All Whites v Belarus | Tues 13th June | 3:50am | Minsk | SS2

is roux injured,  both wingbacks looked lost throughout that game. Not sure how bill isn't starting although he was as good today as last week. Thought Kosta and Patterson add a bit of fight and intensity up front which was lacking. 

I can kind of see what Hudson is trying to do....his football philosophy. He said he wanted to pay football..to not park the bus, to win the ball high up the field, to press the opposition. Trouble is we are now at the business end of his time as AW coach. We are about to play on the World Stage in the Confed Cup against really serious oppositionand things are not working..

From what we have just witnessed against Belorussia we are far far away from being anywhere near putting in a competitive performance. We look underdone, under prepared, undercoached. The guys look like they just met each other today rather than being in camp for three weeks.

He picked our three best ball players in midfield..fair enough. Problem is Rojas, Thomas and Wee mac are easily over run by any half decent international midfield..In both warmup games the side has looked more balanced when Tuiloma has come on. 

To me there is a gulf between Hudsons theoretical ideas and his ability to transfer these ideas to the players. I kind of fear what might happen once the Conf cup kicks off. If he does not fix the glaring weaknesses in midfield we will be in big big trouble. Sides like Mexico and Portugal will cut us to ribbons if we play like we have been in the warm up games. 

Hudson is trying to play a style we just don't have the players for. That's bad management. Midfield is obviously our weakest area so why play a style which puts more pressure on it. 

I think a 4-3-3 sitting deep and counterattacking down the wings makes way more sense than a high pressing short passing game.

Don't worry I'm sure we'll nick a draw then balance will be restored and Hudson will then say "Told ya so". To me this is not the style that NZF should want to advertise our game with for the talent we have. Look at the likes of our SSprem teams and their style of play, although a different standard of play our boys could take that style to the next level. But at the end of the day it's about winning yet I can't see how we can win anything based on the dross that constantly gets served. Let's just hope they pull it together on the day because at the moment we're looking shark.

Seems to be some reoccurring themes in this game.

I still don't think we are set up to best match the players we have on offer. 5-2-3 worked well for us in 2010 because it played to our strengths (3 good CBs & 2 good DMs) and limited our weakness (lack of full backs). As defensive as it was, it was pragmatic and we created a handful of chances.

I don't think you can apply the same logic this time around with the 2 primary formations played recently. For example, the two players who have had the best seasons (Wood and Rojas), are being asked to do different roles at national level. Almost all of Wood's goals have been tap ins from wide. Given our strength in wingers, really don't understand why we don't have 3 up top we've barely created any chances with a front two. I'm guessing Hudson prefers 2 strikers to try create an overload in the middle of the park. When we can't create an overload, our pressing game really struggles and when we do gain possession, we struggle under pressure from the opposition and end up lumping it forward.

Hudson mentioned in an article the other day that he wants to play 3 CBs because otherwise one of his best players is sitting on the bench. However I reckon that creates issues further up the park if he wants to play a pressing game. It pulls a player from the attacking unit so it's much easier for others teams to play through us. Which they have.

If he wants to play a back 5, we should really set ourselves up as a counter attacking team against stronger opposition. Essentially playing with 2 DMs (tuiloma and weemac) and three up top in (Rojas, Wood, Thomas). If he wants to press, reckon it needs to be 4-2-1-3 with Tuiloma, Weemac and one more (Lewis or Themi) making up the midfield.

At the moment it still looks like he is trying to shoehorn players into a preferred style and formation.

What a horrible horrible game!

It's hard to pick what half was worse - I can not understand starting Smeltz and Wood together - no mobility! Our best players are being asked to play roles they are not familiar with... Patterson at least looked to play, but needs to not fall over at the slightest touch every time.

