Хөлбөмбөгийн дэлхийн аварга шалгаруулах тэмцээний хагас шигшээд үлдсэн багууд тодорлоо

After 100 matches at World Cup 2026 there are four teams left standing.

Kylian Mbappe and France overcame Morocco, Lamine Yamal and Spain eased past Belgium, Jude Bellingham helped England eliminate Erling Haaland’s Norway in extra-time. Lionel Messi and defending champions Argentina became the last team into the semifinals by defeating Switzerland, with the help of a stunning extra-time strike from Julian Alvarez.

The ties will take place on Tuesday and Wednesday with the final taking place on Sunday at MetLife Stadium (and a bronze-medal match the day before in Miami).

So who is predicted to make the final? Who are the key players in each game? And is the final being played at the right stadium?

We asked our writers all of that and more, and this is what they said.

The best performance of the quarterfinals was?

Thom Harris: A Ballon d’Or winner can hardly go ‘under the radar’, but Rodri has been quietly rediscovering his most dominant form at the heart of the Spanish midfield. He was everywhere against Belgium, putting out fires all across the pitch with the unmatched sense of anticipation and positioning that makes him so good at playing the holding midfield role. He has also completed more passes and carried the ball further than any player at the tournament so far, just as crucial to their patient possession play.

Lukas Weese: Kylian Mbappe. Not only did he score against Morocco but he took three Moroccan defenders with him, creating space for Dembele, who ultimately extended the France lead. Mbappe continues to elevate his level in this tournament.

James Horncastle: Jude Bellingham. England put in an understandably tired performance against Norway. They were also confusing. Bellingham rose above it, as he so often does. As was the case at the Azteca. As was the case when England reached the final of the Euros in 2024, Bellingham grasped the nettle. Name an England player in history with more big game aura?

Oliver Kay: Jude Bellingham. The story of England’s campaign has been one of unconvincing performances rescued by huge contributions from their two outstanding players. At times it has been Harry Kane, but on this occasion it was Bellingham. Incidentally, did you know St Jude was the patron saint of lost causes? That quarter-final against Norway would have been one of them for England without Bellingham.

Phil Hay: France all round, as per. Once they got Morocco where they wanted them, pinned in and struggling to mount any sort of attacks, the French turned the screw superbly. The two goals were lethal, again, and they seem to be able to pull out finishes of the highest quality at will. To repeat what everybody has been saying: the trophy is theirs to lose.

Stu James: Jude Bellingham. England are in the semi-finals because of him — as simple as that, really. It seems crazy to think that there was a debate (among some) not that long ago about whether Bellingham should go to the World Cup. To follow up his performance in the Azteca with another two goals says everything. His influence on this England team is huge. In fact, he’s upstaging Harry Kane now.

Mbappe scores against Morocco (REUTERS/Mike Segar)

Seb Stafford-Bloor: Jude Bellingham. England would not be in the semi finals without him and he continued a trend against Norway of turning up exactly when his side needed him. His first goal vividly described his technical quality. His second, the unending competitiveness with which he always seems to play; nobody else had the will or the heart to get to the rebound that ultimately won the game.

Adam Crafton: It’s Jude Bellingham but given everyone has said that I will mention John Stones. Stones is out of contract and 32 years of age after leaving Manchester City at the end of the season and had played 90 minutes only twice in 2026. For him to then go the full distance for England in the brutal Miami heat and humidity represented a mighty effort and he’s not had enough credit for his patience and positioning in that two-on-one where he narrowed angles for Sorloth to pass to Erling Haaland.

Henry Bushnell: Mbappe — though Michael Olise was also excellent for France. And Elliott Anderson also deserves a shout here for 120 tireless, all-action minutes against Norway. He helped create the equalizer, and when everyone else wilted in the Miami humidity throughout the second half and extra time, Anderson was still going.

Laura Williamson: Jude Bellingham. That ability to seize a game by the scruff of its neck and bend it to your will is such a special gift.

Are the best four teams left?

Harris: The official FIFA/Coca-Cola World Ranking table says yes, so who are we to disagree? In all seriousness, all four sides have world class match-winning talent, and incredible strength in depth throughout the rest of their squad. They probably are the four strongest sides.

