By the numbers, this Women’s World Cup has been every bit as dramatic as headlines about Morocco’s triumphs and Brazil’s heartbreak would have you believe — and then some. In the 48 contests of the now-concluded group stage, nine underdogs on betting lines won outright, and another 10 fought favorites to draws. And many of these results were true shockers: 19 percent of World Cup matchups have yielded wins for teams over opponents that were at least five spots higher in FIFA’s world rankings, about twice the rate of deep upsets that took place in 2019.
This has been a tournament where co-host New Zealand, ranked 26th by FIFA, could open the proceedings by defeating Norway (12th), then turn around and lose to the Philippines (46th). Overall, we calculate that underdogs outperformed their moneyline expectations by an astounding 7.4 wins in the group stage. Forget the history of the World Cup — we’re not sure we’ve ever seen a tournament as topsy-turvy as this in any sport.
We try to explain why upsets happen, and the big picture here is pretty clear: Scoring has dropped 11 percent from 2019 group stage play and parity has increased. The declining dominance of the United States has been a major story throughout the tournament — and just as surely, despite the World Cup expanding from 24 to 32 teams, the field’s worst teams aren’t as bad as they used to be. Even Vietnam, which managed two shots on target during the entire group stage, lost its three games by a cumulative 13-0, the same score by which the U.S. annihilated Thailand in a single match four years ago.
Our research indicates that the lower a team’s FIFA ranking at the start of this World Cup was, the more likely it was to overperform in groups — which is pretty good evidence that teams such as Morocco, Nigeria and South Africa have been developing more rapidly than most fans and analysts realized, and were underrated entering the tournament.
Lower scoring and tighter packing is a perfect recipe for gobs of 0-0 and 1-0 games. We’ve seen plenty of both this year — nearly 40 percent of group stage matches have produced one total goal or fewer, up from 28 percent in 2019. And upsets abound when contests can be decided by any random beautiful pass or carry gone awry — or by penalty kicks, as will be the case in knockouts.
But longshots also win by playing smart. As we’ve explored, the right way to go high-risk/high-reward in the ultra-low-scoring world of soccer is by doing whatever it takes to avoid giving up even one goal. Specifically, we have found that in this year’s group play, three metrics correlate strongly with how well teams performed compared with their betting-line expectations: preventing opponents’ shot-creating actions, limiting opponents’ shots on target and save percentage.
For example, Spain had a whopping 1,061 touches against Japan in their Group C matchup, but Japan allowed La Roja to get off just 10 shots, only two of which were on target. Japan put on a clinic of tackles, interceptions, clearances and long balls, and won 4-0 despite holding just 24 percent of the possession. Underdogs usually can’t hog the ball against strong foes, but they don’t need to. Teams that obstruct and disrupt opponents’ scoring chains can prevail despite losing battles for possession.
Keeping in mind the styles of play that can create upset chances, especially in win-or-go-home scenarios, here’s our look at the knockout stage. We’ve sorted the matchups into four groups, ranked by how much the upcoming longshots deserve your attention.
Red Alert
USA vs. Sweden
Underdog (Sweden) advancement betting odds: +125
It gives us no pleasure to pile on the USWNT, but both the numbers and the eye test suggest that the U.S. is extremely vulnerable — and that’s even before factoring in an opponent that’s ranked third in the world. The U.S. underperformed badly in group play, to the tune of about 0.7 wins worse than expected based on betting lines. While they are creating scoring chances (fourth out of 32 teams in the World Cup), those aren’t translating to shots on goal (26th), evident in their lackluster draw with Portugal.
Things won’t get easier against Sweden. The Blue and Yellow are typically a favorite, but they play the obstructionist defense that makes them even more dangerous as an underdog. So far, they allow just 15.3 scoring chances per 90 minutes, and only 25.9 percent of the shots they allow end up on target. That’s a tough puzzle for the U.S. midfield to solve, especially considering they have already lacked creativity and now will play without Rose Lavelle (yellow card suspension).
While you can bet on Sweden to advance at +135, it might be even wiser to back them at +255 to win in regular time. And if you’re feeling frisky, Sweden is +1800 to win the tournament: If they get by the U.S., they will quickly become one of the top favorites remaining.
Colombia vs. Jamaica
Underdog (Jamaica) advancement betting odds: +155
You don’t need fancy math to see Colombia as vulnerable: It is the only favorite in the first round of knockouts whose expected goal differential in groups was negative. It advanced by taking advantage of horrendous play by Germany, but lost as a heavy favorite to Morocco. And while Colombia loves to attack, it ranks 16th among tournament teams in creating scoring chances and in taking on-target shots — not the efficiency an overdog needs to brush off a pesky underdog. And the deeper you go, the more the numbers like Jamaica. The Reggae Girlz have honed precisely the style of aggressive defensive play that can irritate and sometimes topple overdogs: In scoreless but hugely inspiring draws against France and Brazil in groups, Jamaica had a combined 77 clearances, and now lead the entire field in that key stat. Goalkeeper Rebecca Spencer is also having the summer of her life, with 17 saves on 17 shots on target. That’s how you stop expected goals from turning into the real thing.
