"Naa Chuaay" Somchai Chuayboonchum gave a direct analysis following Thailand's away draw against China, while "Coach Thong" Thongchai Sukkoki speculated on what English head coach Anthony Hudson was thinking.
On 9 Jun 2026 GMT+7, "Naa Chuaay" Somchai Chuayboonchum analyzed after the Thailand national football team, known as the 'War Elephants,' drew 0-0 away against the Chinese national football team at Jinzhou Sports Center Stadium. Meanwhile, "Coach Thong" Thongchai Sukkoki guessed what Anthony Hudson, the English head coach, was thinking through a live broadcast after the game on Thairath Sport - Thairath Sports, a prominent sports media outlet in Thailand.
"Naa Chuaay" Somchai Chuayboonchum said, "The result is okay; a draw meets the coach's target. Drawing away at China's home ground is acceptable. However, regarding style and approach, it wasn't very good. Perhaps they were experimenting with players, seeing how this group would perform in terms of readiness and team preparation, deciding who to field and who fits the tactics. It wasn't perfect because there seemed to be some stumbling blocks."
"I see that China's national team plays similarly to before. How they played in the past, they still play the same way now, from the first minute to the last. They keep playing long balls, which differs from Japan or South Korea, who play differently. China, year after year, always plays like this, using a defensive and counterattack strategy. If we had a stronger squad, I think we could compete better. But we were not well prepared; some players weren't fully fit, causing problems. So, we shouldn't blame them. It's the same as always with the association's team preparation. No matter how many squads, in the end, corrections must be made. Success depends on preparation, not just a day or two. I've been in football for 50-60 years, and it's always the same. I don't know if I'll get to see Thailand play in the World Cup."
Meanwhile, Coach Thong Thongchai Sukkoki commented, "If you ask what the benefit was, there is only one: planning before the competition, including tournament evaluation, opponent assessment, and player selection. I consider it a planning mistake. The team switched to playing 3-5-2, which clearly shows a difference between the coach's ideas and his teaching to the players. The coach's vision is different, and teaching within such a short time means these lessons don't immediately manifest on the field. It requires more practice. The benefit gained is very minimal. What we saw were the mistakes to be fixed for the next time."
"Overall, if I were to give a score out of 100, it would be below 50. The mistakes started from planning and player selection. From that point, everything deviated. There was no diversity in changing tactics or creating plays. There were many limitations, all stemming from the initial planning that started off on the wrong foot."
"Simply put, from Anthony Hudson's perspective—his feelings as the team's representative—I think he must be wondering why things didn't go as planned, why it wasn't like what they practiced or planned. Certainly, one must look back and reflect on why it turned out this way. From my view, it's football that relies on memory to follow the process. I believe the coach told all the players, and they understood it, but it got stuck at the point of whether they could execute or not. What was shown on the field was that they couldn't. If they had practiced and could only perform like this, showing this much on the field, I think that's not acceptable."