Weese: I’d say yes. To use the NCAA Tournament equivalent, it’s if four No. 1 seeds advanced to the Final Four. This is a quartet of soccer powers with star players aplenty. It should provide a compelling conclusion to a memorable World Cup.

Hay: I’d say so. In fact, definitely. I went back through all 48 qualifiers and I can’t see a side who deserved to get much further than they did. The exception is probably Norway. They were good enough to merit a place in the last four — but that doesn’t mean England don’t deserve to be there, because they do.

Haaland won a lot of followers at the World Cup but is now out of the tournament (Photo: PATRICIA DE MELO MOREIRA / AFP via Getty Images)

James: On paper, yes. That said, that England-Norway game could have gone either way. But we’ve got two thrilling semi-finals to look forward to now and, in my mind, four very different teams.

Horncastle: The last four are the top four in the FIFA rankings. Feels right.

Kay: Yes. And it’s a rare thing. And luckily for one of England and Argentina, the best two are on the other side of the draw.

Stafford-Bloor: Yes — certainly based on what we’ve seen at the tournament. Put it a different way: I can’t think of a team that deserves to be in the final four that is not there.

Crafton: Yes. But France have been playing on a different planet to the other three.

Bushnell: Yes, because there’s no clear next-best team. But among the semifinalists, there’s a clear top three, with England a small step below the rest.

Williamson: Yes. It’s almost like the four highest-ranked teams in the competition all won their groups and progressed to the semi-finals!

Who will be the key player in each semi-final?

Harris: Spain have only conceded once this entire tournament, but they have yet to face a truly devastating centre-forward who can attack their brave rest-defence structure with searing pace. It’s an unoriginal choice, but Kylian Mbappe could decide the first tie if he can time his runs in-behind.

The second semi-final features two other players in the race for the Golden Boot in Messi and Kane, but Bellingham only continues to illustrate his importance to this England side. Not just the critical goals, but the lung-busting runs to open up spaces for others and his defensive intensity in midfield.

Weese: I’ll go with Marc Cucurella in the first semifinal. He will have the primary assignment of Kylian Mbappe on the left flank. Spain’s conceded one goal so far this tournament. Cucurella will need to be sharp defensively.

In the second semifinal, I’ll go with Bellingham. He has braces in back-to-back games. If he can be a force in the midfield and go on the attack against a vulnerable Argentina defense, England has a chance to advance to the World Cup final for the first time since 1966.

Yamal was confident Spain can beat France (Photo: VALERIE MACON / AFP via Getty Images)

Hay: Messi and Bellingham in Argentina versus England. Kylian Mbappe and Rodri in France versus Spain. Spain’s defensive approach has to be bang on to keep that French forward line out. It’s been a while since Rodri went all Ballon d’Or.

James: It’s hard to look beyond Mbappe in the France-Spain tie… so, naturally, I’m going to look beyond him. Playing with total freedom and supreme confidence, Michael Olise has been a joy to watch. As for England versus Argentina, how can you not mention Messi? Hang on, the same applies to Bellingham now.

Horncastle: Rodri. If Spain are to overcome France, they need to keep the ball away from Didier Deschamps’ attacking players. In the other one, the Argentina centre-backs have come up with big goals. Will Cuti Romero use his head again? Or will he lose it?

Kay: I have enjoyed watching Argentina’s No 10, a 39-year-old forward called Lionel Messi who plays for Inter Miami in Major League Soccer. He’s one for England to look out for. France vs Spain? I’m sorry to state the obvious again, but it’s Mbappe.

Stafford-Bloor: To go slightly left field, Dayot Upamecano will need to have a very good game if France are to advance. The case for Mbappe or Olise writes itself, but so much happens in the Spanish attacking midfield and the team as a whole controls the ball so well, that the French are going to have to reach a new defensive standard in a game which will likely look different to all their others so far. England vs Argentina? Declan Rice. His withdrawal against Norway at half time was presumably forced, but his team were nowhere near as balanced or convincing without him. He has to play against Argentina and he has to play well.

Crafton: For France v Spain, I’m curious to see if Lamine Yamal can discover his best form against one of France’s less superstar names in Lucas Digne at left back. For England, can Bukayo Saka get on the field at the start and give 90 minutes at a high level? I have my doubts but it would make a world of difference.

Bushnell: I think the only way to beat France is to suck the life out of them by keeping the ball and squashing counterattacks before they get going — both of which Rodri can do for Spain. In the second semifinal … Messi.

