Before kick-off: define the sample first
| Outcome | matches | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland wins | 0 | — |
| Draws | 0 | — |
| Canada wins | 0 | — |
FactUsing the explicit scope of completed 2026 World Cup matches before kick-off, the teams had met 0 times: 0 Switzerland wins, 0 draws and 0 Canada wins. This is not presented as an all-time record.
FactThe comparison direction on this page is fixed: Switzerland is the recorded home side, Canada the away side, and 2–1 is stored in that order. A later meeting would remain a separate event record.
Personnel: how the starting XI changed
FactSwitzerland changed 4 starters from its previous match; Canada changed 2 starters. Continuity is calculated from confirmed starters only.
FactSwitzerland's new starters include Luca Jaquez, Djibril Sow, Johan Manzambi, Rubén Vargas; Canada's new starters include Nathan-Dylan Saliba, Mathieu Choinière. The names connect the continuity count to specific personnel.
The result: 2–1 and the decisive sequence
FactThe final score was Switzerland 2–1 Canada. The verified scoring sequence was 46′ Rubén Vargas、57′ Johan Manzambi、76′ Promise David. Score, sequence and line-up changes are facts; the mechanism inferred from them is labelled as analysis.
FactThe verification index for Switzerland versus Canada fixes four fields: the 2–1 final score, the 2026 FIFA World Cup · Group B stage, the BC Place location and 3 scoring events. Together they identify this match without borrowing context from another fixture.
FactNode 1: Rubén Vargas scored for Switzerland in minute 46, setting the ledger at 1–0; Node 2: Johan Manzambi scored for Switzerland in minute 57, setting the ledger at 2–0; Node 3: Promise David scored for Canada in minute 76, setting the ledger at 2–1
FactSwitzerland's location key for this match is BC Place, shared by Canada; Switzerland's 2 goals and Canada's 1 goals belong only to this venue and kick-off record.
Why this result made sense
AnalysisSwitzerland versus Canada, 2–1: Switzerland converted the lead against Canada into the 2-1 result. Aggregated player data shows a shot gap of 7 and a pass-completion gap of 3.4 percentage points; game-state management mattered more than any single possession number.