English!!!)

Otto brought in team discipline and a structure designed to be miserly in defense and hit on the counter and as seen by Euro 04 it worked perfectly...the problem since then is that he has not evolved his ideas to the players he has now and results on a regressive brand of kick-ball which is not only ugly watch, but not that effective. I mean come on people....we couldn't defeat Moldova away or Switzerland and Ukraine at home!?!?!

We actually have very good young players. Players who are not just work horses, but are very skillfull, but to Otto they are not fit for his system.

So of course we played fantastically against England back in 2001, as Otto hadn't fully ingrained his footballing philosophy on decent and skilled players. He essentially broke them down to play his system and it certainly worked as we were Euro champions a mere 3 years later, but it's come to the detriment of a decent football style.

[Euro2004]

We have the players to play like that NOW!

However Otto is responsible for the style and quality of our tactics and play.

I used to bang on about how in the past we were actually a very skillfull NT. We could have loads and loads of possession and dominate teams, but we had little in the way of decent defense or cutting edge up front and we would regularly see matches end in blowout scores where we actually dominated posession.

In the late 80's and early 90's we used to beat teams by large margins in friendlies... I remember a 6 - 1 win over Egypt (then a humiliating 7 - 1 against Denmark or that 5 nil against England at old Wembley prior to the 94 WC where as some have forgotten or did not watch the match....we had far more posession than the English!!!)

Otto brought in team discipline and a structure designed to be miserly in defense and hit on the counter and as seen by Euro 04 it worked perfectly...the problem since then is that he has not evolved his ideas to the players he has now and results on a regressive brand of kick-ball which is not only ugly watch, but not that effective. I mean come on people....we couldn't defeat Moldova away or Switzerland and Ukraine at home!?!?!

We actually have very good young players. Players who are not just work horses, but are very skillfull, but to Otto they are not fit for his system.

So of course we played fantastically against England back in 2001, as Otto hadn't fully ingrained his footballing philosophy on decent and skilled players. He essentially broke them down to play his system and it certainly worked as we were Euro champions a mere 3 years later, but it's come to the detriment of a decent football style.

In 2001 we had a poor team. The game against England was nothing more than a decent performance. Both teams were sloppy. In the game just before that we lost 5-1 to Finland!

Greece was nothing before Rehaggel, less than nothing in the world of football. The fact is we do not have the players to play an expansive game against Europe's best. Do you honestly think you could pick an a team that could attack Spain, England, Brazil, etc and get a result?

Rehaggel makes alot of mistakes, but question isn't "is Otto perfect?", it's "who could replace him effectively?". Bajevic is supposedly the no.1 target for Epo. This is the guy that has ruined AEK! He will fall out with half the team within a week! Maybe some foreigner that doesn't know the first thing about Greek football?

Rehaggel has brought Greek football out of the dark ages. If we flop at the world cup then he should go, but until then let's give him one more chance.

[plato-ny]

Someone who believes Greece can win it all

[mangas21]

euro, one of your best posts.....the "dark ages" comment is right on ! perfect analogy....100% in agreement with almost everything you said.....

[primetime]

And this is why there is a need for authority at games because of morons like this Plato

[Euro2004]

euro, one of your best posts.....the "dark ages" comment is right on ! perfect analogy....100% in agreement with almost everything you said.....

I'm glad you agree mate. Obviously everyone here wants the best for the Greek NT but Greek fans are always too impatient. Sometimes what appears to be negative is in fact positive and we have to accept that and maintain faith. For instance, we were blatanly robbed by the refs on numerous occasions in this campaign. But if we had won the group perhaps Otto wouldn't have given Papasta his chance, or Pliatsiakas, or even more experienced players like Salpi. So maybe our short-term failures have forced him to make changes that will benefit us in the long term.

