Brazil had no game plan for Haaland

A World Cup exit is always painful for a team like Brazil. But their defeat to Norway was entirely deserved. Norway were clearly the better side, and that was evident in both their tactical planning and their body language on the pitch. In my analysis, Brazil's elimination can be explained by five key factors, along with several highly effective tactical decisions by Norway.

The first and most obvious issue was Brazil's lack of preparation for Norway's high pressing. I don't think Brazil expected Norway to press so aggressively throughout the match. They probably assumed Norway would defend in a low block and rely on counterattacks. Instead, Norway pushed high up the pitch from the start and consistently disrupted Brazil's buildup.

Normally, Brazil's midfield is well-organised and dynamic, with at least four players actively involved in controlling possession. In this match, however, Brazil often had only two midfielders engaged, allowing Norway to create four-versus-two situations and dominate the center of the pitch.

The second factor was Brazil's fear of Erling Haaland and the fragility of their defense. Brazil appeared to have done no real homework on Norway's biggest weapon, and that ultimately contributed to their World Cup exit.

Although Haaland touched the ball only 10 to 12 times during the match, his presence alone terrified Brazil's defenders. Whenever he received possession, defenders such as Marquinhos and Gabriel seemed to lose their composure. They became so preoccupied with containing Haaland that they struggled to defend effectively.

The third factor was the team's obvious mental pressure, lack of confidence, courage and patience—qualities that are unusual for a Brazilian side. The burden of being expected to win the World Cup appeared to weigh heavily on the players. We first saw signs of that in the group-stage match against Morocco. Although Brazil recovered well over their next three matches, Norway's dominance in the opening 10 minutes of this round-of-16 clash seemed to make them nervous.

Brazil never displayed their trademark composure or bravery. A missed penalty, combined with Norway goalkeeper''s crucial save, further damaged Brazil''s confidence while giving Norway even greater belief.

The fourth reason was Brazil's lack of an effective, traditional No. 9. Without a reliable center-forward, many of their attacks lost direction. Norway, by contrast, repeatedly played long balls to Haaland, who executed his role perfectly.

Whenever Brazil tried to bypass Norway's high press with long passes, there was no proper target man available to receive the ball. Brazil also usually creates chances by exploiting the space behind opposing defenders, but in this match their passing and running were poorly timed, resulting in several offside calls.

The fifth factor was the inability of coach Carlo Ancelotti's coaching staff to anticipate Norway's tactical adjustments and respond accordingly.

When Norway surprised Brazil with an unexpected approach, Brazil failed to adapt. Even after Norway introduced two fresh wingers to increase the pressure during the match, Brazil could not mount an effective response.

Brazil's elimination should also serve as a warning for Argentina. The positive news for Argentina, however, is that they are generally more capable than Brazil of coping with high pressing, retaining possession and building attacks.

Against Egypt, Argentina are likely to face a low block and counterattacking approach, with Lionel Messi expected to receive tight marking. However, it would not be surprising if Egypt—like Norway and Cape Verde—also opted to press Argentina aggressively.

For the tournament's major contenders, the biggest challenge now is not only technical quality but also mental preparedness and the ability to respond to unexpected tactical approaches from opponents.

In conclusion, Brazil simply lacked the level of preparation required to defeat Norway.

* The author is a football coach and analyst.