Belgium 🇧🇪🔥 The Red Devils arrive with a cannon for a right foot and a calculator for the table

Perfect group winners, a ruthless goal difference, and a World Cup group that invites ambition if Belgium stays sharp in the details.

Introduction

Belgium’s qualifying story reads like a team that never fully takes its foot off the pedal, even when the match tries to drag it into the mud. There were nights of open-hood chaos, frantic comebacks, and penalty punctuation marks; and there were also afternoons when the opponent barely touched the ball before the scoreline turned into a headline. In between, Belgium carried itself with that particular blend of talent and pragmatism: the kind that can win 7–0 and still leave the stadium annoyed about a concession, or draw 1–1 away and walk off looking like it just missed a train.

The thread that ties this campaign together is not perfection, but control. Belgium did not go unbeaten by accident. It survived uncomfortable away moments, it embraced the pressure of must-win home dates, and it learned how to flip games with a burst rather than a slow burn. When the door was open, it didn’t knock. It kicked.

The hard numbers give the narrative its spine. Belgium finished first in Group J with 18 points from 8 matches, unbeaten, with 29 goals scored and only 7 conceded for a +22 goal difference. That’s an average of 3.63 goals scored per match, and 0.88 conceded—elite output, especially when you factor in the variety of game states it faced: early concessions, late equalizers, and the kind of matches where a single moment threatens to spoil an entire evening.

Three hinge moments define the arc. First, the campaign’s early warning: June 6, 2025, a 1–1 draw away to North Macedonia, with Maxim De Cuyper striking first and an 86th-minute equalizer forcing Belgium to settle for a point. Second, the fireworks at home: June 9, 2025, Belgium 4–3 Wales—an end-to-end game with penalties, momentum swings, and Kevin De Bruyne landing the decisive blow late. Third, the statement stretches in September and November: a 6–0 away win over Liechtenstein on September 4, then a 7–0 home demolition on November 18, bookending the group with the clearest message Belgium can send—when it clicks, it overwhelms.

Yet the most revealing parts of Belgium’s path are not only in the blowouts. They’re in the two away draws that could have turned into banana skins: the 1–1 in Astana against Kazakhstan on November 15, and that earlier 1–1 in Skopje. Belgium’s qualification wasn’t just built on talent. It was built on not collapsing when the game refused to be tidy.

The Road Through Qualifiers

UEFA qualifying is a marathon dressed as a sprint: each group match is heavy with consequence, and the table rarely lies after eight fixtures. In Belgium’s Group J, the separation at the top was real but not comfortable enough to invite complacency. Belgium won the group and secured direct qualification, while Wales chased closely behind and North Macedonia stayed in the conversation through stubborn draws and selective punches.

The table tells you where Belgium stood, but also how narrow the margins can be in a campaign that looks dominant in hindsight. Belgium ended on 18 points; Wales on 16. That two-point gap is basically one drawn match turning into a win. In other words: Belgium’s ceiling was obvious, but its discipline in the middle matches mattered just as much as the spectacular finishes.

A closer look at Belgium’s record—5 wins, 3 draws, 0 losses—reveals a team that refused to lose even on days when the rhythm was off. The goals are the loud part: 29 scored. The defensive side is the quiet achievement: 7 conceded. That is the profile of a team that can win in multiple ways: big, medium, or small; clean sheets or controlled concessions; early leads or late saves.

Wales were the main competitor, and the head-to-head was decisive. Belgium beat Wales twice: 4–3 at home on June 9, 2025, and 4–2 away on October 13, 2025. Those two games alone explain a lot about Belgium’s group-winning character: it could ride chaos and still find the finishing touch. Meanwhile, North Macedonia proved to be the “problem-solving” opponent: 1–1 away on June 6, then 0–0 at home on October 10. That pairing suggests a clear tactical reality inferred from results: some opponents could slow Belgium down enough to reduce its scoring volume, even if they couldn’t beat it.

Kazakhstan played a similar role in one match: the away 1–1 on November 15 after Belgium conceded in the 9th minute. This is where qualifiers become a performance audit: not “can you score?”, but “how do you respond when you don’t control the opening minutes?” Belgium responded with an equalizer after the break, but the draw still sits there as a reminder that travel, surfaces, and match rhythm can shrink the gap between teams.