Personally I don't like Rehaggel's team selection. I like his new 3-4-3 which can become a 5-4-1 when we're being attacked, and against weaker teams i'd like to see a 3-5-2. But I don't think he picks the right players. He clearly loves Avraam and Torosidis seems to be a fixture at left wing back, while Haristeas on the right is plain dumb. But we're there now and that was the aim, so let's just keep the faith.

If he does go eventually I'd like to see one of Anastasiadis (Cyprus manager) or Nioblias (u-21 manager) but again, who is to say that they would be selected and who is to say they'd do a good job? Relying on veterans isn't good enough, but relying merely on youth isn't good enough either and that's what Nioblias might do because of his experience with the u21 players. While Anastasiadis has been with Cyprus for a while, who knows how well in sync. he is with the Greek league. The point I'm making is that the "Unknown" has many pit-falls and things could go very, very wrong.

Look at England for instance. Everyone said "Ericsson is killing this team, we need a change", or "Ericsson's diamond system doesn't work", or "Sven isn't passionate enough, we need an English manager to understand our style of play". Under Sven England made the last 8 consistently. The fans got their wishes, he left and McClaren came in and failed to get them to Euro 2008!

A similar thing could happen to Greece. The difference is, we don't have the depth of talent that England has, we don't have their prestige or money to bring in Fabio Capello to put things right, etc. If Otto's replacement fails and we slip down the rankings we could be in a situation where we're in pot 3 in the future, making qualification even harder. That will bring on the onset of a vicious cycle. The Greek fans don't go to the games now that we have a decent team, imagine how few will be going if that happens? That will be the onset of a new dark age!

Let's face it, whether we like his selection or not, Rehaggel definitely has the love and belief of the players. As long as the general doesn't lose the loyalty of the troops then there's always hope because they will fight for him. We've seen them rise to the challenge against Turkey and Ukraine when his back has been to the wall. Will they show that level of committment for a Bajevic or an Anastasiadis? I'm not so sure.

Therefore, out of sheer fear of the possible consequences we must hope that Greece performs well at this World Cup and boosts the morale and reputation of Greek football; because if we fail miserably it could mark a catastrophic end to what has been, overall, a dream-like era.

[Sharpos]

For our but also for Otto's sake i hope we do well in South Africa. If we make it to the second round, and even if we lose in that game (as long as we played with heart and did our best). Otto can exit as manager with his head up high and the respect from all Greek football fans for his great achievment with the team!

Whatever happens in the world cup we need a new coach. And i hope the search have already started. I would like to see someone experienced like hiddink, ericsson or maybe even zico. I dont think there are any greek coaches at this high level at the moment.

If we want to keep this momentum that Otto has created the EPO needs to dig deep in its pockets. Succes doesn't come cheap anymore. So use the money from the world cup spot earning wisely please!

[plato-ny]

And this is why there is a need for authority at games because of morons like this Plato

Take it easy. It is all in good fun.

[mangas21]

Euro, i thik you know my commentary by now...if i c something that makes sense i say it, and if donti agree i say it.....these last two posts have very eloqunetly painted the "big picture" of ottos reign and the implications of his departure perfectly...

your analysis of spinning back into the dark age 100000% spot on correct....and anyone that cant see the monumental benefit of ottos tuteldge is blind....i have been his worst crtitic at times becuase yes, he does have faults....but he has managed to do what no one has ever done: corrall the greek individualistic non disciplined, "point the finger teh minute the wheels fall off" mentality and create a different mindset...THATS HIS BIGGEST ACCOMPLISHMENT because any success starts form there...and further, you can never understand hopw it feels to be successful until you taste success.....theses intangible factors i think played a big role in the win against ukraine....i pointed out that it was the type of game we were good at, and it seemed even more effortless than the turkey game....

ottos ability to keep the team togeth and focused is even more impressive after the failures 2006 / 2008 where it would have been easy to (and it was done) start poinitng fingers, calling for his ouster, etc....

so overall ottos has done more for greek soccer than anyone could have imagined....now if some can tell me his fascination wiht haristeas and avraam and his unwillingness to sprinkle young talent more frquently into the team...?

and I have a technical question maybe you or (anyone) can answer.........how much freedom do player have in a particular system? for instance, in this 3-4-3 system....do the players have certain zones they cant abandone? or do they have the freedom to go where they want as the situations change and they see openings in the opponents defense....? cant you attack out of any formation? what roles do the players have - an explanation of how the formation affects attack/non attack/counter/build up would be very informative.....

