With the emergence of the latest results ahead of the start of the World Cup, it can be seen that the decline in the level of some of the major teams did not occur in vain, and cannot be limited to the absence of a prominent star or just a temporary stumble. The matter is deeper than that, as it is linked to the change in the nature of the game itself, and the loss of some teams from three elements that previously instilled fear in the hearts of competitors: identity, stability, and the ability to impose control.
In the past, teams with a long history entered matches in a clear manner. As soon as you faced “Italy”, you knew you would be facing a team that was good at closing down spaces and shutting down the game tactically. You expected that Germany would press hard and regulate its pace with a strict mentality, and that Brazil would have individual solutions capable of turning the tide. This clarity was part of the prestige. Today, many of these teams have lost this strong definition, and have sometimes become just shiny names without distinctive features. It’s not always the players that are the problem. It is true that some current generations do not have the same brilliance that previous generations enjoyed, but the real crisis often lies in the artistic vision. There are teams that have excellent players in their clubs, but they appear lackluster at the international level because they have not succeeded in transforming individual skills into an integrated team system. A talented player alone does not create a terrifying team, if there is not a clear playing style that links the roles and gives the team a consistent character.
With the 2026 World Cup approaching, the picture of the big teams does not seem entirely satisfactory, even when they achieve positive results in friendly matches. “France” presented its best indicators this week after beating “Brazil” with a score of 2-1 and then beating “Colombia” with a score of 3-1, in a performance that showed offensive depth and diversity in solutions before announcing the final list on “May 14.” “Spain,” in turn, seemed more cohesive, after surpassing “Serbia.” With a score of 3-0, confirming that the clarity of the collective plan today may be more important than the brilliance of the names alone, but the picture is not ideal for all teams. “England” settled for a late 1-1 draw with “Uruguay”, in a match that revealed that relative control is not always enough, especially with the many changes and hesitations in the decisive moments, as it prepares to face “Japan” on “March 31” amid many absences in the team’s ranks, as for “Germany”, despite its exciting 4-3 victory over the team “Switzerland” left a mixed impression embodied in clear offensive strength versus a defensive weakness that is still worrying, and that is why its match against “Ghana” today appears to be a new test before the final options are decided.
In fact, the decline in the prestige of some big teams necessarily means not only a decline in results, but also a decline in the ability to arouse fear and certainty at the same time. Some big teams win, but they are not completely convincing, and others have brilliant names, but they do not yet have a complete personality. With only a few weeks left until the World Cup, the current friendly matches look less like ordinary preparatory matches and more like a final test of an obvious question: who only has a big name, and who truly has a team ready for the World Cup?
