3 Takeaways From Latvia’s 6-3 Loss to Sweden in 2026 World Juniors

Friday, Jan. 2, was quarterfinals day at the 2026 World Junior Championship, and the first game of the day was between Latvia and Sweden, a rematch of last year’s quarterfinal that Sweden won 3-2. Latvia looked to make it past the quarterfinals for the first time, and although they had some good chances, they couldn’t get past Sweden. 

Sweden got the early lead in the first, Latvia fought back to tie it, and it looked like it was going to be a close game. It was tight until the latter part of the second period when Sweden pulled ahead by three goals, and they held the lead until the end. In this article, we’ll look at a few takeaways for Latvia, starting with their bright spot, the power play 

Latvia’s Power Play Success

Although Latvia couldn’t come out with the win, they did have a few bright spots in their game, with the main being their power play. While they didn’t score on the 5-on-3 that they had, which could’ve possibly changed the game, they did score on two other man-advantages they had. Their first goal of the game tied it 1-1 on the power play, and it looked like they were going to swing the momentum thanks to that goal; they had different goal scorers for each, but Bruno Osmanis helped set them both up. 

Unfortunately for them, Sweden scored right back and took the energy level with them, but they kept their heads down and continued to play hard. Their final goal of the game was also on the power play. It did give them some energy again, and they had some strong chances, but they didn’t have enough time to build on it. 

They had a total of six power plays, and while scoring on two of them was great, missing out on their 5-on-3 was huge. Even scoring just once could’ve been enough to get the energy back their way, but they couldn’t find a way. 

Latvia Struggled to Keep Sweden Out

Clearly, when six goals are scored, the defense is struggling, and while it wasn’t an outright struggle from the start, Latvia did have issues keeping Sweden from entering their zone. They kind of stayed back and let them skate in rather than trying to be aggressive and forcing them to stay out. 

Every team’s defensive structure is different, and while that may work for some teams, it could’ve helped Latvia if they stepped up a bit more and tried to force Sweden to make the move instead of allowing them to enter the zone at all. Of course, they run the risk of Sweden skating right around and getting behind them, which is likely a worse situation, but it would’ve been interesting to see them try to change it up a bit. 

They weren’t quite as physical as they could’ve been, either. Of course, they needed to be careful not to end up in the penalty box against a team like Sweden, but they could’ve done a bit more to keep them out of their zone. 

Latvia Had Minimal Chances

Again, although a 6-3 score doesn’t look the greatest, it wasn’t as one-sided as it looked. Sweden did score and have a solid lead; however, Latvia stayed with them speed and skill-wise. The whole game wasn’t controlled by Sweden; Latvia did have some solid chances to come back, but they couldn’t quite make it happen. 

They had some very close calls and at times looked better than Sweden, but they struggled to get past Love Härenstam in the net. He wasn’t tested a lot throughout the game, however, as Latvia put up just 16 shots total while Sweden had 38. It’s been said multiple times throughout this article, it seemed like it was a one-sided game; it really wasn’t. 

Latvia had chances, scored some goals, and kept fighting back even though Sweden answered. They didn’t hang their heads and allow Sweden to walk right over them. They fought hard and just didn’t have quite enough. 

It’ll be interesting to see how Sweden does in the next round, as they look like the team to beat. They have strong scoring, capable defense, and a solid goaltending tandem. They’ll be a team to keep an eye on going forward, and hopefully, next year, Latvia can continue to improve and have a strong showing at the tournament.