I picked 3 matches to watch at the Asian Cup - Matchday 1
Once again, we are back in Qatar for an Asian festival of football. Let's get this show on the road!
It is that time of year again, albeit a year late. But finally, the Asian Cup is here. For this year, I have decided to do something a bit different due to time limitations and the temptation of covering as many teams as possible. Instead of the normal long-form analysis articles, I will be covering three matches every matchday and bring my thoughts and quick analysis together into one single newsletter.
I have also chosen to be a neutral fan, as always, rather than supporting a specific team. This will allow me to give my thoughts from a neutral perspective and without any biases or rants towards a single team. And yes, this is done so that I cannot rant about Vietnam for thousands of words. I also want to find dark horses of this tournament and look out for “under-the-radar” players through my selection of matches so that I can give them the spotlight that they deserve.
For matchday one of the group stage, I will be covering:
I will go through my reasons for choosing the match once we get to that match, which also serves as an overview/pre-match info for that match. This will be accompanied by my thoughts, analysis of the match, and highlight of players that catch my attention as the match progresses. There might be some data visualisations and tactical images here and there, but I will not be using them often unless there is a specific point that I want to make. I am also open to any new ideas that you might have to improve this series, so let me know down in the comments!
Now that you have an idea of what the structure of this series will be, let’s get into the first match of the three!
Japan vs Vietnam - Group D
Overview
It is very clear that Japan is the best Asian team at this moment. From the depth of their talent pool to the way that both the men’s and women’s national team have performed at the last World Cup, it feels like they are on a different level to the rest of the continent. They enter this Asian Cup as the favourite to win the tournament and improve their 2019 placement as the tournament’s runners-up.
On the other hand, there is a sense that Vietnam are stagnating as they go through a transitioning period under Philippe Troussier. It is a bold move to immediately change the way that the national team play within a very short period. From a defence-first, counter-attacking style under Park Hang-seo, to a possession-based style, this highlights a drastic change, and so far, Vietnam have done alright.
The reason why I chose this match is to answer one of the questions that I have about Troussier: “which approach will he take against the best Asian side?”. Against stronger teams like South Korea and China, Troussier still decided that he wanted the team to play his way rather than sitting back and wait for the right opportunity to counter. They are also missing plenty of key players due to injuries (and many underlying problems) and are entering this tournament with one of the youngest squads, which can only make the problem worse. This match can go either way, either Vietnam will grab a bucket and be ready to concede plenty of goals, or they will be bold and actually put some nerves onto Japan.
The match
I had doubts before the match and they were very quickly answered. Vietnam had decided to be bold, and it worked? I like it though, because they sticked to Troussier’s style and caused some troubles for Japan. Obviously Japan was still the better team and whenever they were on the ball, they pushed Vietnam way back to in front of their penalty box and started to play around with them with short passes and small combinations. This was the premise for Takumi Minamino’s second goal, which came from an excellent through ball by Wataru Endō.
Going back to Vietnam, I am also going to give credits to the way that Vietnam played in the first half because I had never seen the team being so comfortable with controlling and playing with the ball. The fact that the players understood each other to make small combinations work and play through Japan’s press was one of the highlights. It was not perfect, for sure, as it was easy for the Vietnamese players to misplace a pass or lose a challenge because of the difference in physicality. But if the team can play like that for the remaining two matches, it will bring plenty of optimism for what the future might holds for this team under Troussier.
The two goals that Vietnam scored was also an indication for Troussier’s willingness to try out new things, which, in this case, was set-pieces. While Phạm Tuấn Hải’s goal was just the case of being at the right place at the right time, Nguyễn Đình Bắc’s header was simply majestic. From the slightly low delivery from Đỗ Hùng Dũng, to a header that required a lot of skills to take it to the far post, everything had to be perfect, and it did. We will talk more about his individual performance a bit later, but for now, let’s sit back and enjoy his equaliser for Vietnam.