Then there is Liechtenstein, the matchups that Belgium treated as what they were: opportunities to stack goal difference, confidence, and repetition. The 6–0 away and 7–0 at home weren’t just wins; they were clean, structured exclamation marks. In those games, Belgium’s attacking depth and finishing variety came to the surface, and the defensive line enjoyed rare stress-free nights.

Table 1: Belgium match log in Group J

Date	Group	Opponent	Venue	Result	Goalscorers	Stadium
6 June 2025	Group J	North Macedonia	Away	1–1	Belgium: De Cuyper 28'	Toše Proeski Arena, Skopje
9 June 2025	Group J	Wales	Home	4–3	Belgium: Lukaku 15' pen., Tielemans 19', Doku 27', De Bruyne 88'	King Baudouin Stadium, Brussels
4 September 2025	Group J	Liechtenstein	Away	6–0	De Cuyper 29', Tielemans 46', 70' pen., Theate 60', De Bruyne 62', Fofana 90+1'	Rheinpark Stadion, Vaduz
7 September 2025	Group J	Kazakhstan	Home	6–0	De Bruyne 42', 84', Doku 44', 60', Raskin 51', Meunier 87'	Lotto Park, Anderlecht
10 October 2025	Group J	North Macedonia	Home	0–0		Planet Group Arena, Ghent
13 October 2025	Group J	Wales	Away	4–2	Belgium: De Bruyne 18' pen., 76' pen., Meunier 24', Trossard 90'	Cardiff City Stadium, Cardiff
15 November 2025	Group J	Kazakhstan	Away	1–1	Belgium: Vanaken 48'	Astana Arena, Astana
18 November 2025	Group J	Liechtenstein	Home	7–0	Vanaken 3', Doku 34', 41', Mechele 52', Saelemaekers 55', De Ketelaere 57', 59'	Stade Maurice Dufrasne, Liège

From this list, Belgium’s season splits naturally into three mini-stories. The “friction” games: both against North Macedonia (1–1, 0–0) and the away draw in Kazakhstan (1–1). The “fireworks” games: both against Wales (4–3, 4–2). And the “professional executions”: the two heavy wins over Liechtenstein plus the 6–0 home rout of Kazakhstan. This distribution matters because a World Cup group phase rarely allows you to play the same match three times. Belgium showed it can live in different tempos—but the question is whether it can choose the tempo, not just survive it.

Now the table, complete, because context is part of performance analysis. Belgium didn’t qualify in a vacuum; it qualified with Wales pushing, North Macedonia nagging, and every away trip carrying its own small traps.

Table 2: Group J standings

Pos	Team	Pts	Played	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Qualification
1	Belgium	18	8	5	3	0	29	7	+22	World Cup 2026
2	Wales	16	8	5	1	2	21	11	+10	Play-offs
3	North Macedonia	13	8	3	4	1	13	10	+3	Play-offs via Nations League
4	Kazakhstan	8	8	2	2	4	9	13	−4	Not qualified
5	Liechtenstein	0	8	0	0	8	0	31	−31	Not qualified

Belgium’s advantage is obvious: +22 goal difference. But the more subtle advantage is structural: it never took a loss. That matters because losses change the psychology of a group—suddenly you’re not managing a campaign, you’re chasing a repair job. Belgium stayed in the “management” mode throughout.

There’s also a useful home-away split inferred from the match list. At home Belgium played four matches: Wales (4–3), Kazakhstan (6–0), North Macedonia (0–0), Liechtenstein (7–0). That’s 17 goals scored, 3 conceded, and 10 points from 12. Away Belgium also played four: North Macedonia (1–1), Liechtenstein (6–0), Wales (4–2), Kazakhstan (1–1). That’s 12 scored, 4 conceded, and 8 points from 12. The home edge exists in volume and comfort; the away output remains strong, but the game can tighten.

Look, too, at the “one-goal margin or less” matches: Belgium had four such games—1–1, 0–0, 1–1, and the 4–3 thriller that ended with a one-goal gap but played like a coin toss. Belgium didn’t lose any of them. That’s a qualifying superpower: staying emotionally stable when the match refuses to reward your quality immediately.

