Coach Bae Ji-won Points Out Vietnam's Problems After Loss to Thailand

Vietnam's 0-2 loss to Thailand in Group B of the FIFA ASEAN Cup 2026 not only cost them top spot but also exposed a series of tactical issues that Coach Bae Ji-won – an analyst who previously worked in the V.League – calls "structural gaps" in how the team operates its attacking play under Coach Kim Sang-sik.

The match took place at Si Jalak Harupat Stadium (Bandung, Indonesia), just 34 days after Vietnam and Thailand drew 2-2 in the ASEAN Cup 2026 final. Kim Sang-sik's side entered the match as defending champions but left the field with their first defeat after a run of 3 wins and 1 draw against the Thais. Thailand scored the opener in the 10th minute, then dropped deep and protected their lead with a disciplined defensive block.

The first issue Bae Ji-won points out is the ability to "impose attacking play" – using possession dominance to break down a deep-lying defense – which remains unresolved. Vietnam held more of the ball, but for much of the match it circulated in front of Thailand's well-organized defensive block, lacking penetrative passes into the central corridor – where Thailand's central midfield trio consistently closed the half-spaces behind the strikers.

According to Bae's analysis, holding the ball a lot is not an advantage for Vietnam's current squad, as the team lacks players capable of creating breakthroughs in a positional attacking setup. Speed players like Ngo Dang Khoa are only effective in quick transitions, not suited to patient passing play against a packed defense. This is a structural personnel issue, not just a one-match problem.

Conversely, Thailand under Coach Anthony Hudson executed an almost perfect "deep block + long-range shooting" plan. Sarach Yooyen's goal – a long-range strike – demonstrated the risk of leaving space in front of the penalty area while holding possession. Thailand's central midfield trio combined with their full-backs to form a defensive system that Bae rated as "perfectly matched to the tactical intent."

Notably, Thailand does not always play defensive counter-attacking football. In the ASEAN Cup 2026 final, they attacked more proactively. But when they took an early lead, Coach Hudson immediately adjusted the match mentality – a tactical adaptation that Vietnam could not make. The difference lies in the ability to read the match state and change approach, not just in player quality.

The crux of Bae Ji-won's analysis is that Vietnam lacks automated, repeatable combination patterns to break down a deep block. He pointed to two specific moments showing the team has individual tools to threaten opponents: Nguyen Tai Loc's offside-called breakthrough in the 37th minute, and Nguyen Hoang Duc's penetrating run into the box in the 58th minute. These are viable attacking solutions, but they appeared sporadically, not repeated systematically.

In other words, the problem is not that Vietnam lacks ideas, but that those ideas have not been installed as automatic patterns in training. A team wanting to break a deep block needs at least three to four different combination patterns – overlapping runs, second-line penetration, central combinations with a dropping striker – and must execute them fast enough that the opponent cannot shift their defensive block in time.

Bae also questioned the quality of backup options on the bench. He suggested that Pham Gia Hung – a striker with aerial ability – should have been introduced late to create aerial pressure, especially when Vietnam needed a goal and Thailand had dropped deep. Kim Sang-sik's failure to use this option suggests either tactical rigidity or a lack of trust in backup personnel.

The personnel issue becomes more serious when four of Vietnam's key players – Nguyen Thanh Chung, Nguyen Quang Hai, Nguyen Xuan Son, and Nguyen Hoang Duc – all suffered injuries from playing continuously over a short period. This is a consequence of workload management, not merely a matter of luck. The fact that young players like Pham Gia Hung were not given opportunities further shows that the generational transition is not running smoothly.

This defeat exposes a paradox: Vietnam plays better when transitioning states, but loses confidence when forced to control and impose attacking play. When leading or in a balanced match, Vietnam's quick transitions are effective. But when trailing and forced to push forward, Kim Sang-sik's team lacks diverse solutions to create breakthroughs.

Thailand, despite being criticized by their own experts and fans for pragmatic football, is showing tactical maturity. Thai expert Be Bangkapong said bluntly: "Just looking at the final result is enough." This view represents a new school in Thai football – pragmatic, respecting results over beauty, and willing to play ugly if needed to win.

The division in Thai public opinion between the aesthetic school (associated with the Chanathip Songkrasin era) and the results school (under Hudson) may signal that Southeast Asian football is entering a new phase of development, where tactical solutions dependent on match state are valued more highly than the traditional high-tempo transition game.

For Vietnam, Coach Bae Ji-won emphasized three areas for improvement: ball circulation speed, maintaining pressure after losing the ball, and diversifying attacking options. These are not new issues, but they have never been thoroughly resolved. The fact that a foreign expert who previously worked in the V.League publicly points out these limitations could signal a tactical review at the national team level.

Commercially, this defeat does not reduce the value of the Vietnam – Thailand matchup. On the contrary, it creates a new storyline: revenge. Broadcasters and sponsors will maximize this rivalry as a permanent "Southeast Asian derby." Commercial value lies in the recurring nature of the matchup, not in the specific result of one match.

Above all, this defeat raises questions about competition cycle management. Four key players injured from overload is a warning about the coordination between the V.League schedule and international match windows. Without fundamental solutions, Vietnam's national team will continue to face squad shortages at the most critical moments.

Football is a sport where every defeat carries an opportunity to learn, but only when people dare to look directly at structural problems instead of seeking comfortable explanations. Vietnam remains one of the top two powers in Southeast Asian football. But the gap in squad depth and tactical flexibility with Thailand is narrowing – and that requires adjustments not just in one match, but across an entire system.

In esports, one final click erases three hours of silence. In football, one defeat can erase a championship. But if viewed correctly, it can also open a new path. The question is not whether Vietnam lost – but what this team learns from that defeat, and whether those lessons are converted into concrete adjustments on the training ground.