There were a few interesting selections in that game, so I am wondering if there a few niggles in the squad - regardless we need to be a lot better. Looking ahead to Russia I would like to see:

Marinovich

Boxall Themi Smith

Roux                                         Doyle

              Tuiloma McGlicnhey

                       Thomas

                   Wood Barbs

We can't play Thomas and Rojas in the middle together as they are too light weight as mentioned. Thomas gets ahead as he has a higher work rate and will drop in to receive more. In Tuiloma and McGlinchey we have decent mobility and both players can play. Smith comes in for Durante, who is simply not good enough with the ball at feet and we need to look after it more.

Not sure why Roux has not been sighted. He is our most experienced wing back and has come off a good season. Nothing between Doyle and Wynne for me. Doyle has a little more mongrel for me and slightly better in the air. 

I would almost consider starting Patterson ahead of Thomas based on this game.

How embarrassing, what is Hudsons angle?

We should be playing like Iceland, direct and physical, we aren't good enough technically for the play Hudson is trying to implement. 

After the looking at 'hundreds' players this should be the starting line up. But it sounds all pretty bad, the only decent games where the ones in the US, looks like many years wasted, sad.

Hudson's getting found out isn't he?  So much big talk pre-tour

2 x 0-1 results against teams ranked higher than us -  relax, any result at the Confeds can be deemed a success given what we have and where we have come from.

What's the point if it's invariably painful to watch?

a few people have referenced the playing formation as being 5-3-2. but today we started that way and after about 15 minutes themi moved to DM and we played 4-1-3-2 and when bill came on rojas moved to AM, mcglinchey to DM and bill played in front of mcglinchey to the right in a 4-1-2-1-2

man, we are so under done. 

we really lack cohesion and fluidity. if there's a development curve for this team, we seem to still be near the start.

here's hoping it comes together for the confeds!

I guess my point is that he was brought in to take the team forward and really this is all exactly the same as we have seen for years, no composure, no combination play etc etc

I am also well past the team and management taking any credit for losses.  

Friendly, 12 June 2017, Traktor Stadium, Minsk

Belarus 1 (Denis Polyakov 47)

New Zealand 0

HT: 0-0. Ref: Mikhail Vilkov (Russia). Att: 2,000

Goal: 1-0, Denis Polyakov (47): Rios pulled his right-wing corner back to Burko on the corner of the area. In acres of space, Burko looped a cross to the back post where Polyakov turned the ball between Marinovic’s legs from close range.

BLR: Andrey Klimovich - Sergei Politevich, Denis Polyakov (Aleksandr Pavlovets 86), Alexandr Sachivko, Igor Burko (Dmitri Aliseyko 71), Artem Bykov, Nikita Korzun, Ivan Mayevskiy (Yevgeniy Berezkin 80), Aleksey Rios (Sergey Matvejchik 70), Mikhail Gordejchuk (Pavel Savitskiy 62), Maksim Skavysh (Denis Laptev 61). Unused Sub: Denis Scherbitsky. Booked: Alexandr Sachivko (89). Sent Off: None.

NZL: Stefan Marinovic - Kip Colvey (Dane Ingham 78), Themistoklis Tzimopoulos (Bill Tuiloma 51), Andrew Durante, Michael Boxall, Deklan Wynne, Ryan Thomas (Monty Patterson 51), Michael McGlinchey, Marco Rojas, Chris Wood, Shane Smeltz (Kosta Barbarouses 63). Unused Subs: Glen Moss, Tamati Williams, Sam Brotherton, Clayton Lewis, Tom Doyle, Alex Rufer, Tommy Smith, Storm Roux. Booked: None. Sent Off: None.

Would rather we lost by more but showed more signs of progress than took these 1-0 losses playing like we are. I don't think I'd be in the minority holding that view.

Also contrast this with the win we had against Serbia before 2010.  This team is going NOWHERE

it was the 3-5-2 (that's how they intend it, no matter how it looks when defending) for half an hour, then Themi moved into DM in a 4-4-2 diamond (4-3-1-2/4-1-3-2/4-1-2-1-2, however you want to notate it). I think they later shifted back to 3-5-2 in the second half, with Bill dropping in as the third CB.

yeh this seems a world away:

Would you look at that, a team playing to their strengths.