In contrast to the first half, it felt obvious that the tempo of the second half was lower as Japan focused more on the defensive side after getting a third goal from Keito Nakamura right before half time (what a goal, by the way!). This is just a guess, but I think Moriyasu’s plan after Vietnam scored their second goal was to apply pressure on the opposition in order to regain their lead. Once they have the lead, the game would be theirs to control, which would allow them to sit back in a mid block and preserved some energy for a last-few-minutes burst in the second half.
And so they did. Japan was defence-first for the majority of the second half and did very well to shut most of Vietnam’s attacking attempts down even before they could get into the final third. They were happy to hand over possession to the opposition team, but their 4-4-2 mid-block worked really hard to close down any possible space that the Vietnamese players could play through. In total, Vietnam only had 18 touches inside of the final third in the second half, which was a decent drop from 28 touches in the first half.
Most of Vietnam’s touches inside of the final third were out wide with very few took place in the central area. This was because Japan’s defensive block was very discipline and left little to no space in between their defensive lines, making the task of playing through them almost impossible. Vietnam had to resort to moving the ball wide, and yet that was made hard by Japan’s quickness to shift side-to-side and overload the wide space quickly.
Within the last 15 minutes of the second half, Japan took back control of the match and quickly overwhelmed a now-tired Vietnam team. The Itō duo of Hiroki and Junya caused havoc down Japan’s left-hand side, while the presence of Ayase Ueda gave the team a focal point to play the ball to if they wanted to play through Vietnam’s 5-4-1 defensive block. Once again, they did, and also scored the fourth goal in the meantime.
It was an expected performance from Japan, though I had thought they would have dominated a lot more. This was down to a huge fight and effort from Vietnam to limit the damage as much as they could and they also did some damage onto Japan as well. Nonetheless, it was a promising performance from Vietnam and I am excited to see more from this team in the next couple of matches.
The players
It is hard to single out any Japanese players given that this was a good team performance where everybody played their part. Minamino stood out with his two goals and huge contribution to Japan’s attacking play, while Endō was the metronome of the team as he was involved heavily both during the build up and inside the final third. Both Junya Itō and Keito Nakamura had a decent game as well as their dribbling skills caused a lot of problems for Vietnam’s wing-backs. One player that I had expected more from was Mao Hosoya, but that was to be expected given that he was completely isolated inside of Vietnam’s defensive block and could not contribute much to the team.
For Vietnam, I was very impressed by Đình Bắc (#15), him being a young player allowed him to play with a lot of freedom and he was never afraid of showing what he could do against much, much stronger players. The same can be said for the majority of this team as they did not feel rigid like the team that went to the 2019 Asian Cup. Players like Phan Tuấn Tài (#12), Lê Phạm Thành Long (#25), and Nguyễn Thái Sơn (#16) played with almost no pressure and tried to go toes-to-toes with some of the Japanese players. Considering this is all four’s first major tournament for the national team, I can only hope they will maintain this freedom to play as time goes on.
UAE vs Hong Kong - Group C
Overview
Even though they are one of the top Asian teams, the UAE have not had any significant achievements in a while. Now under the guidance of former Korea Republic manager Paulo Bento, they enter this Asian Cup with high hopes that they will go quite deep and a small chance of going all the way. Given that teams around them like Saudi Arabia, who is only getting better, or Qatar, who is getting there, the pressure on the UAE to put on a show is quite significant.
Meanwhile, Hong Kong will enter this tournament virtually unknown to everyone as they are back in the Asian Cup for the first time since 1968. Yes, 1968, it is that far back. But they bring a bit of optimism having finished fourth in the most recent Asian Games, which might be an indication for an upward trajectory for Hong Kong football as a whole.
It is an interesting match to say the least, as no one knew what to expect from Hong Kong as they have not reached this level in quite a while. On the other side, we have a UAE team that is expected to perform at a high level in order to achieve their expectation and show other Middle East countries that they can also compete. As they were not expected to win, Hong Kong entered this match with virtually no pressure and could cause a problem or two for the UAE.
