Coach Bae Ji-won: Vietnam exposed many problems in loss to Thailand

In the 10th minute at Si Jalak Harupat Stadium in Bandung, Indonesia, Sarach Yooyen received the ball outside the box, adjusted his feet and fired a low shot into the far corner. The opening goal came too early, when Vietnam were still in the process of feeling out their opponent. From that moment, the match completely shifted to the script Thailand wanted: solid defending, letting the opponent hold the ball and waiting for counter-attacking chances. At the final whistle, the defending ASEAN Cup 2026 champions left the field with a 0-2 defeat and lost top spot in Group B. Just 34 days earlier, Vietnam had beaten Thailand in the ASEAN Cup 2026 final to claim a convincing title. Therefore, this group-stage rematch was seen as Thailand's chance for revenge and a true test of coach Kim Sang-sik's side. The 0-2 result was a massive shock to Vietnamese fans, as the home team dominated possession, attacked more but could not score. Thailand, in contrast, showed composure, experience and excellent tactical adaptability. Coach Bae Ji-won, an experienced analyst who closely follows Asian football, did not hesitate to point out Vietnam's problems. He said: “Vietnam have not reached their highest form and failed to solve the problem of imposing attacking play. Keeping the ball a lot is not an advantage with the current players.” This observation immediately drew attention because it shows a complex picture rather than mere bad luck. It was systematic stalemate against a disciplined defensive opponent. In reality, the problem lies in the quality of Vietnam's possession. They passed a lot, but most of them were sideways and backward passes in front of the opponent's box. Thailand intentionally dropped deep, set up two dense defensive lines and closed every gap between the lines. The experienced central midfield trio of Thailand constantly marked and intercepted passes, while their full-backs were very disciplined in limiting Vietnam's crosses or down-the-flank penetration. As a result, Vietnam's attacking midfielders were completely isolated and could not find space to receive the ball or shoot. The biggest difference from the final lies in the way Thailand approached the match. That day, they pushed high and created many spaces behind their defense, allowing Vietnam to exploit their speed. This time, coach Anthony Hudson instructed his players to surrender the ball, maintain a compact shape and not push forward unless necessary. This tactic completely neutralized the opponent's most dangerous weapons. Sarach Yooyen's early goal made it even easier for Thailand to play their game: controlling space, slowing down the tempo and waiting for mistakes. Coach Bae Ji-won emphasized the speed of ball circulation. In his view, when facing a deep defensive block, a team needs to move the ball quickly from one flank to the other, stretch the opponent's shape and find space behind the defensive line. Vietnam did the opposite: they held the ball slowly, passed sideways too much, allowing Thailand time to drop back and reorganize. He said: “Just passing the ball around the box and hoping for a goal is impossible. We must take risks in the final third.” The only rare moments Vietnam looked dangerous came from set pieces or individual breakthroughs. In the 37th minute, Nguyen Tai Loc dribbled inside and shot, but the referee ruled offside. In the 58th minute, Nguyen Hoang Duc – despite not being in optimal physical condition – made a penetrating run from midfield, creating the first clear chance for his teammates. However, these moments were too few and not enough to break through Thailand's defense. The problem became even more serious as Vietnam had to play without their strongest squad. Before the match, four key players – central defender Nguyen Thanh Chung, midfielder Nguyen Quang Hai, striker Nguyen Xuan Son and midfielder Nguyen Hoang Duc – were all nursing injuries caused by overload from playing too many matches in a short period. This injury list reflects a harsh reality: the congested fixture schedule and inappropriate conditioning plans are wearing down the country's most important players. Coach Kim Sang-sik was forced to use improvised solutions, but the substitutes failed to make a significant difference in quality. Coach Bae Ji-won also pointed out that Vietnam lack significant squad depth compared to Thailand. While Thailand have many experienced substitutes who have featured in big matches, Vietnam's replacement options are limited. In particular, when the team needed a strong aerial striker to create long-ball pressure in the final minutes, the coaching staff did not properly use striker Pham Gia Hung. Many analysts believed that bringing Pham Gia Hung on earlier, alongside Williams Minh Hoang, would have given Vietnam an extra cross-and-header option against a packed defense. However, these changes never materialized, making the attack even more toothless. On the other side, Thailand's victory did not completely silence controversy. A section of Thai fans and pundits criticized Hudson's side for being too pragmatic, lacking the flair that had long been considered the identity of Thai football under Chanathip Songkrasin and the previous golden generation. Thai football expert Be Bangkapong defended the coach: “Just looking at the final result is enough, winning is everything.” This statement illustrated a deep debate about football philosophy in Thailand between the aesthetic school and the results-driven school. For Hudson, beating Vietnam is a major step to strengthen his position, but if the team continues to play unconvincingly, pressure from fans will only increase. Comparing with the final 34 days ago, one can clearly see the difference in the mental and physical state of the two teams. In the final, Vietnam reached peak form, moving with flexibility, pressing intensely and converting chances well. Now, they showed signs of decline after the peak. This is understandable in terms of physiology, but it is a major challenge for the coaching staff: how to maintain the performance of key players throughout a long tournament. Without better load management, Vietnam will continue to face injury risks and declining squad quality in important upcoming matches. Systemically, this defeat also raises questions for Vietnamese football in general and the V.League in particular. The gap in squad depth between Vietnam and Thailand is not the result of a single day, but rather a product of years of development and training. V.League needs a more sensible fixture schedule, reducing the burden on players and enabling young talents to play regularly in a highly competitive environment. When young players lack match experience, the national team will find it difficult to build a quality reserve force ready to replace key players when needed. Another perspective that must be truthfully acknowledged: Vietnam's current tactics are somewhat monotonous. Coach Kim Sang-sik wants to build a proactive possession-based style, but modern football demands flexibility. A big team must have at least two or three tactical options to choose from depending on the opponent and match flow. Simply keeping the ball and building slowly will not work against defensive teams, especially in short tournaments like the ASEAN Cup. The psychology of the defending champions is also a talking point. After winning the ASEAN Cup 2026, Vietnamese players may have become complacent or felt pressure to win, leading to psychological rigidity. In the match against Thailand, many players looked indecisive, slow in their ball handling and unwilling to take risks. Thailand understood this and exploited it fully by keeping a compact shape, creating frustration and then capitalizing on mistakes. In the long run, Vietnamese football needs a tactical revolution at both national team and club levels. Player development should not be limited to individual technique; players must also be equipped with tactical awareness, smart movement and fast decision-making in tight spaces. These qualities cannot be developed in one or two training sessions; they require a systematic, long-term environment. Without that, the problems exposed by the loss to Thailand will keep recurring. The 0-2 defeat to Thailand is a necessary wake-up call. It came in the group stage, so there is still a chance to correct mistakes. But if things are not fixed quickly, elimination is a real possibility. Will coach Kim Sang-sik be courageous enough to change the core lineup and give opportunities to young players whose qualities better fit an imposing attacking style? Will he be flexible with tactics for each match or stick to the old formula? The answer will determine the future of the national team in this tournament as well as the philosophy of Vietnamese football for years to come. Looking at the bigger picture, this defeat is not the end, but if fans expect a team that can rise after adversity, now is the time to act. Glory only comes to those who know how to get up after failure. With everything shown, the biggest challenge for coach Kim Sang-sik and his players is not how many goals they score, but finding the way to regain the mental strength and tactical sharpness that earned them the ASEAN Cup title. Supporters are still waiting for a better version of Vietnam – a version that does not only know how to keep the ball, but also how to conquer opponents.