With just one defeat in his time in charge of the Socceroos, it is not time to start fretting about Pim Verbeek's suitability for the job. But is the honeymoon over for the Dutchman after a defeat by Iraq, which reminded us all just how tough international football in Asia can be?
Is some of the gloss coming off a man who has charmed the media and the Australian public and has convinced us all that his vision was the only way forward for the Socceroos?
There is no doubt Verbeek's personality has helped him sell himself during his short time in charge of Australia. He is an affable man and has treated the media in Australia with utmost respect, asking only that he be given the requisite time to get the national team in a state where they can be at their most competitive.
That requisite time has just about passed and the reality is that Australia is two losses away from a World Cup disaster. While that seems a long way away, the pressure must be building on Verbeek after that loss to Iraq, as he knows that luck can play a major part in these qualifiers. Should the rub of the green desert the Socceroos over the next two matches, then the dream of South Africa could be gone at the very first hurdle.
The one criticism that could be levelled at Verbeek is that Australia has been too conservative in its set up, especially in that game in Dubai. Verbeek selected a back five, with three central defenders, plus a four-man midfield with Jason Culina, Vinnie Grella and Carl Valeri, all of whom are defensive players. It left Harry Kewell up front by himself without the help of even an attacking midfielder.
Had Australia emerged from that match with a 0-0 draw or even a 1-0 win then Verbeek would have been praised, but there's an argument which says fortune favours the brave, and Australia's approach was far from brave on Saturday. It was a lucky goal which decided the game, but if you are intent on sitting back, then there's a chance the opposition will try their luck from range.
As soon as the ball flew into the net, all of Australia's plans went out the window. Plan A had failed but there was no considered Plan B. Australia needed composure and creativity in the middle of the park, but Verbeek sent on Brett Holman instead of Mark Bresciano, then replaced Chris Coyne with Josh Kennedy and Kewell with Scott McDonald.
Australia dominated the last 30 minutes, but lacked an attacking midfielder to really run at the Iraqi defence, fragmenting it and opening it up for the strikers. Holman did that to a certain extent, but that is not his strength whereas Bresciano has the ability to do that and also fire from long range.
Under Verbeek, South Korea was renowned as a dour, defensive team which lacked the spark which it had under Guus Hiddink in the 2002 World Cup. The Koreans finished third in the Asian Cup but almost created a cure for insomnia along the way, failing to score in 360 minutes in the knockout stage, but winning two penalty shootouts in the quarter finals, and then in the 3 v 4 match. At the end of it, Verbeek bemoaned the absence of his best players and left feeling he had failed to live up to the massive expectations set by Hiddink.
Australian fans are hoping that his tenure with Australia doesn't go the same way.
Hiddink's reign in charge of Australia lasted less than 12 months, but his legacy was to convince FFA that a European coach was needed to provide the players with the technical skills they needed to play international football at an elite level. Under Hiddink, the Socceroos had learned to play the Dutch style of flexible football, slotting-in in different roles when needed and using multiple routes of attack.
It was thought Dick Advocaat would continue that path of development and FFA was delighted that he had agreed to come in and maintain that education. But Advocaat changed his mind, leaving FFA at the altar, seeking a new groom.
Verbeek fitted the mould and immediately stamped his mark, declaring that the A-League wasn't as good a proving ground as everyone thought and he wanted his best players playing in Europe. A 3-0 win over Qatar in his first match in charge had everyone hailing the second coming. Guus was gone, but Pim was set to step in his shoes.
But Verbeek and Hiddink are very different operators, with two very different resumes. Hiddink is revered as one of the finest coaches in the world, while Verbeek has yet to ascend to that level.
They also have very different methodologies and at this stage of his Socceroos career, Verbeek has not shown the same willingness to embrace that Dutch model of flexible football. Rather, Australia has been playing percentage football, keeping possession and using its physical advantages over opponents.
Australia has become risk adverse which means fewer goals conceded, but with that has come an adversity to the creative play which made Australia under Hiddink so dangerous.
Whether that's just a personnel issue at the moment is subject to debate. He has only had his full strength side available to him once so far in this campaign and Australia is a very different team without Tim Cahill at the pointy end of the midfield.
Football is a game of results, and if Verbeek gets Australia to the World Cup playing a style of football, which while it is not attractive, is effective, then his job is done. But if the Socceroos fall short, can we be guaranteed that Verbeek got the most of what was at his disposal? We will find out in the next fortnight.