Something’s Brewing
Japan vs. Norway
Underdog (Norway) Advancement Betting Odds: +175
Norway isn’t a gritty underdog looking to trip up superior opponents with surprise defensive tactics; they’re just an outstanding program that doesn’t allow opponents chances to score. With 669 possessions per game, the Grasshoppers can go toe-to-toe with Japan on possession. And they’ve allowed just 11.3 shot-creating actions per 90 minutes, then let opponents take just four of 23 shots on target, for a 17.4 percent rate that’s second-best in the field. Further, FIFA ratings see this matchup as a tossup, but bettors are giving Norway just a 35 percent chance of pulling an upset. They did fall to New Zealand in a big upset to kick off the group stage, but the numbers say they will likely be an extremely tough out.
The hunt for value can take you to some paradoxical places, but we also want to point out that if Japan does get by Norway, they’re worth considering at +750 to win the tournament. Japan posted the biggest scoring differential (actual as well as expected) in groups. They rank sixth in the field in creating shots and second in putting them on target, and their top players lead the tournament in goals and assists. Ayaka Yamashita, their goalkeeper, has put up three clean sheets. Their demolition of Spain was impressive evidence that they could punch up and down. And, like Norway, they deserve more respect than they’re getting.
England vs. Nigeria
Underdog (Nigeria) advancement betting odds: +500
We see two big reasons to take a long look at Nigeria. First, value: There’s a gap of 1.77 goals between Japan’s expected goal differential per 90 minutes in groups and Norway’s. The spread between England and Nigeria? Also, 1.77 goals. Yet bettors are giving the Super Falcons less than half the chance to advance than they see Norway enjoying. If you gave us one day to figure out why Nigeria is so underrated for every point of difference in FIFA’s ratings between them and Australia, whom they beat in groups, we aren’t sure we would find the answer. But we would have an entire year to work on it.
Further, Nigeria is an outstanding example of what a disciplined underdog can accomplish if it focuses on choking off a particular segment of opponents’ scoring chances. The Super Falcons allow opponents 663 touches per game, the fourth-most among all surviving teams. And they give up 16 shots per 90 minutes, the worst rate of any side in the knockouts. But when they apply pressure, it’s intense: they’re fifth-best at limiting shots on target (22.9%). In their 3-2 win against Australia in particular, Nigeria showed they will wait for long stretches to focus on anything beyond funneling opponents into subpar shots, then pounce on mistakes for counterstriking opportunities. And in their other two matchups, they posted clean sheets.
Australia vs. Denmark
Underdog (Denmark) advancement betting odds: +170
At first glance, Denmark doesn’t do much to inspire enthusiasm. They scored just three goals in group play, beating China 1-0 and Haiti 2-0. But, oddly, it was their one loss that might be the most intriguing sign of underdog potential. England dominated possession (70 percent) in that game and had 25 shot-creating actions, compared to just nine for Denmark. Yet England had just four shots on target, while Denmark posted 27 clearances. Those stats are all hallmarks of upsets — many an underdog employs a counter-attacking style that allows plenty of possession but few high-quality shots.
Of course, the Matildas will be playing at home and won a tough Group B (sending Canada packing in the process). But as we identified before the tournament, homefield advantage is often overrated by analysts and bettors. Sure enough, Australia played well, but not as well as the betting lines suggested: Our numbers suggest they underperformed by about half a goal in the group stage. There isn’t a huge difference in quality between these two teams, and when you add in Denmark’s comfort in playing an underdog style, the Danes have a solid chance.
Not Completely Crazy
Spain vs. Switzerland
Underdog (Switzerland) advancement betting odds: +400
Switzerland would appear to be a more extreme version of Denmark. After all, the Swiss won a lackluster Group A despite scoring just two goals, which is possible when you don’t allow any. In their one game as an underdog, they played a scoreless draw against Norway. And their overall performance in the group stage was even more lackluster than the results show: Their expected goal differential over those three matches was just 0.66. You’re probably not that good if you can’t beat up on the Philippines and New Zealand.
And Spain is very good, despite its 4-0 loss to Japan. They lead the field in shot-creating actions and are ninth in percentage of shots that end up on target. Switzerland will try to muck things up – maybe to penalty kicks — but Spain owns a considerable advantage.
Not Today
Netherlands vs. South Africa
Underdog (South Africa) advancement betting odds: +550
Kudos to South Africa for exceeding expectations and advancing out of the group stage. However, despite a significant upset over Italy, the numbers don’t tell a compelling underdog story. South Africa gave up six goals in the group stage and doesn’t appear to have the defensive chops to hang with a Netherlands squad that ranked fifth in scoring chances against and fourth in percentage of shots that ended up on target in the group stage. South Africa is a better team than it appeared before the World Cup, but that doesn’t mean it is a model underdog. Look elsewhere for an upset.
France vs. Morocco
Underdog (Morocco) advancement betting odds: +850
We love underdogs, but we can’t build a case for Morocco. The Lionesses lead the tournament in one key stat: In three group matches, 12 of their 24 shots were on target. However, they netted just two goals from those attempts. Those goals did secure 1-0 wins for Morocco over South Korea and Colombia, but nobody should expect that kind of severe luck to hold up. And the news is worse at the other end of the pitch, where Morocco surrendered six goals in a wipeout loss to Germany. The falloff from France’s expected goal differential in groups to Morocco’s was 2.47 goals per 90 minutes, the biggest between any teams now meeting in the knockouts. Even if style-of-play factors could bridge that chasm, our analysis hasn’t found any here.
Thanks to Martin Alexandre of Columbia University and Tim Chartier of Davidson College for research assistance.
(Top photo: Paul Kane / Getty Images; In-line photo of Australia’s Ellie Carpenter: Andrew Wiseman / DeFodi Images via Getty Images))