Vietnam 4-2 Pakistan: A Jakarta Comeback and Defensive Cracks That Cannot Be Hidden

In the 50th minute, Nguyễn Hoàng Đức met a precise through-ball inside the penalty area and fired the ball into Pakistan's net, levelling the score at 2-2. Seven minutes later, Hải Long put Vietnam in front. A solo run from Đinh Bắc, then a finish from Williams Minh Hoàng in stoppage time, closed out a 4-2 victory. It was a thrilling comeback at Gelora Bung Karno, Jakarta, on the afternoon of Friday, October 2, 2026.

The 4-2 scoreline hides more than it reveals. Vietnam won, but won in a way that should make anyone tracking this team's defence wince: conceding first inside the opening half, then needing a full second-half surge to turn the game around.

Context: a win inside a run of instability

The Pakistan match was Vietnam's final group-stage fixture. Before it, Kim Sang-sik's side had endured a far-from-smooth group campaign, and the end result was second place in Group B — enough to progress, but not enough to preserve the title-contender status the experts had expected.

For a team long regarded as a regional powerhouse, a runners-up finish is a step backwards. The pressure on Kim Sang-sik is far from small: Vietnamese fans are used to trophies, and they are not easily satisfied with a semi-final place. With the final now out of reach, every remaining match becomes a test of credibility.

I followed this team throughout the tournament, and what caught my attention was not the number of goals, but the way the goals were conceded. Vietnam held more possession and built attacks more methodically than their opponents, yet conceded from moments of defensive loss of concentration. It is a recurring pattern, and the Pakistan game is its clearest example. Reviewing the footage is not a matter of distrust; it is a way of respecting the truth — and the footage shows a team with two faces.

Looking across the region, Vietnam's position is not isolated. Thailand and Indonesia remain peers of comparable stature, and the gap at the top is narrowing. A team that once dominated Southeast Asia now has to fight far harder for every deep run. Vietnam's exit before the final is not an isolated accident; it is the consequence of a regional standard that has been raised. Rivals such as Malaysia have also shown clear progress, taking the Group A runners-up spot and emerging as a likely opponent for Vietnam in the third-place playoff.

Analysis: when possession is not enough to win

Vietnam's possession figures in this match were superior to Pakistan's, but this is the kind of statistic that must be read carefully. High possession does not equal control of the game. Vietnam had the ball, yet conceded first from a moment of defensive loss of concentration. As the first half closed, Kim Sang-sik's side went into the break trailing — a paradox for a team rated far higher.

Tactically, Kim Sang-sik appears to have built a hybrid structure between a back three and a back four, with wing-backs pushing high to create width. That structure allows Vietnam to control midfield and circulate the ball quickly, but it also places heavy demands on the defence's ability to cover. When the midfield pushes up, the space behind the full-backs becomes prey for counter-attacks. Vietnam's opening concession most plausibly came from exactly that space.

The change came in the second half. Vietnam raised their attacking intensity, pushed the line higher and pressed their opponent. Hải Long's equaliser early in the second half was the direct result of that adjustment. By the 50th minute, Nguyễn Hoàng Đức — a central midfielder — appeared unexpectedly inside the box to meet a through-ball and score. That goal carried the signature of an advancing midfielder rather than a fixed centre-forward, and it points to a scoring model built on late-arriving runners into the box.

Notably, Vietnam's second-half goals all arrived in the early phase after the restart. That is a sign of an effective tactical adjustment in the dressing room, not merely luck. But it also raises a question about sustaining attacking intensity across the whole match, rather than compressing it into a short window.

Đinh Bắc's goal had a different colour. It was a solo run — the product of individual quality in a transition moment, not the output of a structured system. For a young player, scoring that way signals the potential to become a valuable attacking asset, and it is also a sign that Vietnam still has individuals capable of producing something out of nothing.

Up front, the combination of creative midfielders such as Nguyễn Hoàng Đức and the pace of Đinh Bắc creates a mix of control and transition. Hải Long adds the ability to break into the box. It is a diverse attacking framework, but that diversity only works when the team keeps its balance between attack and defence.

Then, in stoppage time, Williams Minh Hoàng sealed the 4-2 scoreline. The way he came on and scored suggests Kim Sang-sik used him as a heavyweight substitute, someone capable of changing the game from the bench. It is a small but telling detail about how the Korean coach rotates his squad.

Overall, this was a performance showing that Vietnam can overwhelm a weaker opponent through fitness and squad depth in the second half. But it also shows this team is no longer the flawless machine people once assumed.

The contrarian view: a win does not erase the problem

The most easily overlooked detail after this match is that Vietnam scored four and conceded twice. A team that concedes the opening goal and then concedes again in a game it wins 4-2 is a team with a defensive concentration problem. Against a stronger opponent, this kind of leaky-in-a-winning-performance profile becomes fatal.

Moreover, Vietnam's winning mechanism — built on a second-half surge and a stoppage-time goal — is a fragile one. It depends on the opponent being weaker in fitness and squad depth. Against peers or stronger sides, Vietnam can hardly rely on turning a game around after falling behind.

Notably, no expected-goals or pressure index was published to quantify this performance. All we have is qualitative description: dominated possession, increased attacking intensity. Without quantitative data, assessing the process becomes difficult, and a 4-2 win can hide more than it reveals. A mistake is a footnote; only silence is a verdict — and here, the silence of the data makes it hard to tell system from luck.

A thought to take away

Vietnam go into the third-place playoff with the mindset of a team that has just won but not yet convinced. Their opponent — the Group A runners-up — is a peer, and that will be the real test of the defence and of this team's ability to maintain concentration.

For Kim Sang-sik, a win in the third-place match will be recorded as a positive ending; a defeat will turn this tournament into a comprehensive failure. But whatever the result, a bigger question remains: how can a team that holds the ball as well as Vietnam stop conceding from moments of lost concentration?

Fans remember the goals, but I remember the clause — and in football, the clause here is the defensive structure. A team cannot keep coming from behind forever. At some point that door will close, and when it does, people will realise the problem was never in the attack.