Williamson: I worry about that England defence (and the midfield to be honest – I worry about a lot of things when it comes to England!) so I’ll say Jordan Pickford if we’re picking one player to stop Messi and Argentina. Then Rodri feels key for Spain against France, as others have mentioned.

Pick your finalists

Harris: France vs England. But it’s a 50-50 for me between Argentina and England — there are too many players who could potentially decide a game with a moment of quality.

Weese: France versus Argentina. The 2022 World Cup final was an absolute epic and arguably one of the best in the tournament’s history. Sometimes you get a sequel like The Godfather Part II. If it’s France and Argentina again, I have a feeling it could rival the 2022 version, given what Mbappe and Messi are doing.

Horncastle: Spain versus Argentina. Daring to be different here. Do I really believe it? No. Although have you seen Luis de la Fuente’s record in tournaments and Spain can keep the ball away from France’s attackers. As unconvincing as Argentina have been at times they have Messi and so, so many intangibles. England will likely be tired after playing at altitude in Mexico and going to extra-time in Miami.

Can Messi reach back-to-back World Cup finals? (Photo by Carl Recine/Getty Images)

Hay: France versus England. I’m confident in calling England, but less so France (despite their stupid levels of talent) because I was at Spain’s win over Belgium and there are huge levels of confidence in their camp.

Kay: France vs … (cautiously) England. Thomas Tuchel’s team haven’t convinced to this point — their second-half performance against Norway was really poor — but Bellingham and Kane have stepped up in big moments time and time again and the rest of the team has shown a certain kind of fortitude under pressure in every game. I would evaluate Argentina in similar terms: a bit chaotic, but with a certain spirit and — in their case — one incredible player carrying a lot of very good ones. Tuesday will be so incredibly intense, but I feel England’s players might be more likely to stay calm under the pressure of that game. Argentina look slightly more combustible.

James: France v England. I typed Argentina initially. But, well, it’s starting to feel like it’s meant to be for England – to get to the final, that is. Not to win it.

Stafford-Bloor: France vs England. I can’t make an argument for a team beating France — yet — and Egypt and Cape Verde have shown that Argentina are hardly unbeatable. Yes, I’m obviously trying to talk this into being.

Crafton: France v England. I think England at their best are better than Argentina at their best. Now England just need to hit their best. Hold on tight.

Bushnell: France vs. Argentina, again. But neither semi has an overwhelming favorite.

Williamson: France versus…. England. Or Argentina. Arghhh… never bet against England. It’s England.

Which stadium would you have chosen for the final?

Harris: It has to be the Estadio Azteca, doesn’t it? An iconic arena, having already hosted two finals, at the heart of a football-mad country. It is a venue fitting for the occasion.

Weese: I’ll give a venue for each host nation. BC Place for Canada, SoFi Stadium for USA and Estadio Azteca for Mexico.

Horncastle: Consensus tells us the Azteca has established itself as the ultimate World Cup venue. If you’re drawing up the ideal World Cup the final happens there. I want to shout out the Mercedes Benz in Atlanta. SoFi has caused jaws to drop. But the Merc is everything I want in a modern stadium.

Kay: I understand and partially agree with the argument for the Azteca. But doesn’t the depth of its World Cup history, having held two finals, suggest it would be a little greedy for it to host a third? I like the idea of the final being in New York. Does East Rutherford, New Jersey count as New York. No it doesn’t. And it’s not an enormously appealing venue, but I think I’m more comfortable with a — in FIFA speak — New York/New Jersey final than others are.

MetLife Stadium has been criticised but will host the final (Photo: ANGELA WEISS / AFP via Getty Images)

Hay: The Azteca in Mexico City. Although as an out-there choice, Vancouver is a super World Cup city.

James: It’s got to be the Estadio Azteca — a stadium that has such historical significance when it comes to the World Cup, especially for the 1980s kids among us. Plus, you can tell from the way that our colleagues have talked and written about their experiences at the Azteca during this World Cup that it’s been truly special. But, realistically, it was never going to host the final.

Stafford-Bloor: The Azteca. For the atmosphere, of course, but also the heritage and what it represents. Think of the great moments in the game’s past that have happened there? Finals belong in stadiums with history. Nothing against the American stadiums, which look wonderfully opulent, but the Azteca holds a special place in most fans’ hearts.