The match
Right from the start, the UAE was determined to prove that they were the better team and they took control of the match quickly. Paulo Bento’s side played with intention and utilised the spaces that the opposition created to get the ball into the final third. As much as they were able to progress the ball, though, there was a lack of quality in creating goal-scoring chances. The UAE relied heavily on getting the ball wide and just swung crosses into the box, hoping one of those crosses would eventually be connected to one of the attackers, which most of them did not.
Meanwhile, Hong Kong’s style of play was a slight contrast to the UAE’s style. They were fast, direct, and energetic as they used long passes to move the ball back-and-forth as quickly as possible, and that is not mentioning their long throws into the penalty box. But I felt as if Hong Kong was lacking that bit of experience playing at a big tournament, which should not have been a surprise. The players showed energy and determination, but they did not have that composure to retain the ball and actually created something meaningful even with their 9 attempted shots.
At the other end, their energetic style was starting to bite back as the UAE just exposed Hong Kong by baiting them to press high, only for the goalkeeper to play a long ball over the top to the left full-back Abdulla Idrees. It left their back four very vulnerable to deal with the attacking threat of the front three plus Idrees as Hong Kong’s midfielders could not recover in time. They did not help themselves further when their defenders consistently conceded unnecessary fouls, which is definitely not foreshadowing.
The first half was ultimately decided by a penalty, which was conceded by a handball from Hong Kong’s Oliver Gerbig. But the second half offered so much more and also slightly exaggerated Hong Kong’s problems a bit more. With almost the same level of energy and determination going into the second half, Hong Kong improved their attack and got what they deserved, which was a goal after a long absent period from the Asian Cup. Even though it was slightly unconvincing, it was still a significant achievement for the team.
But as mentioned, Hong Kong’s lack of experience of playing at a big tournament started to bite back and allowed the UAE to grow into the second half. On the attacking side, I felt they were rushing things by sending long passes up top to Matthew Orr or giving the ball to Everton Camargo out on the right and let him do his own things. Their attacks lacked a concrete idea and rather scrambled just in hope of a shot on target. If they had taken their chances a bit better or be a bit more composed to spring together a few passes inside of the final third, things might have been a bit different.
Their defensive side was not any better as the UAE kept piling on the pressure and Hong Kong’s defenders started to get overwhelmed and nervous. Many unnecessary fouls were conceded and quite a few close-call penalty shouts were observed, which I think it is hard to avoid given that this is the first major tournament for many of these players (except for the EAFF Championship). The UAE was not convincing by any means since their attacks were still above average at best, at least for me. But thanks to their individual efforts, they made the most of Hong Kong’s defensive errors to score the final two goals and put the final blows onto the away side.
Overall, I thought the match was alright. The quality was not as high as the Japan vs Vietnam match earlier that night (or maybe it was because I watched the UAE vs Hong Kong match at 1am so tiredness might have played a part in my judgement) but I was still interested to see what the UAE and Hong Kong could offer throughout this tournament. While both teams did not show the full potential of what they could do, I was able to see a glimpse of their style of play.
Also, VAR was a bit annoying in this match. Paraphrasing what I always choose in Football Manager whenever I get asked about VAR: I don’t like how VAR is currently being used as I don’t want each game to become a stop-start affair. It kills the energy at that period and we have to wait 2-3 minutes for a discussion, only for the main referee to spend another 2 minutes going over to the screen to check.
The players
The UAE’s Caio Canedo was definitely the star man for the home side as he spearheaded the team’s attacks on multiple occasions. His dribbling skills caused a lot of troubles for Hong Kong’s defence and he also entertained the fans with his eccentricity and some Brazilian skill moves up his sleeves.