[Euro2004]

Whatever happens in the world cup we need a new coach. And i hope the search have already started. I would like to see someone experienced like hiddink, ericsson or maybe even zico. I dont think there are any greek coaches at this high level at the moment.

Finding the right man is very difficult. Hiddink turned down the Chelsea job, i doubt he'll come to Greece. Ericsson was a disgrace with Mexico and Zico is way too attacking for the Greece NT.

[Euro2004]

Euro, i thik you know my commentary by now...if i c something that makes sense i say it, and if donti agree i say it.....these last two posts have very eloqunetly painted the "big picture" of ottos reign and the implications of his departure perfectly...

your analysis of spinning back into the dark age 100000% spot on correct....and anyone that cant see the monumental benefit of ottos tuteldge is blind....i have been his worst crtitic at times becuase yes, he does have faults....but he has managed to do what no one has ever done: corrall the greek individualistic non disciplined, "point the finger teh minute the wheels fall off" mentality and create a different mindset...THATS HIS BIGGEST ACCOMPLISHMENT because any success starts form there...and further, you can never understand hopw it feels to be successful until you taste success.....theses intangible factors i think played a big role in the win against ukraine....i pointed out that it was the type of game we were good at, and it seemed even more effortless than the turkey game....

ottos ability to keep the team togeth and focused is even more impressive after the failures 2006 / 2008 where it would have been easy to (and it was done) start poinitng fingers, calling for his ouster, etc....

so overall ottos has done more for greek soccer than anyone could have imagined....now if some can tell me his fascination wiht haristeas and avraam and his unwillingness to sprinkle young talent more frquently into the team...?

This is all totally true and i agree 100%

and I have a technical question maybe you or (anyone) can answer.........how much freedom do player have in a particular system? for instance, in this 3-4-3 system....do the players have certain zones they cant abandone? or do they have the freedom to go where they want as the situations change and they see openings in the opponents defense....? cant you attack out of any formation? what roles do the players have - an explanation of how the formation affects attack/non attack/counter/build up would be very informative.....

I don't think players have the freedom to do whatever they want except in Brazil and Barca's system. Every player has zones they must fill in all teams. We do see Samaras and Karagounis drift around sometimes but they do have discipline and let's face it they need to.

The back three have to be narrow, with the fastest acting as a sweeper when the team is high up the pitch. The 2 wing-backs/wide midfielders have to get forward whenever possible but when that happens the 2 central midfielders have to hold. If one of the central midfielders does get forward then one of the 2 wide midfielders has to sit. In other words there has to be at least 2 midfielders that are sitting at any one time. Otherwise, (to use the team against the Ukraine as an example) if Spyropoulos and Pliatsikas both get forward and Karagounis does too and we get hit on the counter then Katsouranis is the only protection against the back line.

So overall it's quite a conservative formation because 5 MUST always defend and a MAX of 5 will attack, on most occassions it will only be 4. Many will criticise this as being too defensive, particularly as Samaras is very conservative for a left forward. For example, look how deep he was when he played that pass to Salpi for the goal. You would never catch an attacking team's left forward sitting that deep (i.e. Henry, Petrov, Malouda, Arshavin). So this is essentially a defensive formation, even more so because Spyro and Pliatsiakas could slip into a straight full back position while Salpi and Samaras drop into wide midfield, making it a 5-4-1 when under pressure.