I have just watched the game now, and i'm so incredibly disapointed.  We were just so bad.  I can't think of a single positive to come out of that 90 minutes of 'football'.

The way Hudson set us up at the beginning just seemed so terribly off, even before the game started.  With the 5-3-2 with Rojas and Thomas looking to drift into wide positions, McG is left completely alone in the midfield to try and be defensive screener, option from the back, playmaker, high presser through the middle... and he understandably got completely swamped.  Herbert got shark for trying to force non midfielders into our midfield (Killen, Durante etc...), but Hudson's approach is worse - seemingly it's to completely concede the middle of the park and play what almost looked like a 5-1-4 at times.

I can't get over just how bad we were.  I can only hope it was because Fred was right pre game and we had been having intense fitness sessions and had tired legs.  Even if that's the case, I can't understand why you would be heavily drilling fitness a week out from a tournament?  Surely the work should have been done already and you are more doing work on tactics and structure (but then i'm not a up and coming manager with a sweet wiki page so what do I know.)

Watching that video I remember why I love that team, because we were good!

Yep just finished watching the game (argh that was hard!), and that's the formations we played. I wasn't impressed with Themi as a DM. He didn't move at all when we were in possession so never provided a pass outlet. When Bill came on the midfield looked much better for the 10 mins he was playing in the midfield. Weemac was able to get on the ball more dropping back to receive, and Bill moving well without the ball and was strong and good on the ball a bit higher up. But for some reason they then shifted back to a 3-5-2 and we reverted to total sharkness again.

Comparison line-ups - while there are a few differences, there are a lot of similarities.  Do the differences explain the disparity?  Granted Winston's missing presence is huge, but to me they look similar enough to make the differences in performances really confusing... could it be that Dyer off the bench really is the talismanic key?!

I do remember specifically watching that USA game and thinking that Winston was an absolute beast

At the very least I hope we sort out our marking at corners before the Confeds. That goal we conceded was just an unforced tactical error - it wasn't like we got done by a piece of superior skill or physicality, we were just poorly organised. I don't know if it was Marinovic to blame or someone else but that just shouldn't happen.

We are miles behind where we were in '99, '02, '06 and '09/10.

I'd go:

Keeper (Moss / Marinovic)

Boxall    Durante   Smith

Themi Tuiloma

WeeMac

Barbs                              Thomas

   Rojas

Wood

Play to our strengths ala Ricki.  Boy do we miss Reid

I was at both games, world's apart.  

You could feel in that Austria camp that with the likes of Smith, Reid, and a very young Wood having just joined with Ryan bossing them, we could do something and which we did with some decent results (good times there aye).  

After the NI game, a couple of kiwis told me that Wood shouldn't be captain, I disagreed with them then but not now.

As I said losing Reid would see a big drop in quality.  Still Russia should be fun, even if watching won't be.

Chris James?  So need him right now based on what we have seen.  Pity we've lost A Rod, could have been good in that role for the Whites.

Reid pulling out scuppered that one....

I watched the 1st half and then switched to watching the yachting. 

I look forward to the day Hudson is gone, i view his time with us as being a backward step.

For the 1st time in 50 years of watching NZ football Im thinking of giving the upcoming games a miss. We played better football in the 70's when long ball was the accepted norm. 

I hate this bastard

Hopefully in a few week, why stick with him? I don't think he will pull something off.

Long balls are accepted, these days they are super precise and used in the mix with other tactics.

Will be interesting to see what happens after a Confederation Cup where NZ fail miserably. Will he go or be pushed? or will they persevere until after World Cup qualification. I'd tend to think it will be when we bow out of the WC.

Still, it'll be funny if we get a win or a draw or two at the Confeds, and Hudson suddenly becomes the Jeremy Corbyn of football.