Sami Käkränen

Perhe ja ystävät ❤️😎 Voimailu ja kamppailu 🏋️‍♂️🥊 Leffat, kirjat ja musa 🎞️📚🎧 Pelit ja taide 🎲👩‍🎨 Luonto ja ulkoilu 🌲🐝

[Sami Käkränen @GifusGray]

I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul. -Invictus: William Ernest Henley-

[Troll Football Media @TrollFootball2]

England's man of the match against Norway

[HallalPlaysOnly @excellsheet]

New Side Angle of England First Goal || Clearly touches the cable… 🇳🇴

[Tatu Virtanen @VirtanenTatu]

Ongelma tässä VAR:ssa on se ettei tuolla enää katsota minkä kokoluokan kontakti on kyseessä. Jos joku puhaltaa toisen kumoon niin ei muuta kuin VAR:n kautta uusiksi, koska joku spagettijalka lähtee pötköttämään.

Aivan saatanan karmivaa.

#mmfutis

[Dan @001Oxygen]

Norway are being robbed .

He was clearly pushed and should be a penalty

[SethOfficial @UTD_Seth001]

🚨Ole Gunnar Solskjær on Norway’s disallowed goal against England after Torbjørn Heggem’s finish:

🗣️ “Norway have been cheated. I don’t say that lightly, but I genuinely don’t understand how that goal has been disallowed.

I watched the replay several times, and I don’t see enough contact from Erling Haaland on Anderson to justify cancelling the goal. Football is a physical game. Players are allowed to compete for position. If we’re going to disallow goals for every slight touch, then we’ll be ruling out goals every weekend.

Haaland didn’t push him with excessive force, he didn’t pull him back and he certainly didn’t do enough to make Anderson fall the way he did. For me, Anderson goes down far too easily, and the referee has rewarded it.

The most frustrating part is that Torbjørn Heggem did everything right. He stayed focused, finished the move brilliantly and should be celebrating one of the biggest goals of his career. Instead, the conversation is about a decision that, in my opinion, is simply wrong.

VAR is supposed to correct clear and obvious mistakes, not create controversy where there wasn’t any. I don’t believe this was a clear foul. I believe it was two players competing physically, which is something we’ve seen in football for decades.

These decisions change matches. At 2–1, England are under enormous pressure. Instead, Norway have a perfectly good goal taken away, and that is incredibly difficult to accept. If that’s enough contact to disallow a goal, then football is becoming impossible for centre-forwards. In my opinion, Norway deserved that goal, and they’ve every right to feel extremely disappointed.”

[CitySide @CitehSide]

Amazing.

[Roger Bonet "Ruxi" @Ruxiiii4]

Talking about Norway.

Norway are different from most positional teams in this World Cup.

Instead of vacating the build-up and committing large numbers forward, they do the opposite: they consistently overload the first phase with multiple players.

The main reason is Erling Haaland.

Haaland is one of the biggest reasons Norway have been able to dominate possession throughout the tournament. Having press-resistant midfielders like Ødegaard and Berg also plays a key role.

Norway almost always have an extra player, plus the goalkeeper, in the build-up because very few teams are willing to press them man-to-man. Doing so would leave Haaland isolated in a 1v1, a risk most opponents are reluctant to take. And if they do press aggressively, Norway are more than happy to play long into Haaland and bypass the press.

While Norway are able to control possession, they are less effective at progressing centrally. They lack profiles who consistently receive between the lines and eliminate opponents, especially when Ødegaard drops deep to help the build-up.

That's why I still believe Norway's best route to goal is through the left side. Ødegaard naturally drifts there because he's left footed, while Schjelderup or Nusa provide 1v1 ability and goalscoring threat from that flank. Add Haaland and Sørloth attacking the box, both among the best in terms of box threat. Norway have a clear advantage there to exploit.

[Geosophy @Geosophyy]

Your Nordic Countries

[CitySide @CitehSide]

This visual represents the tactical idea I was referring to earlier and is intended to make the concept clearer.

Again, Norway just need to play their cards right.

[Roger Bonet "Ruxi" @Ruxiiii4]

Norway – England.

Schjelderup replaces Nusa for Norway.

Konsa starts at right-back instead of Quansah, while Stones is back in the starting XI at centre-back.

