Howard Beck called it the ghost that lingered in the NBA, an influence that was “subtle but irrefutable.” It wasn’t the implied affirmation of genius the number 23 came to represent in sport, but the consequently ubiquitous comparison of any athletic guard who emerged in the league to Michael Jordan.
Jordan’s influence is a shining example of a singular talent’s ability to shape how individuals view a sport, from a tactical perspective. Similar thinking has applied in Australian football, and more specifically, to the Socceroos. Although his approach to football was definitely unlike Jordan’s borderline sociopathic competitiveness, the Australian game has irrefutably yearned to replace Mark Viduka.
There were times when Eli Babalj, Adrian Vranić and Tomi Jurić were all given the “Next Viduka” tag. Ultimately – with Australia’s opening group game against France at this year’s World Cup just over a week away – it is exactly what makes Andrew Nabbout’s possible selection as the Socceroos’ starting striker so fascinating.
Stocky, while equal parts quick and unrefined, Nabbout is the very antithesis to the idea of Viduka, and Bert van Marwijk’s evident trust in him marks a significant shift in thinking.
In context, one must look at what Viduka provided, especially under Guus Hiddink. Despite his physical stature and aerial presence, outside of Harry Kewell, it was Viduka’s movement and close control that tied a mobile team together.
He was the outlet moving forward, with the best example being Mark Bresciano’s equaliser against Uruguay in the 2006 World Cup qualification playoff. Before Kewell’s mistimed shot and Bresciano’s statuesque pose, it was Viduka’s initial movement that dragged Paolo Montero out of position, before his backheel to an on-running Kewell into the gap.
Viduka’s retirement created a void up front, and the need to replace him with another taller presence meant a diminutive forward in Scott McDonald was never truly given the chance to transfer club form to international level.
Joshua Kennedy eventually proved a more compatible fit and arguably, the idea of a target man has helped prolong Tim Cahill’s international career, despite a nomadic existence at club level in recent times. Along with Jurić, the 38-year-old’s role as a target man underscores a tactical impasse that coaches have progressively had to consider, with respect to a striker’s role in the modern game: are they there to help create or merely finish play?
This became an increasingly pressing issue in Ange Postecoglou’s possession-heavy game plan, for both Cahill and Jurić lack the requisite technical ability to combine with the collective and merely generate chances.
Despite a high volume of passes, the end point to phases of play largely resulted in crosses against an embedded defence. Last September’s qualifier at home to Thailand was a kind of zenith with both Cahill and Jurić on the pitch, with Australia lumping in 52 crosses at a mere 23.1% success rate.
Although Van Marwijk provides an altered tactical plan, where he does not differ from Postecoglou is the fact Australia’s primary attribute in attack is pace. While Cahill and Jurić could still provide an effective option in the right in-game situation, this is what makes Nabbout’s initial prominence under Van Marwijk – who will look to primarily react – so important.
Nabbout is not a player who can unlock a defence in confined space but in him, Jamie Maclaren and even Mathew Leckie, the Dutchman possibly has more congruent options in a counter-attacking plan.
Energy will be the alpha and omega for the Socceroos in Russia. Particularly with Nabbout’s pace, Australia could be able to start and realise attacking phases of play with lesser numbers, from deeper positions on the pitch. This was evident on multiple occasions in Australia’s 4-0 friendly win over the Czech Republic last week, even before the Czechs went into a premature holiday mode.
How effective this ploy will be in Group C remains to be seen, but in context of rigid positional thinking and a current scarcity in individual talent, there is reason to believe it is the right one.
Fundamentally, Andrew Nabbout is not comparable to Mark Viduka in terms of technical attributes. His first touch and overall ball control is not reliable under pressure, but Australian football has spent the past decade trying to replace the irreplaceable.
Ultimately, within the framework of Van Marwijk’s game plan, not trying to replace him and giving up that ghost could be more conducive to collective balance.
