Germany’s exit from the 2026 World Cup was not an accident. It was not a refereeing conspiracy, nor simply the cruel randomness of a penalty shootout.
It was the inevitable consequence of a tournament campaign shaped by Julian Nagelsmann’s questionable selection calls, muddled tactical thinking, and poor in-game management.
The DFB may conduct its review, but the evidence was already there long before Jonathan Tah stepped up to take a penalty, which he never had never taken before in professional football. Germany’s collapse was authored by the man on the touchline. We now take a look at how the situation has come to pass for Die Mannschaft and Nagelsmann.
The Leroy Sane obsession
If there is one decision that symbolised Julian Nagelsmann’s stubbornness, it was his continued faith in Leroy Sane. The 30-year-old arrived at the World Cup after an inconsistent season and a mixed international record.
Yet, Nagelsmann repeatedly treated him as an untouchable starter despite Germany often looking more balanced and more direct when other attacking options were used. The problem was not merely Sane’s form. It was what his inclusion did to the team’s structure.
Germany frequently became lopsided, with attackers occupying similar spaces and leaving the midfield exposed during transitions. Against Paraguay, the same flaws resurfaced. The attack lacked cohesion, the pressing lacked coordination, and Germany spent long periods looking like a collection of talented individuals rather than a coherent unit.
Nagelsmann kept selecting Sane because of what the winger could do, not because of what he was actually delivering.
The Goretzka contradiction
The inclusion of Leon Goretzka was even harder to justify. Nagelsmann had omitted the experienced midfielder from Germany’s UEFA Euro 2024 squad, effectively signalling that the midfielder no longer fitted his vision. Fast forward to the World Cup, and Goretzka was back, despite questions over his mobility and suitability for the tactical setup. Then came the penalty shootout.
Reports from Germany’s dressing-room chaos revealed that several players hesitated to take the sixth penalty after Manuel Neuer had made a crucial save. Goretzka reportedly declined despite being urged by captain Joshua Kimmich. Tah eventually volunteered and missed.
This was not simply about bravery. It was about preparation. How does a team enter a World Cup knockout match without a clearly established penalty order beyond the initial five takers? Why was a centre-back with no previous competitive penalties left to decide Germanys fate? The confusion reflected a deeper managerial failure.
Julian Nagelsmann and a tactical mess disguised as innovation
Julian Nagelsmann built his reputation on tactical flexibility at club level, but international football is a different challenge. The best national-team coaches simplify rather than complicate. Germany never looked tactically settled during the tournament.
The much-discussed 4-2-3-1 often left huge spaces between midfield and defence. Full-backs were pushed high without adequate protection. The pressing triggers were inconsistent. Paraguay repeatedly found routes through the middle of the pitch, exposing Germany’s lack of balance.
When Die Mannschaft fell behind, Nagelsmann’s response was reactive rather than proactive. Substitutions improved the team only after the damage had already been done. The pattern was familiar from Euro 2024, where Germany also struggled to control games against strong opposition.
For all the talk of modern football and positional play, Germany frequently looked less organised than the underdogs they were facing.
The quote that now haunts him
“I trust my players, but being simply better than the opponent is not enough if you don’t show will and desire.”
The line, circulated widely after Germany’s elimination, was intended as a defence of the squad. Instead, it became an indictment of the coach. If a supposedly superior team failed to show sufficient desire, intensity, and clarity, then the responsibility ultimately rests with the manager who selected the players and prepared the team.
Nagelsmann trusted the wrong players, deployed them in the wrong structure, and failed to create the mentality required for knockout football.
Three tournaments, the same story
Germany’s decline did not begin with Julian Nagelsmann. The rot set in after the 2014 World Cup triumph. But managers are hired to stop decline, not merely explain it.
Germany at recent major tournaments
Since 2018
| Tournament | Result |
|---|---|
| 2018 World Cup | Group stage exit |
| 2022 World Cup | Group stage exit |
| Euro 2024 | Disappointing home campaign |
| 2026 World Cup | Round-of-32 exit to Paraguay |
This was supposed to be the tournament where Germany finally turned the corner. Instead, it became another chapter in a decade-long regression. Reuters described Germany as “back to square one, again” after a third consecutive World Cup failure.
Nagelsmann cannot claim that reaching the knockout stage represents progress when Germany were eliminated by a Paraguay side they were overwhelmingly expected to beat.
Should Germany replace Julian Nagelsmann?
This is the question now confronting the DFB. Rudi Voller has publicly defended Nagelsmann, calling him “a top coach” and “a fighter.”
The DFB president has not committed to keeping him, but he has not announced a change either. What is clear is that “business as usual” is no longer acceptable.
The strongest argument for retaining Nagelsmann is continuity. His contract runs until 2028, and constant managerial turnover has not solved Germany’s problems. The strongest argument against him is simpler; what evidence is there that he can win a major tournament with this group?
At UEFA Euro 2024, he failed to deliver as the hosts. At the 2026 World Cup, he could not guide the team to a deep run despite a favourable group and strong pre-tournament momentum. The tactical issues persisted. The selection controversies persisted. The in-game management questions persisted.
The Klopp factor
Unsurprisingly, calls for Jurgen Klopp have grown louder. The former Liverpool manager offers something Nagelsmann has not consistently provided with the national team: a clear identity. His teams are recognisable immediately. They press with purpose, attack with intensity, and play with emotional conviction.
Germany currently possess talented and world-class players such as Florian Wirtz, Jamal Musiala, Joshua Kimmich, Lennart Karl, and Kai Havertz. What they lack is a manager capable of building a stable framework around them.
Whether Klopp would actually take the job is another matter. But the fact that his name dominates the conversation tells you everything about the current mood in Germany.
The verdict
Julian Nagelsmann remains one of the brightest coaching minds of his generation. His work at RB Leipzig and Bayern Munich demonstrated creativity and intelligence. Yet international football is judged differently. It is judged by tournament management, squad harmony, tactical clarity, and decisive moments under pressure. On all four counts, Germany failed.
Sane’s continued selection despite underwhelming returns. Goretzka’s controversial inclusion and the subsequent penalty drama. The disjointed tactical setup. The absence of a clear shootout plan. These were not isolated mistakes. They formed a pattern.
Germany’s elimination was not merely bad luck. It was the culmination of decisions that had been questioned for months. Nagelsmann may survive the post-mortem, but if the DFB is serious about ending their cycle of tournament disappointment, it must ask a difficult question:
Has Julian Nagelsmann become part of the problem rather than the solution?
After Paraguay, the answer looks increasingly uncomfortable.