The final performance layer is about response after conceding. Belgium conceded early in Astana (9') and still drew. It conceded late in Skopje (86') and still drew. It conceded multiple times against Wales and still won twice. These are not tactical notes; they are competitive notes, visible purely in the scorelines and timings: Belgium did not panic. It kept producing chances until the scoreboard complied.

How they play

From the evidence on the page—results, goals for and against, and the spread of scorers—Belgium plays like a side that aims to win the match twice: first by building a lead, then by squeezing the opponent out of belief. The hallmark is not only that Belgium scores, but that it scores in clusters. Against Kazakhstan at home, it scored six and kept a clean sheet. Against Liechtenstein, it scored six away and seven at home, again without conceding. That is a profile of sustained pressure: once Belgium finds the seam, it keeps pushing through it.

The team’s rhythm, inferred from scorelines, suggests a strong capacity to accelerate games. The Wales matches are the clearest examples. A 4–3 and a 4–2 are not “control games” in the classic sense, but they are games where Belgium still ends up with the bigger number. That tells you something about its attacking ceiling and its willingness to keep attacking even when the match becomes open. In practical terms: Belgium can win in a wide-open script, not only in slow dominance.

The numbers also hint at Belgium’s match management being the separator. In the eight qualifiers, Belgium scored 29 and conceded 7. That’s not just firepower; that’s balance. However, the two matches against North Macedonia—1–1 and 0–0—suggest that when an opponent can compress the game and deny space, Belgium’s scoring volume can drop sharply. In those two games Belgium scored once in 180 minutes. That doesn’t mean Belgium “can’t break blocks” in general; it means certain opponents can turn Belgium’s matches into patience tests, and patience is a performance skill as much as a technical one.

The distribution of goalscorers shows variety rather than dependence, at least in this data set. Kevin De Bruyne appears repeatedly and decisively—two penalties and a late goal against Wales, another brace against Kazakhstan at home, plus a goal against Liechtenstein away. Jérémy Doku’s name shows up in bursts: goals against Wales, a brace against Kazakhstan, and another brace plus more against Liechtenstein at home. Then there are contributions from Tielemans, Meunier, Vanaken, De Ketelaere, Saelemaekers, Theate, Mechele, Raskin, and even De Cuyper scoring in multiple matches. That spread matters at tournament level: it suggests Belgium can survive a quiet night from one star because goals can arrive from several channels.

Vulnerabilities, again inferred strictly from results and timings, sit in two places. First: conceding first away can flip the game into a rescue mission, as seen in Kazakhstan away (conceded at 9'). Second: Belgium can be held scoreless at home, as in the 0–0 against North Macedonia. That draw is the kind of match that doesn’t scream “problem” in qualifiers—but it’s a warning label for World Cup group play, where a single goalless game can twist the entire group dynamic. Belgium’s defensive base is solid, but the attack’s ability to solve a locked door quickly is what separates “qualifier dominance” from “tournament authority.”

The Group at the World Cup

Belgium lands in Group G with three matches that will each ask a different question. The schedule is clean and sequential: Belgium opens against Egypt, then faces Iran, then closes with New Zealand. Three different football cultures, three different match tempos—yet the only safe assumption, based on the data available here, is what Belgium itself brings: scoring power, a relatively low concession rate, and a tendency to decide matches in bursts.

There’s also a travel narrative built into the locations. Seattle, then Los Angeles, then Vancouver: three cities, three stadium environments, and no room for sleepwalking. Group stages are short stories, not novels. Belgium’s qualifier profile suggests it can produce big scorelines, but it also shows it can be pulled into low-scoring friction. The group phase will punish whichever version shows up at the wrong time.

The opening match is the one that sets oxygen levels. Belgium has shown in qualifiers that it can start fast (for example, against Wales at home it scored early through a penalty and built momentum), but it has also shown it can be dragged into late drama (like the equalizer conceded at 86' in Skopje). The first group game tends to amplify these tendencies: early composure, clean passing choices, and emotional stability after a missed chance.

