Lionel Messi continues to showcase his remarkable talent, even at the age of 39, as evidenced by his performance against Egypt. Despite a less-than-stellar penalty record, having successfully converted only four out of eight attempts, he remains exceptionally effective when it counts.
On a chilly and rainy evening in Stoke, one might be tempted to choose Erling Haaland. However, given Messi’s impressive track record during the World Cup, where he has scored in every match thus far, it seems logical to back him on the grandest stage of all.
Erling Haaland boasts an impressive average of one goal every 14 touches during the tournament and has a shot conversion rate of 38.9%, the highest among players with at least ten attempts. While Messi is often the choice for the most breathtaking goals, if the goal is simply about finding the net, Haaland may be the safer bet.
Kylian Mbappé is currently on par with Messi, as both players possess the ability to influence matches significantly. Yet, in the context of a demanding tournament like this, I would lean towards the younger Mbappé.
There is a certain magic surrounding Argentina, where Messi’s mere involvement seems to inspire his teammates to deliver their best performances in critical moments. He remains a formidable player in his own right as well.
It has to be Messi. Even at his advanced age, he still has the capacity to turn the tide of a match in an instant. Although he was not a major factor for much of the game against Egypt in the round of 16, he made his mark with a stunning half-volley.
Can I hedge my bets and say it depends on the type of chance? If it’s a penalty or a header, I might not choose Messi, but otherwise, he is undoubtedly my pick. He plays at a different rhythm compared to his peers, and aside from his technical skills, he excels at choosing the simplest path to achieve results regardless of the situation.
It was unfortunate to witness the exit of all three host nations in the round of 16. Japan was viewed by many as a potential surprise team before the tournament, and they demonstrated their capabilities in an exhilarating match against the Netherlands, although they ultimately fell to Brazil in the last 32. With a more advantageous draw, they could have advanced further.
Colombia brought excitement during the group stage—it’s rare for a goalless draw to leave one feeling that a team could win the World Cup, as was the case when they held Portugal. They had favorable matchups in the knockout stage against Ghana and a Switzerland team missing Johan Manzambi. However, their performance in the last 16 was underwhelming, and with a bit more aggression, they might have progressed. I will miss their passionate fans; a matchup between Argentina and Colombia in Kansas City would have been a sight to behold.
Several African teams, including Cape Verde, Senegal, DR Congo, Egypt, and Côte d’Ivoire, provided entertaining matches. Many had hopes that the USA would recapture the form they exhibited in their first two games. Mexico, however, would likely have ensured thrilling encounters had they progressed further.
It certainly isn’t the United States that one might miss. I would say the Netherlands. They never really found their rhythm and suffered for their cautious tactics against Morocco, making their absence from the tournament feel significant due to their rich history and colorful presence.
Is it inappropriate to mention any of the co-hosts? Each tournament has its unique atmosphere, particularly when home teams are eliminated; the energy from full stadiums is irreplaceable.
Regrettably, the Netherlands is the team I felt least confident about. Their unusual imbalance of world-class defenders and a thin attacking line made me skeptical, and I never felt that Ronald Koeman was the right manager to navigate challenging situations. Their draw against Morocco was a warning sign, and while they managed to reach penalties, they seemed to struggle from the outset. Nevertheless, they likely would have advanced past Canada in the next round.
Senegal stands out as a major disappointment; they faced a tough group that seemed to undermine their confidence. In their last-32 match, they had a two-goal lead against Belgium but squandered it in the final moments. While Belgium’s progression is a positive narrative, Senegal appeared to be the stronger side for most of that encounter.
Morocco has been impressive under the leadership of Mohamed Ouahbi, enhancing the team that reached the semi-finals four years ago. A rematch against France will be intriguing, as they seek to avenge their previous defeat.
Identifying a dark horse among the final eight teams is tricky, but I would suggest Switzerland. Gregor Kobel has made 16 saves and has allowed only three goals, averaging 0.6 goals conceded per match, which places them behind only Spain and France among remaining teams. In terms of expected goals, the Swiss have the highest differential among the so-called “surprises.” While their defensive capabilities are clear, the question remains: can they find the back of the net?
Of the top eight teams in the FIFA rankings, six have reached the quarter-finals, with Switzerland (ranked 14th) and Norway (ranked 19th) being the exceptions. Switzerland has had a relatively easy path to this stage but hasn’t demonstrated the potential to contend seriously. Therefore, Norway is included by default. If any top-eight team can be classified as a dark horse, Belgium would fit that description, having displayed their tactical prowess with a dominant victory over the USA.
Norway still seems a step behind the favorites, yet their sensational striker has been scoring at an astonishing rate. Haaland has netted 27 goals in his last 14 competitive international matches, making him a player to watch as the tournament progresses.