Abdalla Ramadan and Tahnoon Al Zaabi were also decent as the central midfielder duo for the UAE with some of their attacking runs to help the UAE open up spaces or to pick up passes inside of the box. We also cannot forget a good performance from Caio’s partner-in-crime Zayed Sultan as he worked tirelessly down the right-hand side to help making crosses and getting the ball into the box.
Another ex-Brazilian also put on a decent performance, which was Hong Kong’s Everton Camargo. As much as he was left to create things on his own, for me, he was one of a few Hong Kong players who could have changed the game for the away side. Similar to Caio, Everton was direct with his dribbles and he did not hesitate to go at it against the UAE’s defenders. And he actually did create a thing on his own, which was the assist for Siu Kwan Chan to score.
Matthew Orr and Michael Udebuluzor offered the height that they needed to win possession in the air and both also had a few scoring chances here or there, which they either did not convert or got ruled out by a handball. I might have missed a couple more Hong Kong players who also played well, so let me know if there is someone else who I have missed!
Thailand vs Kyrgyzstan - Group F
Overview
Thailand did not have the best of preparation and clearly not the preparation that they had hoped for. From sacking Mano Pölking just months before the tournament to replace him with the Japanese Masatada Ishii, to multiple key absentees due to injuries like Chanathip Songkrasin and Teerasil Dangda, to missing one of their key players in Ekanit Panya because he wanted to stay at Urawa Red Diamonds to impress the new manager Per-Mathias Høgmo, it was an eventful period for Thailand football. Their only friendly ahead of the tournament, which was against Japan, also did not go well as they were thrashed by five goals inside of the second half. As such, not many people had high hopes for the South East Asian side heading into their tournament at Qatar.
For Kyrgyzstan, this will be their second time playing at the Asian Cup after making their debut in 2019, where they qualified to the round of 16 as one of the four best third-placed teams. In that tournament, they got a 3-1 win over the Philippines to secure their place in the round of 16 and pushed the UAE to extra time before a penalty in the 103 minute eliminated them. It was a valiant effort and they are determined to do one better this time around.
Because of Kyrgyzstan’s largely unknown factor and Thailand’s off-field problems, I thought this match would be a fascinating clash. Considering that Kyrgyzstan had beaten the Philippines in 2019 and got a narrow win against Vietnam in their last friendly before the tournament, they could capitalise on Thailand’s unsteady period to secure a surprising win. For Thailand, this would be the chance for them to show that their off-field problems would not affect their performance, and also a chance for Ishii to show what he can do.
The match
Right from the start, Thailand immediately turned positive and took control of the majority of possession, which showed their intention of securing a win. Even though Ishii had a relatively short time to work with the players, I was still impressed with their small but quick combinations out wide. The players seemed to understand Ishii’s philosophy well and created some chances when they were on the ball.
There was a strong dependency on the wide players, which was not a surprise considering that was where their best talents were. Plenty of attacks came down Nicholas Mickelson’s right-hand side and Thailand were reliant on his crosses to get the ball into the box. Still, I felt as though Thailand was missing something early on in the first half to create a meaningful chance.
On the other hand, Kyrgyzstan surprisingly also tried to control possession, and they achieved that with Thailand dropping to defend in a mid 4-4-2 block rather than pressing high up the pitch. But they were worse than Thailand in regards to finding the final ball to convert their attacks to goal-scoring chances. I felt as if Štefan Tarkovič’s side was nervous once they got the ball into the final third as the players did not know what to do and relied heavily on individual efforts to try and progress the ball into the final third.
Credits should also be given to Thailand’s defence because their mid-block was compact and shift side-to-side quickly to close down any potential spaces that Kyrgyzstan could exploit. There were a few glimpse of an attack from Kyrgyzstan but overall, nothing truly meaningful actually came about.
