Given it encompassed two Olympic Games, an Asian Cup, a home Women’s World Cup and a pandemic, it feels like Tony Gustavsson’s Matildas tenure lasted a lot longer than four years. That feeling perhaps lessened the impact of Thursday’s announcement that the Swede and Football Australia had mutually agreed to part ways.
No coaching tenure is perpetual, and even before his side’s ignominious group stage exit from the Paris Games, there was a sense that a point has been reached where the clean break that the end of his contract offered – as opposed to a sacking – was in the best interest of all parties involved. It was something the 50-year-old had increasingly reflected on in the months leading into the Games, meditating not just on whether remaining coach of the Matildas was the right move for him, but if he remained the right coach for the Matildas.
But if he or the federation had any doubts, the Matildas’ Olympics struggles would have done little to challenge the view that now was the time for a conscious uncoupling.
Indeed, for all the familiar foibles on display across the past week in France, perhaps most indicative that Gustavsson had reached his natural end date was his team’s defensive struggles. The back line had shown clear signs of progression during his tenure, but in France experienced a significant regression in fixtures they had spent 12 months preparing for, despite no changes in personnel.
Catastrophic defending on set pieces, too, is inexplicable for a side that has had continuity in personnel and coaching for years, let alone one led by a coach who developed a reputation as a set piece doyen as an assistant to Jill Ellis in the World Cup winning US sides.
How costly did this prove to be? Ship four goals against Zambia rather than five and Australia would have gone through at the expense of Brazil. Instead, the Matildas are homeward bound and a tenure that almost defies proper classification has concluded. It has been a paradoxical four-year run that juxtaposed glorious moments and memories that will last a lifetime with a nagging sense of unrequitedness.
In breaking the quarter-final barrier and leading them to the semis of the Olympics and a World Cup, an argument can be made that, based on results, Gustavsson is the most successful Matildas coach of all time. Only Tom Sermanni and his 2010 Asian Cup crown is a possible challenger.
There have been moments that hinted at something special beneath the surface – the adjustments and subsequent triumphs over Canada, Denmark and France at the World Cup, or the destruction of the Philippines in Olympic qualifying. There have also been injuries and trying circumstances that have derailed best-laid plans; Gustavsson certainly would not have been prepared to be without Sam Kerr for most of the World Cup or these Olympics.
Yet, simultaneously, with the talent at his disposal and the favourable circumstances, there is also a case to be made that more could have been accomplished. There is an argument that more could have been done to optimise the talent at his disposal, and that the framework Gustavsson had the team operating in and the roles he asked of the players placed a ceiling on what they could accomplish.
That it was Alanna Kennedy being thrown forward and Emily van Egmond being inserted into the midfield as the Matildas chased the game against the US was illustrative of a side that, despite attempts to evolve, would often revert to playing the hits in the crunch moments.
Now, as the dust settles on the Gustavsson era, what is perhaps just as important as asking what’s next is a reflection on the context of what has been. Because while there is always a tendency to scapegoat following a post-tournament exit, a coach doesn’t operate in a vacuum.
If a subsequent review by the federation determines that there were inadequacies in approach or philosophy during Gustavsson’s tenure, it will be rendered almost completely moot if that isn’t immediately followed by some internal reflection. Review processes that existed at the federation allowed these deficiencies to go unaddressed.
With the benefit of hindsight, the Matildas’ exit in the quarter-finals of the 2022 Asian Cup was a rubicon moment for Football Australia – the last real point it could move on from Gustavsson with enough time to recover for the World Cup. Instead, as the organisation consistently did throughout his tenure – despite outside noise and discontent – they chose to back him.
In time, a new Matildas boss will need to be appointed. Just as important, however, for the Matildas’ hopes at a home Asian Cup in 2026 and a World Cup in 2027, will be understanding the context in which they will coach and what came before.