The intentions from both teams are quite clear. Instead of starting more possession-oriented players like Saka or Oscar Bobb, they've gone with Sørloth and Madueke, signalling a more direct, transition-focused approach.

[Morgan J. Freeman @mjfree]

Goodnight 🌙

[Estelita Borges ☮🚩 @EstelitaBorges]

Neymar comprou para si um relógio de 1 milhão de dólares. Haaland comprou o livro mais valioso da História norueguesa e doou à biblioteca de sua cidade. Prioridades.

[Scottish Banter @1scottishbanter]

Why we are contractually obliged to support Norway this Saturday 🇳🇴🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

Since we don't have a choice in the matter, we’ve prepared this official guide to ensure every Scot is fully informed of our historical, genetic, and meteorological obligations before kick-off.

Failure to comply may result in Norway asking for their Christmas tree back, and frankly we cannot afford our own.

[Meia Armador - Mufaddal Idris Burhani @MeiaArmador__]

If you watched our recent analysis on the TGC platform, you’d know that the USA and Pochettino were being overappreciated for their performances. We also talked about how their opponents until now suited the context of Pochettino’s approach perfectly, and how Ream is a liability.

High-tempo coaches don’t scale consistently across different styles of opposition. They are perfect for physically overwhelming lesser opponents and making one-off games against better teams chaotic.

[The Footy Feed @TheFootyFeed]

That reply is savage 😂

[Roger Bonet "Ruxi" @Ruxiiii4]

Everything that happened around Balogun before kickoff ended up hurting the United States more than having him on the pitch helped them.

Today they looked completely out of sync. It felt like they lost their focus from the very beginning.

When the entire football world is suddenly talking about something off the pitch against you, it's hard for that not to affect the group.

Credit to Belgium, they were excellent and deserved the win. But it's difficult not to feel that everything surrounding the team before kickoff had a significant impact on the US performance.

What a shame, because they had been one of the tournament's most enjoyable teams to watch.

[Roger Bonet "Ruxi" @Ruxiiii4]

Let's talk about Belgium.

Fair play to Rudi García, he got everything right tonight.

The starting lineup was a surprise, especially with players like Doku, De Bruyne, and Lukaku left out. But every change made sense.

Rudi García understood that, with the United States playing with three midfielders + Pulisic operating inside, using only two midfielders alongside De Bruyne would have been a nightmare defensively. It would have created a 4v2 overload centrally, as De Bruyne doesn't contribute consistently enough without the ball.

Using Tielemans as a #10 isn't ideal in possession, but it worked brilliantly defensively. Out of possession, Tielemans almost became a third central midfielder, giving Belgium much more protection in the middle of the pitch.

Starting Lukebakio instead of Doku also made sense for two reasons. First, his defensive work was outstanding. He consistently tracked Robinson's runs and dropped deep when needed, at times even helping Belgium form a back five. Second, he offered more threat in large spaces and transition moments than Doku.

De Ketelaere also had an excellent game, scoring twice and constantly causing problems with his intelligent movement and runs in behind.

Belgium's defensive plan was well organized and executed. They weren't overly aggressive or excessively passive, they found the right balance. The profiles García selected suited the game plan perfectly.

What I liked most, though, was Belgium's approach in possession. They clearly wanted to prevent the United States from using one of their biggest strengths: their aggressive high press and counter-press.

After recovering the ball, Belgium often played backwards to Courtois instead of forcing risky passes through the middle. Courtois would then play long over the first line of pressure. This stretched the United States, and Belgium had enough physical presence, (Onana, Vakanen, Lukebakio, and even Tielemans) to compete for and win the second balls.

The other option Belgium used was to immediately play forward into the space behind the US press after regaining possession. By doing this, they avoided giving the United States the opportunity to counter-press and instead attacked quickly in transition. The United States are one of the best teams at reacting immediately after losing possession, but Belgium simply didn't allow them to play to that strength.

To be honest, Belgium hadn't looked convincing recently. They struggled to create chances and often found it difficult to beat opponents they should have been dominating given the quality of their squad.

Tonight, however, they looked far more solid defensively, even without some of their biggest attacking stars.

The game plan was excellent, the player profiles fit it perfectly, and Belgium completely nullified the United States.

[Augusto @1cesgusto]

Resumo de Bélgica x EUA:

[Jan Soldaat @SoldaatABL]

BEL - USA 😌

#trumpmakesussick