Their defence was alright and not outstanding by any means because the defenders felt like they were a couple of steps behind the Thai attackers. This resulted in errors being made by the Kyrgyzstani defenders, and one of them was capitalised by Supachai Jaided to score the opening goal. While it was more of a “being at the right place at the right time” case for Supachai, Bordin Phala’s shot earlier was actually decent and forced a poor parry from Erzhan Tokotayev.
The match continued in the same fashion even into the second half. Kyrgyzstan was still very poor inside the final third as most of their chances did not cause major problems for Patiwat Khammai. Meanwhile, Thailand made the most of their possession time by continuously creating chances and threaten their opposition’s goal. I noticed a sense of fluidity when the Thai players moved the ball forward as they knew where they needed to be and when they needed to pass. This, along with the attacking quartet up front, made their attacks looked more dangerous.
The match’s possession percentage did not reflect this as Kyrgyzstan had 55% of the ball while Thailand only had 45%. As mentioned, Tarkovič’s side controlled the ball more often but found it hard to break Thailand’s mid-block down and relied mostly on wing attacks and individual efforts to find a breakthrough. This was made even clearer when they shifted to a back three by bringing on Khristiyan Brauzman to play as one of the three centre-backs and taking off a striker. However, this felt like the wrong move since Joel Kojo was already having a bad day, and by taking off one striker, they were essentially left with no threat creator up front.
Kyrgyzstan relied heavily on Gulzhigit Alykulov and Odilzhon Abdurakhmanov to be the difference makers for the team, and to be fair to them, they worked very hard to try and help the team get back into the game. But once Thailand knew about their ability and closed them down, Kyrgyzstan was virtually out of the game. Honestly, the match could have ended with more than two goals if the Thai attackers had been better in front of goal, but nonetheless, it was a match that they easily dominated despite controlling the ball less than their opposition.
The players
Special mentions had to be given to Thailand’s attacking quartet as their overall performance was very good. Their individual ability was hardly doubted by anyone, but their fluidity during the match was at a high level and it was demonstrated through all of Thai’s attacking sequences. Bordin Phala’s dribbling ability caused plenty of troubles down the left, while Supachok Sarachat’s playmaking ability allowed Supachai Jaided and Suphanat Muenta to make meaningful off-ball runs and be in good goal-scoring positions. I am very excited to see more from this quartet in Thailand’s next two matches.
Right-back Nicholas Mickelson also caught my eyes with his marauding runs and provided width down the right-hand side. His movement was key to Thailand’s attacks as it allowed Suphanat to roam more freely and Ishii clearly saw him as an important piece in their attacks, which was shown by how many attacks Thailand made down Mickelson’s side.
I was hoping to see more of Beknaz Almazbekov from Kyrgyzstan, but he came on a bit late and did not have enough time to make an impact. He did show a glimpse of what he can do, if only Tarkovič had brought him on earlier when his side started to hit a brick wall.
Almazbekov came on to replace Gulzhigit Alykulov, who I thought had a decent game and worked hard to create something for his team. The only problem was he was a bit selfish at times and tried things on his own, rather than bringing both strikers into the game, which left the duo of Joel Kojo and Kimi Merk very isolated up front. He was also marked out of the game by Thailand in the second half, which diminished his ability to contribute to the team and made their attacks down the left less dangerous.
Odilzhon Abdurakhmanov was also decent and, along with Alykulov, was one of the two players who could have made a difference for Kyrgyzstan. His passes helped the team advance the ball into Thailand’s half and set up attackers for runs in behind the defence. He did not contribute much to the defence as most of Thailand’s attacks took place out wide, but I thought he could have supported the centre-backs more when they were under pressure.
And that is the conclusion for Matchday 1 of the Asian Cup’s group stage! Most of the favourites got the result that they wanted, albeit with some pushbacks by their opposition. We have not seen any major surprises or upset yet, but it might not be the same once matchday 2 and 3 roll around. I will return once matchday 2 of the group stage concludes to review three more matches and identify any potential dark horses or players to watch in the making. But for now, enjoy the Asian Cup and thank you for your support!