This also suits us when we are under pressure because Kyrgiakos and Moras are big and good in the air but they are immobile. So imagine we're playing Spain and we've got an open line-up, with Torres, Villa and Iniesta running at our back 3. We are going to get torn apart. But in a tight system with a narrow 3 and alot of protection in front of the centre-backs will force Spain out wide. Not if they're whipping crosses into the box you'd fancy Kyrgiakos and Moras to dominate aerially. So it's all about finding a balance that suits us rather than our opponents.

Against big teams i don't mind this formation therefore because as long as the score is 0-0 we have a chance. Against mediocre teams I don't like it though, because if we're better than a team than the longer it stays at 0-0 the more of an advantage they have because they can always steal one. This is why I want a 3-5-2 against mediocre teams, that way the centre-forward doesn't get so isolated.

[mangas21]

euro, excellent description ....thanks for taking the time to write it....

so that means we created some decent scoring chances even with less attackers?

and, do u think ottos constant emphasis on defense (which by the way is fine with me if it means a WIN) has somehow gotten these guys to think they CANT play offensively? what does that do to a teams phyche? or does it even make a difference?

to me "offensive firepower" DOES NOT mean playing wide open.....it means when you need to score a goal, you create few but QUALITY chances...again i refer to the italians...they could be jerking all day and BANG, when they need a goal they come down twicw with excellent chances and score once....they dont come down 15 times and shoot form 50 yards or cross desperately ala donkey ball.....

more so clever, off ball tactic and recognition of the weakest points on the opponent...thats how i see samara / salpi in ukraine....

[Euro2004]

euro, excellent description ....thanks for taking the time to write it....

so that means we created some decent scoring chances even with less attackers?

Well Otto's old system of 4-3-3 can more attacking if you have the players for it. Arsenal, Chelsea, and Man City have played or do play 4-3-3 and look how attacking they can be. That's because 2 of their 3 forward are wingers and 2 of the 3 midfielders can attack. We don't have the personnel for that so the new 3-4-3 is more attacking.

and, do u think ottos constant emphasis on defense (which by the way is fine with me if it means a WIN) has somehow gotten these guys to think they CANT play offensively?  what does that do to a teams phyche? or does it even make a difference?

I don't think it makes a difference. Olympiakos are an attacking team in Greece and in Europe they can't get a result away to save their lives. Whereas PAO has been more conservative in Europe over the years and has done alot better. Self belief is independent of playing style in my opinion.

to me "offensive firepower" DOES NOT mean playing wide open.....it means when you need to score a goal, you create few but QUALITY chances...again i refer to the italians...they could be jerking all day and BANG, when they need a goal they come down twicw with excellent chances and score once....they dont come down 15 times and shoot form 50 yards or cross desperately ala donkey ball.....

We cannot out-attack big teams and creating chances means taking risks. The amount of risks we can take are limited, on the other hand we can't just sit back and hope to create a few quality chances like Italy because we do not have their individual talent. We don't have a Pirlo, Cassano and a Del Piero. We need to be intelligent in possession and economical. That means not taking too many risks.

more so clever, off ball tactic and recognition of the weakest points on the opponent...thats how i see samara / salpi in ukraine....

This is what we have to work on. We need to find weaknesses in our opponents game. If we're playing Spain we need an aerial tactic but there's no point in doing that against England. England are brilliant in the air but Johnson is too attacking a right back and neglects his defensive duties so doubling up on him down the left might be the way to go. Terry is also great in the air but can struggle against nippy and skillful forwards, so maybe a risk with Koutsianikoulis up front might work for example. It might not, he might get completely owned, but what's the point for playing Haristeas or Samaras against him if we know they'll get dominated? We need to try things in friendlies and play against a variety of opposition. I want to see some friendlies against opposition from different continents. Realistic opponents for friendlies could be Paraguay, Ecuador/Ghana, Ireland, Belarus and Sweden. Very different styles and we could try and adapt by looking at what works against what type of opposition.