Crafton: Lumen Field in Seattle was the most unique stadium I have visited in the tournament and Seattle was the most vibrant host city, containing the World Cup atmosphere into a smaller space with a downtown venue. The time zone would be tricky but the weather is kind enough in Seattle to allow for an early enough kick off to accommodate Europe at a reasonable-ish hour. Having said that, MetLife looks better on broadcast and better once you are in the venue than it does on first sight walking to the stadium and for the World Cup, it holds more people than any other U.S. venue, albeit a couple of hundred less than Azteca.

Bushnell: It probably wasn’t realistic for time-zone reasons, but in a vacuum, SoFi Stadium near Los Angeles wowed everyone. It’s gorgeous outside and inside, and its many digital screens have allowed FIFA to give each game a unique look and feel. I would’ve loved to see how it morphed into a World Cup final venue.

Williamson: I think SoFi looks the best on TV and I’ve loved reading and watching about the atmosphere at Lumen Field. The AT&T in Arlington, Texas, feels a bit like watching a football match in an aircraft carrier (or it did two years ago at Copa America, anyway) so I don’t actually mind MetLife. I’d just have insisted on a bigger run-off around the pitch and an 7pm local kick-off.

Which team do you wish was still here?

Harris: If only Colombia could finish. They played some breathtaking football up until their frustrating draw and penalty-shootout defeat to Switzerland, bringing so much energy with their quick passing combinations and relentless runners out wide. It would have been a real spectacle to see them face Argentina in a rematch of the 2024 Copa America final, but a lack of composure in front of goal let them down.

Weese: I’ll go with Mexico. It ended with a heartbreaking defeat at the Azteca to England but El Tri fought valiantly. Julian Quinones was a joy to watch, scoring four goals in five matches.

Hay: Colombia. The energy of their supporters is terrific and it was a shame that the players ran out of gas against Switzerland. Luis Diaz had driven them hard but he looked like his tank was empty.

Quinones was a joy to watch (Photo: Rodrigo Oropeza / AFP via Getty Images)

James: Colombia. I got ahead of myself and pictured Argentina playing Colombia in Kansas City in the quarter-finals. In fact, I thought that was nailed on, and it would have been a classic. I love the colour and atmosphere that Colombia supporters bring to tournaments, and I love watching the team play, too — a brand of fast, high-tempo, dynamic football. They were brilliant against Portugal, registering 24 shots. But therein lies their problem: goalscoring — and, unfortunately, that came back to bite them against Switzerland in the last-16.

Horncastle: Norway. Less for the Viking row. More for the prospect of Haaland against Argentina and France. He belongs in the same company as Messi and Mbappe.

Kay: It would be nice for the tournament as a whole if one of the host nations was still in, but in truth they had all reached their limit. I was enjoying Mexico, Colombia and Morocco and I was enjoying the U.S. and Canada until they were outclassed in the round of 16.

Stafford-Bloor: The United States. Until everything went wrong, against Belgium and in the days before, I really enjoyed watching and listening to Americans get behind their national team and embracing the tournament. A powerful host country playing well always infuses a World Cup with fundamental energy. Before the bitter fallout the US brought an infectious enthusiasm and wild optimism that we were poorer without.

Brazil were eliminated by Norway (Photo: Molly Darlington/Getty Images)

Crafton: Brazil. We didn’t see them at their best but they weren’t bad against Norway and keeping their huge diaspora here in the U.S. engaged in the tournament for longer — possibly pitting them against Argentina in a semi-final — could have been pretty amazing.

Bushnell: Mexico. Sure, they wouldn’t be playing at the Azteca anymore, but their millions of fans in the U.S. would’ve allowed El Tri to maintain its home-field advantage, and its connection with the entire nation, which was one of the coolest parts of this World Cup’s earlier stages.

Williamson: Mexico. It would have been amazing to have one of the co-hosts in at least the quarter-finals.

Which player do you miss most?

Harris: I’ll stick with Colombia and say Quintero. He did not start a single game at this World Cup but he twinkled with ingenuity whenever he stepped off the bench, picking out forward pass after forward pass that left defenders scratching their heads. A throwback No 10 who plays with freedom and flair, this might have been his swansong on the international stage. At least he bowed out doing what he does best.