The second match often becomes the pivot—either a “qualify early” night or a “now we’ve made it hard” night. Belgium’s qualifiers contain both: the big wins that give breathing room and the draws that turn the table into a math exercise. If Belgium repeats its efficiency games—like the 6–0 against Kazakhstan or the two clean demolitions of Liechtenstein—it walks into the third match with control. If it repeats the 0–0 home draw pattern, the third match becomes tense regardless of opponent.

The closing match against New Zealand is the classic group-stage trap in reverse: either Belgium arrives already qualified and risks dropping intensity, or it arrives needing a result and risks forcing the game. Belgium’s best evidence for handling this kind of pressure is the away win in Cardiff on October 13, 2025: a hostile stadium, goals conceded, and still Belgium found four—two via penalties and another late nail from Trossard. That’s not a tactical blueprint, but it is a psychological one: Belgium can score late and finish games.

Table: Group G match schedule for Belgium

Match	Date	Stadium	City	Opponent
16	15 June 2026	Lumen Field	Seattle	Egypt
39	21 June 2026	SoFi Stadium	Los Angeles	Iran
64	26 June 2026	BC Place Stadium	Vancouver	New Zealand

Now, the match-by-match script and a plain-language prediction, without pretending to know what the opponents will look like beyond their names and the fixture list.

Match 1: Belgium vs Egypt, 15 June 2026 Belgium’s ideal scenario is simple: avoid the “friction start” that appeared in Skopje and Astana, and turn the match into one of its volume games. When Belgium scores early, the qualifiers suggest it can stack goals quickly—especially when multiple scorers join the party. The danger is a tight first half that invites impatience. Prediction: Belgium win.

Match 2: Belgium vs Iran, 21 June 2026 This feels like the pivot match because it lands between the opener’s nerves and the closer’s table math. Belgium’s qualifiers show it can win shootouts (Wales) and can also get stuck in a 0–0. The key will be converting dominance into a lead—because Belgium’s defensive record is strong enough that playing from ahead changes everything. Prediction: Belgium win.

Match 3: New Zealand vs Belgium, 26 June 2026 Closing games are rarely about style; they’re about posture. Belgium has evidence of staying calm in away environments and finding decisive moments late, like De Bruyne’s 88th-minute winner against Wales on June 9, 2025, or Trossard’s 90th-minute goal in Cardiff on October 13, 2025. Whether Belgium needs the win or can accept a draw, the key is not to let the game turn into a single-moment coin flip. Prediction: Belgium win.

Keys to qualify from the group:

• Start clean: Belgium’s best version appears when it avoids conceding first, especially away from home.
• Convert pressure into a lead: the 0–0 against North Macedonia is the reminder that dominance without goals changes the whole story.
• Keep the scoring spread alive: the qualifiers show goals coming from multiple names, and that variety is tournament insurance.
• Manage the late minutes: Belgium can win late, but it also conceded late once; the group stage punishes sloppy endings.

Editorial opinion

Belgium qualified like a team that knows the difference between “playing well” and “collecting points.” The unbeaten line matters, but what truly matters is how it was built: by surviving the awkward away nights, by accepting that some games would be messy, and by still having enough firepower to turn the mess into a win. There’s a maturity in scoring 29 and conceding 7 across eight matches, but the maturity will only translate if Belgium respects the small games inside the big games—the first ten minutes, the five minutes after halftime, the last five minutes when the stadium changes temperature.

The temptation is to look at 7–0 and 6–0 and believe the World Cup will be a continuation of that comfort. It won’t. The real warning sign is the 0–0 at home against North Macedonia on October 10, 2025: a match where Belgium couldn’t turn its quality into a breakthrough. In a group stage, that’s the kind of night that invites panic in the next one. Belgium doesn’t need to be perfect; it needs to be ruthless when the match is balanced, because the tournament doesn’t reward teams for “almost.”

The closing image from qualifiers is not a trophy pose; it’s a lesson. Belgium left Astana with a 1–1 on November 15, 2025 after conceding early, and it left Skopje with a 1–1 after conceding late. Those are the margins that decide whether talent becomes authority. Belgium’s path to a deep run is written in the same ink as its qualification: score enough to breathe, defend enough to sleep, and never let one strange minute become the whole story.