Weese: Vozinha. He’s been my favourite player this tournament, right after his mesmerizing performance drawing Spain in Cape Verde’s opening group stage match. The fact his mother was able to see him play, how he and Cape Verde battled against Argentina, taking the defending champions to the brink, was iconic stuff.

Hay: Australia goalkeeper Patrick Beach.

James: Rayan Cherki. He’s a spectator at this World Cup. But what can you do when Michael Olise is playing No 10, Ousmane Dembele is on one flank and Bradley Barcola or Desire Doue on the other? If you want me to name someone who is out, I’d say a manager: Mexico’s Javier Aguirre. What a character. Actually, I guess we’ll miss Erling now, too.

Vozinha was an early star (Photo: ROBERTO SCHMIDT / AFP via Getty Images)

Horncastle: Flo Balogun. Is he suspended?

Kay: I miss Johan Manzambi almost as much as Switzerland did against Argentina

Stafford-Bloor: Brahim Diaz had a great tournament and watching him work through his AFCON final demons was fun for a while.

Crafton: Kobbie Mainoo. I may send out a search party ahead of England’s semi-final.

Bushnell: Ismael Saibari. Morocco wasn’t the same without him. His injury was a cruel end to a tournament that he lit up in the early stages.

Williamson: Yan Diomande. Quite good, I’d say.

Which goal can you not stop thinking about?

Harris: I was getting a bit annoyed with Lautaro Martinez as he sauntered up to the ball while the seconds ticked away against Egypt. “Go on then, run at your man!” I shouted to no-one in particular. “You’ve only just come on!”

Little did I know that he was about to pick out the most delicious of crosses for Enzo Fernandez to head back across the goalkeeper, to complete a miraculous Argentina comeback and send them through to the last eight. Everything about this goal — the satisfying, slow-motion finish as the ball looped into the side-netting, the manic celebrations, and even manager Lionel Scaloni’s reaction of pure shock on the touchline — makes it an instant World Cup classic for me.

Weese: Sticking with Cape Verde, I have to go with Sidny Lopes Cabral’s goal against Argentina. To handle the ball off a pass, completely ankle break the Argentinian defender with his dribbling, before a scintillating strike that found the far top corner to equalize was sensational.

Kay: I’m with Lukas on this. An incredible and dramatic goal from a little-known player at a crucial stage in a big game. It didn’t prove decisive, but what a moment.

Horncastle: I’ve been fortunate to see most of Mbappe’s goals in person this summer. The one that stays with me, however, is Messi’s equaliser against Egypt. The relief. The euphoria. Argentina move you in ways few teams do.

Hay: The omnishambles that was Belgium’s third against the USMNT. End of days stuff.

Freese loses the ball during the USMNT’s nightmare exit (Photo: David Ramos/Getty Images)

James: Messi’s strike against Egypt. I think that goal is so underrated. To hit a half-volley that sweetly, in a crowded penalty area, when the clock is ticking down and Argentina are on their way out… remarkable. And, of course, it looks even better – as every shot always does – when it goes in off the underside of the bar. For entirely selfish reasons I couldn’t have been happier – it meant that the ‘What’s it like to play against Messi?’ feature that I’d been working on for months was no longer in the bin, plus the possibility of watching Messi in Kansas City four days later was alive.

Stafford-Bloor: Ismaila Sarr vs Belgium. At the time, it looked like the goal that had put Senegal through to the last-16 — and what a finish. Sarr’s touch to control Moussa Niakhate’s driven 60-yard pass, then his strength to hold off the pursuing defender, and finally his balance and technique to produce (what should have been) a seminal moment in his country’s World Cup history.

Crafton: Mbappe’s second against Senegal. The African team had just reduced the France lead to 2-1, only for Mbappe to pick up the ball 30 yards from goal and smash the ball into the top corner. It was a clear message that he meant business.

Bushnell: France’s second against Morocco, because it a perfect encapsulation of how lethal Mbappé, Ousmane Dembélé and Olise are in tandem. Olise unlocked Morocco with a pass that nobody else in the ground could see. Mbappé’s purposeful took three defenders with him. Dembélé used that space to finish. It was gorgeous.

Williamson: Lionel Messi’s first against Algeria. It was like time had stood still, somehow. “He looks so lean! How’s he done that?” So we asked our team to find out – and they did…